Is There A Terrorist Living On Your Street?

Ok, well I'm opening a whole can of worms here, but quite frankly, I'm sick of hearing about current affairs. In actual fact, I didn't open the can of worms, George W Bush did. It's his fault, so if you're annoyed at anything I'm about to write, then please write to Mr Bush with your complaints at:

Mr George W Bush Jr.
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Thanks.

Right, back to the task at hand. Terrorists, Muslims, Extremists, Arabs, call em what you will, they're pissing me off. I know that this may be a socially delicate topic, but fuckit, I'm gonna get straight to the point. Now I'm not a racist, although I am white. Being white in itself would seem like a fine reason for certain extremists to bomb my house. You may think that I'm exaggerating, and I am, in a way, but everything I say is my opinion of the truth.

Now it is a terrible sterotype that Arabs and Muslims are extremists and or terrorists, and I know that for the large part this is untrue. However, you do have to admit that there certainly seem to be a lot more nutters belonging to the Muslim religion than any other. You don't hear about Buddhists or Hindus going mad over the white devil and his antics do you? How often do Rastafarians or Confuscianists declare "Death to France!"???

You may know what I'm talking about now. Yes, it's this.



When I first saw this, I did think it was quite a bad racial slur, and I couldn't believe that this was printed in a Danish newspaper back in September 2005. However, upon reading this article on the BBC News website, I'm beginning to think that the cartoon may be correct after all.

Naturally, the Islamic world is not happy with this cartoon strip. However, instead of just condemming the cartoon and what it represents, in all their sanity and non-fanaticalism, many Muslims protestors have decided to go crazy-eight on everybody, including themselves. Rather than write loads about this, I'll just include quotes from the BBC article, with my own comments beneath. I'll also include a few photos that I have yoinked from the BBC.



The background is that September last year, the picture was released by a Danish Newspaper. Less than a month later, Muslim Ambassadors complain to the Danish Prime Minister. In early January a Norweigian publication printed the picture. Then on January 30th Gunmen raided the EU's offices in Gaza, demanding an apology, which they got from the Danish paper a day later. France, Spain, Germany and Italy print the picture the following day, assumedly as part of news articles relating to the gunmen in Gaza. On February 4th 2006, Syrians in Damascus attack the Danish and Norweigian Embassies. The day before yesterday, more protestors in Beirut ransack and burn the Danish Embassy, completely gutting the building.


Workers of the Embassy rummage and stuff, after it was torched by protestors.

"Two people died when protesters turned on the American airbase at Bagram, even though the US has had no involvement in the cartoons' publication."

- If you ask me, this just says it all really. Kill the White Devil Oppressors. Dirka Dirka.



At least 5 people have been killed in relation to protests so far. There have been some peaceful protests, but as usual many Muslims appear to be lacking somewhat in self control. Many protests saw participants throwing rocks and stones at embassies, and in one in particular a shootout with police left 2 protestors dead, and 6 policemen were injured.

"In Bagram district, a peaceful protest in the morning turned violent when around 300 'bandits and gangsters' tried to enter the US base"

- What exactly does "Bandits and Gangsters" mean? Were they just waiting for an opportunity to storm the US base and get themselves shot? Who verified that this 300 were gangsters and bandits? Where did they all suddenly appear from? Were they definately not protestors that worked themselves into such a crazy that they demanded the blood of the Westerners? And by storming the US base surely this displays the fact that they are not only angry, but stupid also? Whilst you can't blame them for wanting to kill some Americans after everything that's happened over the past few years, but I mean, comeon, if you must storm a US base, you should at the very least suspect that you'll probably get shot, right?

"In the port city of Bosaso, in the autonomous Somali region of Puntland, police shot dead one protester and three more were injured after demonstrators threw stones and barricaded streets outside international aid agency buildings."

- Well this is just ridiculous. Why attack the very people who have left their own countries to go and help people? Especially when they are helping your people? You resort to attacking these people because of the colour of their skin, and has nothing to to with the merit of their actions, which makes you no better than the average racist bigot.

"They want to test our feelings," protester Mawli Abdul Qahar Abu Israra told the BBC. "They want to know whether Muslims are extremists or not. Death to them and to their newspapers," he said."

- My point made exactly.

"Demonstrators shouted "death to Denmark" and "death to France", and called for diplomats and soldiers from both countries to be kicked out of Afghanistan."

-Ok, so far, these protestors has displayed violence, stupidity, and now they show how much they really know of the situation they are in the middle of. France has long been a strong supporter of the Arabic countries when it comes to the US and their 'reign of terror', so I won't get into that now. Needless to say, I have even less support for the US, who as Osama Bin Laden put it so well himself, “he moved the tyranny and suppression of freedom to his own country, and they called it the Patriot Act under the disguise of fighting terrorism.” - However that discussion is for another time.



