"Gun", People & Medical Violence

TO THE EDITORS, THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL:

On Dec, 8, 2012 you published a letter from Milwaukee's Commissioner of Health in which he addressed what he called "gun violence". I did not notice "gun violence" during Timothy McVeigh's bombing at Oklahoma City or during the two Islamic bombings of New York's "Twin Towers" or during the two ax attacks in Wisconsin in recent months or during the many thousands of fist-and-foot attacks (Chiefly on women or children; But  which recently resulted in the death of a man on a West Allis Street) or, I suspect, many auto "accidents".

Mr. Baker should declare that there is no "gun violence", but only "people violence". That was at the core of the Sandy Hood shootings and those other, non-gun, matters listed above.  Mr. Baker does not address the number of violent crimes halted by the use, chiefly the "mere" display of guns, by armed citizens.

If, and only if, Mr. Baker wishes to address one of the core causes of deaths and injuries in the USA, he should address surgical mayhem, gross errors in medical prescription of drugs, intoxicated practice of medicine and other like crimes---Many of which are covered up by hospitals, group practices and others.

Obama's "Do As I Say & Not As I Do"---Schools

Mr.B. H. Obama was strongly supported by teachers' unions which loath private schools. Yet, he sends his daughters to a private school rather that the Washington, DC schools to which the local population, largely Black, must send their precious children.

He appears to dislike (Fear?) the possession of modern firearms by the People. But, the school to which his girls attend has 11 armed guards in addition to the Secret Service Agents assigned to his daughters. (I find this specially strange as that school is apparently sponsored by the pacifist Society Of Friends, otherwise known as "Quakers".) It appears that those pacifists understand that true peace in contained in the (How many rounds?) magazines of semi-automatic pistols and, perhaps, carbines.

This is another Obama "Do as I say and not as I do!" matter.

Some Quotes About Islam

                                                     QUOTES ON ISLAM 

The following quotes, over a period in excess of 200 years, well serve to define Islam, the religion of “peace and tolerance”. 

(2002)  By James Bissett, ex-Ambassador of Canada to Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and Albania.  “It is common knowledge that Saudi Arabia is the most extremist of the Muslim States.  It finances the infamous Madrassas (schools) that preach a litany of hate and turn out thousands of fanatical Islamic zealots.  It indirectly provides the funding and its’ citizens provide most of the fighters for Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda organization.  It supports, financially and by other means, the Palestinian terrorists and other Muslim anti-Western groups throughout the world.” 

(c. 1998)  By M.J. Haipur.  A religion, as a man, must be judged by the fruits of having existed; what has Islam given to our world, except genocide, slavery, and denigration of the human spirit?” 

(2003)  By Edourd T. Nelosni.  “Islam is, to the body politic of the world, as a festering pus-filled carbuncle is to the backside of a human being.” 

(1943)  By C.S. Lewis.  "If Christianity was something we were making up, of course we could make it easier.  But it is not.  We cannot compete, in simplicity with people who are inventing religions.  How could we?  We are dealing with Fact.  Of course anyone can be simple if he has no facts to bother about." 

(c. 1790)  By Alexis de Tocqueville.  “I studied the Koran a great deal.  I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad.  As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world, and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion infinitely more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.”  

(1991)  By Julie Burchill, of Britain’s newspaper, The Guardian, after the 9/11 terrorist .attacks.  “The terrorist attacks were a tragedy for the people who died or were injured, and for their families and friends.  For the rest of us, they were a wake-up call as to what type of lunatics we are dealing with.  And sleepwalking our way back into ill-sorted, dewy-eyed people personal politics is the last thing we need to set us up for the fight ahead.  Come on you liberals, don’t give me the morbid pleasure of saying, ‘I told you so’ again.”                    

(1908)  By The Catholic Encyclopedia.  “In matters political, Islam is a system of despotism at home and aggression abroad….The rights of non-Moslem subjects are of the vaguest and most limited kind, and a religious war is a sacred duty whenever there is a chance of success against the “Infidel”.  Medieval and Modern Mohammedan, especially Turkish, persecutions of both Jews and Christians are perhaps the best illustration of this fanatical religious and political spirit.” 

(1997)  By Muammar Kaddafi (after meeting with Louis Farrakhan).  “We are used to facing the United States as a fortress from the outside.  Now we are finding a breach to penetrate the country (the U.S.) and confront it from within.”

(1997)  By Louis Farrakhan (in Harlem).  “A decree of death has been passed on America.  The judgment of God has been rendered, and she must be destroyed.”

