Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Understanding Iran

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's story ( "Lawmakers try to understand Iran, American policy"; Please see below) reflected the general lack of understanding (By our officials and reporters) of the essential nature of Iran. It is NOT a nation-state of the democratic or totalitarian or other varieties with which diplomats have been dealing for the last 200-years. It is (Like Saudi Arabia, but more so) a theocracy operating under the very, very, different premises and assumptions of such governments, especially those committed to Islamic principles of law and society, of death and sacrifice and of goals and strategies.

Until such time as all understand the nature of Koran based government, its commitment to perpetual war with "unbelievers", the lack of respect for treaties as exampled by Mohammed and the other differences between sane (Even totalitarian) governments and such theocracies, there can be no understanding of Iran.

What Americans (Especially those of the left) fail to understand (Perhaps as a byproduct of efforts to remove religion from public notice and debate in the USA) is that religion does matter and that is especially true for Muslims and even more true in a nation run by Mullahs.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Story

Lawmakers try to understand Iran, American policy
House panel examines relations, perceptions of nation, its people
Posted: Oct. 30, 2007
Washington - With respect to Iran, should the United States use carrots or sticks - or airstrikes?
That was a key question Tuesday when a House panel examined policy toward Iran and its consequences.
House Democrat John F. Tierney of Massachusetts opened the hearing by saying the Bush administration's rhetoric on Iran was becoming "more strident and inflammatory."
"And at the same time - as was the case with the build-up to the Iraq war - much of its decision-making is being made in the utmost of secrecy," Tierney said.
Saying few in Washington understand Iran and many oversimplify a complex society, Tierney said: "Iran is a black hole to us - just as Iraq had become in 2003."
He chairs the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, part of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. It plans more hearings on Iran.
The subcommittee's top Republican, Christopher Shays of Connecticut, did not mince words about Iran. He called it a country that promotes terrorism, wants to become a nuclear power, has threatened other nations with annihilation and could influence control over the energy-rich Middle East given its location.
"Aside from Cuba, Iran is the only country in the world with which the United States has no sustained direct contact," Shays said.
He said the United States has designated Iran a state sponsor of terrorism and has had "no significant connection" with the Iranian government since the 1979 hostage crisis at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.
Although Iran is a rogue state, it is time for the United States to "start talking with Iran - diplomat to diplomat, politician to politician and person to person," Shays said.
Painting a portrait
The hearing focused on Iranian people and their attitudes.
The portrait that emerged is of a little-known, oil-rich nation of about 70 million people with nuclear ambitions that is struggling with inflation, unemployment, underemployment and deep discontent.
A nation where most people are disengaged from politics.
A nation where two-thirds of the people are 33 years old or younger.
A nation where a deep desire for economic, political and social reform is tempered by an aversion to unrest and insecurity.
A nation where few romanticize the idea of conflict or militarization after an eight-year war with Iraq that left an estimated 500,000 Iranian casualties. A nation where the government's enmity toward the U.S. and Israel doesn't resonate on the street, yet the U.S. has lost political capital because many Iranians view the U.S.-led Iraq war as "less about democracy and more as a botched attempt to expropriate the country's oil resources."
The last point was made by Karim Sadjadpour, an associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
He put the present chances of the U.S. using military force against Iran at 20% and said it's in the realm of possibilities not because of Iran's ambition to build nuclear weapons but because of Iran's "alleged support" for militias killing U.S. troops in Iraq.
Direct communication urged
Kenneth Ballen, a former federal prosecutor, said economic sanctions and terrorist designations are likely to fail unless the U.S. begins speaking directly to the Iranian people.
Ballen, the president of a nonpartisan group, Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, pointed to 1,000 survey interviews conducted in June, the first uncensored nationwide survey in Iran since 2002, when Iranian pollsters were jailed.
Some highlights:
• 79% surveyed want free elections and normal relations with the outside world and 68% favor normal relations and trade with the U.S.
• 29% consider developing nuclear weapons an important priority for the government compared with 88% who cited improving the economy.
• Two-thirds support financial aid to Palestinian opposition groups, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and to Lebanese Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia militias. But one-third consider this very important contrasted with nearly half who think seeking trade and political relations with the West is very important.
Ballen said hostility would result if the U.S. persisted in saber-rattling without articulating a vision for a future Iran that is secure, able to trade and respected by the community of nations.
He observed that this country's most effective outreach to the Muslim world came from tsunami relief efforts led by former Presidents Clinton and Bush. He said they could be excellent emissaries to Iran to make a positive case for U.S. policy.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Atheism As Our State Religon---2


The National Park Service, a branch of the federal government, has joined the Veterans Administration in establishing anti-Christian bigotry as public policy. The NPS has censored “God” from a key display of America's Christian heritage in Washington.
The reference is an engraving of "Laus Deo," which is Latin for "Praise be to God," on the east side of the 100-ounce aluminum cap atop of the Washington Monument.
Since the actual inscription on the cap is unviewable atop the 555-foot stone column, the NPS created a replica which is on display in the white-colored obelisk of marble, granite and sandstone.
Now “God” has been removed from the plaque containing information about the Washington Monument. In 2000 the plaque read:

APEX OF THE MONUMENT Reproduction The builders searched for an appropriate metal for the apex that would not tarnish and would act as a lightning rod. They chose one of the rarest metals of the time, aluminum. The casting was inscribed with the phrase, Laus Deo, (Praise be to God).

The NPS censored the last sentence from the latest plaque, which now reads:

CAP OF THE MONUMENT Reproduction The builders searched for appropriate metal for the cap that would not tarnish and would act as a lightning rod. They chose one of the rarest metals of the time – aluminum.
In addition, the replica of the cap which is in the monument has been positioned so close to the wall that the wording “Laus Deo” cannot be read. Prior to the censorship by the NPS, the replica wording could be read.
It was the third time in just the past few weeks that an agency of the federal government has banned the use of “God.” First was the Architect of the Capitol banning religious references when issuing flag certificates. That ruling was later rescinded. Next came the Veterans Administration censoring religious references in the script used to describe each fold of the flag at 125 national cemeteries. That censoring came after only one person complained.
Because of the NPS censorship, children and other visitors to the monument now have no way to know that the words, 'Laus Deo,' ('Praise be to God'), are inscribed on the original cap atop the monument! This censoring of God will help establish anti-Christian bigotry into federal law.

Monday, October 29, 2007

Reflection For All Saints Day--November 1st

At my parish's 2005 All Saints' Day mass my pastor gave a homily in which the great saints of old were mentioned and the great numbers of such Holy Ones marching forward through time was presented to the people.

In my mind's eye, I found myself seeing many columns of God's saints marching behind their special patrons: All the brown-robed Franciscans and those of that persuasion behind St. Francis of Assisi and St. Claire of that same town; Dominicans and many saintly scholars behind St. Dominic, St. Thomas of Aquino and St. Albert the Great; Those attorneys who, somehow, have become saints behind St. Thomas More; All good pastors (Including our beloved John Paul II) Poland's St. John Kanty; And, so forth---Each behind her or his leader in the march to glory.

