Author`s name Dmitry Sudakov

Whose peace will it be in the end?

For many thousands of years, roguish rulers and militant societies have repeatedly tried to impose their own brand of peace on other societies even as these appeared to enjoy peace-like tranquility, but, in a manner which did not conform to the warmonger's own traditions and culture. This could not be more meaningful than it is today, as the mightiest nation on earth has led a full force descent on a small distant country already under strict world surveillance, and for that reason, peaceful on the outside though ominously discordant internally.

Peace is undoubtedly nature's default condition for all living beings, individually or collectively, and the disturbance of that peace is the aberration that creates variable degrees of distress in all of us, individually or collectively. There are a number of common sayings which are designed to encourage the maintenance of peace, such as "Live and let live", "Leave well enough alone", or "Mind your own business". Obviously no one in the White House currently has ever heard of these, nor either has Bin Laden, the Sultan of Terror, heard of another, "Let a sleeping dog lie"

Understanding of the true meaning of peace is surely a desirable leadership quality, which has to be at the top of the agenda for any elected leader. It is a most disheartening fact that really brilliant people do not wish to have their peace oriented inquiring minds cluttered by the daily aggravations of high public office, leaving that field largely open to self-interest and attention seekers,

A fact that is difficult to ignore is that two of the world's greatest powers, Britain and the U.S.A are being led today on the one hand by the ex-singer of a Rock Group, appropriately named "Ugly Rumors" and on the other hand by a Baseball groupie. It is a painful thought that, while these two benders of reality were doing that for which they themselves felt qualified for at the time, other potentially promising leaders were striving to attain true qualifications for leadership but did not succeed in this society where influence, fraud and superficiality are rewarded handsomely, while real human qualities too often have to provide their own self-satisfying reward. Is this a reflection on these confused leaders? Not necessarily, since they are what they are. It is however an Indictment of an incredibly undiscerning electorate.

War, of course, is the peace annihilator, which everyone instantly juxtaposes to peace when the thought of one or the other occupies our minds. There is no middle ground. When the U.S. and the Soviet Union were building and accumulating incredible arsenals of weaponry in anticipation of having to destroy each other and the world 100 times over, during that 44 year period known as the cold war, in actual fact there was no war. That was a time of peace, costly peace but nevertheless each side had leaders that recognized the consequences of starting a war that could bring about the end of civilization. Anyone who believes in God should at this time say a silent prayer of thanks that George W. Bush did not usurp the Presidency during those years.

The U.S.A. entered this century with a strong record of dedication to the cause of peace and in the wars in which they involved themselves, they are deemed to have carried the baton of peace for all freedom loving countries. It is very unfortunate that such an enviable record, unique in history, should now be desecrated, perhaps beyond decontamination, by a President that is unknowingly deprived of wisdom and who wages war like a barnyard rooster protects his harem. Meanwhile the United Nations, starving for a more forceful leadership, has dishonored itself for its lack of meaningful and immediate action tothe plightofthevulnerablepeople of the world. Was it not originally created specifically for that purpose?

The disruption of peace historically, has been a ponderous affair requiring long periods of preparation before evolving into endless wars. There was, however, a strange reluctance on the part of potential defenders of peace, in appreciating the imminence of conflict and this was specifically reflected at Pearl Harbor, in Poland and New York. This is probably the reason why today, with the awesome development of weapons of mass destruction, the opposite may have become reality, and Governments are nurturing true fears of the ultimate possibility of a mass carnage as yet never seen before, at the hands of dedicated generations of religionists who may follow to the letter the presumed thoughts of an idol who spoke words of hate and violence while adopting the role of messenger of God.

Muslims recognize that there is but one God, and the name Allah does in fact actually mean "one God". They do not however recognize that the Judeo-Christian "one God", adopted many thousands of years prior to the instant birth of Islam in the seventh century A.D. is unquestionably the same being, and in so doing they mentally deprive their Allah of non-Muslim subjects. In scriptures written centuries after Muhammad's death it is claimed that he would have been Allah's only messenger and the bearer of all his tidings. It is not explained why Allah with all his resources could not find another earth representative during all those many thousands of years prior to Mohammad's time.