(c. 1903)  By William Muir.  “The sword of Muhammad and the Qur’an (Koran) are the most fatal enemies of civilization, truth, and liberty which the world has yet known.”   

(2002)  By Franklin Graham.  “Islam is an evil and wicked religion.” 

(1997)  By David Pryce-Jones.  “Democracy sometimes appears paralyzed by those who take advantage of its freedoms in order to abuse them for undemocratic ends.”   

(2001)  From Egypt’s second most influential newspaper, Al-Akhbar. “Our thanks go to the late Hitler, who wrought in advance, the vengeance of the Palestinians upon the most despicable villains on the face of the earth.  However, we rebuke Hitler for the fact that the vengeance was insufficient.” 

(2001)  By C.O. Jones, after 9/11.  “Evil exists, and the worst evil of all, is that practiced in the name of religion.”

(2001)  By Al-Badr spokesman Mustaq Aksari, on CNN, September 19, 2001, eight days after 9/11.  “Islam must rule the world and until Islam does rule the world we will continue to sacrifice our lives.” 

(1937)  By King ibn Saud.  “Verily, the word of Allah teaches us, and we implicitly believe it, that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew, ensures him immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of Allah.” 

(1982)  By the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran.  “We are not afraid of economic sanctions or military intervention.  What we are afraid of is Western universities.”

(1985)  By Sa’id Raja’i”-Khorassani, Iranian delegate to the U.N.  “The very concept of human rights is a Judeo-Christian invention and inadmissible in Islam.”   

(1899)  By Winston Churchill.  “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries.  Besides the fanatical frenzy which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is a fateful fatalistic apathy.” 

Better Plan For School Defense

Dear Fellow NRA Members:

A FLAWED PLAN

I am disappointed in your recommendation for having a armed police officer in every school.
I do not consider that an effective method for the following reasons.
A. The example of Columbine High School, where the on-site police officer ran away from the terrorists there, demonstrating that there are police less motivated to protect pupils that such as the Sandy Hook school staff who threw themselves between the shooter and those babies to act as bullet absorbers----To NO good effect!
B. The many rooms, multiple floors and long, often bent, hallways in many schools make one armed person of limited uses even if in close proximity to the site-of-maximum danger.
C. The moneys to be spent on such much too limited protection would be much better applied to the plan described below.

A BETTER PLAN

1. Require all teachers and other school staff,, as a condition of employment and licensing, to be qualified in the close combat use of medium-to-large caliber handguns and, perhaps, carbines;
2. Such training should, by NRA-certified or other qualified instructors, probably not required more than 20-hours of hands-on training (On top of 2/3 hours of safety instruction) and must involve qualification every two-years at close-combat ranges [Considering the track record of the New York PD at the "Empire State Building Shootings", it would be well to insure that all instructors are, themselves, qualified shooters);
3. "Force-on-force" training, with paint ball guns, is recommended to provide the needed and painful lessons;
4. Such qualified school staff could buy their own guns (Tax deduction) or be reimbursed for such;
5. Qualified school staff would be required to CCW them while on duty;
6. Federal law could be satisfied by having the local Sheriff swear them in as "Special Deputies", with authority limited to the assigned school and grounds;
7. Where laws allow, those persons could obtain CCW licenses/permits and take their weapons home, otherwise a gun safe could be provided; And,
8. The office staff should have access to a carbine in such a safe as can be opened by biometric means.

Considering the NRA's very long support of citizen marksmanship, it would have been better for you to support the second plan provided above. Certainly, most teachers will demonstrate a more parent like desire for the protection of THEIR children than some peace officer, no matter how motivated. Being distributed throughout schools, such armed staff would provide a "clear and present" measure of protection well beyond that of one peace officer.

                                      PS---Si Vis Pachem Para Bellum!

Who Owns Israel?

TO WHOM DOES THE LAND OF ISRAEL BELONG??

An Israeli Sense of Humor at United Nations set the record straight.

An ingenious example of speech and politics occurred recently in the United

Nations Assembly and made the world community smile.

A representative from Israel began: 'Before beginning my talk I want to tell

you something about Moses: When he struck the rock and it brought forth

water, he thought, "What a good opportunity to have a bath!"

Moses removed his clothes, put them aside on the rock and entered the water.

When he got out and wanted to dress, his clothes had vanished.

A Palestinian had stolen them!

The Palestinian representative at the UN jumped up furiously and shouted,

"What are you talking about? The Palestinians weren't there then."

The Israeli representative smiled and said, "And now that we have made that

clear, I will begin my speech.

Osama bin Laden Is Dead. Does That "Matter"?

