Please God... Tell us What You Told Mr Bush

George W. Bush

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier...just as long as I'm the dictator..."--Washington, DC, Dec 18, 2000, during his first trip to Washington as President-Elect

"I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen... I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it."--George W. Bush commenting to Texas evangelist James Robinson in the run-up to his presidential campaign

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam [Hussein], which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."--Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Abu Mazen quoting Bush when they met in Aqaba; reported in The Haaretz Reporter by Arnon Regular

"I'm the Commander, see ... I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President ... [I] don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."--Speaking to the National Security Council

Please God... could you explain to the rest of us, that dont hear your voice in our heads telling us what to do, what exactally you said to Mr. Bush.

Climate Change and Globalization are Linked

If the blame for the causes of climate change are purposefully being misrepresented to the people of the world (video link to "Global Warming Swindle" is in video section on right side of this page), to what end? By whom? Who would stand to gain from the restriction of industrialization of third world nations and the stagnation of the first worlds. The very people that own the oil.

Why would the corporations that make billions and billions of dollars want to cut global use of their product? Easy, Globalization. This G-20 (G-8 plus 12) think tank thing has a plan. Right now they are stirring up fear and change so that our R&D will go into developing electric vehicles that satisfy human needs. Because the future of energy IS oil (turned cleanly into "power")...and they are getting it all while devaluing it.

You see the future of energy trade will not involve the ridiculous pipelines and the shipping of tankers full of this stuff half way around the world. That is just plain expensive and it is way too dangerous for our environment. I see the future global energy supply consisting of the export and import of raw electricity/power.

Oil will be pumped to a local processing plant where it will be made into electric (or alternative) power and exported via a world wide power grid. This is why Halliburton is setting up shop in Dubai. It explains our propping up of Egypt's corrupt government and Israel, all these areas we need to put "The Grid" through to Africa.

We are stagnating smaller nations from industrialising so as to have better costumers when it comes time to let them have what we will not allow them to build or mine in their "sovereign" nations right now. This is part of the G-20 "rule set" to help usher in globalization. They need us to demand cheaper cleaner energy for all, and for the sake of the environment, stop shipping it all over and process it at the source into a clean export. Thus these lesser industrial nations will be forced to pay for something they could make on their own.

This "Global Power Grid" is why we find mega-corporations positioning themselves now so they will control the flow of juice to Europe, Africa and Asia out of the Middle-East. Our nation will uncap its wells and be a player in this hemispheres power grid to Canada and Mexico. We will use this new creation to put pressure on any nation attempting independence from "The Grid."

To be clear... I see life in nations that are a part of the Global Grid will be tremendously better than the lives of those without. The pressure for nations to join The Grid will be internal and irresistible.

I also see Globalization, as a whole, as a violent path to peace on Earth. As America we have a leading roll in facilitating the connectivity, and destruction, needed for success. But Globalization is run by unimaginably huge business that the US and its military are just pawns to be used in order to achieve a degree of control over nations via energy policy/"rule sets". After all our future is global security. It really is all the USA can offer to a global economy.

Male Birth Rate Down and De-evolution of Humans

I KNOW this will come real close to offending "true believers." I am not against any religion. I explain myself in my blog about beliefs. So if you are interested in spirituality or before you guys smear me PLEASE read my BELIEFS blog. At least you will know where I am coming from if you do (way out there in left field).


(In response to a comment on the intelligent design of birds and their ability to fly, to a Jesus Crispy)

I don't have a traditional view of god. But I must point out the eye as one of those things that "is too complex to evolve" but did. Or "if an eye doesn't work exactly correctly the first time, it is an evolutionary defect and thus it will never get a chance to genetically improve itself." Eyes should not exist...but do. Thus we must not understand how a simple photon sensor became a fully operating eye. Given enough time it will happen. The amount of time that things have been adjusting to better fit the environment around them, is immensely large. The kind of 'large' amount of time that the human mind cant fathom. Enough time that the diversity of life on earth in and before the Jurassic period has had a chance to die down to the world we know now. Billions of specialised plants and creatures in a veritable circus of different species roamed far and wide, taking full advantage of every nook life could take hold in. Even the most advanced biological organs and internal sensors have their roots in these eras.

