nvdaily.com link to home page

Traffic | Weather | Mobile Edition
Archives | Subscribe

Opinion arrow Reader Commentary

| 0 | 21 Comments

Reader Commentary: Are propaganda machines targeting Muslims?

By R. Don Prange

I am responding to the Oct. 6 letter by Roy Stokes: "What's in place to prevent another Auschwitz?"

He references the Washington Holocaust Museum and its views of "the remains of history" that witness to the "killing industry" conducted by Nazi Germany, and how a hysteria was cultivated that gave impetus to that industry. Then he cites parallels with a "prison industry" and how that becomes acceptable to our citizenry because of "job creation." And he concludes by asking, "What checks and balances are in place to assure Auschwitz doesn't rise again? What checks and balances have been removed to assure it does?"

To be sure, the letter has in mind the possibilities of how a propaganda machine like that in Nazi Germany could be used against Muslims today, and given the hysteria of an Islamophobia among us, that is a very legitimate concern. So, his questions are urgent ones.

But perhaps some answers need to begin with some other perceptions on "the remains of history" offered by Holocaust museums, and I suggest two valuable book resources: "The Holocaust Industry" (a very suggestive title), by Norman G. Finkelstein, Verso Books, 2000, and "Ending Auschwitz" by Marc Ellis, Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994.

These books have special significance because their Jewish authors are among the "checks and balances" that have already been "removed" - removed from teaching positions at prestigious U.S. universities that gave in to intensive lobbying by Jewish organizations who support the Zionist State of Israel because the authors have been critical of Israel's policies in already creating "another Auschwitz" in the invasion and occupation of Palestinian land and territory. Israel and its policies often have been justified by some because of the atrocities of Auschwitz, just as they have been used to perpetuate support by U.S. foreign policy and by many un-critical U.S. citizens. Can the "views" - dare we say propaganda - of Holocaust museums possibly give rise to a "hysteria" similar to that of Nazi Germany leading to "another Auschwitz" today?

And among other "checks and balances" that have been "removed" is that you will never find such a critique of Israel's policies, backed up by U.S. foreign policy, finding its way into commentaries in mainstream media that continue to serve a propaganda machine that targets not only Muslims here, but Muslims worldwide.

That the "killing industry" of Nazi Germany needs to be condemned is a given. But if Israel's policies are now to be defended as a "solution" to those injustices and atrocities, then we need to hear prophetic voices like those of Finkelstein and Ellis in the tradition of the Prophet Jeremiah who stood at the temple gates in Jerusalem and challenged the atrocities of the state of Israel of another era. (Jeremiah 7:1-11).

The Rev. R. Don Prange is a Winchester resident and part-time minister at St. James United Church of Christ in Lovettsville, and works with the Ministries of Economic Justice, a ministry of education and advocacy.


"Zionists" by no means represent the Jewish people. In fact, many Jews in Israel are against the Zionist agenda. Mainstream media has not focused much on the Zionist cabal, so many do not know the distinction. Popular belief maintains that Jesus was Caucasian, when in fact He was Palestinian. The Zionist marketing department has done a thorough job of blurring the distinctions as well as Jesus' messages. Zionists, essentially, are the group behind Jesus' death.

Thank you, Rec. Prange, for a thoughfully insightful commentary. I suspect it will receive much flak, because when reality meets belief systems, belief systems tend to defend their fallacies. It's reassuring to know there is a discerning readership still active in the world: that, in itself, helps prevent the next Auschwitz.

I have to wonder whether either the Reverend or Mr. Stokes have ever actually been to Israel.

Regardless: You both overstate the matter: "The invasion and occupation of Palestinian land and territory?"

WHAT 'Palestinian land?' Check out the history of Jordan for the answer, guys.

When one finds the need to exaggerate a matter to make a point, he has already found that he has no point to make.

Taking a field trip to see a mountain view does not make one an expert on mountains. Nor does placing the word reverend before your name make one an expert on religion. Part of the centuries old conflict among Jews and Muslims and Christian are rooted in the Old Testament. Religious heritage is the problem facing Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

The foundation story of all three faiths concerns the purported meeting between Moses and god, at the summit of Mount Sinai. This in turn led to the handing down of the Decalogue, or Ten Commandments. The tale is told in the second book of Moses, known as the book of Exodus, in chapters 20-40. Most attention has been concentrated on chapter 20 itself, where the actual commandments are given. It should not perhaps be necessary to summarize and expose these, but the effort is actually worthwhile.

