Subject: Hey stupid!
–Alice Cooper, 1991.
09-07-07
Duh Taliban:
Yeah, I guess I’d feel Goldenrule justified killing someone who forces me to wear a burka the rest of my life. (A beard? I don’t know: I’ve never had one.) It’s that demon marriage standard that’s the root cause of the problem. If marriage was what God wants, then women wearing a burka would make sense, because it would decrease men’s sexual desire for them, thereby lessening adultery and sex-outside-of-marriage. I go flippity-flop a lot over a great looking face (I’m too old to emotionally comply with my own writings). I think most of these Muslims are simply sexually in-line with the Catholic Church, but a bit more strict about it: they’re perfectionists, because their religion is a daily thing versus a weekly occurrence. So, this all is just another thing that helps me prove my important point that “marriage” should go. I appreciate having the scenario example to make use of. Their book says to use violence to correct truly bad people. – Hence, all the problems we’re having to deal with today. If you are for the death penalty, then you believe in the same way they do. So, I don’t think killing anyone (the Taliban) who militarily supports the demands that women wear burkas is killing an innocent person. But, if you have to kill a non-military employed civilian to get to the Taliban military, then you are in violation (and make yourself into the same kind of evil). I don’t know why my original war advise wouldn’t work: You assassinate the high leader (use a spy, reward fliers [if you have any integrity left, which we don’t, because we used all we had left just to get Saddam Hussein and his sons], etc.), allow his people to re-elect another, and tell them to stop the burka thing, e.g. (anything that hurts an innocent person) or you’ll seek to assassinate them as well. It should be easy to get them to eventually comply as long as it’s fixing the hurting of innocent people. If it’s just to allow someone to slant drill into their countries resources, forget it, you’re just going to find “escalation” of problems. The scarf thing in Iran (we had similar years ago) does not justify killing the leaders. That’s the kind of thing that should just change via fad and/or eventual logic. We could ask the Taliban if they would comply with not requiring burkas, then, hey, maybe let’em go and let them establish themselves somewhere. Otherwise, the only reason we attacked them was just to be able to enter their country to search for bin Laden. And, since we’ve proved that we are not willing to continue that in Pakistan, the burka thing can be our only justification. (No, I’m not saying we should start invading that area in Pakistan, unless we can do it without killing any innocent people.)
I thought this was funny:
http://www.strangemilitary.com/content/item/3328.html
We’re not fighting Germans or Russians anymore:
Again, these Muslims are religiously instructed to physically fight against true wrong doers. And I don’t have a greater argument against it. Therefore, since we are getting head deep in our conflict crossing them, if we fail to admit to the one-sided evil that we really are, I don’t see this Muslim problem ever just going away. To reiterate, we need to admit to our unfairness and double standards, then make restitution. Yeah, you’re right, it rationally looks like America will eventually fall in the same way Rome fell; and, respectively, Rome was about 2 to 3 times the world power than we are today. So making the U.S. fall today is probably a lot easier to accomplish than making Rome fall back then. I mean, the reality of our WMD mistake may be apparent, but our attitude hasn’t changed one bit. Again, the Democrats know that they’re going to get votes talking liberal, considering our “mistake,” but the next big problem that comes to the Democrat’s desk, will not be taken quite so liberal. Most of us will “believe” it is still liberal, though. And, like I’ve been stressing, “ignorance” is the biggest problem.