Feathers, in their original form, were used on most all dinosaurs like mammals use fur, for camo. and temp control. They had a very simple structure when compared to hair, fur and flight feathers. (in fact the word 'feathers' is deceiving, but that is what most people see when they look at them.) "Feathers" are used for more than flying now and use to be used for everything but flying.. The Pterosaurs was/is a flying dino., it had dino. feathers that did not help it to fly, like bats of modern day. It also seems the only land dinosaurs that survived whatever killed most of them off, are the flying ones (modern birds). That leaves plenty of time for feathers to change into what we see now... flight feathers.

What gets me is some of the evolutionary changes seem to happen in one season (like finch beaks changing seasonally from generation to generation in accordance with the current weather, and thus the future food supply.) To me this does not prove "intelligent design" but instead proves we don't have a clue how fast things can change. Or you can say alien intervention (liken to Gods intervention...but more plausible) may have been the source of any unusual advances we have made. It just seems it makes more sense to say we humans don't know for sure. But a logical approach is paramount to finding out. And we may not realize the importance of the knowledge until we understand it.

We too may have the capacity locked away in our own DNA to change ourselves in one generation. But science states that these finches had already had both beak types at one time or another, thus the latent DNA info was there and just needed to be 'keyed in' by environmental influences. (These quick changes are de-evolution. Evolution is a long process.) The finches of long past had all the genetic info locked in their DNA, but if it wasn't linked to the environmental 'key in', they would be less able to survive than the finches that had 'key ins' unlock their latent DNA (thus de-evolving their children). (Protein differences in the food eaten would be the most likely things to cause a 'key in', thus linked to making it active. Not willpower, worldly or not.)

Today studies are showing a near 30% drop in male birth rates. Is this a process of de-evolution in humans brought on by something in our environment 'keying in' a latent program to make more women, thus children? Or it may be natural for organisms to increase birth rates in the face of certain radiological/geological changes that may have resulted in mass extinctions in the past. Could we be pumping up our numbers to survive a future our DNA detects and we can not? Or is it that the more children the stressed species have, the more chance of some random genetic mutation that will allow the species to survive the upcoming upheaval?

Is it in the air, water or the food we eat? Is it the sun or the rapidly crumbling magnetic fields around our planet?

Mostly, it is either an already 'keyed in' DNA code expressing itself and de-evolving us to survive a future that has been mirrored in our past...or it is a desperate genetic attempt to save a race that, on a genetic level, knows it is doomed and must mutate to survive. (Both very positive survival mechanisms I assume must be in place for life to even still exist on Earth).

The Yeti Dook from SubGenius.com

The Yeti Dook
The Yeti Dook RantOpus IX - by LesLucid

A Yeti Dook did smartly ride
Where crosswinds blow and drifts collide.
Through time and luck he gave and took,
Wringing dong and banging nook.

A golden seam where Yeti stood
Illuminating anglehood
-He basked in his omnipotence
And shone in his magnificence.

Through then and now this Dook did go
Past Jew and Christian rodeo
Tween red and white, mixed to pink
With blue, a monumental stink.

Now is then in Yeti terms
Except for all the recent germs
Which slink and brew and fester long
Where Normals play and creech their song.

Loudly gnaw the normal dorks
And stoutly bite upon their forks.
The forks with shit are piled high
from digging in the bullshit pie.

On gray device the Normals go
Talking of Michaelangelo.
A slackless fool, the normal dork,
With girth abundant, pink, like pork.

O fateful crux where linchpin holds
The luck plane's time-location folds,
Where focused vortex points the way,
Why Dook and dork will fight some day.

He gleams an eye, this elder Yeti,
Radiating slack a-plenty
Like dolphins brow, not leopard's feet,
Like cockatoo and parakeet.

Those who cross this Yeti's path
Might come to know his fearsome wrath,
Those who sponsored so much fear
Like tempest twat's, Ar and Mir.

Those who cross the Yeti's will
Are soon to be forever still,
Still until forever's call
When timeless futures pass us all.

From The SubGenius tunnels.

If The Bees All Die So Will Everthing Else, Including You

Just got done watchin' "Real Time: with Bill Maher". At the very end of every episode he rants about something that is needed to be ranted on. This week was about bees. The following is just what I recall of what he said.
____________________________

Einstein once said that "If the bees disappear than the humans have 4 years left to live." The reason is that most of the food we eat can only be pollinated by bees. Our attempts to do it on our own have all failed. And the Bees are going away.