“Muhammad’s Own Words” website carries over 2500 quotations all of which are certified by the sacred scriptures of Islam: the Qur'an, Sira, Ta'rikh, and Hadith and these are conveniently organized in 32 groups for easy reference. The compiler of these quotes placed his emphasis on Mohammad's disdain for non-Muslims. Quotations dealing with conventional, correct, Muslims are not found in this collection. The reading of this collection of quotes, by non-Muslims, give rise to considerable peace deprivation on the part of those of us described as infidels and unbelievers, and all should familiarize themselves with these thoughts, which today continue to be promoted by Clerics with a bend towards radicalism.

Modern Muslim clerics by association are considered by many of their followers to be in-line legatees in their Prophet's "messagerie", in fact Shiite Imams are deemed to speak for God in any new precept, which they may pronounce as a supplement to existing Islamic law or moral dogma. Could it be by design that these religious indoctrinators create a personal appearance for themselves that is meant to encourage such presumptions?

If the Clerics' teachings today are from the words of Muhammad, and they are creating a new violent generation of hate-filled young Muslim, all non-Muslims of the world are fully justified in being wary of Muslims that overtly cling to traditional attributes directly related to their religion, its precepts and therefore its most horrid commandments. What possible alternative conclusion could there be for us, when we witness the world Muslim majority Sunnis and the Imam led Iraq majority Shiites destroy each other. Who will be next?

All the nations of the world, all the cultures of the world, all the religions of the world, have in their midst a percentage of their people who genetically or for any other reasons, adopt a life of crime, of violence, generally a natural tendency towards anti-social behavior. Studies suggest that a figure of 10% of overall populations may be a reasonably estimate of people naturally prone to violence and crime. It follows that 90% of the world's population whether In Europe, Asia, the Americas, or whether they are, Christians, Muslims or Buddhist, are normal, sensitive, peaceful individuals by nature, and only 10% are not. The Catholic Church has its mafia, despite generating the most peaceful of religious messages. Islam's natural militants, no more prevalent than in other sectarian groups, are however immersed as children in those words of Mohammad that they are selectively obligated to memorize. Those words, responsibly translated in “Muhammad’s Own Words,” induce Muslim students to firmly believe that they are fulfilling the will of God himself, if they carry out acts of violence against non-Muslims, and 10% of them are inclined to respond to these words, written by scribes, 200 years following Muhammad's passing.

Populations of westernized civilizations are taught early to respect other peoples' property, and their lives, but when their Governments decree a state of war, then all bets are off, and it is then permitted, in fact expected, that law abiding young people will take-up arms and kill and destroy other respectable law abiding young people and their properties. This mental state of war, this call to arms has been an ongoing factor for the radicalized young Muslims for many centuries, and the history of Islamic wars and occupations bears witness to the results. Without a serious reversal in the Islamic teachings for its young people, a most unlikely occurrence, it would be insane to expect that peace could originate from that sphere of the world's societies.

A merging of precepts, values, cultures or societies is a mindless concept that few normally intelligent people could have conceived as possible, but unbelievably, the White House occupiers did. Peace should not be a primary factor at this time since it is unattainable. The White House, having opted for an overall policy of threats and intimidation, there is no solid ground from which a political peace process can be seriously entertained. A stable status quo is the best possible foreseeable scenario but the longer-term future for these totally discordant cultures must be consolidated from a firmer base than presently exists. A considerable cooling off period of inter-relations between Western and Islamic nations, perhaps even a clear separation, might result in an eventual rebuilding in the distant future along firmer, more potentially constructive lines.

At some point in years to come, perhaps Muslims, Christians and Buddhists alike will realize that God himself has a strong requirement for inner peace and would prefer to sense peace within his subjects as well. Peace may in fact be one of his principle attributes and one of the reasons for his peaceful state is that there really is only one of him, no matter how many different names are assigned to him by all the nations and religions of the world, who wish to know and possess Him by their own familiar name.

In this context, is it not possible that God's ultimate judgment concerning each individual may have as a major determinant, people's own deeds and thoughts towards each other? Could everyone be held accountable for acts that may have prevented God and them from enjoying peace within their souls? If this is so, for those who in this manner may have disturbed the peace of God, where do they expect to hide?

Whose peace will it be in the end? It will not be Mohammad's, since many of the words attributed to him tell us that he has none to offer, nor can it originate from the likes of George W. Bush, who believes that peace without victory is defeat.

It will be God's peace, one way or another…

Paul Forest
[email protected]

Discuss this article on Pravda.Ru English Forums

Subscribe to Pravda.Ru Telegram channel, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, RSS!