Then there is the very salient question of what the 10 commandments do not say. Is it too modern to notice that there is nothing about the protection of children from cruelty, nothing about rape, nothing about slavery, and nothing about genocide? Or is it too exactingly "in context" to notice that some of these very offenses are about to be positively recommended? In verse 2 of the immediately following chapter, god tells Moses to instruct his followers about the conditions under which they may buy or sell slaves (or bore their ears through with an awl) and the rules governing the sale of their daughters. This is succeeded by the insanely detailed regulations governing oxen that gore and are gored, and including the notorious verses forfeiting "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth." Micromanagement of agricultural disputes breaks off for a moment, with the abrupt verse (22: 18) "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." This was, for centuries, the warrant for the Christian torture and burning of women who did not conform. Occasionally, there are injunctions that are moral, and also (at least in the lovely King James version) memorably phrased: "Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil" was taught to Bertrand Russell by his grandmother, and stayed with the old heretic all his life. However, one mutters a few sympathetic words for the forgotten and obliterated Hivites, Canaanites, and Hittites, also presumably part of the Lord's original creation, who are to be pitilessly driven out of their homes to make room for the ungrateful and mutinous children of Israel. (This supposed "covenant" is the basis for a nineteenth-century irredentist claim to Palestine that has brought us endless trouble up to the present day.)

Seventy-four of the elders, including Moses and Aaron, then meet god face-to-face. Several whole chapters are given over to the minutest stipulations about the lavish, immense ceremonies of sacrifice and propitiation that the Lord expects of his newly adopted people, but this all ends in tears and with collapsing scenery to boot: Moses returns from his private session on the mountaintop to discover that the effect of a close encounter with god has worn off, at least on Aaron, and that the children of Israel have made an idol out of their jewelry and trinkets. At this, he impetuously smashes the two Sinai tablets (which appear therefore to have been man-made and not god-made, and which have to be redone hastily in a later chapter) and orders the following:

· "Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor."

· "And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses, and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men."

Three thousand dead men is small number when compared to the Egyptian infants already massacred by god in order for things to have proceeded even this far, but it helps to make the case for "antitheism." By this I mean the view that we ought to be glad that none of the religious myths has any truth to it, or in it. The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride-price, and for indiscriminate massacre, but we are not bound by any of it because it was put together by crude, uncultured human mammals.

Religious heritage drives Jews, Muslims, and Christians to each hate the other over their religious differences.

Religion poisons everything.

I appreciate your input on this, Mr. Flathers, but the topic is primarily about Zionists. Perhaps you could spend some time with an open mind reading about them:
"Zionists are experts at propaganda, disinformation, denying facts and outright lying. Any criticism of Zionism or of Israel is labelled as "anti-semitism", where this is interpreted to mean "anti-Jewish". This is a slanderous falsehood. Criticism of Zionism is criticism of a particularly ugly political movement, not criticism of a religion or of the adherents of a religion. One may be critical of Zionism and of Zionists while at the same time being quite tolerant of, or well-disposed toward, or even an adherent of, the Jewish religion (as we see from the websites cited above).

Whether one approves of or dislikes the beliefs and practices of Judaism it remains that Jews have a right to hold those beliefs and maintain those practices. No-one, however, Jewish or non-Jewish, has a right to drive out people from their homes on land where they and their forebears have been living for centuries, to deprive people of their human rights, to cripple their society and to damage the welfare of others by a parasitic subversion of the government of another country for base political purposes, which is what Zionists have done and continue to do."
Until the aspects of Zionism are understood by the general public, much of the "us v. them" mentality will continue, even in a place of tolerance and acceptance. When people are divided, they are easily conquered and controlled.

The topic is also a segue from the idea that the rise of the Nazis is in fact quite possible, particularly when a society is busy with entertainment and surface political issues, rather than spending adequate time on deeper matters.

I very much respect you and your opinions, Mr. Flathers: please never take my posts as a personal attack. Your view is important for the complete picture, and should be respected as such. As with any forum, the subtlest word or idea can highjack a topic, and that's why bickering ensues instead of meaningful discussion. Speaking for myself, I submit information for the sake of consideration, not in order to be "right" or hold an upper hand.

[A note to Rev. Prange: This site does not allow for any editing once that "submit" button is hit. Please pardon the "Rec." instead of "Rev."]