The reason for the bee deaths is colony collapse disorder (CCD). We don't know why this is happening to them. What we do know is that bees don't fly near cellphones due to it screws up their internal navigation and can knock them out of the sky. Thus his main point:

Would you give up your cellphone to save the bees?
___________________________

What a great rant, in its true full glory, which I am just highlighting here. Wouldn't it be strange if we found out cellphones are causing the end of human life.

"Real Time: with Bill Maher" PODCASTS his entire HBO show plus extra internet content. This rant will be out in podcast form on or after the 28th April 2007.

The rant is also in a YouTube video box on this page.

I personally think cellphones are causing a inter-dependence in our culture that is not healthy. The EM fields and radio waves aside, 16 year 'olds' and younger should learn self reliance and personal responsibility. Maybe even some ingenuity and real world skills like fixing a flat, or having to be prepared for a worst case scenario, in isolation. I don't have a cellphone because I don't want to be reachable when I am not at home.

I realise this is an archaic way of thinking...that the real world is leaving me behind. I agree. But cellphone users don't understand that they are being desensitized to "Big Brother" over their shoulder. It may not be happening now, that we are tracking people through their cellphones, but we can do it and it will happen. Besides if all the new towers and users are causing environmental damage... well I just don't think they are a good idea on the scale we have. I do think that some people need cellphones, for big business and government officials an instant decision can be very important. But come on.

Your child does NOT need a cellphone. It is not healthy for them and may be destroying our ecosystems ability to maintain itself. The parenting fears you are using connectivity to overcome can be solved by more attentive and informative parenting in general. Without the "cellphone safety net" and illusion of security via said connectivity, your children would be a bit more contemplative in their actions. Not to mention they would pay attention to what they are doing in the space they occupy instead of walk through life with there crooked arm stuck to the side of their heads and day-dreaming about the conversation they are having with some other soul obliviously moving through their world.

It is a mental illness I tell ya!! Now it appears to also be an environmental hazard. More than that.. cellphones' EM fields could trigger a catastrophic collapse of our ecosystem and: WE ALL DIE... "and you little dog too." Wicked Witch (of the west?)

Globalization: It Aint Like What Your Daddy Told Ya

Mr Thomas P.M. Barnett give a seminar, based on his book, that WILL change your view on our position in the world. Why we are in this war. How we need to behave as a superpower and how to reorder our country into a mechanism of global peace.

Mostly it is the single most important thing I have watched in my life when it comes to understanding US foreign policy.

If you are in the military, or know someone that is, this seminar outlines our new security responsibilities in the new world unfolding.

I have Put a YouTube video box on this blog so you can view the videos there if you would like.

Goto C-SPAN Then you must do a video search (found in the middle of the page a little down from the top) on "Globalization" and then watch "The Pentagon's New Map", about 90 minutes then questions. Sometimes that doesnt work KEEP TRYING it is there.

Small snippets can also be found on YouTube. <-link I CAN NOT stress how important I feel watching this is for everyone. Even if you think it will bore you, please try.

Human Extinction Through Ignorance

Geologic history proves climate change happens. The only dispute is how long the swings take once they have begun and why they are triggered. The 'how long' seems to be between 1 and 1000 years most events seem to be closer to the low end.

For instance an asteroid strike or a massive volcanic eruption (super volcano), like that in Yellowstone and 9 other locations worldwide, would result in immediate changes. The changes have lasted for up to a century in the previous worst case scenarios. Then there is the natural ice ages that occur.

These take much longer to unfold. The geological records show that a slow change in global temperatures leads to a snap and drastic changes in global climate. This is why all the theories that involve the disruption of the oceanic conveyor are being studied currently. It is in an attempt to understand how the snap from global warming to ice age happens.

That is what the whole hoo haa is about. Not that the globe will warm up and kill us. But geology would hint that the temperature will rise for a while and then drop off until an ice age is achieved. Why does the planet leave an ice age? The slow buildup of greenhouse gasses and the desalination of the ocean (would be very salty in an ice age)? Seems logical. If I stretch my imagination I can see an Ice age would cool earths outer crust and thus shrink it enough to constrict the core of the planet. This would result in a more compressed and thus hotter core. To release the pressure... volcanic activity and therefore more greenhouse gasses.

Back to volcanic events and pollution. Even though pollution has taken some 100 years to collect and a volcano is an instant effect, in geological terms they are almost the same. A hundred years in the 4 billion year history of things is small indeed. Yet Earth recovers from huge volcanoes within a several decades of their eruption.