Maybe I’ll run for mayor of Topeka, then command the needed burkas:
Iran:
I’m guessing they just want to clean up the problems in their area, for “good deed” reasons, if nothing else, and don’t really wish revenge against the United States (yet). In that effort, I thing they will eventually nuke Tel-Aviv, etc. and have a war with Israel, and I think they’re smart enough to see that we need to get out of Iraq. After the problems are gone, I think they’ll be satisfied with that. But, if we bomb Iran to like aid Israel, etc., then they will surely have a desire for 9-11 types of revenge, and, again, will be a sanctuary of safe-havens (or “a breeding ground for terrorists”) for all the other people in the world who want to kill us. After Tel-Aviv, etc. is gone, I’ll remind everyone how much they should have moved to West Texas. We should find a way to give them Iraq, of course mandatorily in a way that doesn’t make us look like we “lost.” I advise, just talking nice about them, find good things to talk about. Maybe they have a nice museum to commend. Set up some hand shaking meetings. If the inside information is saying that they’re getting Iraq for it, they’ll surely go along with it. The biggest enemy of U.S. is O’Reilly and Hannity (by telling everyone that we lost), but I think if President Bush really stresses it, they’ll conform. I guess just let ‘em blast away the never-ending Israeli problem – I don’t see any other way around that. Just try to be smart enough to realize ludicrous religious Messiah return ideas just doesn’t cut it anymore, especially when it violates Messianic messages (the Goldenrule). I know religious cop-outs rule all minds in the U.S., that’s why I said “try.” I’m sure Iran’s ethics is not perfect. But, that’s something only I could correct. I’m sure they comply with status-quo ethics; but, if that includes the U.S. ethics then that means they can steal, kill, break International law, whatever suits their fancy. Surely they’re not that evil.
You’re all going to not handle it this way, aren’t you? Good, I’m looking forward to copy-pasting this advice into future documents. You could still offer Jews in Israel that you’ll pay to have them move to West Texas. Okay, I understand why you won’t. Some will survive. I’ll copy-paste to them.
It’ll go something like this:
Iran will have a war with Israel, if we “stay out of it” we will probably still supply Israel with rockets, bombs, equipment, etc. China, say, will furnish rockets, bombs and equipment to Iran. Then eventually, they’ll be a nuclear was between China and the United States. Well, if I’m still here after that, I’ll keep up my emailing; but, I betcha I’ll have to remove a lot of names off my list.
To Catch a Predator, on MSNBC:
The show entraps men to come to a house to have sex with a girl past puberty. It’s pretty entertaining because they’ve got it all set up for so. The cameras and boom mics rolling up to the guy, and the loud violent sounds of the arresting officers is great, but the looks on their faces after hearing about the $30,000 bail is the best, added to that continuous in-shock look knowing the rest of their entire life is now pretty much crάp. But, like the drug problem, I don’t think they’re ever going to stop all the sexual desires out there for willing sounding “attractive” young girls. It’s just not the way God made us. I’m just telling you all this because you obviously don’t know. In an open sex society, we could make laws that could much better explain the wrong of having sex with pre-puberty; because, today, just about all sex is defined by some authority as wrong or sinful, so there’s no stability. The Goldenrule with satisfying adult sex lives (diverse multiple partners), should stop sexual desire for pre-puberty kids. Guys like Ted Bundy don’t have an “evil” sexual desire, they just desire to hurt people via sex. A fear of Fair Afterlife Punishment (not cop-outs and false condemnations) is the only way to stop guys like Bundy. I don’t think any of the guys arrested in this show wished to harm the girl. If one did, it can be explained by the law of averages. I’d like to see the number of people who respond to an Internet sting that invites people to rob a bank with them (something indicative of a method where someone usually gets hurt), versus the number who would respond to a ready, willing and, mostly, able lure of young beautiful girls, in a very, very sexually suppressed society. Well, I’m sure it’d take a lot longer waiting for someone to arrest, but when we did get one, it’d be millions of times more for the benefit of society. I understand, cops and the media don’t like working that hard; they like easy things, so enforcing laws that shouldn’t really be laws (where no one really gets hurt) has to be the easiest. Especially when God’s strong sexual desire is working so ever hard against it. Even if the guy already has ten girl friends, there’s still a Godly placed desire for more, or better, something different. Since the Pope demands a monogamous marriage standard, looks becomes a priority, as it creates a game of success: one is more of a “winner” the more attractive his wife is. The average shape of face and body features is what makes one attractive. So with that, older people gradually lose those shapes, with wrinkles, etc. to boot. With a fad that sexually desires diversity in looks, that being what would impress your friends, after you’ve been with a young person, next you will desire someone old. Thin, to fat, to medium, to tall to short, etc. Other than not using safe-sex, the only thing that hurts a consensual adolescent having sex is the ignorant bigots that say it’s wrong. Heck, they probably will even like it. Bigots have been taught it, so they are animalistically unable to not think it; even though, again, there’s no victim. Another problem with this is that while we’re arresting people for consensual sex, busting folks who smoke marijuana at concerts, etc., police and media could much better utilize their time just patrolling areas better where thugs have to kill somebody to join a gang, where people are ready to cut the fingers off of grocery store managers, etc. So dumbness does hurt overall.
