|World peace is
|Humans are too nice,
not too violent
All nations live in fear of one another, and we all have large
militaries for protection. This creates the impression that humans are
incredibly violent and dangerous, but as I emphasize over and over in
this section, we are fools to live in fear of one another.
Animals do not
have frivolous qualities
I will go over lots of evidence
to show that humans are actually very kind, peaceful, and generous. I will
show that the reason there is so much crime, loneliness, divorce, starvation,
rape, mental illness, sex slavery, alcoholism, obesity, and other problems
is because humans are too nice to deal
with destructive and defective people. We want to help people,
not hurt them. We want to
forgive criminals, not kill
them. Our militaries are intended to prevent war, not to start war.
As I will show, we need to be less nice in order to create more
peace; we must become more violent in order to reduce
Animals are biological robots
that have no desires or thoughts. They neither enjoy life, nor dislike
life. They have no leisure activities, either. Everything animals do has
a very important reason for it. For example, we assume that whales
are "playing" and "having fun" when they jump out of the water, but animals
don't "have fun". All of their behavior that we interpret as "playfulness"
or as "leisure activities" developed for a very serious reason simply because
the competitive struggle for life does not
permit frivolous qualities. Animals
have only the qualities that are truly necessary
for their survival and reproduction. (I have more about this
concept in Part_3 of
my Dumbing Down series.)
When fish began adapting to life on land many millions of years ago,
they began to lose the qualities that were no longer necessary, such as
their scales and slimy coating. After adapting to the land, some of the creatures
went back into the water and became whales and dolphins, but they
had lost some of the qualities that they needed for life in the water.
Their skin, for example, became slightly
different after adapting to life on the land. Therefore, it's possible
that the reason they jump out of the water so often is to compensate for
their different skin. Perhaps this is their method of removing parasites
Some smaller dolphins and whales can jump completely
out of the water, and even do flips!
People assume that they are "having fun", but these jumps require their
power output, and they would not
exert such enormous amounts of energy simply for entertainment. You might
find it useful to put on some flippers, go underwater, and then swim up
as fast as you can and try to rise completely out of the water. That should
show you that this activity is an incredible athletic
event, not a casual recreational event.
Animals are fearful and suspicious,
Every physical and mental quality of an animal is necessary
for its survival and reproduction. Animals do not have frivolous or useless
qualities. Since humans evolved from animals, that means we can understand
our mental and physical qualities by looking at how those qualities were
for animals and primitive humans. For example, the violent
temper that men have makes no sense if you consider humans to
be a creation of a God, but the same emotion can be seen in animals, and
it can be seen to have a valuable role in their lives. Nothing about the
human mind or body is
of our characteristics have sensible
reasons for their existence.
In order to improve our lives, we need to understand the purpose
of our characteristics. For example, in order to improve marriages and
relationships between men and women, we must understand that love, romance,
and sex developed only to serve a function,
not to entertain us. We also have to realize that we have qualities that
serve as checks and balances. The more accurately we understand ourselves,
the better we will be at understanding our problems and figuring out how
to design a better society. We need to face the fact that the human mind
is modification of a monkey brain.
Animals don't have the intelligence to figure out which animals
are truly interested in eating them, and which are harmless, and they have
no way of determining whether a loud noise is meaningless, or if it's a
sign that they are about to be flooded by a river that has overflowed its
banks. The animals that survived the battle for life were those that became
extremely alert when they heard a loud noise, or when they saw some other
animal die, or when they found themselves in any unusual situation. Animals
evolved into a creature that was suspicious of everything, and constantly
on the lookout for danger.
Humans did not
develop an emotion to kill
However, it is important to notice that there is no animal that engages
in recreational killings. Everything an animal does has a reason, but there
is no reason for recreational killings. In fact, killing for recreational
purposes would be a waste of an animal's energy and time. Therefore, the
animals that engage in recreational killings would be at a disadvantage
compared to those who didn't have any interest in such an activity. The
competitive battle for life favors the animals who put time and effort
only into important activities, not recreational killings.
Occasionally an animal, especially a pet cat or dog, will kill another
animal for what appears to be recreation, but there is always a sensible
reason for their killings. Pet cats, for example, are constantly hunting
birds, flies, mice, butterflies, lizards, and other creatures, but not
because they enjoy killing. Rather, they have a craving to hunt and feed
themselves, but since humans provide them with excessive amounts of food,
they're not always hungry enough to eat what they kill.
No animal developed an emotional craving to kill. The carnivores like
to hunt, but hunting is not "recreational
killing". If any animal truly had an emotional craving to kill other creatures,
then they would be doing so all the time. Consider that a dog will try
to have sex with your leg. The dog doesn't make any attempt to be romantic
with you. He simply grabs your leg and tries to satisfy himself. If dogs
had cravings to kill, they would behave in a similar manner. Specifically,
they would simply look for something to kill. However, dogs don't
want to kill. They want to hunt.
Pet dogs want humans to throw sticks for them to chase after because they
enjoy hunting. If dogs enjoyed killing, then they would not
need us to throw the stick. They would simply attack the sticks,
balls, and other objects. The difference may seem subtle, but it's very
important in understanding animal and human behavior.
Animals routinely get into fights over territory, status, and mates,
and this can create the impression that animals are violent, but it's important
to note that they don't actually want to kill one another. In fact,
the reason that they make so much noise during their fights is because
their first preference is to intimidate their opponent with frightening
displays of noise and teeth. Animals avoid
violent fights, especially with their own species.
Since animals avoid violent fights, that means humans evolved
from a creature that avoids fights. Therefore, the theory that humans
violence or war requires that during the evolution of animals into humans,
a new emotion developed in our ancestors;
specifically, an emotion that gives us pleasure
from violence, or from killings or suffering. However, it is
unlikely that we developed a new emotion. Some important concepts in regards
to evolution are:
It is difficult for us to inject
insulin into diabetics
• It is very easy for existing
qualities to deteriorate.
It might help you to understand how this concept applies to our mind if
you first consider how it applies to our body. The human body is just a
modification of a monkey body. We have the same bones, veins, tendons,
and organs that the monkeys have. Humans didn't develop any new physical
features. Since we didn't develop any new physical features, what are the
chances that we developed some new mental features?
• It is time-consuming for
an existing quality to be altered by
a small amount.
• It is even more time-consuming for an existing quality
to evolve into a noticeably improved
• It is incredibly rare for new
qualities to appear from nothing.
The human brain is just a modification of a monkey brain. It's not likely
that we developed any new mental qualities. It's more likely that some
of the monkey qualities deteriorated a bit, others were altered
a bit, and others became more advanced.
Since animals do not enjoy violence
or recreational killings, humans should not enjoy violence or recreational
killings, either. And this is exactly
what we see all throughout history. Although people are frequently getting
into arguments and fights with one another, we go out of our way to avoid
killing one another. We don't even like looking at people who are bleeding,
and we don't like looking through torn skin at
the organs underneath. We have so much of a problem with blood and death
that it takes us a while to get accustomed to being a nurse
or doctor. Nobody needs to become accustomed to food, flowers, grass,
trees, sex, sunshine, or water, but we have to become accustomed to blood,
surgery, hypodermic needles, and dead bodies.
If humans were truly violent creatures who enjoyed killing
and hurting people, then we would have no problem injecting insulin into
diabetics. In fact, we would enjoy watching the person suffer a
bit of pain. However, we have trouble giving people injections, even when
we realize that we are helping the person, and even when we realize that
the pain is trivial and very brief.