Humans can not even hope to pollute as much as a volcano... even if we tried. The cows we breed are apparently putting out more greenhouse gasses than all of human industry is. Apparently the Earth fixes itself very quickly if it is out of balance, quick enough to repair anything we do.

I think we arrogant humans give ourselves to much credit. We think that we can change this planet by our actions. But lets put our egos in check for a moment and look at the raw powers that are running the living planet EARTH.

First, most all life on earth is fueled by the sun (directly or indirectly). But the sun is a long long LONG way away. We are but a speck of sand a half football field away from a basketball (maybe baseball... cant recall) sized sun. Yet enough light hits this little ball of dust to make the surface team with life. Think of all the space Earth does not occupy in space...and how much energy the sun is REALLY putting out. It is inconceivable. But lets turn inward.

Earth has a molten core. Heavier liquids settle to the bottom/center of gravity. Keep this in mind. In order to cause a nuclear reaction all one must do is put enough uranium in a pile and it happens. That is right, if you can find enough of this pure stuff and gather it together it WILL happen, no catalysts, just a chain reaction resulting in a meltdown. Back to the heavier liquids thing.

The molten core of earth acts as a giant filter. The heavier Uranium molecules will continually gather into areas of equilibrium until a nuclear reaction happens. This is happening all the time in earths core (A. Einsteins' theories say this is how space-time/gravity work.) if gravity does not peeter out as you get closer to the core...which it may (gravity is a push not a pull. Like a ball under water, not like Einstein theorised. In fact E=MC^2 is not mathematically sound and is likely just a publicity stunt. [A Blog I will soon do]) In that case the earth spin and chaos theory would say that uranium would be centrifuged into layers and spread evenly. What I am trying to say is that there is so much going on in the center of our planet that we don't know for sure if it is undergoing a continual nuclear reaction or not. In fact its, once again, an inconcievable uncalculable amount of energy.

As you can see the amount of energy that effects our planet from within, dwarfs the amount of sunlight energy that falls on it (responsible for the weather and all life), and even more so the human effects. This gives us some idea of the power of the current we may be fighting.

If we are to fall into a natural ice age, as it is time to, there is nothing we can do to change it. It has nothing to do with the atmosphere, due to our atmosphere is just a faint reflection of, and derived from, the internal workings of this planet. An ice age is a natural internal fluctuation of earth, and, like a heartbeat, to stop it could be devastating. Besides the amount of energy in a large volcanic eruption is so much more devastating that we humans are, yet, it is just a tiny pinhole vent, into the true power and forces at work within our planet. So the climate change is derived from an internal change in earths core and is a symptom of a far more unavoidable problem.

We are using the FEAR generated by the Global Warming scare, to fight greenhouse gasses, thus gambling the human race on the hope we can fix something that may not even be broke. And if it isn't broke, and is a natural cycle of the planet... we have no power to stop it. Our most powerful creation is a nuke. A nuke is, once again, just a few rocks from the planet we are trying to change. Shouldn't we be concentrating on getting off this planet? The history of the Earth shows one mass extinction after another.

We know for a fact that this planet changes. That it WILL change again. That our only real hope is to colonize the sea and space. And that if we stop its natural cycles, we are indeed asking for trouble. We don't know enough to know what to do. But one thing is for sure:

WE MUST LEAVE OUR PLANET OR WE WILL EVENTUALLY BE EXTINCT...ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

(please forward to Al Gore) :-)

Comment thread for this blog at Mysterious Universe Forum.

Question Beliefs: Our Lives Might Depend on It

I am not intending to challenge any one religion... but all of their followers. I am more familiar (and less afraid of) the beliefs of the Christian Church but know that these theories apply Universally. (universe=one song. Beliefs are disharmonious.)

Belief is a touchy subject. So much so that it is a social taboo to question ones beliefs. But as I see it beliefs are what separate us from one another. Two folks believe differently and, due to the nature of beliefs, they can prove neither thus an em pass.

Belief, by definition, takes faith to support. A belief founded in logic becomes a theory. So in reality we are dealing in matters of faith. Indeed to question ones faith is not going to get results. Those of faith start going in a circular argument about belief and faith and break down into "if you don't have faith, you cant understand my beliefs." Likely it is they who misunderstand the source of their own convictions.