Would echo Roy Stokes words' to Dan Flathers... and cite another important work written almost 60 years ago but revived in 2003 as a 50th Anniversay Edition... "What Price Israel?" by Alfred M. Lilienthal... and would also encourage going to a site known as JEWISH FOICE FOR PEACE and click on the option of ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT 101... it's a another piece of significant history... just as you might look at Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"... and YES, I have visited Palestine, and while there also was in certain parts of State of Israel... and could only hope that our 'thankgodformakingmeanatheist' friend might identify himself... and surely hope he would understand that we're on the same page when it comes to realizing that "religion poisons everything!" I think you'd discover we have more in common than you seem to believe... (sorry to use that word)... don prange

and a p.s. to cite another important work on understanding what some call 'Muslim rage'... it's a book by Tariq Ali published back around 2002, "The Clash of Fundamentalisms" and the cover is worth the price of the book...

Subtle parallels between Nazi Germany and the present can become very stark, when one observes with a thoughtful mind.

Prisoners were tatooed with serial numbers, and Germany was indeed developing a form of computer system.

We now have technology forced upon us in the form of computer-scan tatooes, but even worse are the RFID chips already in use in many states. The alledged "benefit" is economics, but the cheerful explanations of control, taken in a serious tone, should be nothing but alarming.
"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has built 70 counterterrorism fusion centers across the nation. The cost to taxpayers is $1.4 billion so that federal and local law enforcement agencies can use surveillance equipment to database the movements of American citizens. According to a US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report on fusion centers, some may be allocated for pre-crime suspicions, others would be simply watched so that they the US government will be able to properly learn how to control a mass of people."
"Meanwhile, mainstream media is busy selling the idea that multi-media devices like smartphones, need to be implanted in the body. In the not-so-distant future, corporations hope that humans will embed microchips into their brains in order to use technologically advanced devices. However, this endeavor has a dark side.

It is predicted that in 75 years “microchips can be installed directly in the user’s brain. Apple, along with a handful of companies, makes these chips. Thoughts connect instantly when people dial to ‘call’ each other. But there’s one downside: ‘Advertisements’ can occasionally control the user’s behavior because of an impossible-to-resolve glitch. If a user encounters this glitch — a 1 in a billion probability — every piece of data that his brain delivers is uploaded to companies’ servers so that they may “serve customers better.” [end quote]

It is important to remember that these 'changes' for "security" came about by alledged events that the public did not - or could not - demand sufficient investigation of. And the public still takes the mainstream media's word as gospel, while crucifying messengers relentlessly. Evidence is destroyed immediately...Oswald's immediate cremation, WTC steel being immediately shipped out of the country, Bin Laden's body buried at sea...and people accept the excuses. But the crimes are directly related to removing people's power, and ability to do anything against the crimes.

All the messengers are trying to say is "look with eyes wide open". Is there any good reason to look the other way, when this threat is very real, and very HERE? Does it benefit society, as a whole, to argue against the uncomfortable truth? Does such a division help or hinder the solution?

What will your personal opinion matter when personal opinions are outlawed for the sake of "National Security"?

In 2009, Peter Offerman presented a picture-essay called "Anti-Semitism is a LIE!"

It is important to remember that Zionists are NOT Jewish: they hide behind any group or ethnicity that facilitates their ends. They have operated under many names over the centuries.

The picture essay is available here:
and a public-access forum has been made available.

My sincerest thanks to Rev. Prange for his courageous contribution to this topic on the NVD.

Roy "Mitt" Stokes never met a conspiracy theory he couldn't get his head around. He will never stop twisting information to support the various conspiracy theories he champions. Proof Stokes can not recognize a spoof if it hits him right between the eyes, please allow me to share some news about the latest loony tune conspiracy flowing over his lips.

Roy "Romney" Stokes implies Texas students already have mind control RFID chips implanted in their brains when they are actually Student ID Cards carried in their pockets, no more dangerous than when you walk out of a store without paying for something hidden in your pocket that triggers the shoplifter alarm.

Stokes Reference:

More fun is the taken out of context "tongue-in-cheek" last paragraph of the referenced article Stokes quoted which satirizes the ridiculous 'cell phone arms race':

"It is predicted that in 75 years “microchips can be installed directly in the user’s brain. Apple, along with a handful of companies, makes these chips. Thoughts connect instantly when people dial to ‘call’ each other. But there’s one downside: ‘Advertisements’ can occasionally control the user’s behavior because of an impossible-to-resolve glitch. If a user encounters this glitch — a 1 in a billion probability — every piece of data that his brain delivers is uploaded to companies’ servers so that they may “serve customers better.” [end quote]"

WOW, this is some heavy mind blowing s..... mmmm, ah, stuff.