We cannot kill the severely mentally
We don't like the idea that we are hurting
a person, and we don't even want to watch a person be hurt, even
when it's trivial, such as from injecting
insulin. We don't enjoy watching people suffer. We don't even enjoy
looking at the photos of needles going into people's bodies. If
we truly enjoyed hurting people, we would enjoy
these photos. We even have trouble pulling Band-Aids off of children, even
though that is even more trivial than giving injections to diabetics.
We can easily accept people with minor physical
deformities, but we do not like people
with serious mental deformities. Some
people, especially women, enjoy feeling sorry for the mentally retarded,
but we don't actually like them. Nobody wants them as neighbors, spouses,
or friends. We don't even enjoy looking at photographs of their bizarre
facial expressions, and we don't like listening to their nonsensical remarks
and noises. We hide the mentally retarded people in "human garbage dumps",
such as orphanages and hospitals.
We cannot kill even the hopelessly
We don't like retarded people, so
why are we letting them live? If humans were truly a violent creature that
enjoyed killing, wouldn't we kill the retarded people rather than waste
our resources taking care of thousands
of them? Why are we willing to take care of people that we
don't like? Why don't we kill them? The reason is simply because
humans have such incredibly powerful inhibitions against killing
people that we don't want to kill even
the most hopelessly retarded people. We would rather push the retarded
people into a "human trash pit".
Consider how this issue relates to the concept of war and peace. Why
should the people in Russia or China be afraid that Americans will kill
them when we cannot kill mentally retarded people? One of the most extreme
examples that I've mentioned in my files is this
mother who is taking care of a baby that doesn't
have a brain. If we can't kill a baby that doesn't have a brain,
then why would we want to kill healthy, happy people in Russia or China?
It should be obvious that humans have such incredibly powerful inhibitions
about killing that we don't want to kill any
human, not even the most severely defective people. So why would we kill
people? The answer is, we don't want to kill anybody!
We are not violent creatures. We do
enjoy death or killing. We do not want war. So why are we building
militaries to protect ourselves from war? Who
is going to attack us? Who among us
actually wants a war?
We tolerate minor physical deformities without any trouble,
but there are some babies born with physical deformities that prevent them
from functioning properly in society. How about these
twin girls who are joined at the head? They are apparently sharing a portion
of their brain. They are among the
very few "Craniopagus
twins" who are in good health. Do we consider this creature as one
girl with two bodies? Or as two girls with one brain? If this
creature wanted to get married, would it need one husband or two?
Animals do not care about the quality
of their life
How extreme does a deformity have to be before we can control our emotions
and kill the creature? For example, what if these girls had been joined
farther down along their faces so that all four of their eyes were inside
their skulls, and only their two mouths were exposed?
These two girls are just as happy as all other babies because they are
still very young. However, soon their twin brains will have developed to
the point at which they realize that there is something seriously
wrong with them. Or maybe one half of the brain will figure this out, but
the other won't. They are still too young to know exactly what condition
their brains are in.
If each of these girls end up with functional brains, then both of them
will eventually realize that people feel sorry for them, but nobody
really likes them. They will have a very lonely life, and they will
spend a lot of their time wondering,
is a God, why did he do this to me and my sister?"
These girls might have some scientific value, but they're never going
to be happy. A lot of people talk themselves into believing that
allowing these type of children to live is showing "compassion" and "love",
but life is however you want to look at it. Allowing these two girls to
live is certainly providing them with life,
but unless they enjoy life, what good
will life do them?
Animals are biological robots that merely exist; they
do not enjoy life. When animals raise
babies, their only concern is that their babies are alive. Animals
don't have any concern about the quality
of their children's lives. An animal doesn't even care about the quality
of its own life. You can cut off the
legs and arms of a dog, and you can poke out both of its eyes, and you
can cut out its tongue and pull out some of its teeth, but it won't care.
It will continue living just as if it was in good health. It
will be just as happy. Removing a leg from a dog is like removing
a windshield wiper from an automobile. We assume that the dog is suffering,
but the dogs don't understand or care. It requires a tremendous amount
of intelligence to understand the concepts of life, death, and suffering.
It also requires a tremendous amount of thinking
to understand the concept of the quality of life.
The human mind is just an intelligent version of that stupid, animal
brain. We have powerful cravings to take care of every baby, and we have
powerful inhibitions about killing people, and so we will struggle to keep
every baby alive. However, we do not have any emotion that is concerned
about the quality of our children's
lives. We also struggle to keep the old and sickly people alive, even if
they have had so many strokes that their brains are no longer functioning.
We have no concern whether old people are enjoying life or
Our crude emotions do not want to see anybody die,
but we don't care whether they enjoy life. We want to see people
but we don't care what type of life they have.
The people who allow severely retarded babies to live believe that they
are compassionate, but they are just stupid animals
who are following their crude emotions to keep everything alive with no
concern about the quality of life. If those two girls who are joined at
their heads never enjoy their lives, then letting them live is not
compassionate. Rather, it's torturing two girls; it's forcing two
girls to suffer a very long, lonely, and miserable existence. We
could say that allowing those two girls to suffer is actually very cruel.
To make the situation even more ridiculous, many of the people
who believe that they are "compassionate" for allowing retarded babies
to live are doing nothing about the
Jewish crime network that is starting wars, murdering people, raping children,
and cheating people out of their money. How many children were killed in
the Mideast war that the Jews started by staging the 9/11 attack? How many
children were killed in Europe during the two world wars that the
Jews instigated? If the people who oppose the killing of retarded babies
were truly compassionate, then their first priority would be to stop
and their incredibly destructive wars, murders, rapes,
sex slavery, and other crimes.
Our emotions react to abortions,
not crime networks
There are unwanted children all
over the world, many of whom are suffering a miserable,
lonely life in orphanages or the city streets, and some of them are abused
by government officials and crime networks, but how many of the
"compassionate" people care about the suffering that is occurring
all over the world? Those compassionate people want everybody to live,
but they don't care about the quality of anybody's life. The reason
is because they are not truly "compassionate". Rather, they are just stupid
animals who are following their crude emotions.
A lot of people, especially those who call themselves "conservatives",
try to prevent euthanasia, abortion, and the killing of retarded people.
However, very few of those people are trying to stop the Jewish crime network.
Why are they so concerned about stopping abortion but not a gigantic, international
and extremely destructive crime network?
The people who oppose abortions realize that our emotions
are directly stimulated by photos,
so the title of this
article starts with: "How could anyone look at this
I think the reason people become so hysterical over abortion
but not over the Jewish crime network is because our emotions are directly
stimulated by images of people being killed, but a crime network
is an intangible concept that doesn't
directly stimulate our emotions. In order for a person to become upset
with what the Jews are doing, he must do some research and thinking,
and he needs a certain amount of intelligence
to understand how dangerous and damaging the Jews are to the world.
We don't attack Israel,
so why would we attack China?
I think the majority of people have
the intelligence that is necessary to understand that the Jews are committing
horrendous crimes, but most people
to think, or do any research. Most people want to
entertain themselves, not deal with the complex issues of the
modern world. They want to watch television, get drunk, play with their
dogs, gamble, have sex, eat food, and play with children.
We have incredibly powerful inhibitions about death, so we can trigger
hysteria in people by showing them photographs of aborted fetuses, but
talking to people about the Jewish crime network results in a blank expression
on most people's faces. The end result is that people can be easily worked
into a frenzy over abortion, but most people are unaffected by discussions
about the Jewish crime network, or they try to hide from the issue. This
in turn allows the network to thrive and slowly destroy our economy, take
over our media, instigate wars, and ruin our culture.