As for myself, I hope to someday (If that term has any meaning in eternity) take my very, very, humble place behind St. Bernard of Clairvaux (Doctor of the Church and author of De Laude Novae Militae). My view of his column of saints puts the Knights of The Temple (Knights Templar), with their swords used and bloody wounds suffered in the defense of the Holy Land against the followers of that false prophet Mohammed, first behind him. Following them are such as: The Spanish Crusaders who drove those Muslims out of Iberia; King Jan of Poland and all the Poles who suffered, died and yet were victorious at the gates of Vienna and many other places against the Muslim-Turkish hordes; Don Juan of Austria and all of the brave seamen who sent the Turkish fleet to the deeps in defense of Christianity and true Civilization; And, the true Crusaders of today who battle the false, Muslim, prophet Osama bin Laden and his ilk throughout the world.

We should not forget the other false prophets such as the: “Three Emperor Gang” of World War I; The Nazi and Imperial Japan & foolish Italy of World War II; And the atheist communist and very false leaders, Lenin, Stalin Pol Pot, Mao and all of that evil lot. In defense of my nation, Christianity and Civilization I did serve for three years in the US Navy, this being my only claim to be a follower of St. Bernard and his holy warriors---Among which are those who suffered and died at such places as Flanders' fields, the Bataan Death March, Normandy's beaches and hedgerows, upon and under the the too-hot and too-cold mountains of Korea, the streets of Baghdad, the jungles of Viet Nam and all the other places where evil is confronted, by true knights, throughout history and the world.


Sunday, October 28, 2007

Holy See Errors On Rule-Of-Law


Dear Holy Father:

In his 28 October 2007 speech (Please see ZENIT's version below) to the United Nations General Assembly Archbishop Celestino Migliore made statements based on a gross ignorance of history and international law.

1. There is no guarantee of the respect of small states except by the
force-of-arms represented, in execution or potential, by large
2. The UN is NOT a neutral arbitrator of disputes as it is biased
towards the interests of nations who dislike or truly hate
Western (That is Christian-based) civilization, including
some nations once Christian in their history and civilized
3. Those international courts which exist or are proposed suffer
from the same bias.
4. Certain political (eg Nazi Germany) and ideological systems
(ie Islam when strictly following the treaty-breaking example and
teachings of its inventor Mohammed) have always been such
as to make international treaties or rule-of-law meaningless.
5. Nations have a primary and moral duty to care for and protect
their own citizens and, for democratic states, to chose to
accept or reject international controls or treaties, especially
those which remove the power of law further from the People.
6. Removal of the means to execute the Natural Law rights of
self-defense by disarming the People has never led to any
outcome other than genocide and political-racial-religious
oppression as was executed on the Armenian Christians
by the Turks, on the Jews and others by the Nazis and is
now being inflicted on the People of the Darfur by the new
jihad being waged against them: Those means being the
general possession of effective and modern arms to
substitute for the forces which have failed to protect the

I strongly recommend that you recall Archbishop Migliore and reassign him to (After a prescribed course of study of the history of Nazism and Islam) to some Caritas outpost in the Darfur section of The Sudan.

Respectfully submitted,
James Pawlak

Holy See Statement on the Rule of Law
"Guarantees Respect for Even the Smallest of Nations"

NEW YORK, OCT. 28, 2007 ( Here is a statement by Archbishop Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, delivered Friday to the 62nd U.N. General Assembly, on the topic of the rule of law at the national and international levels.

* * *

Mr. Chairman,

The mutually reinforcing values of peace, development and human rights are both the guiding principles and the goals of this organization. Their nexus and effectiveness is guaranteed by the proper implementation of the rule of law. It is the rule of law that creates the mechanisms to promote justice and peace, ensures predictability and security to allow for the foundation of a stable economy, and protects the dignity of every person regardless of one’s social, economic, or political status.

In an increasingly globalized society, where people from different cultures meet more frequently, migration occurs on a global scale and international trade propels rapid global development, regulating the relations between and among states is of utmost importance to ensure peaceful coexistence.

At the international level, the rule of law guarantees respect for even the smallest of nations. It safeguards the ability of all states to voice their legitimate concerns as equals in a forum of equals. Its rule restrains powerful nations from lording it over the weaker ones. These principles are very relevant to the ongoing reform of the Security Council and the revitalization of the General Assembly.

The role of the United Nations in the creation and implementation of international treaties is vital. By ensuring that the principles of free consent, good faith and "pacta sunt servanda" are respected, this organization guarantees that relations between states are regulated by applicable international treaties and governed by reason, justice and fair negotiations, rather than by fear, force or manipulation.

In enforcing these treaties, the United Nations must be a neutral arbitrator and must respect the contracting intent and desire of the parties. A treaty body system that becomes opaque and unaccountable to states parties runs the risk of undermining the basic tenants of the rule of law and diminishes the credibility and legitimacy of the United Nations as a promoter and guarantor of international law.

Surely states have a primary duty to ensure that treaties are respected. Selective enforcement and selective observance of treaties are antithetical to the rule of law. It would be preposterous to claim observance of the rule of law at a national level if international treaties and international law are not observed.

Moreover, the benefits and value of faithful treaty implementation go beyond the rule of law. Respect for treaties is also an excellent confidence-building measure, as it promotes trust among parties. This is particularly true in the area of disarmament, in which the fear of treaty noncompliance on the part of even just one state party paralyzes the disarmament and nonproliferation agenda. In fact, it is easier to make others comply with their commitments if one complies with one’s own.

However, not all states have the technical capacity to cope with all their international obligations. There is a growing gap between the development of international law and the capacity of individual states to incorporate it into national legislation and implement it. Thus technical assistance to these countries is of utmost importance if observance of international law and treaties is to be had. To this end, we note with interest the establishment of the Rule of Law Coordination and Resource Group and we look forward to following its work in promoting the rule of law.

Mr. Chairman,

The struggle against terrorism is necessary, but at the same time it must be established through the drafting, adoption and effective enforcement of juridical instruments designed to tackle this violent menace with right reason. The rule of law at times is difficult to apply to terrorists who have little or no respect for it. However, states must not engage in measures antithetical to the very principles that give them legitimacy through the rule of law.

The last few years have seen a greater focus on the rule of law at all levels. Though this focus has not always been accompanied by action, some progress has been achieved, particularly in the area of international criminal justice. Individuals and peoples whose rights have been violated, such as in cases of crimes against humanity, are given access to a justice system that serves the truth and banishes fear, revenge, impunity and inequality before the law.

In the same vein, further progress has also been made in the World Summit Outcome Document by which, among others, all member states affirmed the collective international responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, and their willingness to take timely and decisive collective action for this purpose, through the Security Council, when peaceful means prove inadequate and national authorities are manifestly failing to do it.

My delegation believes there is need to pursue the debate and juridical codification along this very line, wherein sovereignty is not understood as an absolute right and used as a shield against outside involvement, but as a responsibility not merely to protect citizens, but also to promote their welfare. Through the creation of legal norms, arbitration of legal disputes and the establishment of safeguards, especially when states fail in their responsibility to protect, the United Nations is called to be the propulsive forum for the rule of law in all corners of the globe.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Friday, October 26, 2007

Shouting Down On-Campus Speakers

Various speakers at events concerned with "Islamo-Fascism Week" have been shouted down and not allowed to speak at the university forums they or their supporters had provided by prior and lawful arrangements. Although some such Nazis were removed from the speakers' areas I know of no related arrests for "Disorderly Conduct", "Violations Of Civil Rights" or like crimes. Certainly, most such universities have taken NO positive actions to effectively protect those speakers OR to punish any of their own students, faculty or other staff engaged in such storm-trooper activities.