I went and read the article Stokes referenced. In the original article the word "predicted" is the embedded hot link reference to the original article from which the paragraph was taken.
This is the full referenced article where Stokes concludes microchips will be implanted in your brain:


· Stewart Scott-Curran, Tim Lampe: What will the phone be like in 100 years?
· They imagine that in 15 years, we get smartglasses with augmented reality
· In 50 years, the wristphone has hologram features and voice activation
· Scott-Curran, Lampe: In 100 years, humans use rocks again to talk to each other

Please allow me to continue quoting the original referenced article where Stokes stopped:

"In the year 2112, civilization crumbles because of climate change and dramatic loss of natural resources. Communication comes full circle as dialogue between humans revert to individuals throwing rocks at each other. But rest assured -- people still laugh out loud."

I could not have said it any better. Check it out for yourself.

living rent free between Stokes ears and poised to start throwing rocks

Bwwwwaaaaahhhhhhh hahahahahahahaa

ROLMAO: I too am ready to throw some rocks.

Mr. Prange, I would be extremely foolish to present my identity to your minions for their consideration of my fate as you rave from your pulpit.

I suspect the connection between Nazism and the Catholic Church is the source of Stokes angst. This example does not stand alone. The connection between religion, racism, and totalitarianism is also to be found in the other most hateful dictatorship of the twentieth century: the vile system of apartheid in South Africa. This was not just the ideology of a Dutch-speaking tribe bent on extorting forced labor from peoples of a different shade of pigmentation, it was also a form of Calvinism in practice. The Dutch Reformed Church preached as a dogma that black and white were biblically forbidden to mix, let alone to coexist in terms of equality. Racism is totalitarian by definition: it marks the victim in perpetuity and denies him, or her, the right to even a rag of dignity or privacy, even the elemental right to make love or marry or produce children with a loved one of the "wrong" tribe, without having love nullified by law ... And this was the life of millions living in the "Christian West" in our own time. The ruling National Party, which was also heavily infected with anti-Semitism and had taken the Nazi side in the Second World War, relied on the ravings of the pulpit to justify its own blood myth of a Boer "Exodus" that awarded it exclusive rights in a "promised land."

As a result, an Afrikaner permutation of Zionism -- whose definition Stokes mangled -- created a backward and despotic state, in which the rights of all other peoples were abolished and in which eventually the survival of Afrikaners themselves was threatened by corruption, chaos, and brutality. At that point the bovine elders of the church had a revelation, which allowed the gradual abandonment of apartheid. But this can never permit forgiveness for the evil that religion did while it felt strong enough to do so. It is to the credit of many secular Christians and Jews, and many atheist and agnostic militants of the African National Congress, that South African society was saved from complete barbarism and implosion.

The last century saw many other improvisations on the old idea of a dictatorship that could take care of more than merely secular or everyday problems. These ranged from the mildly offensive and insulting -- the Greek Orthodox Church baptized the usurping military junta of 1967, with its eyeshades and steel helmets, as "a Greece for Christian Greeks" -- to the all-enslaving "Angka" of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, which sought its authority in prehistoric temples and legends. (Their sometime friend and sometime rival, King Sihanouk, who took a playboy's refuge under the protection of the Chinese Stalinists, was also adept at being a god-king when it suited him.) In between lies the shah of Iran, who claimed to be "the shadow of god" as well as "the light of the Aryans," and who repressed the secular opposition and took extreme care to be represented as the guardian of the Shiite shrines. His megalomania was succeeded by one of its close cousins, the Khomeinist heresy of the velayet-ifaqui, or total societal control by mullahs (who also display their deceased leader as their founder, and assert that his holy words can never be rescinded). At the very extreme edge can be found the primeval Puritanism of the Taliban, which devoted itself to discovering new things to forbid (everything from music to recycled paper, which might contain a tiny fleck of pulp from a discarded Koran) and new methods of punishment (the burial alive of homosexuals or hunting down and shooting a 14 year old girl who advocated women's education). The alternative to these grotesque phenomena is not the chimera of secular dictatorship, but the defense of secular pluralism and of the right not to believe or be compelled to believe. This defense has now become an urgent and inescapable responsibility: a matter of survival.

America does not fight alone against tyranny. Why should Stokes and Prange limit the fight to condemning only the Nazi history or targeting todays Muslims? What could be more motivational than shooting a girl in the head simply because of differing opinions of educational needs? It seems the Stokes/Prange list of urgent sympathies need rearranging of priorities. But...

Religion poisons everything.

In response to my original letter, a member demanded I present evidence of "secret prisons". Today's Northern Virginia Daily has provided that information for me, as well as the bias practiced by what is supposed to be a system of justice...I believe the Pledge of Allegience states "Liberty and Justice for ALL". If this priniple of "freedom is extended to only a few, then what "freedoms" would 'terrorists' have to hate us for?