Dealing with the problems of the modern world requires intelligence,
discussions, and research. I think the majority of people have the intelligence
necessary to deal with a lot of the problems we face, but I don't think
many people have the ability to control their
emotions well enough to make intelligent decisions. And I don't
think many people have much of an interest in thinking, anyway.
Most people want to play, not think.
Israel is the only nation that I'm aware of that has been continuously
killing, kidnapping, and torturing people from nations all around the world.
The Jews also instigate wars, cheat us in business and banking, and even
manipulate the Nobel prizes. Israel is the only nation that can truly be
described with such adjectives as disgusting, sickening, nauseating, appalling,
and horrible. If any nation should live in fear of being attacked, it is
Israel. However, is any nation planning to attack Israel? I don't think
so. There are lots of people who fantasize about dropping nuclear bombs
on Israel, but most people, once they think about it, would rather destroy
the nation peacefully.
Why is Israel the only
You might respond that the reason every nation is friendly with Israel
is because the Jews have fooled us into thinking that they are a wonderful,
honest group of people. That theory was valid until recently. Today there
are millions of people who realize
that Israel is a threat to the entire
world, and every day more people discover this. Anger is building towards
Israel and Jews, but I don't think any nation is planning to attack Israel.
The reason I can say confidently that no nation is planning to attack Israel
is because the history of the human race shows that no nation has ever
behaved like that. Humans do not want violence.
We would rather destroy Israel peacefully.
The only time the police and military use violence is when the enemy
either refuses to surrender or shows signs that they are going to attack.
Nobody in good mental health starts a deadly fight simply for entertainment.
Our first priority is to avoid fights. Therefore, as more people
around the world become more aware that Israel and the Jews are our only
enemy, there will be a point at which there are so many angry people that
there are enough people to confront Israel, and then Israel will have the
opportunity to surrender peacefully. And, believe it or not, most of the
Jews will surrender peacefully. The
reason I say this is because we can see this behavior all throughout history.
Most criminals, once the police have pointed their guns at them, will
surrender. There are only a few lunatics who prefer to die.
There will be a certain percentage of Jews who would rather die, but
they will be the minority. The majority of Jews are
to surrender. Some Jews boast about having a suicidal
option if the world doesn't obey them, but that's just an attempt to
frighten us into submission. Most Jews are not
suicidal. If Israel dared to attack any nation with nuclear or biological
weapons, other nations would defend themselves, and that would require
every nation to attack all Jews and all
supporters of Israel since we don't know which ones are involved.
How is it possible that there is only one
nation that is a threat to world peace? The reason is that Israel did not
develop in a "normal" manner. All nations developed as people fought over
territory. Israel is the exception. It came about as a result of a crime
network that tricked other people into helping them get established.
Israel is not a true "nation". They are a network of freaks and
want to use their guns
No nation wants to start a war with Israel, even though Israel is a
dangerous threat to the entire human race. If we are not going to attack
an enemy of the world, why would we attack a nation that isn't a
problem to anybody? Why would America want to attack China? Why would China
want to attack America? Why would Britain want to attack France?
Every nation is behaving like stupid, frightened rabbits. We are building
enormous stockpiles of weapons to protect ourselves from... who? No healthy
human wants to throw his life away and start a war for entertainment. We
don't even want to start a war to protect ourselves from Israel.
We are building giant militaries to protect ourselves from imaginary
enemies. Our stupid emotions are causing us to live in fear of attack,
and causing us to fear the people in other nations, but we have to learn
to control our emotions. We don't have to fear the people in Japan,
China, or India. They're not interested in war. They don't want
to attack us any more than we want to attack them. They want to enjoy
life, just like we do. There are only a small number of psychotic, violent
people within each nation who truly want to start a war. We are foolishly
living in fear of a small number of freaks.
Instead of living in fear of other nations, and instead of pouring resources
into stockpiles of weapons to defend ourselves from other nations, the
American people should be getting rid of the destructive, parasitic, and
psychotic Americans. Those freaky Americans
are causing trouble for America, and they are pushing America into wars.
Likewise, the Russian people, instead of worrying about the Chinese or
the Americans, should start looking critically at the Russian
people and they should remove the violent, dishonest, parasitic, and psychotic
people from their government, schools, and media. Likewise, the Chinese
people should stop worrying about Japan, India, and Tibet and start dealing
with the violent, psychotic, dishonest, parasitic, and destructive Chinese
people. If every nation would deal with their violent, destructive, diabolical
freaks, the entire world would become dramatically and noticeably more
peaceful and friendly.
Millions of Americans have guns, but not because they
want to kill people. Rather, they are like frightened rabbits who want
the guns for defensive purposes. There is crime everywhere in America,
but the people with the guns will not use those guns to kill or
even arrest any of the criminals. Larry Silverstein, Steven Spielberg,
Jon Stuart, Mike Wallace, Barbara Walters, and lots of other Jews are routinely
lying to us about 9/11, the Holocaust, and other crimes, but the Americans
who have guns have no desire to kill any
of those criminals.
society killed babies for entertainment?
Since the Americans won't kill the Jewish criminals who are routinely
killing, lying, and abusing us, why should the Russian, Chinese, or other
people be afraid that the Americans might attack their nations?
If Americans enjoyed killing people, we would be killing all of the Jews
within our nation who staged the 9/11 attack, and who are lying about the
world wars, and who are cheating us in our financial and banking system,
and who are promoting Holocaust propaganda. Since we don't kill any of
these disgusting Jews, why would we want to kill people in India or China
who never caused us any trouble?
If humans were truly violent creatures, why would we purchase guns and
then leave them in storage while thousands
of criminal Jews are living among us? Sometimes the criminal Jews walk
past Americans who have guns in their
or in their cars, but none of the Jews have to worry that they might
be killed. None of the Americans
want to use their guns to kill
criminals. The Americans purchase guns because they are afraid of
criminals, not because they want to
criminals. The Americans will use their guns only in extreme cases. They
want to hide from criminals, and they want the guns only for protection
in case a criminal attacks them.
Have you noticed that one of the ways the Jews instigate wars
is by spreading rumors that another nation is killing
babies simply for entertainment?
For example, do you remember the incident in 1990 in which we were told
that Saddam Hussein and his band of evil Arabs were killing babies in Kuwait
for entertainment? (I mentioned that years ago here.)
Why are children afraid of the dark?
There are a lot of deaths during wars, and sometimes soldiers kill more
people than they "need" to, but there is no evidence that any group of
people has ever engaged in recreational killing. All of the killings are
the result of anger, frustration, disgust, or revenge, not "pleasure".
During war, soldiers are often irritated, frightened, hungry, angry, suffering
from lack of sleep or some type of illness, and that in turn can make them
much more irritable than they normally are, which in turn can result in
a lot more killings. However, it's important to realize that neither animals
nor humans truly have a "pleasure emotion" that is titillated by death,
blood, dead bodies, or screaming people. Therefore, we cannot truly experience
pleasure by hurting people.
Dead bodies grab our attention, but for the same reason that loud noises
grab our attention. Specifically, our attention is attracted by anything
that could signal a potential danger. We become more
alert by death and noises; we do not "enjoy" them. We are not
put into a pleasant, relaxed mood by death or loud noises. Rather, we become
more aware of potential dangers. Nobody is entertained by death.