Those who shout down speakers on campuses should be arrested and charged with civil rights violations. Those offenses are felonies where arrest can be made by any citizen. If such terrorists resist such arrests, any level of force can be used to overcome such resistance---Including deadly force.

Universities which object to such clear-and-present enforcement of speakers' civil rights have an alternative and absolute duty to insure that such actions are not necessary---Without forcing the speakers to leave or canceling their appearances. They also have (At least for publicly funded schools or schools which receive tax dollars in any amount) a duty to file criminal charges AND to take internal disciplinary actions against any of their own students or staff involved in such anti-freedom acts.

It may be that speakers who are not so protected by schools may have a "cause in action" to bring civil actions for damages, including punitive damages, against schools which fail to protect their free speech rights.

Bishops & Climate Change


Dear Editors & Writers At Ekklesia:

First I wish to thank you for keeping the insanity of political correctness firmly in my mind by the various articles you publish.

In the case of Bishop James Jones' travels to the USA to lecture our politicians and real citizens on climate change I do have the following questions.
1. What is his academic and other expertness in climatology
solar physics and other "hard sciences" as allow him to,
without shame, lecture others on the noted subject?
2.. Where in the Bible does it teach about the care of God's
creation beyond the gift of such to His children for their
own good?
3. Does he wish to apologize for his most unscientific and
anti-truth statement that "The science of anthropogenic
climate change is nonconvertible" when that is most
certainly NOT the case and true science is always
reexamining its positions (eg The sun rotates around the
earth, atoms cannot be divided)?
4. Does he wish to, instead, take his message (Such as it is)
to Communist China, one of the great, developing nations,
whose into the air filth is equaled only by its export of poisoned
toys and food products sent around the world?

Thursday, October 25, 2007

The Suicide Of Reason--A Book Of Note

Harris, Lee
The Suicide of Reason--Radical Islam's Threat To The Enlightenment
Basic Books (Perseus Book Group); New York, 2007.

Although I have provided below a book jacket review of this book I must note that is is NOT an "easy read"! In fact, it is hard to determine the basic foundation of this work as being from: History; Or, philosophy; Or, political philosophy or political science science; Or, anthropology; Or, sociology; Or, psychology; Or, social psychology; Or, something else---Perhaps an unusually integrated work using all of those, and perhaps more, disciplines.

If fault is to be found in this book it is in the following areas:
1. Mr. Harris appears to lean too much on French thinking, especially that of Condorcet (Unless, of course, that writer's theories provide Mr. Harris with the basic matrix for his own);
2. Mr. Harris took too many pages and words to get at the matter of Islam, where the earlier chapters should have referred to that ideology while discussing the developing theories;
3. It might have been best to have included a section on modern Turkey, which shifted towards a secular state, but may be reverting to an Islamic one; And,
4. Although an index is provided, there are few citations to allow the reader to cross-reference Mr. Harris' assertions and quotes.

HOWEVER, this book is well worth the reading by any practitioner of any of the disciplines noted above or any policy maker in government!

Far below is found some of my questions for the Mr. Harris, which I hope he will be kind enough to provide answers.

Produced by Blackwell's Book Services
Terms of Use
"The Suicide of Reason shows how modern liberal societies, whose political theories are born of the Enlightenment, are unfamiliar with the nature of mass fanaticism. The West, so accustomed to thinking of history as an inevitable progress toward enlightenment, can only think of fanaticism as a social pathology, a failure to modernize, rather than as what it is: a variety of social order that is not only fully viable in the modern world but that possesses weapons to which the West is uniquely vulnerable. A governing philosophy based on reason, tolerance, consensus and deliberation cannot defend itself against a strategy of ruthless violence without being radically transformed - or worse, destroyed." "Extraordinarily original and thought-provoking, The Suicide of Reason explains the logic of fanatical movements from the Crusades through Nazism to radical Islam; describes how the Enlightenment overcame fanatical thinking in the West; shows why most Western attempts to address the problem are doomed to fail; and offers strategies by which liberal internationalism can defend itself without becoming a mirror of the tribal forces it is trying to defeat."--BOOK JACKET.


1. Have you read Mr. Eric Hoffer's The True Believer: Thoughts On The Nature Of Mass Movements? If yes, what are your thoughts about that work, especially as to yours? (If not, you really should read it!)
2. In your introduction you assert that the "... rational actor can build a home for himself, confident that he will not be driven from it by a marauding band of thugs. He knows that to defend his house he need not know how to fight off brutal killers---he need only call the police, and they will defend his home for him". Are you aware of the usual response time of police, especially in rural or ghetto areas, in comparison with the much, much, shorter time it takes home invaders to enter a home and kill, rape and rob? Should you reconsider your statement in this matter? [As a rational man, in such an invasion, I would calmly and coolly, improving accuracy by that attitude, shoot to death any such thugs knowing my liability for "wrongful death" is less than that for wounding.]
3. What is the meaning of or impact upon the "rational man", as you define him, of the term-and-concept "the common good"?
4. At Page-30 you note that "The fanaticism of the Jesuit Order was responsible for winning back Poland for the Roman Catholic Church, ...". As an avocational historian, of Polish decent, I would deeply appreciate being placed in receipt of the citation(s) basic to that statement so I might improve my knowledge of my father's homeland.
5. At Page-206 you limit the defeat of Islam to Spain (Iberia), Sicily and "certain parts of the Balkans"; Without noting the liberation of Greece and the success the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had in repulsing Tartar-Turkish-Islamic intrusions on its Eastern borders (Before enabling the crushing of the Turks at the walls of Vienna). Why?
6. There may be another means by which the rational man can destroy Islamic fanaticism, which means is parallel to that of the reasoned defense of a household described above, TO WIT: Make the conversion of Mecca, Medina, Qmm and other select places into slightly radioactive, glass-bottomed, craters in a most cool and calculated manner as a preannounced reaction to any Islamic use of WMDs against the West. What say you?

They Came For Me & It Was Too Late

Ms. Ann Coulter's "Have You Hugged And Islamo-Fascist Today" (October 24, 2007; Published by adapted (Please see below) a poem originally written by Germany's Pastor Martin Niemoller, an early supporter of Hitler, latter opponent and survivor of Nazi death camps. She wrongfully appears to assume that her readers know the source of that poem and its historic context--For which she should get a journalistic slap on the wrist as most Americans, even her readers, do not "know history".

However, putting that reprimand aside there are those (ie Christians under attack by both Islam and secularists; Defenders of the Constitutional right of individuals to keep-and-bear-arm; Academics and others who refuse to accept the "that is beyond debate" judgments of censors and persecutors) who should always keep the lessons of that poem and of history in mind as they face and battle those who would suppress others---In preparation of suppressing them.

