we were hacked

well, we think we have it all - alan hartung has been great and so has stephen miracles [stephen helps develop ideas and code, just wait he emailed me during this entry with a very cool up coming idea] - but we got hacked :) it may sound silly but for some reason i have seen this as more of a learning experience, a "good thing," as opposed to a pain in the ass, a "bad thing." we were hacked by some islamic group, or a group that is claiming to be islamic, who seems to be against the pope and a whole grip of other things. here is a copy of the text that was on the screen:

Tarihim, şerefim, şiirim, her şeyim:
Yer yüzünde yer beğen !
Nereye dikilmek istersen,
Söyle, seni oraya dikeyim !

Musul Türk tür Türk Kalacak

Tüm Türkmen kardeşlerimize selamlar

Fuck you fransa, papa and vatikan

- La France a assasiné ler Turcs à Gallipoli 1915
- La Frane a teé des milliers Algériens en 1945. Les saldats Français antmontré le courage de se photograpier avec les jeune Algeriennes nues qu�ils ses ant forcement couchés.
-La France a toujours soutenu le terreurisme ils étaient avec les terreurists depuis des anneés.
-La France estun pas impérialiste
- Fucked France

Metlak marque du monde, présente ses salutations à tout le monde.


interestingly, i have tried to find out about this "metlak" and from what i have found out i think i agree with some of the stuff he has been posting on the net - while the hacking part that drives me crazy, "his" words are very clear and on the money. i think he has a voice worth hearing. "he" [not sure of the gender, or it metlak is a group] is anti war more then anything else he is speaking against the killing of the innocient people in the wars in his area. i agree with him 100% on stoping wars, stopping the killing and stopping the genocide that seems to be running through the area.

i believe certian people, and certain policies desire to keep the killing. they see it as "ridding the world of evil." but in reality, the average person is not "evil" and is not trying to kill anyone - many are simply trying to live, work and raise a family in a part of the world where we fight for something as stupid as oil. then, to add insult to injury, our "religious leaders" insult their faith and never even come close to saying "sorry." here is a very simple message he wrote on another hack:


how can anyone be against something so simple, so basic and so true - his cry is that we stop the killing, stop the opression and stop the hurt. why is that so hard to grasp? have we become a people so caught-up in our own "system" that we forget the words of our master, jesus the christ? have we walked so far away from the ideas of peace and love he gave us? are we so close to having a country based soly on the call of politics, economics and power that we forget to love, give and walk in peace?

sure, the hack is a pain in the ass, and i would rather his voice be heard in another way - but i wonder if we would listen if he simply had a blog? we are in the process of rebuilding our search area, because that seems to be the last effected area - this has been a very interesting adventure, and one that opened my eyes. i have always been against war [as many know] but now i can place a "name" to another, on the "other side" who has the same heart. -


in and of itself

how do we define morality? what makes one thing moral and another thing "not" moral? what is morality? what is "moral?" now, i am not looking for the "webster definition" of the word, i want to know what is moral? do we get the idea of what is moral from scripture, or do we decide what is moral and then look for scripture to support our view? does morality come from our faith, or does our faith come from our morality?

if something is seen as moral in one culture, does another culture have the right to say it is not moral? can one view of morality be seen higher then another view? can one group place their moral views on another? if morality is based on religious convictions can people have different views of morality and yet hole the same faith? can one gathering of christians have a different view of what is and is not moral? do we all need the same moral reality?

is smoking a moral issue? is drinking a moral issue? is "cussing" a moral issue? is dress a moral issue? if they are, can we see them all as scriptural issues as well? for example, drinking. can different communities have different views, and both be right? what if your community says it is wrong, and the community next to you says it is right, can you both agree that the others point is valid? what about cussing? if in a community words like "shit" and "crap" and "pimp" and "bitch" have a positive meaning, and in another they have a very negative meaning whose morality do we go with? who gets to decided the use of a word in community?

if you were to go to a place where the word "the" was considered the greatest insult would you use it and simply think "man, these people need to get over this stupid 'the' thing." would you insist that your morality of the word "the" was the right morality and theirs was the wrong morality? what if you were from the community where "the" was considered a great insult and found yourself in a community where "the" was the greatest complement, what would you do? how would handle the use of the word?

how do you define morality? is it defined in culture, or in scripture - or is there a difference?

tags: , , , , , ,


we can help

the aleutian & pribilof peoples of alaska have decided not to take citgo' offer of free, or reduced heating oil. these people, because of where they are located, pay between $5 and $7 a gallon for heating oil, their average bill could run hundreds of dollars a month, and in a culture that does not have much this is hard.

i am not interested in the politics, but i care about the people - we should all care about the people. they need our help - and you can give directly to them, and go through no middle-man.

to help, visit this site - they truly need us to help as we can. please share this with your community of faith and see how they can also help.

contemplating your navel

ever just get in one of those "i am thinking moods?" you know, the ones where you want to say something but you are filled with questions and no answers? like, how do you define friendship? what elements need to be there for a friendship to develop? does one need to be in contact all the time? does one need to touch? can friendships be developed over the internet? what defines friendship for you?

i am not sure i have the answers, because as soon as i do i notice that people who claimed to be my friend - are no longer my friends. people who i could email and have conversations fall off the face of the earth and when i email, nothing. or when i visit, there is no mention of our friendship - how does that come to be? what quality in friendship makes it cheap and short lived? what quality of friendship makes it shut down soon after it's started?

i have always been a rahter feeling kind of guy, and i value my friendships so when one seems to go away, for no real reason, i feel hurt. how does one value a friendship? are people friends because they can offer you something, or are they your friends because you simply desire friendship?

i think for most people friendship is rather cheap and meaningless. for me, it is the greatest thing i have to offer, me.


i'm green

i'm green, and i have been green for a very long time. i am a firm believer that we are to care for this world so that our children can have a place that is safe to live. so, i believe in being a green christian.

i was watching a moyer's pbs show "God is green" and i have to say i think he did a great job - but one thing truly got me upset - and it was not moyer at all. it was based on some of the stuff the "iecs" puts out - calvin beisner, the "creator" of the cornwall declaration said that it really did not matter much to him if the earth was polluted or not, because he was saved and would be in heaven anyway, even if he was wrong [now i am not quoting word for word, but that is the idea behind his words] and i have to say that this is just another case of bad evangelcial theology.

now, it bugged me, not because of the poor theology concerning salvation, but because it matter little to him if, for example, children died drinking lead filled water; well, i guess it is his theology. you see, for him he is "saved no matter what he does to this planet" i believe this to be poor theology. "don't even think of hurting a child, because you will answer to me for it and the result is not 'salvation'" seems to me jesus said something like that - right?

the idea of the cornwall signers is that they think if we call people who are green "liberal" then it will shame them into not talking - well, i guess that makes me liberal - and i am still green :) but what drives them the most is not theology, or science - what drives them the most is money, and the greed they have to see this economy strip the world of all it's wonders.

if you want to know more about being green church out this [click here]

tags: , , , , , ,