If humans truly enjoyed killing babies, then we would love to
kill baby Jews. In fact, we might make a television show called
"Killing Jewish Babies with the Stars",
in which a group of soldiers teach people how to use bayonets. After a
period of training, the people would show us their abilities to toss Jewish
babies in the air and stab them with a bayonet before they hit the ground.
We would judge the participants according to their artistic
ability to move gracefully, and their technical
skills at performing the movements properly.
Religion is giving people a distorted view of humans. If you
want to understand yourself, you have to look at animals, not the bible.
If you understand why children are afraid of the dark, then you will understand
the problem we are facing in regards to war.
There is no market for recreational
Children are afraid of the dark because the children thousands of years
ago who had less of a fear of the dark sometimes wandered away from their
parents at night, and the end result was they were sometimes eaten by animals
or bit by spiders, and sometimes they fell off of cliffs, or fell into
ponds and drowned. The children who survived were those who were terrified
of the darkness, and who kept their arms close to their bodies while they
were sleeping. A child's fear of the darkness is a protective mechanism.
That fear is coming from within his own mind.
Animals evolved for a very brutal, competitive world, and so they assume
that danger is everywhere, and that they will be attacked at any moment.
Humans still have that fear that we will be attacked without warning, and
we are still very cautious and suspicious of everything that is unfamiliar.
We are cautious about trying something new.
This fear of the unknown and this fear of being attacked without provocation
was vital thousands of years ago to both animals and primitive humans,
but today it's causing a lot of trouble. This fear is causing every nation
to develop militaries for protection against every other nation. We are
getting carried away with this fear. We are wasting enormous amounts of
resources on weapons.
The same problem is happening at the level of the ordinary citizen.
We live in fear of being attacked by criminals. Millions
of American citizens have purchased guns and security devices for their
home, but this doesn't stop or prevent crime. Crime is widespread
throughout America despite all of these guns, and our government is full
of criminals, despite the guns, and our media is a network of
criminals, despite the guns. Purchasing a gun and hiding behind security
devices is behaving like a stupid, frightened rabbit. Instead of encouraging
the citizens to purchase guns for protection, it would make more sense
to change our society so that the criminals are
pursued and removed from society.
Likewise, when nations build militaries in order to defend themselves
from other nations, they are behaving like frightened rabbits. There are
only a few people in Russia or China who want to attack America, and they
are freaks. Why are we afraid of a
few freaks in Russia or China? Every nation should stop building militaries
to protect themselves from one another and start cleaning
their own nation of freaks, criminals, and parasites. Every
nation should try to become an inspiration to the others.
We kill rats, mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas, but we don't enjoy
the act of killing them. Our first preference is to avoid those
creatures. Killing those creatures is not a pleasurable, recreational
activity. We kill those creatures only because they are destructive and
parasitic. If humans truly enjoyed killing people or animals, we would
be doing so as a leisure activity. To understand this concept, consider
how large the market is for pornography and dolls. The market
for pornography is enormous because men have a strong attraction to sex,
and the market for dolls is enormous because women have strong attractions
to babies. If either men or women received pleasure from killing, then
businesses would offer us animals to kill, and they might also offer the
equivalent of Playboy magazines so that we could titillate ourselves with
pictures of killing and death. We do
look at photos of death, but it is because of our concern about
death, not because we get pleasure from death.
We have trouble executing
criminals who have been sentenced to death
When we look at pictures of mountains, attractive people, rivers, and
flowers, we become relaxed and we enjoy the images, but when
we look at pictures of dead humans or animals, or of people being killed,
a completely different emotion is triggered. Photos of death and killing
attract our attention, but they don't make us relaxed or happy.
If humans truly enjoyed killing people, then we would enjoy
the killing of criminals who have been sentenced to death.
However, every nation resists executing criminals, and in America, we go
to extremes to worry about a prisoner suffering a few brief moments of
pain. Why should we care if criminal experiences a few moments of pain?
People who die a "natural death" from old age usually suffer more
than the criminals that we execute!
criminals over and over and over
Our inhibitions about killing people are so strong, and most people
have such a resistance to thinking, that most people follow their emotions
and assume that executing a criminal is wrong, and that we are being nice
when we let them spend their lives in jail. However, who benefits from
this policy? How do criminals benefit by spending their lives in jail?
What will the quality of their life be? And what type of a death
will they have in jail? They are likely to die in the same manner as the
rest of us; namely, a long and slow and painful death as a result of kidney
failures, strokes, heart attacks, or cancer.
Furthermore, consider the effect on society of keeping people in jail.
Resources that have to be spent maintaining all of the jails and keeping
all of the prisoners alive, and that means resources have to be diverted
from other projects. If we were to alter society so that criminals were
executed in a simple and inexpensive manner, then those resources could
go to projects that benefit society.
Life is however you want to look at it, so we could say that executing
the criminals is being nicer than locking
them in jail and letting them die slowly.
If humans were truly violent creatures who enjoyed killing
people, then wouldn't we enjoy killing people who are convicted of crimes?
Why would we punish a criminal briefly and then release him so that he
can have a second opportunity? And later, when a criminal is convicted
of a second crime, why would we once again punish him briefly, and
then give him a
third chance? And when he is found guilty of committing
a third crime, why would we give him a fourth chance? Why are we
so nice to criminals?
If humans were truly violent, and if we truly enjoyed killing people,
we would kill criminals as soon as
they were convicted of the first crime, and that would dramatically reduce
crime because it would never give a criminal the opportunity to commit
a second crime. The Japanese would love to kill their Yakusa
members, and the Chinese would love to kill their criminals, and we would
love to kill all of the pedophiles within the Catholic Church. However,
we don't want to kill criminals. We want to be
nice to them and help them.
What will we do with the Jewish criminals? Will we try to fix
those Jews by punishing them briefly and then releasing them back into
society so that they can have another opportunity at life? What will we
do if the Jewish criminals behave like children and beg for sympathy?
sorry that we set up thousands of you to be killed and captured in Vietnam,
and that we started the world wars and the 9/11 attack. We were blinded
by our crazy religion. But we have since taken Jesus into our hearts, and
we can now see how wonderful you Goyim really are. Now we know that
you are the kindest, sweetest, most generous people. We appreciate you
now. We love you! Most Jews are honest, wonderful people. There
are only a few bad Jews.
Please forgive us. We love
We love you!
We love you!
We love you!
We love you!”
We have trouble dealing with euthanasia
Everybody is going to die, and most of us will die in a slow,
manner over a period of many years.
Some people suffer so much during their final years that they beg for somebody
to put them out of their misery. However, we have such strong inhibitions
about killing that we have tremendous difficulty putting people out of
their misery. The end result is that we show no concern for the
suffering of old people, not even our own parents.
We are more concerned about whether a criminal
will suffer a brief moment of pain during his death. We are giving criminals
treatment than our own parents.
The woman in the photo,
who had cancer in her face, asked for somebody to put her out of her misery,
but news reports claim that she had to commit suicide because nobody would
do it for her. If humans were truly violent, and if we enjoyed killing
and hurting people, then we would enjoy putting people like her out of
their misery. Of course, we could interpret our refusal to kill people
like her as a sign that we enjoy watching people suffer a long and
slow death, but I don't think people were letting her live because they
enjoyed watching her suffer. I think that most people simply cannot overcome
their incredibly powerful inhibitions about killing people.