I could almost imagine a poem:
First they came for Rush Limbaugh, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Rush Limbaugh;
And then they came for Ann Coulter, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Ann Coulter;
And then they came for David Horowitz, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't David Horowitz;
And then ... they came for me ... And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
by Ann Coulter---After The Poem Cited Below

First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Some Forgotten Illegals

In the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel;s October 23rd and pro-open-borders editorial ("Just counterproductive") the editors forgot to note some illegal immigrants who also hope to avoid detection-and-deportation after arrest (Hopefully also by non-Federal authorities), TO WIT: Drug smugglers and dealers; "Gang-bangers"; Identity thieves; Potential terrorists; Bearers of untreatable diseases; And, persons who work without paying taxes and ship billions of such untaxed moneys out of the USA and our economy.

As a matter of journalistic honesty, that editorial really should have noted those "other" illegal immigrants.

Monday, October 22, 2007

Founding Fathers, Immigration & Assimilation

According to a very politically incorrect history book (1) both Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton ("Founding fathers" of the USA and very often strongly opposed to each others positions) initially agreed that open immigration was "not a good thing" for their new nation and that the growth in the new USA's population should be by the natural growth of its generally homogeneous Anglo-Saxon population.

Neither could see into the a future were most new immigrants for most of our history would rush to become Americans by: Giving up (For better or worse) their hearth languages for American English (If not for them, then for their children and grandchildren); Losing most of their cultural identities, except for some comfort foods and holiday customs; And, dispersing throughout our cities and towns sometimes after historically short periods of time in ethnic ghettos, utilizing our schools to do so and fully accepting our democratically passed laws as supreme and fairer than what the old world had to offer.

O yes---There have been some exceptions to that assimilation as the Amish and some Jews and Chinese; But, for the most part, that integration continued for most and at a rapid rate.

That is, it continued until the recent influx of (Often illegal) Latino immigrants who may be able to speak English too often refuse to do so--Even when in contact with those who do not speak Spanish (eg In Miami, Florida).

Worse yet is the more recent influx of Muslim immigrants who, although most often speaking English, deny the basic justice of our Constitution and system-of-laws insisting that they should be governed by a parallel use of Sharia, that system of Islamic law which provides for the most unequal treatment of women and all non-Muslims and death for anyone who "insults" the Koran or its inventor, Mohammed.

(1) Woods, Thomas E., Jr.;
33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed
To Ask;
Crown Forum (Crown Publishing Group); 2007

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Searchers After Truth VS. True Believers

Putting forth unpopular questions (eg Are there differences between races or genders? Does human activities have any real effect on climate? Did the holocaust occur? Is Islam inherently violent and a danger to civilization?) has become very unpopular---Among the "True Believers" who prefer Faith to reasoned inquiry. Those cultists use every means, including the power of the State (eg Hate speech laws) or personal violence (eg Cutting off heads) or other means (eg Suspending students; Denying tenure to professors) to forward the cause of their "religion" (eg Atheism) and to punish those who might disagree with their "theology".

This horrid movement away from searching for truth has already overcome too many politicians, TV producers and editors. What is even more horrid, is that such mob rule has infected and is destroying our universities and professional associations of what were once scholars and searchers after Truth.

In all academic, political and general debate there should never be any "That is beyond question/debate" statements as might be based on power of some consensus of real or self-appointed authorities. (After all, at one time the "experts" all agreed that the Sun revolved around the Earth and that atoms were indivisible).

Friday, October 19, 2007

Jesus The Christ & Weapons/Self-Defense

Jesus the Christ sent his disciples out without any possession to spread "The Good News" (Luke 22:35). Upon their return and (Can we assume?) because of what they experienced on that earlier expedition on the dangerous roads and among the contentious people of Israel and surrounding areas, He had other instructions and commands for them.

Among those other commands was that they should do every thing possible (Including selling their most basic garments) to obtain swords. When his disciples presented him with the two such weapons they had, He said: "They are sufficient" or "They are enough" (Variation by translation for the balance of Luke 22:35). Since the Christ was NOT sending out armies to reestablish an independent Israel (A disappointment to some of his followers), two swords appeared to be "sufficient" to protect his law-abiding followers on their travels.

Now--I have read a variety of interpretations of these verses which all appear to be pathological pacifists' misreadings of plain text. Some have claimed that Jesus was being sarcastic or ironic or using a parable--Without any proofs of that and in opposition to the most direct statement and the usual parable-style of His other teachings.

Others have claimed that Jesus, the "Prince of Peace", would not support the arming of his followers with swords (The AK-47s or AR-15s of that era), conveniently forgetting his whipping out of the money changers in the Temple, his words about child abusers and Judas and the frequent Words about the punishment of evil doers and unworthy servants.

Yes--He did teach peace and "turning the other cheek"--To insults. However, there is nothing in the Gospel teaching that anyone should submit to such criminal attacks as murder, rape, robbery, genocide (The use of which are supported by the Koran, Nazi ideology and practices and the injustices inflicted by other tyrants now and throughout history),

We should also remember: The advice of St. John the Baptist to the soldiers, which was NOT to give up their swords and profession; The writings of St. Paul as to the State's authority to use the sword to punish wrongdoers; And, the very clear advise of St. Bernard of Clairvaux (In his De Laude Novae Militae) as to waging war against those who attack Christians (Muslims in his time and, as likely as not, in our time).

Rust, Water, Jobs & Treaties

After all the years of Southern and Western States sucking out the "Rust Belt's" jobs and many of our citizens by use of lower (Non-union) wages, lower costs due to no great need for heating and just-plain-bribes by them to various corporations, those parts of the USA are now whining that their water supplies are too low. Hurray! There is justice in this world and karma is being balanced!

Some there now want Great Lakes water to be piped to them. In a pig's eye! I would, however, be willing to support the addition of beautiful photos of our large lakes (If the US Army Corps Of Engineers does not drain them dry) to our efforts to recruit businesses and jobs back to the Great Lakes Basin.

Strangely enough, those who supported and profited from the environmentally unsound exurban growth in such places as Waukesha County, are making the same demands. Not so strangely I wish them well in their thirst and suggest that they might wish to stop such growth before all of the well water is exhausted---As we should NOT allow any Great Lakes water to go outside of the lakes' basin, a matter regulated by inter-national treaty having a force-of-law only slightly inferior to that of the Constitution.

Elected officials, who "know what is good for them", would do well to oppose any transfer of Great Lakes water away from that part of Wisconsin with the largest number of voters.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Guns, Genocide & The Darfur

Below you will find a very "different take" on the role of disarming peoples before extermination by genocide. Certainly Adolf Hitler approved of both taking effective weapons away from such persons and of resultant genocide. History apparently supports the same tactics and resultant massacres by many tyrants throughout history. I suspect that the abused People of the Darfur region of the Sudan would have not been subjected to the murders, rapes, robberies and genocide of a new-wave jihad if they had been equipped with modern, military grade, personal firearms.

Any disarming of the People is a sure sign of some sort of planned removal of other civil rights.

October 16, 2007, 4:00 a.m.

Genocide Resistance
The possession of arms saved many Armenians.