You’re too “smart” to know you’re dumb:
I mean, I’m trying to think of the best way to explain how you’re wrong about certain taught subjects, and really the best and probably only way is using the word “dumb”: If you don’t realize how easy it is for you to be fooled and taught by our elders the wrong or antiquated thing, then you’re not going to accept the explained logic of it in any other way. Especially, if you’re Pope. Hannity can change easier that the Pope.
Desiring one versus desiring more / diversity:
“Love is a burning thing, and it makes a fiery ring. Bound by wild desire [for one], I fell in to a Ring Of Fire… I fell into a burning Ring Of Fire. I went down, down, down, and the flames went higher. And it burns, burns, burns: the Ring Of Fire: the Ring Of Fire.” –Johnny Cash, 1963. Need I really comment?
We rely on our communication skills more than you think:
Hypothetically, if everyone currently living (over 6 billion), didn’t have the communication taught prerequisites of the people who have lived before, or their things, we wouldn’t have anything we have now. Our only food would be just what we can get within reach (hence we’d starve in today’s forest). Our shelter might be a bunch of branches on a creek bluff (considering a large population). None of us could communicate during our entire lifetime with anything more than emotional sounds. We would not be eating any animals, though: we would not even know we could. And if we did see a carnivore take apart an animal for food (which is described in Genesis), we could only obtain via chase (or by already dead): we would not be able to reckon out traps, etc. No fire. No wheel. We wouldn’t have sex until we would notice the simply correlation. If the hole was too tight (too young) we wouldn’t force it, and would not try it again. Only in later years, and only by learning by experience (learning the hard way), could we maybe learn to defend ourselves with sticks or rocks. Bow and arrow or spear: forget it. Our minds are predominantly adapted for reliance on taught communication: the Chimpanzees could survive better than we could, because they’re adapted to survive without complex communication abilities. Now, when someone like any of us who knows what we know today, came to them, then we could quickly teach them all kinds of fabulous things that would definitely amaze the elders (and much more so, if we had the skills of someone 200 years ago); where the Chimps would be much harder to teach. Now, you think I’m wrong because you currently do know a lot of stuff; but, even with your current knowledge, Lewis and Clark could survive better than you could, simply because we haven’t been trained as well with our modern conveniences. You’d have to read many of the books at your local survival store first. So if you’re right, tell me why I can reasonably say that a man 10,000 years ago could survive in the wild better than a well advanced you? Because he had been taught it more, and you haven’t. I guess my point is, that our ability to think “further” is not what we think it is. A good example is, we are so dumb that we can bomb the hell out of Iraq’s infrastructure killing thousands of innocent civilians (and in this case, also their innocent military) three (3) different times, then actually think those people are not going to want revenge. And, you even had me informing you of that likelihood prior to 2003: realistic probability I never heard from anyone else (others just thought we didn’t have ethical justification). “Dumb”: it’s just the way you all are. So my time in writing (including harsh criticisms) is a very, very charitable thing for you! And, you’re not even smart enough to realize it.