Slaughterhouses have trouble keeping
The intellectual portion of our brain can easily figure out that we
are being cruel when we force people like her to commit suicide, but our
about killing people are so powerful, and most people have so
little control over their emotions, that they follow their emotions
like a stupid animal rather than follow their intellect like
an advanced human. Most people also try to hide from the issue of euthanasia
and hope that it goes away, just like a stupid rabbit that hides in the
A comedy routine could be created about this. For example, old
people at a convalescent hospital who want to die would help one another
murders in order to be executed in a pleasant manner.
Since somebody convicted of murdering an "ordinary" person will remain
in jail for many years, these old people arrange to kill a policeman,
thereby upsetting the other policemen enough to kill them immediately.
That would be a funny comedy skit, wouldn't it? No, I don't think
it would be funny. It would actually be a description of the world today.
There are people all over the world wishing that they could die in a painless
manner, but nobody does anything. Convalescent hospitals have people
whose brains are no longer functioning as a result of strokes and other problems.
Those people are not even human. They're just pieces
of meat that exist. These decrepit old people are a burden on
society, and they are an emotional burden on their family members, but
we have such inhibitions about killing people that we can't put them out
of their misery.
Furthermore, this problem is getting worse every year because
medical technology is allowing us to keep even more
sickly people alive for longer periods. The people who want
to keep all of these decrepit old people alive are
not compassionate people. They are stupid animals who
can't handle the advanced medical technology of this era.
If humans truly enjoyed the killing, then we would enjoy
killing animals at a slaughterhouse. And if we enjoyed killing humans,
then we would have a preference for killing the animals that more closely
humans, such as monkeys, or animals that make noises like humans, such
as pigs. But the opposite is true. The more closely an animal resembles
a human, the more difficult it is for us to kill it. This is more evidence
that humans do not want to kill other
We have trouble killing mice
Slaughterhouses have trouble keeping people at the job of killing animals
simply because we don't enjoy killing
animals or humans. We can easily kill an animal only when
we want to eat it because our desire for food can overpower our
dislike of killing.
Pigeons are a nuisance
in our cities, so if we enjoyed killing animals, we would love to kill those
pigeons. However, our inhibitions about killing are so strong that instead
of killing the pigeons, we try to chase them away with spikes and other
devices. Mice are also living in our cities, and some people have so much
trouble killing mice that there are businesses producing traps
to catch mice alive so that people can release
them after they capture them.
We humans treat animals better than animals treat
each other. For example,
article shows us how to catch mice in a "humane"
way. Why should we catch mice in a "humane" way? Why not catch mice in
the same way that cats, snakes, or birds catch mice? For example, why not
develop a small robot that watches for mice, and then grabs them with claws,
and then squeezes them to kill them?
People purchase animals, but to
We don't like to kill animals because we assume that animals are thinking
the same thoughts as us, but that is a ridiculous assumption. Animals don't
have enough intelligence to understand that they are being killed. Very
young children who are dying from automobile accidents can barely understand
the concept that they are dying, and they are much
more intelligent than a mouse.
Animals have so little intelligence that we can cut parts of their body
off and they continue with life as if nothing had happened. Animals cannot
understand the concept that they are missing their legs and arms. Very
young children who are born without arms and legs, or who lose body parts
from automobile accidents, don't realize that something is wrong with them
until they are many years old. It takes a tremendous
amount of intelligence to understand these concepts.
There is an incredibly large demand for dogs, cats, birds,
and other animals, but people are purchasing those animals to take care
of them, not to kill or hurt them. If humans were truly violent creatures
who enjoy killing and hurting, then businesses would be selling animals
to us so that we could entertain ourselves by killing and hurting them.
However, there has never been a group
of people anywhere in the world that has wanted to purchase animals simply
to hurt or kill them.
are traumatized by people who eat or kill dogs!
Some people might respond that there are people who purchase dogs and
roosters for fights, but those people are not trying to hurt
the animals. Each of them is taking care of his animal. They are behaving
very similar to the people who arrange for boxing matches in which
fight each other. All male animals fight over status and territory, and
the females also fight. Fighting is a part of animal behavior, but it's
important to understand that the fighting is for a purpose.
It is not recreational. No animal kills
or hurts for pleasure.
On 28 December 2010, the television host Tucker Carlson said
that Michael Vick should have been executed
dogs. We allow humans to fight in boxing
rings, so why not let dogs fight with
each other? I suppose the reason we don't like to see dogs fighting with
each other is that dogs fight with their teeth, and that causes a lot of
bleeding and damage to their faces. Sometimes it results in death. The
dogs are too stupid to understand or care about their injuries, but humans
have such inhibitions about bleeding and injuries that it bothers us to
see a bleeding dog.
We need machines
to kill animals for us!
(Incidentally, what will Tucker Carlson suggest we do
with all of the criminal Jews? Will he suggest we execute them all?
Or will he want us to be sympathetic to the Jews? I also have to wonder
if Michael Vick would have been sent to jail if he had been a Jew.)
If humans were truly violent creatures who enjoy death and suffering,
then some people would kill dogs for entertainment, and nobody would care
that people want to watch dogfights. However, we have such inhibitions
about killing, and Americans have such an attraction to dogs, that Americans
are not even allowed to kill dogs for food.
Furthermore, a lot of people become upset when a child pulls off the
wings of a fly. If humans were violent
creatures, why would we care about a fly? A fly doesn't have enough of
a brain to care whether somebody pulls its wings off, so having a concern
about the suffering of a fly is as irrational as being concerned that a
refrigerator is suffering as a result of a hot, summer day.
It's important for a society to pass judgment on who among us is exhibiting
undesirable behavior, including whether we want to permit dogfights,
but I don't think many people are capable of controlling their emotions
well enough to make intelligent decisions about these type of issues. Our
current policies in regards to animals are irrational
because most people are overly influenced by our incredibly powerful inhibitions
about death, suffering, and blood.
We like to eat animals, but we don't like killing them, cleaning
them, or even looking at their blood. We should face the fact that we are
violent creatures. If we were to develop machines to do the killing and
cleaning of animals, then we could keep the animals alive until
we are ready to eat them, which would provide us with fresh meat.
Don't encourage people to behave
We should also develop machines to kill some of the animals in our cities,
such as rats, pigeons, and squirrels. For example, instead of setting spikes
on top of buildings to chase away birds, we could have some type of robotic
devices on the buildings to capture and kill the pigeons. We could also
create small robotic devices to capture and kill mice, rats, and even cockroaches.
We might even be able to develop machines to kill mosquitoes, perhaps with
When you point out to people that they are being ridiculous
when they care about a horse that was killed for food, or a fly that had
its wings pulled off, or a mouse that was killed in a trap, they sometimes
respond by boasting that they are special people who love all animals.
Don't encourage this type of behavior. A human is not behaving in a loving
manner when he cares about a fly or a mouse. He is actually titillating
himself. He is masturbating. You should respond that he should stop
jerking himself off and behave in a more intelligent manner.
Why didn't Americans "have fun"
If humans truly enjoyed killing people, then Americans would
have used their nuclear bombs during the 1940s to conduct killings of people
around the world. They had an unbelievable
opportunity at that time to attack other nations. However, instead of attacking
other nations, the Americans stockpiled nuclear bombs for defensive purposes.
This is equivalent to a lion building a giant wall around himself because
he's afraid a few mice might attack him.
Wars are instigated,
The reason America never used its nuclear weapons is simply because
no nation wants to use them. We are
building nuclear weapons for the same reason a child is afraid of the dark;
we are afraid of imaginary enemies.
The only people who seem to be pushing for the use of nuclear weapons are
the Jews. The Jews have been trying
for decades to instigate a nuclear war between America and Russia, and
between America and China, and during December 2010, the Jews tried to
get a war going between North and South Korea, and then bring America and
China into it.
