November 25, 2006

Dear Editor in Chief

A scholar asked: “You said there should be delegation of leaderships. All peace loving
strong moderate leaders should be obliged to share the risks of being defeated in an
election by helping a member who needs most the help in times of civil war or
insurgency because of twisted words in those psyches of those extremists. The goal is to
defeat extremism and to stop extremism to spread. Members who want that this world
would be a world of peace loving, world of moderates, world of tolerant, world of
enterprising should not be afraid to risk even their many blessings by example letting
their general to have a chance to serve through volunteer services as commander of the
coalition of the willing for 3-6 months in a rotation basis. What if a commander in turn
wants to show to the world that he is different, and he would ask his president to
reinforce him many soldiers, and that the world was really impressed of his decision just
like what some legendary ancient heroes did?” The A.I. answered: “This is an opportunity
for all moderate country to show the best ability in fighting extremism when their turn
arrives. But if example a new commander asks for 200,000 reinforcements from their
strong leader and the majority of the people supported it and blessed it with law and there
is no string attached then it is good. It shows that many people still care.
A scholar asked: “If in this sharing of burden, one general in his turn becomes the
hero, could these open to new rivalries and showing of superiority and supremacy of
one’s strength, courage and unity with its fellow party or faction or race? And this
showing of superiority would create again distinction that breeds rivalries?” The A.I.
answered: “Perhaps if the commander would become boastful and conceited in his
accomplishment, media would project him as what he wants to be projected, and his
legacy might be tainted with some negatives. But if he remains humble and low profile,
he could be remembered as a legendary hero and a global hero.
It is hard to credit a winning where many people have contributed something.
Perhaps, if this principle of having delegation of responsibility among leaders for a short
time or chip in system or ant system of doing things could become successful in pre-
empting extremism to grow or to spread, countries would no longer need much resource
to solve a big or major problem or start of extremism. There is no need to fear with each
other or to mistrust each other because all would become team-partners because of many
good teachings from many good & moderate groups, bless by the majority of many
moderate states and help by science & technology in solving any start of the problem in
this whole small world.
Perhaps if there would be regional or world peace, it should result to creation of
businesses and opportunity to repay back those who sacrificed their lives especially if the
problematic country becomes stable. Perhaps almost all moderate member countries
would contribute something in a World Trust Fund for the war veterans. Those veterans
would also be compensated of their services rendered. Most entrepreneurs and business
oriented people would show also their gratitude of having the opportunity to do
businesses because of the efforts of those veterans. That dream of having peace should
drive many people from many countries to render civil or military services and should
also result to letting those veterans have also pension or also some benefits.
A scholar asked: “Why is it that for other religious group, life begins on the
conception or fertilizations of female & male eggs while other religious group claims that
life begin 120 days or 4 months after fertilization?” The A.I. answered: “Perhaps the basis
of the two perspectives is different. Example: if the start of division of cells is the
emphasis because of the soul entry then more credits should be given on conception, but
if the completion and wholeness especially of the brain or intelligence is given emphasis
then more credits should be given on after 120 days; especially if the rewards and
punishments in heaven or hell or limbo is considered like: what will those resurrected
fetuses do in heaven if they have no capacity to enjoy heaven because they have no
intelligence?
As for my personal opinion, those religious leaders should refrain from given
controversial claims connected with scientific things because their focus should
concentrate on propagation of good teaching; not on superiority of group wisdom:
example-one has no other obligation toward others except to love- and to even love ones
enemies. Or there is one thought and one purpose-love. Or perhaps those religious leaders
should concentrate about spiritual, universal moral, universal ethical aspects but not on
controversies that there are scientific explanation as alternatives except if the religious
leaders are called to give declaration as a consensus of their group/s with regard to
controversial thing/s to check abuses, and extremes on science experiments, researches
and adventures.
A scholar asked: “Why make a computer program about weighing many
considerations, especially about good government, good leader, and publish them world
wide so that people could know the standing of a leader in so many details in the most
balanced way?” The A.I. answered: “It’s a good idea so that a country or a leader or a
manager or a parent can pin point its weaknesses, strengths, potentials according to many
perspectives in the whole world; not only according to its friends and constituents. It is
like the program in choosing potential compatibility on friendship or future lovers or
future husband and wife. Example of tests that could be imitated and improved could be
found on pen pal and friendships web sites compatibility tests.
A scholar asked: “You mentioned what must go up should go down, and you
mentioned words like holy retreat, etc.-And I saw in a meeting of many leaders the word
‘RETREAT II’ as the title perhaps of their meeting. Why make a ‘retreat’ really ‘down to
earth’ for those people who are so ‘humbled’ or ‘poor’, somewhat the same as what those
leaders who wore sack clothes in Nineveh during the time of Jonah even just for 2 days
every three years? What can you say about it?” The A.I. answered: “Perhaps it would
seem another controversy and those critics might say words like ‘hypocrisies, etc.” But
there seem some balancing act on the extreme that most meetings of world leaders are
located to the best place of the host-and not seeing those realities that could let leaders
feel that they are really needed by those very poor people and also ponder on some
spirituality.
Perhaps no body would like to let his visitors see or visit his place in a messy
situation. Every host would try his best that those leaders or visitors are really well
secured, well entertained and well served of their best. Anyway, if ever there would be a
leader who is desperately poor and there would be a ‘humble retreat’ of, for, by leaders
and the host would also do his best to offer the very best that his province or country
could offer; but for the rest of the world it is really a place to feel humble then why create
like one retreat –similar with that during the time of Jonah every three years on a raffle
basis selected from the most poorest countries or provinces in the world. It is not to put
shame to people because media is not allowed. Leaders will not keep on giving promises
there, but they will just feel how to be humbled. Perhaps when they go back to their home
place, there is something that could let them do more, and inspire more to do more than
just enough and especially about some spirituality.
Or why just have some spiritual retreat for most leaders on every major religion
worship center every two years on a rotation basis? The retreat could test their ability not
to judge others but to respect and to care and especially to learn from others.
A scholar asked: “I saw in TV a tunnel believed to be part of network of tunnels and
very long perhaps 100-300 kilometers long in a country that 50,000 GI’s lives were lost
for fighting to preserve democracy in the South during the 1960’s. What if you were alive
during the war and many of your democracy’s fighters are just being killed because of the
aids of those tunnels, what counter measures would you do?” The A.I. answered:
“Perhaps during those times, the generals also knew the existence of those tunnel
networks, but smart devices, GPS, cell phones, satellites and others modern technologies
were not available. Perhaps intelligence network of those GIs were infiltrated that’s why
most ‘secret’ assaults they made are failures or defeats. Since it is now history, it is very
hard to comment about those underground tunnels. Those tunnels were really made for
small humans so that those big humans would be discouraged to use them for their
benefits.
But, if rats and snakes could create holes and small tunnels; those holes could easily
be destroyed by any means. But the problem lays when the opening is very small and
very secretive and many alternative routes to come out. History might study the tactic and
adopt it as a practical strategy for the new moderate soldier to win the war on terror. Or
the extremists might adopt using secret tunnels to have underground networks for their
advantages.
Perhaps I saw a satellite imagery technology that could trace underground old rivers
and underground old or ancient walls using heat waves or sound waves technology;
similar to a cat’s scan or a scanner used for pregnant woman. Perhaps those underground
networks could easily be traced by this technology. Perhaps this technology could be used
to trace secret tunnels and to enhance the security of the border of a country.
From someone who might be wrong,