In order to understand said source, I must go back to evolution... intelligent design (in case you are a 'true believer'). The empty feeling that most humans feel and fill with their belief system, is a positive evolutionary trait. The reason is simple. Peoples that felt this way were more curious and inventive in an attempt to get psychologically contented. They were less apt to just be happy and exist in bliss, in other word, they left the Garden of Eden. Perhaps they even found more pleasure in the more mundane things in nature due to a satisfaction of filling the void within, whereas if there is no void to fill there would be no artificial satisfaction, no curiosity, wonder or invention. This psychological edge would be enough to dominate those without. Further, the development of a distinct spiritual system both attracted and pacified larger groups of people than had been possible any time before. Another reason it is a dominant trait in modern man.

But alas I must try and approach faith without sounding godless. In order to do so first I have to explain why anyone would want to disrupt someone elses life structure by attempting to undermine their beliefs. History is ripe with wars of faith. And we are not insulated from that now.

In the USA around a quarter of our populace BELIEVE that Armageddon is coming. That YHVH will rescue them from this Earth and take them into the sky. These people don't view Earth as anything more than a disposable temporary living space. The climate change problem don't effect them because they wont be here in the 'end of days'. This is a reflection of what religion is for, absolution.

Humans go to church and pay to be told what they think. Most don't bother to read the bible much less take the time to learn a new language to read the original texts. But are contented to listen to one mans interpretation of an already overly transcribed, and hand copied, Roman interpretation, of 200 year old texts written 50 years after the actual life of Jesus.

I am not saying it is of no worth. But the life of Jesus is being misused by the church as an example of behavior that will grant access to heaven. By putting Jesus between us and God the church has undermined Jesus main teachings about our personal connection with the all mighty.

Jesus' death has been used against us also. Are we not suppose to worship any false idols. Just worship the one God directly. Moses said this. Then came Jesus, and 250 years later (when Rome created modern Christianity... NOT JESUS or his followers) we are using a cross (a torture/execution device) as a crutch to remind us of the sacrifice. And our acceptance of Jesus dying for our sins grants us an eternal seat in the presence of a omnipotent omnipresent being that, I assume, must have billions of other worlds to monitor and grant miracles on. This seems a bit pride full, the original sin. Yet the cross is a sin, a false idol that serves only to put distance between you and God.

God, as it is, must be understood individually. There are NO SHORTCUTS. Churches are profitable organization that allow their followers to absolve themselves from personal responsibility by substituting our logical mental processes for unfounded beliefs and unneeded submission rituals along with rules of how to be civilized... in ages long past. Likely, the actions of the believer and the conscientious non-believer, will be the same in most every circumstance. Simply because a spiritual person will finds the truth...for free.

I am not sure how to challenge someones beliefs without getting anger as a response. But its got to be done. We cant allow the planet to be run by a bunch of people that believe God is a man in the sky with a white beard and big muscles and the Earth is just a place to wait for death or for "the man in the sky" to rescue them. This is the only planet we have got, and the faithful can't be logical about this. We must have logical reasons for what we do to effect the population and environment, not beliefs, and hopes, and absolution from sound reasoning due to 'its what the Bible said.'

But alas, stained glass windows, golden trinkets and bejeweled crosses (all needed to impress God?) cant be acquired through faith alone. If we could all find for ourselves what the spirit urns for, the churches would be nothing more than a strange cult.

We should wield the Bible as a weapon of peace and not an excuse to exclude other people of differing beliefs (or none at all). Nor to wage war or gather money. The words of God should connect us to mother Earth and let us know we are dependant on the rock we live on. That the true nature of God can not be found in a church but between the sky and rivers. That the path to your salvation is yours alone to travel, and no one can guide or follow you. My proof lies in the lives of the great prophets. They followed no one.

Thier unique experiences in life formulated their reality. So no man can ever hope to get to a higher place unless they are willing to throw away conventional ways and find their own truth. In doing so, you will be more liken to any one of the most revered humans in our history than those that are just faithful.

At least that was my theory... and is now my way of life. :-)

Democracy American Style

Supposing that Democracy is the most humanitarian form of government currently in practice, I must pose that the manner by which democracy works in the USA is antiquated and must change. As the emergent world military power we must impart stability and consistency in the use of our power. But America is built on a four year plan (8 at max). This is not good for global security.

Under Bush the US developed the "first strike doctrine" (Bush Doctrine), which states that the USA can attack anyone for any future plans to harm the USA. This is why Iraq happened. There was no reason to go to war with a nation that at current does nothing to effect the USA proper, just our economy.