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (AP) — A U.S. military judge is considering broad security rules for the war crimes tribunal of five Guantanamo prisoners charged in the Sept. 11 attacks, including measures to prevent the accused from publicly revealing what happened to them in the CIA's secret network of overseas prisons.

Prosecutors have asked the judge at a pretrial hearing starting Monday to approve what is known as a protective order that is intended to prevent the release of classified information during the eventual trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has portrayed himself as the mastermind of the terror attacks, and four co-defendants.

Lawyers for the defendants say the rules, as proposed, will hobble their defense. The American Civil Liberties Union, which has filed a challenge to the protective order, says the restrictions will prevent the public from learning what happened to Mohammed and his co-defendants during several years of CIA confinement and interrogation.


Well, Stokes, what do you think about shooting 14 year old girls in the head for promoting education for women? Must death come in boxcar loads before you notice? Where is your outrage?

A thorough and comprehensive study of Agenda 21 will answer your question.

Is it too late to get off the beer? Impairment is what they want, and the deterioration "feels good", so you might be too late, after all.

Please feel free to reject advice from anyone lacking the strength of character to enjoy anything in moderation, especially adult beverages.


Dear Reader,
We have a new grand conspiracy theory to add to the Stokes repertoire of absurdities: The Agenda 21 Grand Conspiracy Theory, guaranteed by Stokes to cure what ails us.



Stokes new grand conspiracy theory revelation joins a growing list of his other closely held grand conspiracy theories:

The New World Order Grand Conspiracy Theory
Mayan End of the World Grand Conspiracy Theory
The UFO Secret Abduction Grand Conspiracy Theory
The Area 51 Little Green Men Grand Conspiracy Theory
The Nazi's Are Running America Grand Conspiracy Theory
The Aliens Are Walking Among Us Grand Conspiracy Theory
The Reformed Alcoholics Know Best Grand Conspiracy Theory
The Connect The Dot Grand Conspiracy Theory;
· Prescott Bush linked to
· the Nazi Party linked to
· George H.W. Bush linked to
· the CIA linked to
· the Patriot Act linked to
· box-cutter wielding Neanderthals
· leading to the conclusion:
· we are living in a Police State

Stokes expends a great deal of effort to sustain the illusion that he is somehow eternally separate from the rest of the universe. Hard not to think he is from another world unknown to you and me.


PS. MINIRWB asked you a question;
"Well, Stokes, what do you think about shooting 14 year old girls in the head for promoting education for women?"

Dear Royster Stokes,

Did you learn the debating tactic named "The Gish Gallop" by observing the performance of your friends, Paul Romney and Mitt Ryan? Or did you get it straight from the horses mouth, Duane Gish?


The Gish Gallop, named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education. Sam Harris describes the technique as "starting 10 fires in 10 minutes"

The formal debating jargon term for this is spreading. It arose as a way to throw as much rubbish into five minutes as possible. In response, some debate judges now limit number of arguments as well as time. However, in places where debating judges aren't there to call bulls*** on the practice, like the internet, such techniques are remarkably common.


In a debate on the morality of America's Founding Fathers, a Gish Gallop might look like this:

"Sure we think that they were good folks, but did you know that Washington not only had more than 100,000 slaves, but he also staged gladiatorial games and made them fight to the death? He also ran a network of opium dens and used his gladiators as couriers to deliver opium all over the 52 states. In fact Washington's opium smuggling got so bad that the British had to step in which caused the Opium War that led to the Revolutionary War and John Locke's famous statement that he had to be given the liberty to smoke opium, or he'd prefer death. That also points out another problem, in that most of the Founding Fathers were part of Washington's opium cult and Ben Franklin's most harmful invention was actually a process to purify the active ingredient in opium and inject it. That's right, Ben Franklin invented heroin! What's more, by the time Andrew Jackson was president the US government was so full of drug addicts that they created a soft drink that was just a way to get cocaine into their systems. Don't believe me? It was called Coca Cola because it was a cola with cocaine in it. Go look it up and you'll find I'm right, coca cola really did contain cocaine!"

If I didn't know better, that example reads like something Stokes would write.


Fluoride used by Nazis to sterilize inmates and make them docile. Fluoride a key dumbing down ingredient of Prozac and Sarin nerve gas -- poisons of choice for tyrant rats.