So very loyal members of our Armed Forces (The SEALs) killed Osama bin Laden at the orders of a politician who has never physically risked himself  in any dangerous civilian or military position. So what?

Osama was already unimportant to Muslim terrorists (Sorry about the redundancy) as demonstrated by the lack of trained-and-skilled bodyguards in his compound.

That dirty-old-man lived in retirement with his sex-objects and pornographic films and was no ongoing threat to our safety; but certainly to our sense of justice.

Mr. Obama's "spiking the ball" on this killing was more of the fakery of his misrule.

Military Law Destroyed

When the persons involved in the murder of President Lincoln were tried, it was by a Military Commission. That body provided council to the defendants, heard and carefully considered the evidence, found the defendants guilty and had most of them properly executed (By hanging) without legal nit-picking.

On 22 June 1942 German spies and saboteurs were landed, by submarine, in the USA. Quick arrest, trial before military authorities immediately followed and six of them were executed on 18 August 1942.
During World War-II some German soldiers dressed in US Uniforms and committed other war crimes. They were quickly, but fairly, tried under the Laws Of War, were found guilty and quickly executed.

On 5 November 2009 Major Nidal Hasan committed Treason (Although Mr. Obama's Administration lacks the courage to bring that charge) and mass murder at Fort Hood. This week, our military justice  non-system finally came to the conclusion that he could be shaved of his beard for his trial appearances.

Many of the terrorists (Who are not under the protection of the Geneva Conventions) held at Guantanamo Bay have violated the Laws of War by attacking the forces of the USA (And its allies) or civilians under their protection, by murder and like offenses, not being in the uniform of a recognized government. Yet (As far as I know), none have been tried for those capitol offenses, let alone executed as has been both legal and just for centuries.

NOW, take a moment and consider the old and valid maxim: "Justice delayed is justice denied".

What then has happened to our once valid, fair and efficient system of Military Commissions and Courts Martial?  The basic answer is LAWYERS! These critters are the same as inflict such complicated laws and regulations as only (Some) attorneys can understand and, thereby, insure their bloated incomes.

Since I am loath to present a problem without offering at least one solution, I offer the following.
1. Prepare to eliminate the "Universal Code Of Military Justice" (UCMJ) by developing a new code, let us call it the New Article Of War (NAW).
2. Keep, as much as is possible, attorneys out of that process.
3. Base the NAW on the old 101 Articles Of War of the US Army and the old Articles For The Government Of The Navy.
4. Require that randomly selected Enlisted personnel (Grades E5 and above) be involved in both the development of a draft NAW and, by like and greater selection, the evaluation of that NAW as to it being able to be understood by personnel with the average education in our services and that without "legal advise".
5. Insure that the NAW contains a definition of "Terrorist" [eg A person who attacks members of the Armed Forces of the USA or its allies or civilians under their protection, outside of the laws-of-war, not being properly in the uniform of the armed forces of a recognized government and under the effective control of such a government.]
6. Provide for a like definition of "Pirate".
7. Provide for the summary courts-martial trials of terrorists and pirates captured on the high seas OR in areas where: Civil government cannot provide for the control of such; OR, Is considered a general area of combat activities; OR, where the safety of members of the armed forces or innocent civilians would be endangered by deferring judicial actions.
8. Provide for the summary punishment for such persons and under the same requirements.
9. Provide, under certain conditions (eg During an intense and dangerous military situation where delay may endanger the national defense or military personnel or civilians under their protection) the same summary trials and punishment for others under military jurisdiction.
10. Most importantly, reduce the number of steps between offenses and final disposition, disallowing certain appeals in times of immediate great danger, where permission in such times for capitol punishment would be given to any Flag or General grade officer having command over the physical area in which such matters originated or were tried.

No doubt but that the trustworthy senior NCOs of our forces can come up with other and useful provisions---Without "lawyering-up"

Federal Government Vs. The People War?

Please remember that "paranoia" is only an unreasonable fear of others! Please also remember that the Founding Fathers of our nation feared any too-great power of a tyrannical chief executive (Insisting on a three-branch government) and of a too-great power of a federal government (Insisting on the passage of  a "Bill Of Rights" before full acceptance of the Constitution---Especially as to Articles I, II, IX and X).

In recent months various Federal (Civilian) agencies have purchased huge supplies of large-caliber ammunition and, at least at the Department of Education, a supply of new, 12-gauge riot shot-guns.  Why? The supplies ordered seem far beyond the needs of such agencies to train and arm what should be a very limited number of persons for very limited armed duties. [I doubt that DOE agents would be patrolling schools, with riot guns, to only insure that pupils "color only within the lines".]