By Dave Kopel & Paul Gallant, & Joanne D. Eisen

Whatever may be said about the U.S. House of Representatives committee vote concerning the use of the term “genocide” in reference to Turkey’s atrocities against the Armenians during World War I, two facts are indisputable: It was gun confiscation that made the atrocities possible. And it was the possession of firearms that saved many Armenians.

Under the Ottoman Empire, Armenians, who are mostly Christian, had not been allowed to own firearms. This was standard practice for Christians and Jews throughout the Empire, under sharia law for the “Dhimmi” — Christians and Jews (and sometimes other faiths) who were allowed to retain their religion, provided that they lived in subordination.

One feature of dhimmitude is a ban on the possession of any weapons, and a prohibition from striking a Muslim, even in an act of self-defense. Unsurprisingly, the Dhimmi were easy prey for thugs and extortionists. For example, Armenian Christians in the 19th century had to pay the Kurds not to attack their villages and pillage their monasteries.

Military necessity led to a change in the Ottoman policy in 1908. Armenian Christian soldiers would be permitted to train with weapons, and by 1915, a significant number of Armenian men had done so. After the Balkan War of 1912, many Armenian civilians bought firearms from returning Turkish soldiers. Weapons and ammunition were secreted in the walls of homes.

During World War I, in 1915, the Ottoman government decided to launch a massive persecution of the Armenians. The current Turkish government, along some scholars, denies that genocide was the intention, although there is no doubt that many hundreds of thousands died.

U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau reported that the Ottoman Turks faced an obstacle: “Before Armenia could be slaughtered, Armenia must be made defenseless.” Armenians were reluctant to disarm, given their distrust of the Turks.

As a first step, Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman army were stripped of their weapons. Beaten and clubbed, placed on short rations, and sometimes murdered, they were used to dig fortifications and latrines for the Turks. Soldiers fled and returned home, bringing stories of the destruction of Armenian villages and towns, murders of priests, and rapes of women.

Disarmament orders were sent to Armenian towns; however, Armenian leaders would collect broken and useless weapons, and, with a bribe, deliver them to Turkish leaders — while keeping the functioning weapons for themselves.

As the persecution intensified, contemporaneous Armenian writings lamented that if civilians taken a more pro-active approach sooner, more Armenians would have survived. But initially, the Armenians had felt their best chance for survival lay in keeping a low profile and remaining passive. It was only after a long pattern of murders by the Turks that they began to actively defend themselves.

The 5,000 townspeople of Shabin Karahissar, including 600 poorly armed Armenian men, retreated to a nearby fort when 10,000 regular and irregular Turkish army troops approached. The Armenians’ guns allowed them to keep the enemy at bay for 26 days. Although they had sufficient water, they lacked adequate planning and eventually starved. One survivor, Aram Haigaz, wrote: “Of the more than 5,000 who ascended the Fort, only 47 survived….”

Armed resistance movements also sprang up in Ourfa, in Shadakh, and in the Pesan Valley. At Van, a group of 1,500 men with only 300 rifles fought off an army of 5,000 Turkish soldiers, and diverted the attention of Turkish troops away from the Russian enemy. The defenders at Van successfully held out for five weeks until they were rescued by the Russian army. But shortly after, the Russian army made an unexpected retreat, allowing the Turks to swoop in by surprise and kill the 55,000 people of Van.

The best-known and most successful of resistance movement was memorialized in the 1934 historical novel The Forty Days of Musa Dagh. People from several villages retreated to the mountain whose English name is “Moses Mountain.” Provisioned with weapons and supplies, the villagers held out on Musa Dagh for 53 days.

Pastor Tigran Andreasian listed the Armenian population of his native region as 6,311. Of them, 4,231 persons chose to fight on the mountain, while 2,080 people obeyed the deportation order of the Turks. When the fighters were eventually rescued by the Allies, an amazing 4,200 survivors were taken to Port Said, Egypt.

As for those who accepted deportation, according to Vahram Shemmassian, a scholar and descendant of one of the fighters, “the exact count of casualties may never be determined, many families lost several members and others perished completely.”

Hitler reminded his generals that “nobody remembers the Armenians,” and he worked assiduously to disarm his own genocide victims more thoroughly than the Turks had done. When we do remember the Armenians, let us remember that the difference between life and death was often the possession of arms to resist mass murder by government.

David Kopel is research director for the Independence Institute. Paul Gallant and Joanne D. Eisen are senior fellows at the Independence Institute.

Monday, October 15, 2007

Unscientific, Undemocratic Political Scientists


Dear Political Scientists:

It seems strange to me (As an American, sort-of scientist and avocational historian) that members of your professional organization would attempt to use its collective force to boycott a convention in Louisiana due to that State's passage of an Amendment to its Constitution limiting marriage to an act between one man and one women and excluding from legal consideration as married persons all same sex unions.

If those members are (As I suspect) opposed to traditional Judeo-Christian standards of morality and committed to a scientific point-of-view, then from a purely scientific point-of-view, most male homosexuals in the USA (Who have clearly demonstrated a collective and general lack of self-control and sense of the "common good") represent a disease vector as do the plague bearing fleas on rats, the flies and cockroaches who hang about "unprotected" food and garbage, the mosquitoes who carry malaria and other diseases and other like threats to the health of all people.

If the general and Jewish-Christian foundations of morality are to be ignored (As is the constant drum beat of the "homosexual lobby" and its supporters), then we should take the most effective, scientific, public health measures to stop the AIDS/HIV epidemic: Which measure is, lacking a truly effective treatment, the elimination of the central disease vector basic to that disease in the USA. After all, we kill flies, rats, mosquitoes, cockroaches and other like spreaders of diseases--So why not male homosexuals?

Do the members of your association really wish to be that "scientific"???

As an American, I am more than surprised that your association would so oppose the democratically expressed will of the People of the Sovereign State of Louisiana in passing the noted Amendment. Although I support economic boycotts by individuals, I am opposed to them being "rammed down the throat" of all members of a professional organization---Especially when the question at hand does NOT impact on the professional competence of members---AND when such an action clearly appears to be in violation of an organizations constitution or charter upon which its members have a (Legal?) right to depend for governance and collective policies.

Blog: Marquette Warrior
Post: Will the American Political Science Association Cave to Its Gay Lobby?

Archbishop Rowan Williams Ignores Reality

In his hodgepodge of platitudes (Please see below)as to a false-flag peace offering by a collection of alleged Muslim scholars, CoE Archbishop Rowan Williams ignores the reality of 1400-years of the history of Islamic aggression and crimes-against-humanity (The same being now inflicted on the people of the Darfur), the arrogant teachings of Islam (Which encourage, if not command, the use of murder, rape, genocide, robbery, perpetual war, etc.) and the absolute refusal of Muslims to throw out those horrid teachings of the Koran and derivative works.

