.
Updated: here is the video.
.
Patriot Guard Riders Mission Statement
The Patriot Guard Riders is a diverse amalgamation of riders from across the nation. We have one thing in common besides motorcycles. We have an unwavering respect for those who risk their very lives for America’s freedom and security. If you share this respect, please join us.
We don’t care what you ride or if you ride, what your political views are, or whether you’re a hawk or a dove. It is not a requirement that you be a veteran. It doesn’t matter where you’re from or what your income is; you don’t even have to ride. The only prerequisite is Respect.
Our main mission is to attend the funeral services of fallen American heroes as invited guests of the family. Each mission we undertake has two basic objectives:
1. Show our sincere respect for our fallen heroes, their families, and their communities.
2. Shield the mourning family and their friends from interruptions created by any protestor or group of protestors.We accomplish the latter through strictly legal and non-violent means.
To those of you who are currently serving and fighting for the freedoms of others, at home and abroad, please know that we are backing you. We honor and support you with every mission we carry out, and we are praying for a safe return home for all.
It’s the bikers. Why only them? Where are those other people at? The non-bikers. Ohh, you’re too busy. You can’t take off of work.
Not for an afternoon’s worth of work will you trade for a man’s ultimate sacrifice.
When Eve ate fruit which He had forbidden to her from the tree in Paradise, the Lord, be He praised, cursed women with eighteen punishments:
-menstruation;
- childbirth;
- separation from mother and father and marriage to a stranger;
- pregnancy;
- not having control over her own person;
- a lesser share in inheritance; (one half of the male as per the Quran)
- her liability to be divorced and inability to divorce;
- its being lawful for men to have four wives, but for a woman to have only one husband;
- the fact that she must stay secluded in the house;
- the fact that she must keep her head covered inside the house;
- the fact that two women’s testimony has to be set against the testimony of one man;
- the fact that she must not go out of the house unless accompanied by a near relative;
- the fact that men take part in Friday and feast day prayers and funerals while women do not;
- disqualification for ruler ship and judgeship;
- the fact that merit has one thousand components, only one of which is attributable to women, while 999 are attributable to men;
- the fact that if women are profligate they will be given twice as much torment as the rest of the community at the Resurrection Day;
- the fact that if their husbands die they must observe a waiting period of four months and ten days before remarrying.
Where did I get that from? Ever heard of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali? Of course not. Your government doesn’t want you to know anything about Islam, accept “it’s a religion of peace”. Abu,
He was one of the greatest Muslim theologians, jurist, philosopher and mystics of the 12th Century. He wrote on a wide range of topics including jurisprudence, theology, mysticism and philosophy.
He’s even honored today, in the Muslim world. He lived in Persia 1058-1111 AD. He didn’t like women very much. What’s he honored for? For elimination of reason in the Muslim world.
Imam Al-Ghazali is widely known for his heroic role to defeat Mu‘tazilites (rationalized movement) and revived pure Islam. While it is well known that Al-Ghazali himself intended to “shut the door of ijtihad” (the process through which Islamic scholars can generate new rules for Muslims) completely and permanently, which led the Islamic societies to be “frozen in time”.
Back in those days the works of Aristotle and Plato were the thing. The precursors to rational thought in them days. And what did our Muslim do? If you drew intellectually upon the Ancient Greeks, or tried their methods and ideas,you will be known as corrupters of the true Islamic faith.
And I’ve never heard of that word “ijtihad” before.
Another science known as ijtihad (or reasoning and interpretation) was developed by Muslim scholars in order to understand and apply the message of the Qur’an to varying societal needs and conditions.
This is what he did away with. The right of Muslim people to change their religion as time changes. I know Christianity changed. It’s too bad Islam won’t change. And it not been good for the Muslim countries.
Closing the doors of ijtihad has had extremely detrimental ramifications for the Muslim world. According to Qazwini, this decision has resulted in chronic intellectual stagnation, as thousands of potential mujtahids and scholars have been prohibited from offering workable solutions to newly emerging problems. Muslim thinkers have become captive to rules that were made long ago, leaving little scope for liberal or innovative thought.
It seems the ijtihad is our only hope.That the Muslim’s themselves will reform their own religion. Odds? Not a chance.
Ijtihad: Reinterpreting Islamic Principles for the Twenty-first Century
Keep Your Powder Dry
Douglas Tompkins made his fortune by starting North Face and Esprit. He’s now spending it by buying vast quantities of ranch and farmland in Chile and Argentina and returning it to nature.
Let’s here it for Douglas Tompkins! Read it here.
I’ve learned alot about scientists and science by reading online. In reading about scientists I’ve learned how human they are. Not gods, their just as human as you and I. Hey, sometimes they make mistakes, and being human, they won’t admit to it till the end of time. You won’t do that? Neither would I, but we aren’t scientists are we? If we make a mistake it’s not like our whole world collapsing down upon us, but it’s not like that with scientists.
Too many people have too much invested in the reigning ideas; for those people an acknowledgment of their own idea’s bankruptcy is tantamount to an admission that they have wasted their lives.
One thing I’ve learned is the scientific method. What I’ve learned there
Scientific method refers to bodies of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.
So the scientists who measure things are part of scientific method. That’s a lot different than just looking at your computer screen modeling software.