I'd like to apologise to any Muslims and Arabs who may read this, and aren't crazy terrorists. I know obviously that every one of you aren't crazed murderous suicide bombers, but the very people trying to defend themselves against this cartoon, are only seeming to prove the cartoon right. However, in all true honesty, it's not just about Muslims. I am of the strong opinion that a great deal of the world's problems could be dealt with quickly by ridding the world of religion. Look back through history and there seems to be one main link between all of the instances of genocide and war; Religion.



A basic Google search will tell you all about the many instances of religious genocide, all across the world. Barring Buddhism, nearly all religions seem to have gone through a phase of persecuting and killing non-believers, and more than one is still at it! However, that's another story.



In short, my overall point is to these Zealots, not your average Muslim or Arab on the street (unless of course they are one of the aforementioned Zealots). By kicking off everytime you don't like something, you only make yourselves look like murderous fools. I'm not particularly happy with the state of my own Government or it's Allies', but going on a religious rampage of death is just not the answer. You're only giving yourselves, and the less crazy among your religion a terrible name.



And as your your average Muslim over here, stop being so bloody pig headed. We know you're not all terrorists/Extremists/Evil Nazils from the future/whatever, but shoving your religion down our throats is also not the right way to go about things. We don't demand to build Churches in your country (any more) do we? English people in Arab countries don't demand that you build Christian only schools, yet you demand muslim only schools. Surely this just increases the segregation?

You have to realise that you are in our Country, and we have our own religions and traditions. You demand we respect your views and requirements according to your religion (and our spineless politicians in the age of Political-Correctness give it all up, plus more), but at the same time you completely ignore the things that we believe in.


Where the hell are they getting these flags from?!?

If everyone would stop being so suspicious and racist, then we could all get along a lot better. I don't mean to offend people, but the whole situation is stupid.

Loose Change 9-11. A Film Everyone Should See.

Especially the Americans. I believe every American should put their views aside, and take a look at this film with an objective eye. Although to be quite honest, the evidence is pretty damning. From only watching a small portion of the film, you can tell that the official story behind the terrorist attacks are quite frankly, bullshit, and badly disguised at that.



The film written and directed by Dylan Avery, a 21 year old from Washington DC. Three years of research presented in a tidy and straight to the point manner, the film is basically a documentary containing what appears to be nothing but hard facts. I've done a small amount of reasearching, looking at the credibility of this guy's claims, and it has to be said, they seem pretty on the mark to me!

Whilst watching this film I had a compelling urge to shout at people. Anybody really. How can people commit atrocious crimes, and clearly escape punishment? How does the American public accept George W Bush? It's would seem that George and his administration are directly responsible for this tragedy. Even if somehow G.W Bush isn't directly responsible, he should still be shunned out of office for letting such a blatent cover up go without action. However, you will see from the film, that the only people who benifited from 9-11 was the Bush family, suprise suprise.

I'm not gonna go deep into discussing the film, and biase your views. However it's only an hour long, and I'm sure you will find your own form of outrage that power can be so calmly abused, and nobody does a thing.

Except of course people like Dylan Avery. Give this film your time, please. It really amazed and shocked me. If you're expecting Michael Moore, you'll be dissapointed. This film makes Michael Moore's look like a mockumentary, and seems to deal soley in the facts, rather than the vague, drama-esque style that Michael is more accustomed to. Sorry for the pun by the way; the words just worked out like that I'm afraid.

I wouldn't normally advocate this, as normally it would be illegal, but get yourself over to Mininova.org or Torrentspy.com and download this film.



Not only does that message appear right at the end of the film (and in the beginning of the extras), but as you can see from this post in a 911 forum that he has actually posted it online, and knows and endorses the fact that people are downloading his film.

Go buy it, or download it, or even watch it on Google Video. Whatever. But make sure you see Loose Change 9-11. And tip your hat to it's creator, while you're at it.

Was there a whiff of cannabis about Jesus?

Article Stolen from: Cannabis.net

Claims of drug use by biblical figures surprisingly have susbtance, says Professor Carl Ruck.



Was Jesus a Stoner? is the mischievous title of an article about the use of cannabis in ancient Judaism in next month's High Times, a pro-cannabis magazine. Its author, Chris Bennett, likes to shock. He is the host of Burning Shiva, a show on Canada's Pot-TV, and an advocate for the medical use and decriminalisation of marijuana.

Bennett first looked at the use of drugs in religion two years ago in his book Sex, Drugs, Violence, and the Bible. He postulates that Jesus's ministry was fuelled by mind-altering substances, that he may have used cannabis-based oils to heal eye and skin diseases and that his very name - Christ - derives from being anointed with cannabis-enriched oil.