Mr. Critical, we think you just make up your own rules:
Well, yeah, you’re right. I have to because status-quo rules just say it’s whatever you can get away with, depending entirely on how much money you have, how attractive you are, and I guess who you know. But, all my five issues well cooperate with Jesus’ red-letter priority Gospel instructions of the Goldenrule. Today’s cop-outs don’t. So, who has really made their own rules? – The answer is: sinners (those who gain by hurting innocent people).
“Dumb”: I sense it in different ways depending where I am:
I’ve done business in several states, and I could be mistaken, but I’ve noticed some consistent stretches of dumb that appear to vary from state to state:
In Arkansas: They seem to be much more dishonest than other places. And in a way where you know they’re being dishonest. Like I could state something to you all right now where you would have no idea I was being untruthful, or I could lie in such a way that you could easily tell I was lying. That’s the way they are in Little Rock. However, they are easy to sell to: They seem to trust whatever I say. Once they see the point of an innovative product or service, they’ll buy it. Since the lies were easy to realize, it really never hurts me because I will know to either do or not do something anyway based on factuality; but, it sure can irk a person.
Iowa: They’re kind of the opposite of Arkansas. They are very distrusting and skeptical that there could be anything better, even though I’m not being dishonest about product, service or self. But, they seem to be pretty honest, and will openly speak their mind. If they’re lying, it’s in a way that’s difficult to catch. You have to really earn a sell in Iowa; but, once you’ve earned it, you’re in: they’re very good to work with.
Nebraska: I’d say they’re pretty average, average in everything. Average degrees of smarts and dumbs. Nothing excessive or abnormal that I could see.
Oklahoma: They’re a lot like Nebraska, but, of course, in a bit more Southern or rugged way (which is perfectly okay). Great state to do business in.
Texas: I haven’t done a lot of business there, but with who I have, they can be rather mean / cruel. Now, they’re all pat you on the back, your big Texas pal kind of thing (which can make a person feel good) if they want what you’re selling. But, if they don’t need what you’re selling, they seem to want to burn their bridges.
Colorado: They are kind of light headed. They will work hard and honest on something, but will have to do it over because they made a few dumb mistakes.
Missouri: Sorry, people there seem to be a good example of pretty dumb, while strongly thinking they’re very smart.
Kansas: Hard to believe, but there is a lot of excessive criticism, fault finding and perfectionism here. If there’s a small blemish on your product or service, they’re going to find it and point it out. I don’t see how I made it through school here, because it seemed I was being put down about something or via by some gesture every day. But, of course, to be more perfect, I know they were in error probably half the time. (I guess that Phelps family can attest to this.) Kansans are very cordial people, though. They’ll like invite you in their home, but will point out things they think are in need of improvement. Yeah, now that I think about it, I can see the correlation: they’ll invite you in the house so they can enjoy fixing all your imperfections. I think I, even, have disturbed many a Mormon missionary, etc. who’s knocked on my door, by welcoming them in.
If I had to list the states in order that I would most like to do business in (just my closest states) it’d be: Oklahoma first, then Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa (even though I could make twice the money in Arkansas), Arkansas, then Missouri last: the dumbest is the most annoying to have to work with. Once I was sitting on a train across some folks from Tulsa, Oklahoma. I was kind of shockingly impressed with them just because of where they were from. I gave their town a very good complement, in a way that it probably seemed rather excessive / pretentious. But, I was being sincere from my heart. Next time, I’ll have to make an effort to lessen my enthusiasm a bit. (And I’ve been to California, New York, Florida, etc. too.) Nebraska might be a bit on the misunderstanding in communication side, but not enough to affirm a tendency. I don’t know if the Clinton’s really reflect Arkansas. I really don’t know Hillary, but Bill’s leans a bit more Missouri. George W. Bush, yeah, he’s a Texan: he’s either your best friend or your worst enemy, depending on his own personal need. He kind of treats God the same way, where he’s the best of both.