Archbishop of Canterbury responds to 'A Common Word'
By staff writers----EKKLESIA
13 Oct 2007
Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams has given an intial positive response to the 'A Common Word' document from Muslim scholars and religious leaders addressed to Christian leaders.
Dr Anas S. Al-Shaikh-Ali, Chair of the Association of Muslim Social Scientists, and one of the signatories to the letter, presented it to the Archbishop at Lambeth Palace before the weekend.
The Archbishop welcomed the letter as a clear reaffirmation of the potential for further development of existing dialogue and common action between Christians and Muslims and other faith communities:
“The theological basis of the letter and and its call to “vie with each other only in righteousness and good works; to respect each other, be fair, just and kind to another and live in sincere peace, harmony and mutual goodwill”, are indicative of the kind of relationship for which we yearn in all parts of the world, and especially where Christians and Muslims live together. It is particularly important in underlining the need for respect towards minorities in contexts where either Islam or Christianity is the majority presence."
The Archbishop said that the letter’s emphasis on the fundamental importance of belief in the unity of God and love of neighbour is welcome. He said ”the letter rightly makes it clear that these are scriptural foundations equally for Jews, Christians, and for Muslims, and are the basis for justice and peace in the world.
Dr Williams continued: “There is much here to study and to build on. The letter’s understanding of the unity of God provides an opportunity for Christians and Muslims to explore together their distinctive understandings and the ways in which these mould and shape our lives. The call to respect, peace and goodwill should now be taken up by Christians and Muslims at all levels and in all countries and I shall endeavour in this country and internationally, to do my part in working for the righteousness which this letter proclaims as our common goal."

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Islam & The West---Learning From History

In considering the reaction of the West to the renewed aggression of various Islamic groups in today's world, we might look at the last such great conflict which was that between the West and Turkish-Islamic aggression in the late 1500s. First consider the quote given below and then my "rewrite" for today's conditions.

"By the beginning of the sixteenth century Christendom was in a very sorry state. Gone were the crusading ideals of old; people turned deaf ears to the alarmed utterances of preachers and popes about the necessity of stopping the Turkish advance. For most European governments the Ottoman threat was low on their list of concerns --- they were more interested in maintaining their positions in the rich eastern markets --- while a few states were quite ready to abet, or at least not hinder, the sultans' expansionist policies for the sake of their own commercial interests." (1. At Page-47)

"By the beginning of the 21st century the West was in a very sorry state. Gone were the crusading ideals of the 1940s which lead to the crushing of the Nazis and Imperial Japan. People turned a deaf ear to the alarmed utterances of security analysts and reflective historians about the necessity of stopping the new Islamic aggression, with its 1400-year old and unalterable goals of conversion-and-conquest and its approved, if not commanded, use of murder, rape, genocide, robbery and perpetual war to further the goals of Islam and the individual desires of Muslims.. For most westerners the Islam threat is low on their list of concerns --- They are more interested in maintaining their sources of Arab oil and maintaining their positions of power in the economic world --- while most states are quite ready to abet, or at least not hinder, Islam's new campaign of aggression for their own commercial or secular progressive interests."

I realize that the fact that the history of more than two weeks ago can be applied to our present political, cultural and economic environment will be a shock to most of this era's journalists. It may be an equal shock to too many politicians and university professors that the lessons of history apply to today's threats to western, true, civilization.

It is specially a problem that this era's Popes, the Holy See and other Christians have lost sight of the essential battle between Civilization and Islam as much as have others.

It is well to remember that the only proven method of dealing with Islamic aggression is that proven over the last 1400-years---With the edge of a sword (Or its current equivalent).

(1) Capponi, Niccolo
Victory of The West: The Great Christian-Muslim Clash
At The Battle of Lepanto
Da Capo Press (Perseus Books Group); 2006
Cambridge (MA)

note bene I highly recommend this book for a variety of reasons.

Expert Advise For Politicians, Journalists, Et. Al.

It appears that too many of our politicians, journalists, professional victims (eg Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Muslim apologists, open borders advocates) and uncritical proponents of pseudo-scientific arguments are following the following and expert advise.

"All this was inspired by the principle---which is quite true in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility: because the broad masses of an nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie; since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods."
by Adolf Hitler

I will let you put names to those who follow this advise. Do carefully look at politicians, editors, et. al., and yourself, to insure that this advise is not followed by them---And you.

Friday, October 12, 2007

Al Bore's Nine Inconvenient Factoids


Al Gore's 'nine Inconvenient Untruths'

By Sally Peck: The Telegraph; London, UK
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 11/10/2007

The 'nine inconvenient truths'

Al Gore's environmental documentary An Inconvenient Truth contains nine key scientific errors, a High Court judge ruled yesterday.

Watch the trailer
Watch the trailer for An Inconvenient Truth
The judge declined to ban the Academy Award-winning film from British schools, but ruled that it can only be shown with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination.
In the documentary, directed by Davis Guggenheim, the former US vice president and environmental activist calls on people to fight global warming because "humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb".
But Judge Michael Burton ruled yesterday that errors had arisen "in the context of alarmism and exaggeration" in order to support Mr Gore's thesis on global warming.
His criticism followed an unsuccessful attempt by Stewart Dimmock, a Kent school governor, to block the Government's plan to screen the documentary in more than 3,500 secondary schools in England and Wales.
The father of two claimed An Inconvenient Truth included "serious scientific inaccuracies, political propaganda and sentimental mush".
The film's distributor, Paramount, warns in its synopsis of the film: "If the vast majority of the world's scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods, droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have ever experienced."
But the judge ruled that the "apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was politically partisan and thus not an impartial scientific analysis of climate change.
It is, he ruled, a "political film".
The nine alleged errors in the film
Mr Gore claims that a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future". The judge said: "This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore's "wake-up call". He agreed that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water - "but only after, and over, millennia"."The Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus."

The film claims that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" but the judge ruled there was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.

The documentary speaks of global warming "shutting down the Ocean Conveyor" - the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over the North Atlantic to western Europe. Citing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the judge said that it was "very unlikely" that the Ocean Conveyor, also known as the Meridional Overturning Circulation, would shut down in the future, though it might slow down.

Mr Gore claims that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said that, although there was general scientific agreement that there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts".

Mr Gore says the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was directly attributable to global warming, but the judge ruled that it scientists have not established that the recession of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro is primarily attributable to human-induced climate change.

The film contends that the drying up of Lake Chad is a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming but the judge said there was insufficient evidence, and that "it is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability."

Mr Gore blames Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans on global warming, but the judge ruled there was "insufficient evidence to show that".

Mr Gore cites a scientific study that shows, for the first time, that polar bears were being found after drowning from "swimming long distances - up to 60 miles - to find the ice" The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm."That was not to say there might not in future be drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice continued - "but it plainly does not support Mr Gore's description".

Mr Gore said that coral reefs all over the world were being bleached because of global warming and other factors. Again citing the IPCC, the judge agreed that, if temperatures were to rise by 1-3 degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and mortality, unless the coral could adapt. However, he ruled that separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was difficult.
A Government spokesman said he would not make any further comment on the case today.
Information appearing on is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Lobotomize Republicans?

A few days ago my daughter-in-law noted a bumper sticker stating, more or less, "Lobotomize Republicans! It should be the law!".

Like most converts to reality (From being a liberal), she became very incensed and shouted politically incorrect words at the driver of the bestickerd car.

If I had the funds, I would distribute such stickers with the following printed on them: "Lobotomize Republicans! Make Them Democrats!"