First of all, it needs to be stated that the 'substance' referred to as 'Fluoride' is a misnomer - there is no such substance listed in the periodic chart of the elements, nor in the prestigious CRC handbook, nor in the sacred 'bible' of the pharmaceutical industry - the illustrious 'Merck Index'. Instead, we find a GAS called Fluorine - and from the use of this gas in various industries such as aluminum manufacturing and the nuclear industry -certain toxic byproducts are created which have 'captured' fluorine molecules. One such toxic, poisonous 'byproduct' is called sodium Fluoride - which according to the Merck Index is primarily used as rat and cockroach poison and is also the active ingredient in most toothpastes and as an "additive to drinking water". But sadly, there is much more to this sordid tale.

Did you know that sodium Fluoride is also one of the basic ingredients in both PROZAC (FLUoxetene Hydrochloride) and Sarin Nerve Gas (Isopropyl-Methyl-Phosphoryl FLUORIDE) - (Yes, folks the same Sarin Nerve Gas that terrorists released on a crowded Japanese subway train!). Let me repeat: the truth the American public needs to understand is the fact that Sodium Fluoride is nothing more (or less) than a hazardous waste by-product of the nuclear and aluminum industries. In addition to being the primary ingredient in rat and cockroach poisons, it is also a main ingredient in anesthetic, hypnotic, and psychiatric drugs as well as military NERVE GAS! Why, oh why then is it allowed to be added to the toothpastes and drinking water of the American people?


The federal government calls them FEMA Corps. But they conjure up memories of the Hitler Youth of 1930’s Germany. Regardless of their name, the Dept of Homeland Security has just graduated its first class of 231 Homeland Youth. Kids, aged 18-24 and recruited from the President’s AmeriCorp volunteers, they represent the first wave of DHS’s youth corps, designed specifically to create a full time, paid, standing army of FEMA Youth across the country.

On September 13, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security graduated its first class of FEMA Corps first-responders. While the idea of having a volunteer force of tens of thousands of volunteers scattered across the country to aid in times of natural disasters sounds great, the details and timing of this new government army is somewhat curious, if not disturbing.


Particularly disturbing is the "Obama Youth" video (scroll down to bottom of page). Remember, George W. Bush started the AmeriCorps youth groups after 9/11.

Turn your head if you must. With Christian book burnings and everything else afoot at the moment, I will tell you that there were extensive displays at the Holocaust museum for each of these events, and where they fit in the complete takeover of Germany.

It's happening again, verbatum.

Yep, King of Conspiracy Theories Stokes practices the fine art of the "Gish Gallop". And he also packs the most words into the fewest ideas, smothering his train of thought. This is a fine tactic when your argument lacks substance, but is full of bull.


Stokes: "It is important to remember that Zionists are NOT Jewish."

Really? You are sure of that? Do you mean:

...ALL zionists are Not Jewish
... NOT ALL zionists are Jewish
... Zionists are never Jewish

Zionism - n
1. a political movement for the establishment and support of a national homeland for Jews in Palestine, now concerned chiefly with the development of the modern state of Israel
2. a policy or movement for Jews to return to Palestine from the Diaspora

Zionism ( Hebrew: ציונות‎, Tsiyonut) is a form of nationalism of Jews and Jewish culture that supports a Jewish nation state in territory defined as the Land of Israel. Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity and opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be liberated from anti-semitic discrimination, exclusion, and persecution that has occurred in other societies. Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to advocate on behalf of the Jewish and address threats to its continued existence and security. In a less common usage, the term may also refer to non-political, cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha Ha'am; and political support for the State of Israel by non-Jews, as in Christian Zionism.

Critics of Zionism consider it a colonialist or racist movement. Some scholars consider certain forms of opposition to Zionism to constitute Antisemitism.

So, Stokes, "zionism" is a noun describing a worldwide Jewish movement that resulted in the establishment and development of the state of Israel.

So, Stokes, "zionist" is an adjective and a noun. A christian could be a zionist, but more likely he just simply hates jews.

Stokes accusing Flathers of possessing a closed mind... Ironic. The pot calling the kettle black..... Priceless.

Associating Zionism with Hitler..... typical Christian hatred of the Jews.

Blaming the Jews for rising anti-Muslim sentiments .... typical evangelical cheering from the sidelines.

I seldom read ROFLMAO's blathering, but I can always count on him to comment on articles I am involved with. So whenever I want to bump an article back to the front menu, I merely need to post...I could simply say "The sky is blue" and pyschopaths cannot resist posting their comments. Sane people can see where the blatherers are coming from and ignore their rants, yet have the topic brought to their attention.

So ROFLMAO actually supports my "causes" by posting, because he can't resist spewing hate and superiority at his targeted victims.

