Killing All Kings

Cartoons, your version of Islam is 1% different than mine, western culture is making me horny and I don’t like it…whatever your reason for becoming a mass murderer, may I offer a bit of advice?  Get to work on killing the royal families already!  Monarchy had it’s day, and mankind has since evolved. 

Believe it or not, mass amounts of people realized one day that if they all just work together, they can kill off every last member of the royal family and finally get a chance to run their own country.  You’ve got the killing part down, but like Europe in the 100 years war, you’re stuck in the cycle of ‘kill that person over there because my king and his holy advisor said it was a good idea’. 

Never realizing that both the king and his holy advisor are stealing food from your table, as they did to your parents and their grandparents before them, it’s obvious that a lack of education is to blame here.  These people in the Middle East and some parts of Africa simply fail to grasp the whole ‘strength in numbers’ concept. 

The same can be said for their apparant inability to realize that ‘spiritual leader’ can and does often equal ‘greedy bullshit artist’.  Here in America we just recently uncovered an entire generation of priests who were having sex with the altar boys and getting away with it.  While that’s horrible, it’s been years since American preachers have been able to convince people to riot.  In fact, the last uprisals inspired by religion here involved non-violent protest. 

With that in mind, Ghandi was busy smacking around the Brittish empire using that exact same method over 50 years ago, and here you folks are still killing your neighbors like it’s the year 1200!  It’s time to step back and realize for once that a common enemy does exist, and regardless of what you’re hearing down at the mosque, it’s not your fellow peasant countryman. 

It’s the rich folk who’ve been keeping you down for centuries.  People of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Pakistan, Egypt…it’s time to smarten up and get real about this thing called life.  Your leaders have been playing you for fools for hundreds of years now, and it’s high time reality played a roll in the violence over there.  Your kings don’t care about Allah, they care about money.  It’s never going to change unless you take them out.

America isn’t going to solve your problems, neither is Allah.  We do more to keep these people in power than any other nation in the world.  As far as we’re concerned, if the oil stays cheap, your royal families can keep you down forever.  Torching an oil field, a neighbor’s house or their mosque isn’t the answer.  

Demand education, jobs, security, clean water and uninterupted electricity.  When your leaders fail to provide these things, if you can’t vote them out of power, take them out the old fashioned way!  That’s what we did here in America in 1776, and look where we are now. 

This entry was posted in Words. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Killing All Kings

  1. Paul says:

    So now you are advocating murder Chris ? Am I reading this correctly ? Sounds like might makes right to me . While there are enough rich tyrants to go around, I have known poor people who were just as bad. Tell the whole truth !

  2. Washington says:

    The strength in numbers theory is absurd. Pick up a history book or talk to anyone who understands numbers versus power.

    As to what we did here, in 1776, it would be interesting to hear your version. Was it the fault of George Bush? Maybe if Kerry had been ’round? 🙂

  3. Chris Austin says:

    1776 – Washington, Nathanial Greene, Henry Knox, Dorchester, New York, Virginia, Jersey…a lot of luck, a lot of balls, but most importantly, they were right.

    Why kick up to a king who didn’t care whether any of them lived or died?

    Men fighting for a common cause, that’s the key to freedom. Never is it the key to getting everyone in the world believing what you believe in terms of religion…though most of us gave up killing our neighbors to get them to pray like we do a long time ago…these people are still stuck in the past when it comes to that.

    Figure out why North America was settled by the Pilgrims, and it’ll say they wanted to get out from under the thumb of a king who made them think a certain way about life, God…meanwhile, the prick was keeping them down, only using them once in a while to help steal some land from the kingdom to the right or left.

    Screw that. We’ll stick up for those people as long as some maniac is disrupting the oil output, and largely it’s none of our business anyway. But the majority of the wealth in those countries is concentrated at the top. Though these royal families don’t provide education, services, jobs…

    Off with their heads!!!

    Just like I’d have been advocating back in the day when it was time to shake our chains!

    Screw Allah, fight for yourselves! Your kids!

    Was the Revolutionary War a case of mass murder Paul? It’s good enough for us…not for them?

  4. Paul says:

    I don’t think thaat Washington , the pi;grims advocated murder Chris! Freedom from tyranny yes, but murder no. Get your historical facts strait. YOU said “Get to work on killing the royal families”! No the Revolutionary War was not a case of mass murder -that’s a rediculous question, but the men who fought the British acted on principle not murder !!

  5. Washington says:

    Chris,

    All due respect but you rant like someone who does not have a position. You sound rather like Lenin only he couched in more intellectual terms.