Bush, and most of the USA populace, believe that a nations potential to destroy our economy is a matter of national security. That seems to make perfect sense. The question is, why have we put ourselves in a position where our national security is based on our economy, which is foreign controlled?

It is Greed.

We elect people to office that have no long term investment into the betterment of the United States. They don't have enough time to enact any complicated social changes before they get forced out of office. The most they can hope for is to not need to work anymore after they are out of office. Folks like the current admin. show the grossest side of what capitalism has become. The top officials in our government all stand to profit from the "War on Terror," which is a conflict of interests...or it should be. They have a finite amount of time in office, our military dominance, an apathetic public and greed.

Other nations cant depend on us because the potential that we will change the planets diplomatic structure with the election of a new president. One man, with so much power. Nobody can disagree with him or they are labeled unpatriotic or slandered for not supporting our troops. Indeed the public at large is being insulated from the global effects of this war by our nationalism (state approved bigotry), and media. And the people of America have no power except for a single day in Nov. every 4 years. Diplomatically speaking this is an impossible situation to allow any long term relations...unless economic.

Countries like China have a stable reactive government. We have a proactive government and a belligerent foreign policy of first strike. Instead of having the luxury of "wait and see" our officials are more apt, due to time constraints, to "go and get." This is why we are better allies with other democracies.

Any nation with a form of government based on having a lifetime leader has a hard relationship with the USA. They see the inconsistency of such a global power as a threat. I must agree. We could turn on any nation and justify it through well told lies.

What can we do? Isolation? Or just not be so casual about waging a war? We need to make some changes that is all I can see.

Is Bush Giving Billions to Terrorists?

I would like to first express that I am not familiar with the topic of Arabic life and structure. Thus if you happen to read this and find errors or have answers please comment.

The Muslim religion is divided into sects, much like the christian church. The two sects of current concern are the Sunni, the majority, and the Shiite, the minority. The Shiite have been ruled by the Sunni in Iraq and Iran....everywhere?

Al-Qaeda is a Sunni organisation that may or may not be actively supported by pro-American Sunni Governments. But I must think most nations in the extended middle east region, (pro-American Gov. or not) are attempting to secure their position in the future that does not include western influence. That means keeping Al-Qaeda off their backs through concession or outright bribery. At current the region is starting to polarise further than ever before.

This may be the plan, seems empirical nations are served by creating conflict and instability in areas they desire control over. We force instability through our promotion of nationalism while creating new divisions amongst those we subjugate. We seem to force historic enemies into conflict through our redistribution of their power structures and indeed their nations borders.

Now Shiites are ruled by Sunnis and a civil war in Iraq threatens to spread throughout the region. This would upset the power structure in the mid-east. While in the short term this would be tragic, nations in chaos, rioting in the streets, sectarian violence and the like. In the long term it would leave a middle east free from the west. The US wants to avoid this.

To this end the Bush administration has begun to pump BILLIONS of dollars into Sunni countries in order to fight the growing Shiite uprisings. We are asking for no accounting of this money and how it is spent because we are asking them to use it for a counter-insurgency effort. Therefore no records will be kept. But wait... isn't Al-Qaeda Sunni?

So the USA gets caught up in a 'War on Terror' against Al-Qaeda (Sunni). Then Bush causes a civil war (Sunni vs Shiite) by attacking Iraq. To stop the unrest from spreading Bush gives billions to the Sunni, asking them to give it to organisations like Al-Qaeda.

HUH?

Time and the Control of Time

This is not a sci-fi/future tech blog her I am going to get into. I am using 'time control' in the real world way. For instance a boss delegates his employees activities thus their time at work is controlled by another.

We currently live in a very structured world. So structured that the mere notion of returning to some more natural and simple manner of seeing things seems loony at best. Bear with me here...

Humans originally came to understand day, being light, and night, being dark, were different from one another and that are behavior was naturally adapted to these two periods. Eventually we came to understand the winter and summer and their cycles. You may be saying "Everyone knows this. We weren't that dumb." But if you look at the evolution of man, it may have taken til just before the "Henge" period for us to understand the significance of the solstices and equinoxes. That is, after all, the alignment of the famous Stone Henge (solstice) if not the entire purpose of the structure (I think it was a meeting hall of the pre-English tribes.)