It is best to not engage with psychopaths: it only festers their disease, which there is no cure for. But using their predictability for the benefit of all seems like a nice karmic turn-around.

Note that psychopaths consistently reject possibilities: over time, they actually dismiss all hopes for help, for themselves and everyone else. They reject the very things that could help them, and demand others agree with them. This is one reason there is no cure for them...in the mainstream medical industry, anyways.

On his death, Pope John Paul was praised among other things for the number of apologies he had made. These did not include, as they should have done, an atonement for the million or so put to the sword in Rwanda. However, they did include an apology to the Jews for the centuries of Christian anti-Semitism, an apology to the Muslim world for the Crusades, an apology to Eastern Orthodox Christians for the many persecutions that Rome had inflicted upon them, too, and some general contrition about the Inquisition as well. This seemed to say that the church had mainly been wrong and often criminal in the past, but was now purged of its sin by confession and quite ready to be infallible all over again.

One could go further and say that secular totalitarianism has actually provided us with the summa of human evil. The examples most in common use -- (and a favorite fall-guy for the rantings and ravings of Mr. Stokes) those of the Hitler and Stalin regimes -- show us with terrible clarity what can happen when men usurp the role of gods. When I consult with my secular and atheist friends, I find that this has become the most common and frequent objection that they encounter from religious audiences. The point deserves a detailed reply.

To begin with a slightly inexpensive observation, it is interesting to find that people of faith now seek defensively to say that they are no worse than fascists or Nazis or Stalinists. One might hope that religion had retained more sense of its dignity than that. I would not say that the ranks of secularism and atheism are exactly crammed with Communists or fascists, but it can be granted for the sake of argument that, just as secularists and atheists have withstood clerical and theocratic tyrannies, so religious believers have resisted pagan and materialistic ones. But this would only be to split the difference.

As to the Anglican Church, it may look like a pathetic bleating sheep today, but as the descendant of a church that has always enjoyed a state subsidy and an intimate relationship with hereditary monarchy, it has a historic responsibility for the Crusades, for persecution of Catholics, Jews, and Dissenters, and for combat against science and reason. Again, a favorite pass-time for Mr. Stokes.

The level of intensity fluctuate according to time and place, but it can be stated as a truth that religion does not, and in the long run cannot, be content with its own marvelous claims and sublime assurances. It must seek to interfere with the lives of nonbelievers, or heretics, or adherents of other faiths. It may speak about the bliss of the next world, but it wants power in this one. This is only to be expected. It is, after all, wholly man-made. And it does not have the confidence in its own various preachings even to allow coexistence between different faiths.

For some reason, many religions force themselves to think of the birth canal as a one-way street, and even the Koran treats the Virgin Mary with reverence. However, this made no difference during the Crusades, when a papal army set out to recapture Bethlehem and Jerusalem from the Muslims, incidentally destroying many Jewish communities and sacking heretical Christian Byzantium along the way, and inflicted a massacre in the narrow streets of Jerusalem, where, according to the hysterical and gleeful chroniclers, the spilled blood reached up to the bridles of the horses.

Everybody knows the sequel. The supporters of al-Qaeda, led by a Jordanian jailbird named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, launched a frenzied campaign of murder and sabotage. They not only slew unveiled women and secular journalists and teachers. They not only set off bombs in Christian churches (Iraq's population is perhaps 2 percent Christian) and shot or maimed Christians who made and sold alcohol. They not only made a video of the mass shooting and throat-cutting of a contingent of Nepalese guest workers, who were assumed to be Hindu and thus beyond all consideration. These atrocities might be counted as more or less routine. They directed the most toxic part of their campaign of terror at fellow Muslims. The mosques and funeral processions of the long-oppressed Shiite majority were blown up. Pilgrims coming long distances to the newly accessible shrines at Karbala and Najaf did so at the risk of their lives. In a letter to his leader Osama bin Laden, Zarqawi gave the two main reasons for this extraordinarily evil policy. In the first place, as he wrote, the Shiites were heretics who did not take the correct Salafist path of purity. They were thus a fit prey for the truly holy. Why do Christians, Jews, and Muslims all insist they are the single and only "truly holy"?