Do you want more?:
California: They lean to be more the thinker types (Reagan, Arnold, hippies). But not always realistically.
New York: Pretty organized and realistic, but not very innovative.
Florida: I really don’t know.
Washington, D.C.: Very happy people. Not a good place to be an illegal drug dealer – they don’t really need it.
Minneapolis: Very productive. Keeps a low profile for a city of its size. Probably uses their highways a lot.
Chicago: Watch your back there. They’re the epitome of American business. They won’t keep promises. And will nitpick you to the bone for what’s good for them. Probably over worked and under paid. I bet there’s a lot of anger control problems there. Prisons are probably full.
New Orleans: Illegal drug use has to be the norm. They’re probably angry at the National Guard mostly because they didn’t bring them a supply of controlled narcotics – heck with all that other stuff. When I visited there about ten years ago, being under sea level learning about all those levees, I was amazed that it could be done housing that large of a city. The tour guide said a huge disaster could easily happen: just one hole could do it.
Detroit: Very strong, powerful and energetic.
Indianapolis: Isn’t it just a racetrack surrounded by a corn field?
Nashville: A lot of people just waiting in line.
Orlando: Meet your new neighbors.
Atlanta: A place you can be openly gay.
Boston: Unexpectedly nice. Appeared safe.
Philadelphia: Lots of assaults.
Las Vegas: The thing here is to stay up late, if you can handle not getting enough sleep.
Phoenix: Too hot.
Baghdad: Determined.
Taliban: Dumb (or dumber).
Israel: “Needs” cop-outs for some reason. Just move to West Texas and will find satisfaction changing to Protestantism.
United States (as a whole): Slowly but surely (hopefully).
O’Reilly: Is living in another time period.
Hannity: Enjoys hurting others.
Greta Van Susteren: Knows how to do her job without offending any of us viewers. Therefore, not quite as entertaining.
Be careful when you do your good deeds:
I remember a big story years ago when a woman was arrested in Cincinnati for adding money to people’s expired parking meters. You see, even media leaders are too dumb to realize that parking meters aren’t just there for city income: they’re there to limit someone’s stay in busy congested areas, so others who need to park close for quick business can more likely find a spot. So, placing money in an expired meter is not a good deed for the person who needs the meter for something brief. If top media leaders lived to be a thousand years old, they’d have never figured this one out on their own. But those are the IQs who really control things in this world.
O’Reilly says “I don’t get it”:
–concerning gangster rapper Nas’s “Shoot ‘em up, just shoot ‘em up … kill kill kill” lyrics. Well, just put Nas in Iraq to support our troops, then O’Reilly would understand. Tell me about the worst know gang violence that you can find. Then “just try” to explain to me how that was worse than the al-Saa restaurant, Amiriyah civilian shelter, etc. I’m not saying at all that gangs are righteous, but explain to me the real difference between their disputes with other gangs, and our disputes with other countries? Educate me! I’m too stupid to “get it”!
! ! !:
I’m noticing O’Reilly’s starting to raise his voice again. Well, he finally realized he can’t let something I write influence him. Especially letting it show. Plus, I’m sure his ratings go up when he gets really angry. Next time, have something nearby to break or throw something on the floor. Or do something really interesting. – I’ll bail you out of jail. Maybe you could ask for some advice from Ted Nugent. When all else fails, just tell that difficult guest: “Hey… up your nose with a rubber hose!” Or, “Off my case toilet face!” Maybe: “Up your butt with a coconut!” How about: “Eat my bladder, Mad Hatter”? Or enter high school level and shout: “Route your spout out, you devout liberal pout!” “Try to ascertain: your brain is like a piece of grain in a mountain chain.” To get one of those gangster rappers: “Yo mamma’s booty is so big that her graduation picture hada be taken via aerial photograph!”
Tell the government leaders to just flip a coin, to give the public better odds.