So we humans had day and night, winter and summer. Further divisions for planting and harvesting times came about much later (agriculture is relatively new.) Then why, do you imagine, humans had the need to name the days. The first need is a cave person wanting to tell someone else to do something later. Being able to do so means the ability to divide labor. More precisely it was our first real attempt to control another beings life by controlling their time on earth absolutely.

Original humans lived from moment to moment with little to no account for their actions (Garden of Eden). Social groups were small and it is supposed we only worked 3-5 hours a day for food in our early homo sapien days. In these first few social groups a need for the ability to communicate the ideas of 'later', 'tomorrow' and even 'tonight', would facilitate the creation of some distinct terms (verbal or somatic).

When these groups got larger, a need for leadership and division of labor to sustain them, became needed. A simple way of dividing up the blur of days flowing by, is into a short cyclical "work week." Without this, a leader could not communicate to the workers when they would get to rest. How many days the original 'work week' was has never been looked at. In fact NONE of this has ever been looked at by serious science. I'd imagine the first 'work weeks' were tribe specific in their duration.

All I am saying is this: The days of the week, months of the year and hours of the days, are UN-NATURAL and only here for our original enslavement by the civilization we chose to create. We should understand that these things are needed in order to exist in our world, but we need to view them as control mechanisms. We should feel our time is blissfully ours... not live each day doing things we would otherwise not do, simply because we have the weekend or vacation to look forward to. Take back your time.

Letting our division of time become so integrated into our lives has lead to an unnatural mental state for human beings. The civilisation it facilitated has left us numb and we would never survive in nature (no Wal-Mart). The very mother of our creation (nature) can NOT support its own children, and I say it is due to division of labor. Thus ability to overpopulate.

Without days divided against one another labor and civilized society could not exist. The structures that hold up society often will hold down its populace. It appears that we have made our choice as humans to give over control of our time on Earth to the society that we live in and ignore our nature...our mother.

Chocolate Jesus

Anatomically correct is the big problem right? Showing nude humans is only obscene due to cultural programing. The only thing one may find offensive about the penis is its varying sizes and shapes are subconsciously linked to power and domination.

But "a penis is as a penis does" and excretion and reproduction is all it does. No reflection of a mans true nature can be divined from looking at his 'manhood'. The true issue is with people that are self conscious over their own penis relative to others. They have been troubled by their relative shortcomings for their entire lives. While as a teen a boy will obsess over a small tool, a man becomes comfortable with his insecurity as part of life.

These are the folks making trouble for an artists depiction of "Gods greatest creation." (man or Jesus, if you are a "true believer.") I am sure if Jesus was given a massive penis people would have complained about as much, but then would not be a true depiction of how a Jewish genitalia look.

Given it is a generalization to say that black men have larger penises than white men, unfortunately it is generally true (I am white). Evolutionarily humans have the largest penis vs body size of all primates. An ape may appear impressive but vs their body size it shrivels down to a relative two and a quarter inches, if they were man sized. Same for breasts. This is due to walking erect.

When we stood up we changed the way and ease of choosing mates with stronger reproductive organs. Man and woman alike stood up and exposed sexual organs to full view and the process of survival of the fittest took over. White people have been wearing clothes and using different ways of choosing mates for longer than Africans.

While desirable female traits are still very similar to the first days, men have managed to change the playing field. Physical strength and a powerful sexual partner became second to finance (the equivalent to strength of old.) Modern security cant be achieved though force alone so those traits are waining.

Jesus was a Jew. I have known many Jews. If this artist depicted Jesus AS A JEW, then I would say the Jewish community might throw a fit. But why christian? Jews can take a joke and may even feel complimented if the artist used a non-Jew as a model. I find no offence in the human body and must assume any person that understands the MEANING of what the bible is trying to say, should take no offence.

The Bible is written to control a civilization 2000 years gone. The underlying meaning of the text and the ideas in it still ring true today. But the antiquated way of interpreting what happened two thousand years ago will always be a source of conflict and truly DOES NOT MATTER. The ideas are what is important. NOT THE MESSENGER! ie)The cross is a false idol; a 'sin' to use it to talk to/worship GOD. You can see, by the way we use the cross, why it is dangerous to interpret the "words of God."

The Chocolate Jesus is a deep and contemplative piece of art to me. I see the that the properties of chocolate and Jesus have many similarities. More to the point, I hope we all restrain our prejudgement and beliefs and really take a good look at Chocolate Jesus and the christian church built around him they both are sweet and melt away if exposed to the light of day.