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Race & The Military

My recent letter and posting yielded the following data and comments.

2002 October 04 Friday
Racial stereotypes about US Army Fighting Units
Mackubin Thomas Owens explodes a myth: no, the front line combat units are not overweighted with minorities.

The fact is that blacks disproportionately serve in Army combat-service support units, not combat units. When Ricks wrote his piece, such units had become "majority minority," with more black soldiers than white. By contrast, he observed, the infantry, which generally suffers the most casualties in wartime, had become "whiter than America." African Americans constituted nine percent of the infantry, compared to 11.8 percent of the age eligible civilian population. In 1995, 79 percent of the new troopers were white, compared with 74.3 percent of civilians. There is little evidence to suggest that these figures have changed much over the last five years.
Why is this the case? Ricks pointed out that the new demographics of the Army have to do with the dynamics of an all-volunteer force - Blacks and whites join the military for different reasons. On the one hand, white youths are frequently looking for adventure while they try to raise money for college. As a result, they tend to flock to the combat arms, especially elite units like the Rangers and airborne. On the other, young black males, "are generally seeking skills, and so gravitate toward administrative and technical jobs. Because they often find the Army a fairer and better place to live than civilian society, blacks tend to stay enlisted longer: Though only 22% of today's recruits are black, the Army itself is 30% black."

By Randall Parker at 2002 October 04 12:58 PM

I'm Fine---An Ode To Aging

My mother, who passed away last Saturday at Age-98 and with an active mind to the end, sometimes let her quirky sense of humor show. She gave the below to my wife who was working at a home for the aged at the time. You might know someone who would appreciate it.


There's nothing whatever the matter with me.
I'm just as healthy as I can be
I have arthritis in both my knees
And when I talk, I talk with a wheeze.

My pulse is weak and my blood is thin,
But, I'm awfully well for the shape I'm in
I think my liver is out of whack
And a terrible pain is in my back.

My hearing is poor, my sight is dim,
Most everything seems to be out of trim
But, I'm awfully well for the shape I'm in.

I have arch supports for both my feet
Or I wouldn't be able to go on the street.
Sleeplessness I have night after night
And in the morning I'm such a sight.

My memory is failing, my head's in a spin,
I'm peacefully living on aspirin
But, I'm awfully well for the shape I'm in.

The moral is,as this tale we unfold,
That for you and me who are getting old,
It's better to say, "I'm fine", with a grin,
Than to let them know the shape we're in.

by Richard Cardinal Cushing

The White Man's Burden

Today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel noted a sharp decline in military enlistments among Blacks and Latinos. Certainly, TV news photos show few Blacks (Other that the specially selected "Front Office" examples) walking about the combat zones of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Perhaps such non-volunteers do not like a war waged in accordance with our democratically passed laws OR have any wish to serve the nation OR elect to run the risks of being murdered by other Blacks in the combat zones of the USA OR prefer to stay at home and study Arabic OR are just cowards.

As usual, the majority (Mostly men) will have to take up the burden and defend the nation and true civilization---And pay the taxes to support a largely Black-and-Latino prison population, the children of children and the costs of illegal immigration (Which are greater than its benefits).

The White Man's Burden
by Rudyard Kipling

Take up the White Man's burden--
Send forth the best ye breed--
Go bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild--
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half-devil and half-child.

Take up the White Man's burden--
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain
To seek another's profit,
And work another's gain.

Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.

Take up the White Man's burden--
No tawdry rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper--
The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter,
The roads ye shall not tread,
Go mark them with your living,
And mark them with your dead.

Take up the White Man's burden--
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard--
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light:--
"Why brought he us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?"

Take up the White Man's burden--
Ye dare not stoop to less--
Nor call too loud on Freedom
To cloke your weariness;
By all ye cry or whisper,
By all ye leave or do,
The silent, sullen peoples
Shall weigh your gods and you.

Take up the White Man's burden--
Have done with childish days--
The lightly proferred laurel,
The easy, ungrudged praise.
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers!

Monday, October 08, 2007

US Senate VS Science

Some have claimed that Federal restrictions on embryonic stem cell research amount to a Bush Administration "war on science"---Even though there is no proof that such research has had or will have any positive result. Others claim that any support of doubters as to alleged human impact on weather changes are rooted in the same, anti-science and conservative, political theories even though there are plausible reasons to doubt such an impact.

Yet, Senator McCain and other members of the US Senate have declared a war on the science of Anthropology by attempts to (Very literally) bury the scientific questions regarding "Kennewick Man" which appears to be the most important archaeological discovery and puzzle of the last 100-years by caving in to the "political correctness" of Native American fanatics. This effort is through a very sneaky and back door method of making a "technical correction" to a US Law, "The North American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act"---After the Federal Courts threw out an earlier attempt to suppress science and the evidence of the noted discovery.

Those of us who remember the Stalin era's "loose leaf histories and encyclopedias" should strongly object to like editing of truth as now attempted by the US Senate.

October 08, 2007, 6:45 a.m.
Before Columbus …
By The Editors

Last week, Hillary Clinton condemned the Bush administration’s “open season on open inquiry” and promised to end its “war on science.” She might have chosen a better target, closer to home: the Senate, where the Indian Affairs Committee has just approved a two-word change to federal law that could render the scientific study of pre-Columbian history in the United States virtually impossible.

One of the first casualties of the revision would be Kennewick Man — the popular name for a set of 9,300-year-old bones found along the Columbia River near Kennewick, Wash., in 1996. Human remains of that age are extremely rare in North America. Each discovery has much to teach about the ancient settlement of the western hemisphere. Kennewick Man holds special interest because the bones are well preserved and aren’t obviously related to modern-day tribal populations. The first physical anthropologist to examine them initially thought they belonged to a 19th-century pioneer of European extraction. Then the carbon-dating results came back with their amazing conclusion.

Today, Kennewick Man is a profound mystery. He certainly belongs to an early wave of migrants. Scientists still aren’t sure precisely where these people came from or how they got here. They’ve been linked to various Asian groups, including the indigenous Ainu population of Japan, and the traditional explanation of a crossing on a Bering Strait land bridge is giving way to other ideas. One hypothesis is that the ancestors of today’s Indians, who are most closely related to people in northeastern Asia, arrived at a later point in time and replaced those who came before them.

The only way to solve the riddle of how the New World came to have such people is to allow the scientific study of old bones. The public has taken a keen interest in the question: A few years ago, Time even put Kennewick Man on its cover.

Yet under the North American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) — a well-meaning law passed in 1990 — tribes can lay claim to cultural objects and human remains locked away in federally funded museums or unearthed on federal land. In order to do so, they must prove a reasonable connection between themselves and the objects they wish to obtain.

When Kennewick Man came to light, a coalition of tribes in the Pacific Northwest demanded the remains under the provisions of NAGPRA. They said they wished to bury the bones, making further study impossible. The Army Corps of Engineers, which has jurisdiction over Kennewick Man, took steps to comply. But then a group of prominent scientists sued. In 2004, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the scientists, pointing out that the modern tribes had failed to demonstrate an adequate link between themselves and the skeleton of a person who died more than nine millennia ago.