“We ridded Iraq of a terrible leader”: Saddam Hussein:
The way we’ve fought our past and current wars, and via our discrimination, explain to me how we can rightfully call him a terrible leader? Oh, I forgot, our media doesn’t tell about our atrocities and all the innocent people we have killed. Ted Nugent’s even oblivious to it. Well, then never mind: I can’t make my point until the media quits discriminating!
Nonoxynol-9:
Studies have proved that one in twenty women reported some kind of irritation using spermicide containing the active ingredient nonoxynol-9, which earlier simple tests found “rapidly” killed HIV, and just about every other STD; which unlike the condom does not hamper sexual enjoyment. This findings suggested that if a woman who had a severe allergic reaction to nonoxynol-9, like prostitutes surveyed in Africa who used it about ten times a day having sex with even more than ten men a day, tiny cuts or bleeding inside the vagίna could occur opening the necessary avenue for the HIV to enter the blood stream, after the HIV has swam through the “rapidly” killing active ingredient. And this is the reason why now American clinics don’t recommend the use of this product at all for people who are dating, nor to even try it to see if she feels any kind of irritation. Therefore, couples or any liaison now have to always use a condom, which does hamper sexual enjoyment, which experts hope will lead to less promiscuity, begetting less divorces, thereby causing less welfare taxes to poor women whose ex-husbands don’t properly pay the court ordered child support, so the rich man can see just that little bit higher of a number to the far right of his total assets figure, which impresses the wife just that much more, and may help just that slight bit more when money talk comes up on the golf course. (Too many thinking steps for even me to reckon out.) So my question is, what was the percentage of women who reported some kind of irritation using placebo?
(I feel sorry for a company trying to bring to market a comparable spermicide with even less reported irritations. I think if the reports show that one in a thousand told of some kind of irritation, our government would still through it out, especially the Bush administration.)
Hey O’Reilly:
“Up your gizzard with a rubber lizard!” No, I’m just kidding. Seriously, I think you could utilize your valuable time much better by pressuring Mexican leaders to answer the root reason why so many of their people want to cross the border, instead of whimpering so much about the poor innocent (ethically) / guilty (statutorily) human beings / violators who cross the border. You know, put the pressure on. Maybe you could get a solution to the entire problem. Then I’d have to call you smart. Of course, now they’re all gonna know that you did it after my suggestion. But, if I don’t mention it, you’re never going think it. That’s what’s called a “catch-22.” I think future people will see you as a better person if you don’t let the fact of my suggesting it deter you. Same with you Mr. President.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio:
He’d be great if he could focus on being tough only on people who hurt innocent others. Once we all know what’s truly right, and what’s truly wrong (simply the hurting of an “innocent” person, only), then guys like Joe will make it a much better world. But now, I bet he’s rightfully just called a lot of names. “Intelligence”: we’re still a long ways from it.
I don’t see why Iran should be worried:
Let’s see, we’ve got Afghanistan, we’ve got Iraq, yeah I’d say we’re ready to move into Iran to retaliate for that 1979 hostage situation: the one where no one was killed. We don’t know why, we just “feel” that we should:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_bombings_in_Iraq_since_2003:
September 2: A suicide car bomber killed two soldiers and injured eight when he targeted the first gate of an Iraqi Army base in Taji.
Ouch, that’s gotta hurt. Or, that’s just more people who had to die so someone would remember my February 1998 advice.
If you are for the death penalty, then you judge the same way the terrorists do.
See ya later, greater hater.
Mr. Critical – Knowin’ when others say they don’t know.
PLEASE TAKE NOTE:
If you got war drafted onto my email victim list after 3-21-06 (or you are a little old man in China looking for answers), and if you would like to read my prior emails, which are sometimes necessary to fully understand subsequent mailings, I decided to slap ‘em all on the Internut (along with a few other idiotologies). My new website: http://www.the-Goldenrule.name/. So, go get ‘em! Oh, of course I permit your sharing of this Web link, or your wife, with others.
-- Home (Index) --