You are on page 1of 3

November 23, 2006

Dear Editor in Chief

A scholar asked: “I heard a Queen’s word supporting those newly moderate and trying
to be well balanced countries to become well self-sufficient and independent, wealthy and
well balanced country someday. What can you say to the Queen’s move? The A.I.
answered: “It is a very good action, and it could let the mind-sets of most people being
governed by the Queen that the Queen has already decided; she needs the constituent’s
supports and perhaps also the moderate majority world’s support …!”
A scholar asked: “I heard that a rally in that most populous Muslim country might be
staged said by a TV commentator because of the specifics pictures and color used on
those posters or placards. What can you say about his comment?” The A.I. answered:
“Perhaps that commentator is very observant. Ordinary people would not use those kinds
of wordings or pictures. Perhaps most ordinary protesters would use something
differently. Anyway even if it might be true that the rally is staged or not staged, what is
important -the people are doing something to have checks and balances on any issues that
affect their lives. And leaders are also listening to critics and having some adjustments
and flexibilities and firmed stand on issues.”
A scholar asked: “I heard that there is another breakdown on the talks between two
brothers with one ancestor- father Abraham. The same issues are laid down perhaps about
their ancestral lands. But I also heard that on issues of building desalination plants-
getting water from the Red sea and supplying fresh water on those barren lands -is a very
concrete action that things could still be made better between two groups with hatred to
each other. Perhaps more of these concrete and practical projects should be made on
many places where sea water is plenty and barren lands are just waiting to be watered
from those desalination plants instead of hating each other. Perhaps if many barren lands
and deserts would be converted to produce consumable oil and never depleting then those
haters would subside because most people are looking for other source of livelihood.
Principle: If people are busy, earning something, they would forget to be radicals instead
they would become enjoyer of their youth and life. Because they believe now that life is
not a problem to be solved but a gift to be enjoyed.”
A scholar asked: “If the military are well safe in their barracks, and the police are not
well secured in their police stations, and those investigation agents are also not very well
secured, why give emphasis to let them-policemen and agents- become so secure?” The
A.I. answered: “The police or those investigation agents really lack armors, hand guns,
skills in intelligence gathering, and skills on pacifying wild civilian people or potential
criminals, or secret extremists. And perhaps their commanders are also being used as
body militias by powerful influential elders, or ethnic leaders; then more focus should be
given to address these problems. Perhaps rotation of division chief should really be a
must so that to eliminate favoritism, godfather system, gang system or clique or syndicate
system. Perhaps even those police low rankings should also be rotated to those
neighboring towns so that familiarities among low ranking men could be avoided.
Perhaps rules and ordinances should be passed specially about gun control. Only
police and those investigation agents and those undercover agents with permit to carry
should carry weapons. The enemies are the loose weapons, and loose ammos and those
wrong interpretations of words that result to hatred and being preached by misguided
clerics and imams because of unclear words in their sacred books. Principle behind:
Police and justice investigation agents and under cover intelligence should really be well
trained, has skills and armor, weapons to carry the principles of moderation or trying to
be well balanced nation under the rule of the Word or universal good teachings, majority
rule or law and ordinances, and science and technology.”
A scholar asked: “Why is it that most politicians are using emblems or color or
identity in their campaign? The A.I. answered: “It is an attempt to know people’s
sentiments by just wearing something. Another scholar asked: “It would create distinction
and trademark which would cause divisions, alliances, groupings or conflicts which is
perhaps another kind of extreme. How would you check the extreme being made because
of name callings?” The A.I. answered: “One should be very observant and never use sign
or thing that is being made by the media as bad or connected to bad. One should easily
detach to it so that there would be no distinction being created. Men have a habit of
making tagged to people’s mistakes. So never use anything that would connect you to
bad. Change colors, change emblem, change slogan and keep on trying to be better; if not
the best. People are fault finders, they are expert on that. So leaders should really be good
on not creating distinction because one has no obligation to others except to love. There
is one thought one purpose-love of others and love of enemies.”
A scholar asked: “You said that the enemies are not those extremists but those twisted
words in their sacred books. But I heard also that there are so much words in the Bible
that encourage annihilation or cleansing or killing of unholy people or unholy animals
being ordered by a prophet or prophets especially in the Old Testaments. Why is it that
those misguided clerics, preachers, and imams are not responsible if there would be
killings… instead those twisted words written in their sacred books should be
responsible? Those words perhaps are historical events and could never be changed.
Perhaps the enemies are not those twisted words but the wrong interpretations of those
misguided secular imams, clerics, preachers or scholars. What can you say about my
comment?” The A.I. answered: “Yes, you are right, I might be wrong again. Those
misguided people who have wrong interpretation of the wording in their sacred books
should be the one responsible of other people’s false jihad and false martyrdom, and too
much hatred to others that result to killings. But, perhaps there could still be some
problem on their sacred books because the reader has no alternative way to classify those
incidents that push people to hate or kill infidels. But in the bible, those similar incidents
like killing unbelievers or killing or cleansing unholy people are found on the Old
Testaments. And most Christians concentrate now on the New Testaments. Perhaps the
Muslims should also have “New Testament” version in their sacred books.”
Another scholar asked: “Why is it that even there is New Testament there is a point in
history especially during Dark Ages-that fellow Christians were killing each other
because of different interpretations of the bible? And these two groups even took several
hundred years to settle down their problems - the hating or hatred between sects or
factions or names of religion especially those Catholics and Protestant were very great!”
Why is that? The A.I. answered: “Perhaps what is happening in a sectarian violence in a
country is also what had happened between Catholics and Protestants during those Dark
Ages-killing and hating each other because of wrong interpretation of religious beliefs
about those words written in their sacred books. Perhaps both parties insist that their
group is the only true and right group. Words like: a) we are the remnants vs. we are the
original, b) we are good men teaching base religion vs. we are word base religion, c) we
have miracles to support our claims vs. we only stick to the word. And so many words
and claims that flame hating, hatred and so and so forth. Perhaps this is also happening in
that region, one group claims this, and another group claims that and so on that fuels
hating and hatred. Perhaps the enemies are not those historic facts but the interpretations
of those words and those motives of the one interpreting to show he is the only right. It is
the ambition of a secular preacher or secular teacher, secular imam to boast or to show off
that cause hating.
Perhaps words pertaining to boast could be like: “If you want to boast, boast of what
Christ did for you…!” Another scholar asked: “Is Christ superior to other prophets of
other religions?” The A.I. answered: “Others claim that their prophet is the son of God, or
the messiah or the savior of this world, or God himself becoming man, etc. This
superiority of Messiah question is a tricky question; it was also asked even by those
people who interrogated Jesus before Jesus was crucified. The answer is of course written
on the bible and an expert on the bible could answer it better or the best. But for my
personal opinion so that there would be no more contest on whose prophet or savior is
better why just assumed that they are all equal. There is no superior or inferior among
them. If my personal opinion is wrong I stand to be corrected as long as there should be
no hating or hatred that would be sparked because of opening this question. Perhaps it is
obvious that no head of a group would admit that their prophet is inferior to the other for
now; perhaps in the near future things would be clear to all.”
A scholar asked: “Why recall all those sacred books with controversial wordings and
place there “footnotes” about the historical facts and also explain about a parallelism
during the Dark Ages-religious groups kill each other for superiority of group but
forgetting their master’s word or command to even love their enemies. What can you
say?” The A.I. answered: “It is a good idea. Perhaps other better ideas could still help to
correct wrong interpretations that incite hating.”

From someone who might be wrong,