    You state that these “kingdoms” should rise up to overthrow but you fail to add that there is a distinct difference between the American and French revolution and what you are positing; namely that among the leadership, and down, was a literate class that believed that war was to be waged only as long as to throw off the yoke of oppression. In no way was there to be a religious revolution which is exactly what would happen in many of these present day kingdoms…they would have Mullahs leading each country, pushing down any free expression, which you so value.

    You advise others to throw off the yoke yet you fail to hide your contempt for your country, it’s history, and all who oppose your thought process. That would put off even the most violent person. Your words echo-in an eery fashion – those of the Propaganda Minister for the Third Reich and of Bukharin of the Sovs.

    I respect your opinions and appreciate the forum here but I must tell you that “your at whatever cost” demeans your position except to those few who feel likewise, inhabiting the very fringe of thoughtful inquiry.

  6. Chris Austin says:

    Washington: You state that these “kingdoms” should rise up to overthrow but you fail to add that there is a distinct difference between the American and French revolution and what you are positing; namely that among the leadership, and down, was a literate class that believed that war was to be waged only as long as to throw off the yoke of oppression. In no way was there to be a religious revolution which is exactly what would happen in many of these present day kingdoms…they would have Mullahs leading each country, pushing down any free expression, which you so value.

    Washington, so the Saudis have to wait until their ruling class provide them education before an overthrow of the government is legit? When is that going to happen?

    And as far as the Mullahs leading each country, what’s the difference between that and Iraq? If the people vote, they’ll support their own people of course, and unlike America and Christianity where the two are seperated in terms of religion’s role in government, Islam is entirely different. An elected theocracy is what we have today in Iraq and Palastine.

    As much as I disdain that arrangement, it’s now up to these elected officials to govern. Once the business changes from brainwashing to providing utilities and education, you might find that 50 years down the road, they too learn to understand that religion’s role in the country has little to do with the actual WORK that comes with running a government.

    In Iraq we’ve got from a dictatorship, a form of monarchial rule, to an elected government. America will leave that place eventually, and at that point it’s up to the people to make it work. If religious differences prevent elected officials from keeping the electricity on for more than half the day, then logic will either prevail, or they’ll be doomed to another few generations of subjugation.

    Nothing happens overnight, I know that. I also know that an elected theocracy is better than an unelected ruling class. Allah only takes these mullahs so far…they’re in power now, so it’s time to step up. Say the religious leaders fail their people and they end up worse off than before with Saddam. What’s to come of their religion then?

    Be careful of what you wish for I suppose…but until these people see for themselves that Islam has nothing to do with keeping the water running, perhaps they’ll begin to evolve past the point they’re at now.

    I find the status quo to be disgusting. We don’t pay as much attention to the daily goings on of the middle east besides the news that directly affects our people or our interests…but what the ruling class gets away with there is a serious problem. The amount of control religion has on these people is another one, but as I see it, you can’t cure the second without dealing with the first.

    You can’t approach this as ‘we need to get rid of fundamentalist Islam’, without first getting rid of the cause. Ideally, people with something to live for will act rationally in most situations. Of course you’re going to have batches of wackos, but an economy and government that works for these societies will provide them something else to live for besides getting to heaven.

    I love my country – – – Washington, I served 4 years in the Army from the age of 17-21. Don’t get psychological on me now. This is my example of using the first ammendment to further the growth of my mind.

    I aim to discuss this in completely non-political terms.

  7. Washington says:

    I suppose one should ask what the definition of love is then? But I shall not because you are as American as I, and vice versa. Perhaps someone somewhere is observing our give and take and appreciating the fact that we can disagree but remain loyal to our respective views of country.

    As to the Saudi’s – no, one cannot wait until a class is learned. However, in the course of history, going from monarchy to theocracy, or worse, means that millions will die. For you, no doubt, this is a by product of your revolutionary aim. You want democracy for the Saudi’s even if, by chance, it might lead to a catasrophe of epic proportions. You belong in the Bush cabinet. I now understand why you despise the President-you think like his people.

    Where you fail, in my opinion, is equating the people of Islam with the people of Christianity or Judaism. You think that the Mullahs will fall if they can’t keep the water running. My dear fellow you are mistaken. A Christian leader may be disposed of by the people because they can, in their minds, say this leader was not keeping faith with Christian principles. However, that is not the case with Islam.

    Water does not matter. The spread of Islam, the subjugation of people of the book, and the removal of infidels, such as yourself, is the goal of militant Islam. You can’t make the trains run on time and expect that will suffice.

    Granted, what you say is a grand utopian, though revolutionary, aim. It will not work. What, then, is the solution? None apparent – if the house of Saud falls then that will be – but to foment it is to invite responsibility for the future deaths of millions-and make no mistake-that area would end up as glass.

Comments are closed.