In the second place, if a religious war could be induced within Iraqi society, the plans of the "crusader" West could be set at naught. The obvious hope was to ignite a counter response from the Shia themselves, which would drive Sunni Arabs into the arms of their bin Ladenist "protectors." And, despite some noble appeals for restraint from the Shiite grand ayatollah Sistani, it did not prove very difficult to elicit such a response. Before long, Shia death squads, often garbed in police uniforms, were killing and torturing random members of the Sunni Arab faith. The surreptitious influence of the neighboring "Islamic Republic" of Iran was not difficult to detect, and in some Shia areas also it became dangerous to be an unveiled woman or a secular person. Iraq boasts quite a long history of intermarriage and intercommunal cooperation. But a few years of this hateful dialectic soon succeeded in creating an atmosphere of misery, distrust, hostility, and sect-based politics.

Once again,religion had poisoned everything.

As the debate over intervention in Iraq became more heated, positive torrents of nonsense poured from the pulpits. Most churches opposed the effort to remove Saddam Hussein, and the pope disgraced himself utterly by issuing a personal invitation to the wanted war criminal Tariq Aziz, a man responsible for the state murder of children. Not only was Aziz welcomed at the Vatican as the senior Catholic member of a ruling fascist party (not the first time that such an indulgence had been granted), he was then taken to Assisi for a personal session of prayer at the shrine of Saint Francis, who apparently used to lecture to birds. This, he must have thought, was altogether too easy.

On the other side of the confessional span, some but not all American evangelicals thundered joyously about the prospect of winning the Muslim world for Jesus. (I say "some but not all" because one fundamentalist splinter group has since taken to picketing the funerals of American soldiers killed in Iraq, claiming that their murders are god's punishment for American homosexuality. One especially tasteful sign, waved in the faces of the mourners, is "Thank God for IEDs," the roadside bombs placed by equally anti-gay Muslim fascists.

It is not my problem to decide which theology is the correct one here; I would say the chances of either being right are approximately the same.) Charles Stanley, whose weekly sermons from the First Baptist Church in Atlanta are watched by millions, could have been any demagogic imam as he said, "We should offer to serve the war effort in any way possible. God battles with people who oppose him, 'who fight against him and his followers." His organization's Baptist Press news service printed an article from a missionary exulting that "American foreign policy, and military might, have opened an opportunity for the gospel in the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."

Never to be outdone, Tim LaHaye decided to go even further. Best-known as the coauthor of the best-selling Left Behind pulp series which readies the average American for the "rapture" and then for Armageddon, he spoke of Iraq as "a focal point of end-time events." Other biblical enthusiasts tried to link Saddam Hussein with the wicked King Nebuchadnezzar of ancient Babylon, a comparison that the dictator himself would probably have approved, given his rebuilding of the old walls at Babylon with bricks that had his name inscribed on every one of them. Thus, instead of a rational discussion about the best way to contain and defeat religious fanaticism, one had the mutual reinforcement of two forms of that mania: the jihadist assault re-conjured the bloodstained specter of the Crusaders.

All religions take care to silence or to execute those who question them (and I choose to regard this recurrent tendency as a sign of their weakness rather than their strength). It has, however, been some time since Judaism and Christianity resorted openly to torture and censorship.

In this respect, religion is not unlike racism. One version of it inspires and provokes the other.

Religion poisons everything.

My turn already? Golly, time flies when I'm having a good time.

Cheers to TGFMMAA for his eloquent 'shining light' bonfire essays

Jeers to Stokes befuddled 'flickering candle' rants.

19 Posts on this page to this point by:
Stokes - 9
Others - 3

Conclusion = Megalomaniac Stokes loves to read the sound of his own voice responding to the 'emptiness' of everybody else. (do you suppose I am 'honored' as the leading air-head listening to the sound of my one-handed clapping?)

Stokes, please let us know when you can cure people with just your gaze.
Who shall be first in line? Me? Or will you heal yourself first?

(and living rent free between Stokes' ears)


Leave a comment

What do you think?

(You may use HTML tags for style)


Comments that are posted on nvdaily.com represent the opinion of the commenter and not the Northern Virginia Daily/nvdaily.com. If you feel that a comment is objectionable, please click on the Report Abuse link above. We will review the reported comment and make a decision on deleting it if we feel that it contains inappropriate content.


Opinion Sections

Carolyn Long Editorial Cartoons Editorials Jules Witcover Leonard Pitts Jr. Letters to the Editor Linda Ash Mary Sanchez Paul Greenberg Reader Commentary

News | Sports | Business | Lifestyle | Obituaries | Opinion | Multimedia| Entertainment | Homes | Classifieds
Contact Us | NIE | Place a Classified | Privacy Policy | Subscribe

Copyright © The Northern Virginia Daily | nvdaily.com | 152 N. Holliday St., Strasburg, Va. 22657 | (800) 296-5137

Best Small Daily Newspaper in Virginia!

nvdaily.com | seeshenandoah.com