If it were not for the Jews stirring up trouble during the past few
centuries, would any nation have bothered developing nuclear weapons? Without
the Jews, there wouldn't have been any world wars, terrorist attacks, banking
scandals, or economic chaos. The 20th century might have been a very peaceful
era during which nuclear energy was developed only for peaceful purposes.
Americans didn't casually decide to use nuclear bombs on Japan.
Rather, they agonized over it. I think we should look at who
in America was pushing for the use of those bombs, and who
in Russia was encouraging the Russian soldiers to rape, kill, and torture
the Germans at the end of World War 2, and who
was encouraging the Americans and British to bomb Dresden
and other cities. I would bet that an analysis of the wars would show that
they are very similar to the 9/11 attack and the resulting Mideast wars.
Specifically, I suspect that we will find that there were Jews
secretly operating in the background to instigate hatred and trick people
into fighting with each other. We are fools to let them manipulate us into
wars and waste enormous amounts of our resources on the stockpiling of
Soldiers have trouble killing people
The people who join the military are assumed to be violent,
and there are certainly some mentally ill people in the military who are
perpetually angry and frequently losing their temper, but most of people
in the military are just "ordinary" humans who have the same inhibitions
that the rest of us have. For example, in 1993, during the war in Bosnia,
a Croatian town of about 6500 people was attacked and invaded by the Bosnian
military, and most of the Croatians decided to abandon their town. In the
process, they also abandoned several hundred sick, crippled, and retarded
people at two of their hospitals. When United Nations troops
these abandoned people, they tried to take care of those that were still
alive, even though nobody wanted them.
Saving retarded people during a war is like saving a bag of garbage
while your house is on fire. Humans have such strong inhibitions about
death that we get ourselves into ridiculous situations, such as
a city, which kills lots of healthy people, and then struggling
to save some unwanted, retarded people. This behavior is idiotic!
It is something to expect from a stupid animal, not an intelligent
human. It is as irrational as worrying about abortions and euthanasia while
millions of people are suffering as a result of wars, crimes, kidnappings,
automobile accidents, and pollution.
We assume that the soldiers, especially of other nations, are violent
maniacs, but if any nation truly had a military of violent people, they
wouldn't waste any of their time or resources trying to save anybody, especially
not other people's retarded children. Instead, they would entertain
themselves by killing the retarded people. However, there has never
been a military that has treated the killing of people as a recreational
activity. There is not even a military that is capable of putting retards
out of their misery, or providing euthanasia for old people who are begging
for assisted suicide.
Every military goes out of its way to reduce
deaths. Wars are not nearly as destructive as they would be if we were
truly interested in killing one another. A military will fight only when
they believe that they are being attacked. As soon as their enemy surrenders,
the fighting will stop.
Before that mysterious website, judicial-inc.biz removed its
articles and switched to begging for pity and money, they had an article
about some US Marines who were being shot at in Iraq. The Americans had
a drone in the area, and they identified the location of the snipers, and
that allowed the Marines to capture those snipers. However, these snipers
turned out to be mercenaries or contractors of some type, not Iraqi soldiers.
Later those snipers were released, probably by Jews high up in the US military.
People assume that the Marines are violent, but if they truly enjoyed killing
people, why would they allow such deceptive saboteurs to be released and
possibly kill more military personnel?
This brings up an interesting issue. Specifically what will the police
and military do when they are finally pressured into identifying and arresting
the Jews and other criminals responsible for the 9/11 attack, setting up
American soldiers to be ambushed in Vietnam, and other crimes?
||Will they risk their lives trying to capture the criminals alive?
Will they put the criminals in jail for a certain number of months
or years, and then release them back
into society? How many police and military personnel are capable of killing
A lot of soldiers are willing to kill a person who is attacking
him, but once a criminal is arrested, most try to be sweet and adorable.
How many soldiers are capable of resisting
the apologies of the criminals and killing
them? And of the soldiers who can kill criminals, how many could kill them
in a simple and quick manner rather than going through an elaborate
execution procedure in which they worry about the criminals suffering a
few moments of pain? How many soldiers can kill criminals without needing
psychological treatment afterwards?
Humans cannot deal with bad
If humans truly had a desire to kill, we would
love to kill the
Jews and other criminals. And we would have no problem using the healthy
criminals as live organ donors. However,
when we finally get around to arresting the Jews and other criminals, we
are going to have to help people control their emotions so that
we can seriously discuss this issue of whether we want these criminals
alive, dead, or as organ donors.
If humans were violent creatures who enjoyed killing people,
then why don't we kill the people who ride skateboards or bicycles on public
sidewalks when they know they're not
supposed to? Why don't we kill the people who ruin our cities with graffiti
or "love locks"? Why don't we kill any of the people who allow their dog
to make noises and messes in our neighborhoods and cities?
We cannot criticize
leaders who are useless
We have trouble executing people who have been convicted
of murder and sentenced to death, so
how could we possibly kill children for spraying graffiti, or kill a person
who allows his dog to make a mess in the city? Humans are non-violent
who want to help people, and the end result is that we allow badly
behaved children and adults to irritate us year after year, decade after
decade. We are too nice for this modern
era. We are allowing ourselves to be abused, even by children.
King George VI of Britain (photo) never did or said anything
intelligent. Actually, he couldn't even say stupid things properly
because he had a stammering
problem. Some of the monarchs of Europe were even more defective
than King George VI. The American government is also full of people who
have nothing intelligent to say, and have all sorts of speech disorders,
mental disorders, alcohol problems, or criminal affiliations. If humans
were truly violent, hateful bullies, then we would enjoy killing all of
these freaks. However, humans have such incredibly strong inhibitions
about hurting people that we don't even want to complain about the
problems of Congressmen
Barney Frank or Alan Grayson.
We don't even want to investigate the possibility that some of these government
officials are mentally defective.
The mentally ill appear
to kill for pleasure, but it's just an illusion
Consider how this issue applies to the people in Russia or China. Why
should the people in Russia or China be afraid of the Americans when most
Americans are so nice that we worry
about hurting the feelings of people who have speech problems, or who look
like Neanderthals? Why should the people in any nation be afraid of us
when our own disgusting government officials, news reporters, and school
officials have no fear of us?
Even the killings that appear to be random during a war are
not truly random. Some soldiers become very frustrated, angry, or irritated
with war, and sometimes they suffer from a lack of sleep or proper food.
This in turn can cause them to lose their temper more easily than when
they are feeling better, and when we lose our temper, we can kill. However,
these type of killings are not truly for pleasure. Rather, they are the
result of people who are so irritated that they lose their temper when
they normally wouldn't.
If men were truly sexist, feminism
This same concept applies to the mentally ill lunatics who kill, such
as Jeffrey Dahmer. It appears as if these people are killing for pleasure,
but they are killing because they are suffering inside, and they are losing
their temper very easily. A normal person has to be irritated to a tremendous
amount before he loses his temper and is willing to kill, but if a person
is suffering from internal pains, it doesn't take as much to push him to
the point at which he loses his temper. We describe those type of people
as "irritable", but a better description
is "mentally defective", or "suffering from internal pains".
If a person with mental disorders could understand that he is suffering
from internal problems, then he might
look for ways of dealing with his problems. Unfortunately, America encourages
the attitude that if you are unhappy, it is due to something outside
of you, such as aristocrats, discrimination, sexism, or a lack
of money. America does not encourage
people to understand themselves and deal with their problems. America encourages
people to blame their problems on somebody else or some intangible concept.