So the tribes turned to Congress. Two years ago, Sen. John McCain proposed altering NAGPRA’s definition of “Native American” from “of, or relating to, a tribe, people, or culture that is indigenous to the United States.” The new language would add two words: “, or was, indigenous...” McCain’s efforts failed, in part because of public objections. But now the change has slipped through in a bill of “technical corrections” that the Senate’s Indian Affairs Committee has just approved.

This is no technical correction. It’s a major change in federal law that would lead to an impoverished understanding of American prehistory — an “open season on open inquiry” that neither Senator Clinton nor anybody who wants to understand the human past should accept.

Sunday, October 07, 2007

Black Muslims & Violence

With the usual caution about the need for a judicial finding of guilt, I note that the man arrested for the cold blooded murder of two Philadelphia armored car guards was a Black Muslim--Something not noted in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's too short "squib" about that apprehension.

We should all recall the recent murder of a California news reporter upon the commands of local Black Muslim leaders. All newspapers should now publish an in-depth report as to cases of violence by members and leaders of that sect AND its essential violence as built on both the teachings of the Koran and Black racism.

Oh---I forgot: Most newspapers' "political correctness" is unlikely to allow them to criticize either Islam or racist Blacks. (Of course, they could prove me wrong).

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Lay-Offs At Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Buried on Page-3D of today's business section of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel was the news of that newspaper's intent to lay off, via "buyouts", 50 staff due to falling revenue.

That newspaper's publisher, Ms. B. Brenner, is responsible for its overall operations (Including the matter of revenue). Therefore, I had expected to read that she would either take a proportional cut in her salary and other benefits or be replaced with someone more skilled in that business. I was disappointed to not see such news. Perhaps, I should also have read of pay cuts or terminations for those staff responsible for developing and executing plans to prevent decreases in income.

We might also consider the possibility that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's grossly liberal bias has "turned off" those more conservative and middle-of-road readers who might otherwise advertise in that paper. If that is the case, some changes in the editorial direction of our area's largest paper is needed.

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

A Need For Basic Science Education

After reading many newspaper articles and some editorials (As well as viewing TV news and feature article) as to matters of medicine and other scientific subjects (AND considering the exposed ignorance of of science as demonstrated by too many persons I have spoken with AND too many journalists, it is apparent that it would be well for newspapers to publish a short refresher as to the meaning AND application of the following words and terms: "Experimental design; Double Blind; Controlled Study; Multi-Factor Analysis; Reliable-and-valid; Peer evaluated; Placebo effect; Long-term VS. short-term study; Inductive VS Deductive reasoning; Levels of confidence; ETC.".

I specially note the need to define "Long term VS. short term" as to each type of science (eg Five years for medicines; Thousands of years for climate changes; Hundreds of thousands of years for geology).

I have no doubt that many of us could benefit from such a presentation.

40-Years After "Freedom Marches"

Recent Milwaukee area news and editorials noted, if not celebrated, the 40-years ago "Freedom Marches" in Milwaukee. What have those marches and resultant actions earned all of us--Black and White.

1. A many times higher Black-on-Black murder rate (Which would be
even higher except for the skills bloodily earned by the staff of the
"knife-and-gun clubs" at our local hospitals) and other like,
intra-racial, assautive crimes.
2. Jails & prisons with majority Black populations, utilizing moneys
better spent on education, county parks and public health
3. Much worse levels of education among Black children;
4. Schools which are more detention centers than places of learning.
5. A skyrocketing level of children born out of wedlock, and born
to other Black children.
6. White flight.
7. An influx of hard working, but illegal, immigrants who are taking
the entry level jobs needed by all of our own poor.
8. "Black leaders" as typified by the very rich Jessie Jackson and
the lying Al Sharpton rather than such as Dr. Martin L. King, Jr..

Oh yes--We should be dancing with joy for the effects of those 40-years! (In a pig's eye!)

Monday, October 01, 2007

Is The Koran Now Illegal In England & Wales

Does the implementation of the new (England & Wales) "Religious Hatred Law" make the publication of the Koran now illegal---As it contains many verses preaching hatred of Jews and other non-Muslims along with commandments to kill (A behavior) such persons?


Published on Ekklesia (
Religious hatred law comes into force
By staff writers
1 Oct 2007
Incitement to religious hatred will today become a criminal offence in England and Wales with the commencement of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act.
The Act creates a new offence of intentionally stirring up religious hatred against people on religious grounds, closing a gap in the current legislation.
Existing offences in the Public Order 1986 Act legislate against inciting racial hatred. Jews and Sikhs have been deemed by the courts to be racial groups and are protected under this legislation, but other groups such as Muslims and Christians are considered to be religious rather than racial groups and have therefore not previously received any protection under the law.
The new Act will give protection to these groups by outlawing the use of threatening words or behaviour intended to incite hatred against groups of people defined by their religious beliefs or lack of belief.
The new law however explicitly does not outlaw 'expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions'.
The new offence therefore has an even higher threshold than the race hatred offence, recognising that religious beliefs are a legitimate subject of vigorous public debate.
Home Office Minister Vernon Coaker said: "This Act closes this small but important gap in the law against extremists who stir up hatred in our communities. To be attacked or targeted because of your race or religion is wholly unacceptable.
"It can have a devastating effect on victims who can find themselves on the receiving end of bigotry and hatred.
"We are committed to protecting everyone in our society and legislating against this abhorrent behaviour. Our overarching goal is to build a civilised society where we can all achieve our potential free from prejudice."
See the Ekklesia paper: 'Rethinking hate speech, blasphemy and free expression' [1]
Keywords: racial and religious hatred [1] | racial and religious hatred act [1] | religious hatred [1]
Creative Commons License [2]This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License [3]. Although the views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of Ekklesia, the article may reflect Ekklesia's values.
Source URL:


* verses which preached cruelty, incited violence and disturbed public tranquility (i.e., 2:193; 8:39; 2:216; 9:41; 9:123; 66:9; 9:73; 8:65; 8:66; 47:4—15; 8:12; 69:30—33; 8:15—18; 25:52; 9:39; 9:111; 3: 169—171; 4:100; 48:29; 49:15; 2:154; 3:157—158; 8:59—60; 9:2—3; 9:29; 8:67; 4:84; 29:6; 29:69; 61:9—13; 9:36; 9:5; 9:14; 9:20—22; 4:95—96; 8:72—74; 3:142)
* verses which promoted, on grounds of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities (i.e., 4:101; 60:4; 58:23; 9:7; 8:13—14; 8:55; 25:55; 5:72; 9:23; 9:28; 3:28; 3:118; 4:144; 5:14; 5:64; 5:18; 5:51)
* verses which insulted other religions as well as the religious beliefs of other communities (i.e., 5:17; 4:157; 5:116—118; 98:6; 68:8—13; 38:55—57; 22:19—21; 22:56—57; 5:36; 15:2; 72:14—15;41:33; 4:125; 25:27—29; 26:96—99; 3:85; 8:38; 31:13; 29:41—42; 37:22—25; 37:26—32; 25:17—19; 7:173; 21:66—67; 21:98—100; 16:20—21; 6:22—23; 6:40—41; 6:148; 2;221; 24:3)