His politics and television career might make it tempting to dismiss him but what Bennett says makes perfect sense. Over the centuries drugs have been used by virtually all religions. Why not Christianity?

In ancient times cannabis was widely cultivated throughout the Middle East. It grows like a weed and provides nourishing seed, which is also a good source of fibre used to make rope.

People certainly knew of its pleasurable effects; it would have been impossible to harvest it without becoming ecstatic as the drug would be absorbed through the skin. And as long ago as 1935 a Slovakian linguist identified the plant known as "fragrant cane" in the English Bible as flowering cannabis, a link since accepted by some Jewish authorities.

Ancient people were fascinated by herbs and their healing powers and knew much more about them than we do; at least about mixing herbs to release their potency.

Ancient wines were always fortified, like the "strong wine" of the Old Testament, with herbal additives: opium, datura, belladonna, mandrake and henbane. Common incenses, such as myrrh, ambergris and frankincense are psychotropic; the easy availability and long tradition of cannabis use would have seen it included in the mixtures. Modern medicine has looked into using cannabis as a pain reliever and in treating multiple sclerosis. It may well be that ancient people knew, or believed, that cannabis had healing power.

Much of their knowledge, passed down through an oral tradition, has been lost and to some extent it is the modern prejudice against drugs that has stopped us looking for it. Revulsion against drugs and the hippie culture even led to the term "entheogen" being coined to describe a psychotropic substance used in religious rituals.

Entheogen comes from the Greek entheos (meaning "god-inspired within") and the word is now commonly employed in English and European languages to discuss sacramental foods used by shamans (mystic or visionary priests) to achieve spiritual ecstasy.

So what of the early Christians? At the time they were evolving, they had to compete with other religions of the Roman empire. The strongest of those was Mithraism, imported from Persia, which exists today as Zoroastrianism.

Its sacrament, Haoma, was virtually identical to what we know of soma, in Brahmanism. Worshipped as a god, soma was a strange plant without leaves or roots that needed little light and induced religious ecstasy. It was most likely amanita muscaria: a magic mushroom. In ancient Rome sharing the Haoma cemented the bond of brotherhood of emperors, bureaucrats and soldiers. Pagan Greek celebrations at the sanctuary of Eleusis, meanwhile, included a visionary experience for a crowd of 1,000 people, from drinking a potion made from a fungus that grows on wheat and produces an effect similar to LSD.

So, did Jesus use cannabis? I think so. The word Christ does mean "the anointed one" and Bennett contends that Christ was anointed with chrism, a cannabis-based oil, that caused his spiritual visions. The ancient recipe for this oil, recorded in Exodus, included over 9lb of flowering cannabis tops (known as kaneh-bosem in Hebrew), extracted into a hin (about 11 pints) of olive oil, with a variety of other herbs and spices. The mixture was used in anointing and fumigations that, significantly, allowed the priests and prophets to see and speak with Yahweh.

Residues of cannabis, moreover, have been detected in vessels from Judea and Egypt in a context indicating its medicinal, as well as visionary, use. Jesus is described by the apostle Mark as casting out demons and healing by the use of this holy chrism. Earlier, from the time of Moses until the later prophet Samuel, holy anointing oil was used by the shamanic Levite priesthood to receive the "revelations of the Lord". The chosen ones were drenched in this potent cannabis oil.

Early Christian documents found in Eygpt, thought to be a more accurate record than the New Testament, portray Jesus as an ecstatic rebel sage who preached enlightenment through rituals involving magical plants. Indeed, Bennett goes so far as to say that Jesus was probably not born the messiah but acquired the title when he was anointed with cannabis oil by John the Baptist. The baptism in the Jordan was probably to wash away the oil after it had done its work. The early Christians fought hard for followers in the ancient world, recognising the similarity of their own "foreign" god and his eucharistic meal to the Greek gods. Various sects and even the elite in what would eventually become the Roman Catholic church probably used the full range of available entheogens for baptism, ordination and the eucharistic meal.

What we now call the host might have been more than just bread. There are indications that early Christians shared magic mushrooms - and the spiritual visions and ecstasies they occasioned - as their eucharistic meal. A 4th-century mosaic discovered at a basilica in Aquileia in northern Italy depicts baskets of mushrooms. Why? This wasn't a restaurant. Could the "red mushrooms" have been the ritual meal?

Eating bread and sharing wine together was, and remains, at the heart of the Christian ritual. We'll never know exactly what Jesus and his disciples consumed at the Last Supper, but as they believed they were drinking the blood of Christ we must accept it was - if not actually hallucinatory - at least fortified by God.

Carl Ruck is professor of classics at Boston University