As a result, mentally ill people are becoming angry at society, poverty,
aristocrats, or corporations. When these people lose their temper, they
attack what they assume is their enemy, such as society, or the corporations.
|The feminists claim that men are cruel, but the fact that men allow
the feminist movement is proof that the feminist philosophy is nonsense.
If men were truly as oppressive, cruel, and selfish as the feminists
claim, the feminist movement would have been suppressed as soon
as it was established.
“Daddy, how can I enjoy life
when men abuse women? I need to be liberated from sexism!”
“Yes, dear. Becoming a feminist should
make you as happy as a man. I am ashamed that men have abused women
for 6000 years.”
When people do something that has
been done before...
In one of my previous files I pointed out that whenever we
find a person accused of doing something that has never been done before,
we have to be suspicious. Consider how this concept applies to the Holocaust.
All throughout history we can see people making an effort to avoid killing
other people. You can see this in German history, also. Prior to World
War II, the Germans were just like everybody else. They had incredible
difficulty killing pigs and chickens, and they couldn't kill homeless people,
or even put old people out of their misery. The German students who were
studying to be doctors and nurses had to get accustomed to blood, hypodermic
needles, and dead bodies.
We feel guilty
that the Jews have suffered for 6000 years!
However, according to the Jews, after Hitler was elected, the German
population went through a magical transformation into a type of monster
that was capable of transporting millions of Jews and millions of other
people to death camps where they were casually executed. And then the millions
of dead bodies were casually put into incinerators and burned. And then,
after World War II was over, the magical influence of the Nazis vanished,
and the Germans returned to their previous condition of having extreme
difficulty with the killing of chickens, pigs, and old people. And the
Germans once again became squeamish of blood and hypodermic needles.
We could deduce that the Holocaust stories are Jewish propaganda simply
because the Jews expect us to believe that the German people behaved in
a manner that no humans had ever behaved before or after.
Humans are so generous and nice that when the Jews tell us
sad stories about how they have been suffering abuse from anti-Semites
for 6000 years, we feel guilty because we are related to the anti-Semites.
If humans were truly violent and hateful, we wouldn't care that the Jews
were abused. Furthermore, if there were anti-Semites for 6000 years, they
would still exist today, and the Jews would still be suffering. But there
are no anti-Semites today, and there never have been any. Instead, people
have been treating the Jews with generosity and kindness for thousands
of years. And in return, they exploit us. We are also exploited by the
defective people of our own race.
Who among us wants
Thousands of years ago our extreme generosity was acceptable because
nature took care of the defects and retards, and the Jews were living in
their homeland. In this modern era, however, we have to keep our generosity
under control. We are hurting ourselves when we are generous to people
who don't appreciate our kindness,
or when we are generous to people who are destructive.
The "official" attitude is that every nation must maintain
an enormous military for defensive purposes because other nations may attack
us without warning, and without any sensible reason. We live in constant
fear of attack, and we assume that we are surrounded by enemies
rather than friends, but who are our
enemies? Who are we protecting ourselves from? What are the names
and addresses of the people in Russia and China who truly want to start
a war with America? And why do they
want to start a war with us?
Organized religions encourage war,
hatred, and arrogance
How many people in France actually want to stop what they are doing
and attack Britain? Let's get their names and addresses and analyze who
those people are. Let's get a list of the names and addresses of the Americans
who want to attack Iran or Korea. And let's get a list of the names and
addresses of the people in Japan who want to start a war with Korea or
If we were to identify and analyze the people who are pushing for war,
we would certainly find that those people are a small minority of the population,
and they are what we would describe as freaks, criminals, and lunatics.
They would not be people that we would describe as respectable or healthy.
Some of those freaks will be in leadership positions in the government,
media, schools, and businesses, but they are not "respectable" people.
There are no "normal" people who want
to stop what they are doing and start a war simply for entertainment.
It's important for the people in India, China, and other nations to
realize that most of the American people have no
desire to attack them. There are only a small number of people
in America who want war. Likewise, there are only a small number of people
in Russia and India who want violence. Therefore, instead of every nation
living in fear of one another, we should all be helping one another to
find the emotional strength to look within our nations, identify that small
minority of violent freaks, and deal with those troublemakers. We should
be dealing with the minority of people
who cause trouble, not living in fear of the majority of people.
The American people believe that we will protect ourselves from enemies
by building giant militaries, but our enemy is not
the nation of Russia or China, so our militaries are doing absolutely
nothing to protect us. We have nuclear bombs all around the
nation, but we have been under attack for decades by a network of
freaks who are "conquering" our government, media, schools, and businesses.
They are destroying the nation. Our nuclear bombs are doing nothing
to protect us from this violent hoard of freaks. Our aircraft carriers
are doing nothing to protect us.
Our enemy is not the Russian people or the Chinese people. It is a small
minority of violent freaks and selfish, crude savages. Many of them have
leadership positions in business,
the media, and the government. We should be identifying and dealing with
that minority of violent freaks instead of worrying about people in other
nations who have no desire to hurt us. We should be identifying and dealing
with the people who are pushing us into attacking Iran and North Korea,
and who are staging terrorist attacks, and who are trying to instigate
fights between men and women in different races and different political
Humans are too arrogant for this modern world, but instead
of encouraging people to do a better job of controlling their arrogance,
the organized religions are encouraging their members to believe that they
are the only good people on the planet, and that everybody else's ignorant
or possessed by an evil force.
Psychotic people tend to have psychotic
views of life
The religions are also causing trouble for us because they encourage
people to believe that intangible evil forces
occasionally get into people's minds. Humans have strong inhibitions
people, but we don't have any inhibitions about killing
intangible evil concepts that don't make sense, such as a "devil".
The devils don't bleed, and they don't scream or cry, and they cannot be
seen. We cannot have physical contact with a devil, and that means the
devils will never affect our emotions, and this in turn makes it very easy
for us to kill the devils.
The organized religions claim to be a wonderful influence on people,
but they don't encourage good behavior. They encourage arrogance, hatred,
and nonsensical concepts. They also manipulate people into giving them
and they won't disclose the details of how much money they make, or where
exactly their money is going. There is also evidence that many church officials
are involved with pedophilia or other crimes, but their secrecy
prevents us from knowing exactly what is going on.
The religions don't encourage people to work with other people for the
benefit of all. Instead, they encourage the hatred of people who follow a
different religion. The religions also encourage blind obedience of leaders
rather than encouraging people to analyze their leaders and replace those
who are not doing a good job. Furthermore, there is a lot of evidence that
the Christian religions have been infiltrated by criminal Jews (I
have a bit of information here),
so getting rid of the organized religions would be another step in protecting
ourselves from the disgusting influence of those criminal Jews.
The people who don't think very well, or who avoid thinking because
they don't enjoy it, can be manipulated by organized religions into becoming
arrogant jerks who want to help people "learn the truth" and become free
of the mysterious evil forces. If we were to eliminate organized religions
and insist that religion be a personal philosophy towards
life, the world would become slightly more peaceful.
A lot of influential people are promoting the theory that humans
are inherently violent, and that world peace is impossible, but those people
are lying to us about the 9/11 attack, the Holocaust, and other crimes,
so a lot of those people may be criminals.