There’s another thing. Who is giving this message? Is it someone you can trust? You want to trust the United Nations? I don’t. They hate the U.S. And I don’t blame them. And I don’t trust them. Do you remember the oil-for-food program? The UN proceeded to allow Saddam Hussein to rip people off to the tune of $10B to $20B.
…the programme suffered from widespread corruption and abuse. Throughout its existence, the programme was dogged by accusations that some of its profits were unlawfully diverted to the government of Iraq and to UN officials. These accusations were made in many countries, including the US and Norway.
The top dogs at the UN got their money, but what did they leave for their followers?
…to admit that U.N. peacekeepers and staff have sexually abused or exploited war refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
I want to leave the future of my country and the earth up to these guys? Not a chance. And why are they the only ones we go through to get this news? A thought two heads are better than one. Of course with one head you could say anything you wanted, couldn’t you?
What do you think, the UN does it for the people? Like the people of Darfur or Rwanda? No. They are humans, remember that. The humans want the money. They wouldn’t be human if they didn’t.
They want us (the rich countries) to pay for the climate changes to have have undergone.
There is a deep injustice in the impacts of climate change,” argues Oxfam in the report, published on 29 May. “Rich countries have caused the problem with many decades of greenhouse-gas emissions (and in the process have grown richer). But poor countries will be worst affected, facing greater droughts, floods, hunger, and disease.” Based on this assessment, Oxfam argues that rich countries must finance developing countries’ climate-change adaptation efforts without diverting funds from existing development-aid commitments.
Hunger? I haven’t read anywhere about the world wide famine. Has it gotten hotter lately? This is just people with their hands out.
You know, don’t you, that these models you claim are correct, are dealing with events in the future? They hadn’t happened yet. Most things that the AGW supporters talk about happening, happens in the some future. And over a long time. But they want the money NOW. What if something happens 50 years from now. I guess we’ll pay that too, ad nauseum.
It’s all about the MONEY.
Scientific consensus is the collective judgement, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study. Consensus implies general agreement, though not necessarily unanimity. Scientific consensus is not by itself a scientific argument, and it is not part of the scientific method. Nevertheless, consensus may be based on both scientific arguments and the scientific method.
Well, that sounds good. If I didn’t think about it too long. But I did think about it to long so other explanations came to me. Scientific consensus has not been good all the time. Galileo went against the scientific consensus in that he believed that the Sun lies motionless at the center of the universe. Galileo was allowed to return home, where spent the remainder of his life under house arrest. Well, that’s not to good, isn’t it? Let’s see about another one, closer to this time. This will make you proud.
In this respect, going along with the “scientific consensus” of the day can prove dangerous in some situations: nothing looks worse on a record than making drastic decisions based on theories which later turned out to be false, such as the compulsory sterilization of thousands of mentally ill patients in the US during the 1930s under the false notion that it would end mental illness. Certain domains, such as the approval of certain technologies for public consumption,can have vast and far-reaching political, economic, and human effects should things run awry of the predictions of scientists
Wow. Compulsory sterilization. In the US. You know what I think?
Scientific consensus don’t mean shit to me.
Let’s get to peer review. In Wikipedia it goes like this.
Peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review.
That’s sounds good. That is unless you read more. It gets more human as you read.
But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.
Its what? Occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong? That’s not what I was led to believe. I was led to believe that peer reviewed information was truthful.
Any journal editor who desires, for whatever reason, to reject a submission can easily do so by choosing referees he knows full well will knock it down; likewise, he can easily obtain favorable referee reports. As I have always counseled young people whose work was rejected, seemingly on improper or insufficient grounds, the system is a crap shoot. Personal vendettas, ideological conflicts, professional jealousies, methodological disagreements, sheer self-promotion, and a great deal of plain incompetence and irresponsibility are no strangers to the scientific world; indeed, that world is rife with these all-too-human attributes. In no event can peer review ensure that research is correct in its procedures or its conclusions.
You can read about it here.
Wow. Frequently wrong? Ideological conflicts? You know what I think?
Peer reviews don’t mean shit to me.
For Dow Kim, 2006 was a very good year. While his salary at Merrill Lynch was $350,000, his total compensation was 100 times that — $35 million.
I’m not mad at Dow Kim, he should take it. I’m mad at the people who paid him.(who do you think that is) And continue to pay him bonuses.
Scrutiny over pay is intensifying as banks like Merrill prepare to dole out bonuses even after they have had to be propped up with billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money. While bonuses are expected to be half of what they were a year ago, some bankers could still collect millions of dollars.
If you want to be pissed off you can read it to. Right here.
Capitalist: their own worst enemy.
I came across something that got my hopes up. It’s the Claire Conner McCaskill, a Senator from the state of Missouri. She has something I like. She doesn’t have any uses for earmarks. I don’t remember where I got that from, but it was believable. Here is her official site. Even though she’s a Democrat, I still have high hopes for her future. I read where she wasn’t alone in her dislike for earmarks, so I got to hunting for so more. I found Jeff Flake, From Arizona. Even though he’s a Republican, I still have high hopes for her future.
Now it’s the bad news.
“More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims”
This news article didn’t make the news. Do you want to know why? It’s because nobody wants you to know how many scientists don’t believe in it.
There are at least 60 requests for new parking lots and garages (or improvements to them) in the cities (and I only counted up to Florida.)Some requests include a parking facility at the Los Angeles Zoo, the Robert King High Park Soccer Field and parking lot, and a parking lot at the Orange Bowl.
That will be good for their economy. Won’t it?