Therefore, we should consider the possibility that one of the reasons they
promote dreary theories about humans is because they are looking at
and judging the entire human race according to what they see in their own
There are some people, such as Josef
Fritzl, (hiding his face in the photo), who may truly enjoy
torturing people. And consider how many people in leadership positions
of the government and the churches have been caught forcing children into
sex acts. And consider that there is supposedly a large market for sex
slaves, but who is purchasing them? Because sex slaves are expensive
"toys", their main customers may be the wealthy and influential members
"Guide dogs" are born,
If Fritzl, the pedophiles, and the customers of sex slaves were to assume
that they are typical humans, they could come up with a lot of dreary theories
about how the human race is hopelessly violent, selfish, and cruel, and
that there is no chance for world peace. And since many of these freaks
are in leadership positions of the media, government, schools, businesses,
think tanks, and other organizations, they can easily promote their distorted
When I'm upset, all sorts of violent and crazy thoughts wander through
my mind, but when I am in my "normal" condition, I don't see any craving
for violence. I don't see any craving for violence in other "normal" people,
either. Rather, I see people going out of their way to be nice to people,
even during a brutal war. All throughout history we can see people struggling
to help one another, and trying to avoid violence. Policemen are even nice
to criminals who are trying to kill them. My conclusion is that
world peace is entirely possible. All we have to do is get
the more crude, more violent creatures out of leadership positions,
and preferably out of society.
This concept of removing criminals from leadership positions might seem
sensible, but no nation actually wants to follow this policy. All nations
are following the policy that anybody can do anything he pleases, and
if a person misbehaves, we can cure him with
We must change our policy and start looking for people who are higher quality
rather than trying to fix the badly behaved people. Consider how this concept
applies to guide dogs.
The people who train dogs to help the blind, elderly, and disabled
take dogs at random. Instead, they look for dogs that show evidence that
they have the appropriate intellectual and emotional qualities necessary
for the job, and then they put those dogs into a training program. The
dogs are observed throughout the training program, and they are removed
and rejected if they show signs that they don't have the necessary qualities.
The dogs that get through the training program are given jobs as guide
dogs, and if they ever misbehave while on the job, they are removed.
Imagine creating "Guide
Dogs" the way we create "Guide
It's important to note that dogs that misbehave or lack the necessary
qualities are not sent to jail, or
made to take "time-outs", or beaten with a stick. They are simply rejected.
The people who train the guide dogs look for dogs that were born
with the necessary qualities; they don't try to transform a badly behaved
dog into a good dog.
The people who train guide dogs are following the philosophy that a
dog's mental qualities are genetic
rather than environmental. They do
not try to "create" guide dogs; rather, they test and train
the dogs that show the potential to be guide dogs.
The leaders of businesses, governments, schools, the media,
and other organizations could be described as "Guide Humans" because they
provide guidance to other people. We allow virtually anybody to
become an influential member of society, and when those "Guide Humans"
misbehave, we assume that we can fix their bad behavior by making their
organization pay a small fine, or by punishing them in some manner, such
as putting them in jail for a few months.
Humans" must also be born with leadership
Imagine a company creating guide dogs in the same manner that we provide
ourselves with leadership. Imagine a company taking dogs at random,
putting them into a training program for guide dogs, and then letting
virtually all of them graduate. The dogs that misbehave are punished.
When a blind person purchases one of these guide dogs, he is told that
whenever his dog misbehaves, he should punish it in some manner, such as
by beating it with a stick, or putting it in a jail for a few days.
Probably every adult has the intelligence to realize that we cannot
create useful guide dogs by punishing the dogs that do a terrible job,
but that is the policy we are using right now to create "guide
The concepts that we use in training guide dogs could be -
and should be! - applied to human leadership. Actually, those concepts
apply to virtually all of the jobs that exist today, such as bricklayers,
athletes, singers, dentists, assembly-line workers, and engineers.
Defective people could become a
race of freaks
Specifically, when we want to find somebody to do a particular job,
we should look for some people who show that they have the necessary physical,
intellectual, and emotional qualities, and then we put those people
through a testing and training program. We observe their performance and
them if they show signs that they don't have the necessary qualities. After
they get through their training program and have been given a job, we occasionally
their performance to ensure that they are doing their jobs properly, and
if they do not, they are removed.
When somebody doesn't perform properly at their job, we should treat
him the same way we would treat a guide dog that isn't performing properly.
Specifically, we should remove him from that job and let him try some other
job. We should not try to fix him with jail, punishments, "time-outs",
or psychological counseling.
It is especially important to apply this concept to people in leadership
positions because our leaders are much more critical to society than a
sales clerk or a waitress. We should try to find people who were born
with the necessary qualities to be a good leader, and who behave properly
because they want to. When they misbehave,
they should be removed. We should not try to fix them by making
their corporation pay a fine, or by putting them in jail.
Unfortunately, all societies today are following the opposite philosophy;
namely, that the human mind is whatever the environment makes it to be.
Every society is following the philosophy that anybody can do any job that
he pleases, and that if somebody commits a crime, we can transform him
into a better person with rewards and punishments. There are some people
who even promote the idea that homosexuality is an option that is
available to all of us, or that homosexuality is due to the manner in which
parents raise their boys.
Eventually the human race will face the obvious fact that humans
follow the same rules of life as the
animals and plants. There are subtle differences between people in regards
to their physical and mental qualities, and we cannot transform a person's
mental qualities through rewards or punishments, and we cannot give a person
a talent that he wasn't born with. We must also face the fact that people
who are destructive to society must be removed. They cannot be transformed
into better people.
We are so
nice that we assist with our abuse
Although everybody occasionally loses his temper, the only people who
are perpetually angry, dishonest, parasitic, and violent are those who
are suffering from mental or physical disorders. Although some people appear
to be more closely related to primitive savages, not even the primitive
savages were inherently violent. It's more accurate to describe the violence,
rapes, tortures, sex slavery, and other crimes as coming from a small number
of mentally defective people.
Unfortunately, we are foolishly allowing these defective people to form
crime networks, and this is allowing them to make enormous amounts of money,
and this in turn is allowing them to get control of businesses, our media,
our government officials, and other organizations. Their money is also
allowing them to attract a spouse and raise a lot of children. If we don't
do something to stop them, we will end up with a race
of criminals, assuming we don't already have such a race.
Humans are not violent;
rather, we are too nice. We have such
a problem killing people that we won't even kill the horrible crime networks
that are killing us. We are so nice
that we are allowing ourselves to be abused. The situation could be described
as a paradox because if we were more
violent towards the criminals, we would end up with less crime and
violence, and more peace.
The world will improve as soon as
we put better people
We don't need gigantic militaries to protect ourselves from
other nations. Instead, the entire world needs to analyze all of the people
and pass judgment on who among us is a contributing member, and
who is destructive or parasitic. That minority of people is the
only problem the world is facing. We don't have to live in fear of the
World peace is possible. All we
have to do is start putting higher quality people in control of businesses,
schools, the media, the government, and other organizations. It is difficult
to pass judgment on a person's mental health and leadership abilities,
but as soon as we start the process, we will slowly learn how to do an
increasingly better job of analyzing people. There is nothing to fear.
We are not going to hurt ourselves!
We must learn to control our stupid emotions
so that we can face the criminals and remove
them. This will be difficult, but once we start the process,
the number of criminals will diminish, and that makes the problem easier
and easier. The problem we face right now is analogous to cleaning up a
garden that we foolishly allowed to become overgrown with weeds. The job
appears to be overwhelming, but as soon as we start removing the weeds,
the job becomes easier and easier, and when all of the weeds are finally
gone, it will be easy for us to maintain the garden. So, instead of worrying
about how big the job is, look forward to this opportunity to transform
this planet into a beautiful human garden.