Now, who would be the target of the noted shift to a war footing of so many Federal Agencies (Who are not known for respect for civil liberties, especially under the current Administration)? Our foreign enemies are the proper focus of our Military who are trained for such warfare.  Who is left?

Some of my relatives have express a fear-or-premonition that Mr. Obama will not give up the presidency even if defeated at the polls.

In Louisiana's prisons a prisoner, under sentence of death, is moved about to cries of "Dead Man Walking!". Any persons who would attempt to so destroy the Republic would be "Dead Men Walking". I suspect that any such action against the People would bring into play some of the 100,000,000 large-bore guns held by private citizens (Chiefly those who honor and would protect the Constitution) to destroy such persons and All of their supporters---In Political Parties or government or academia or the media. There are also trees and lamp-posts and alternatives-to-guns available for such good work.

All should reflect on the following words of President Thomas Jefferson:"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms"; And, "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

Maybe I will go and buy a .308-rifle and 100-plus rounds of full jacketed ammo.
   
=================================================================

Social Security Admin. orders 174,000 rounds of ammo

Posted by David Hardy · 18 August 2012 06:56 AM

And its answer, that it must supply and train 295 special agents, raises questions of its own.

I think many agencies view having their own law enforcement, not to mention a SWAT team, as matter of prestige. A JP in New Mexico once issued a number of search warrants for food stamp fraud cases. Next morning he found the town overrun with Dept of Agriculture SWAT teams, taking down people that he knew would have turned themselves in if given a phone call. Overhead was a helicopter full of armed guys. But there was nowhere to land it ... too many telephone lines. He asked an agent and was told it would just hover there for a while and then fly back to the airport. It was only there because Congress had started asking why the agency had a helo and never u< span="">n>sed <>it.

UPDATE: I'd agree that there are thousands of federal buildings that need some entrance security, and that those folks ought to be adequately training. But in my experience, Federal buildings are not guarded by employees of the agency involved, if only because (apart from major HQ buildings) most federal buildings combine several agencies. They are guarded by Federal Protective Service, which is part of DHS. This might explain DHS's large purchases, but not that of other departments.

I can remember when Interior was protected by private agencies, with unarmed employees, and no metal detectors. When there was an alert they looked in your briefcase, and ladies' purses, but never under overcoats. I thought Interior did not want to face the grim fact that no terrorist would think it worth attacking. What are they going to knock out, the environmental law division of the Park Service, or the migratory bird hunting division of Fish and Wildlife, or screw up FOIA response by taking out the Division of General Law?

Some Historical Quotes On Islam

Historical Quotes On Islam

In Roughly Chronological Order

Patriarch Cyrus of Alexandria, while negotiating the surrender of Alexandria to the Muslims, 640 AD:

"I am afraid that God has sent these men to lay waste the world".

Gregory Palamus of Thessalonica, 1354:

"For these impious people, hated by God and infamous, boast of having got the better of the Romans by their love of God…they live by the bow, the sword and debauchery, finding pleasure in taking slaves, devoting themselves to murder, pillage, spoil…and not only do they commit these crimes, but even — what an aberration — they believe that God approves of them. This is what I think of them, now that I know precisely about their way of life.".

John Wesley (1703-91) who wrote,

"Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it...have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind".

William Eaton, US Consul to Tunis, wrote in 1799:

"Considered as a nation, they are deplorably wretched, because they have no property in the soil to inspire an ambition to cultivate it. They are abject slaves to the despotism of their government, and they are humiliated by tyranny, the worst of all tyrannies, the despotism of priestcraft. They live in more solemn fear of the frowns of a bigot who has been dead and rotten above a thousand years, than of the living despot whose frown would cost them their lives…The ignorance, superstitious tradition and civil and religious tyranny, which depress the human mind here, exclude improvement of every kind…"

Alexis de Tocqueville:

"I studied the Kuran a great deal ... I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammed. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world, and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion infinitely more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself."

John Quincy Adams wrote:

In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Adams's capital letters)… Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant… While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and goodwill towards men."

John Quincy Adams who wrote in 1829:

"The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force".

Winston Churchill, wrote in 1899:

“The religion of Islam above all others was founded upon the sword … Moreover it provides incentives to slaughter, and in three continents has produced fighting breeds of men – filled with a wild and merciless fanaticism”.

Theodore Roosevelt wrote:

“The Greeks who triumphed at Marathon and Salamis did a work without which the world would have been deprived of the social value of Plato and Aristotle, of Aeschylus, Herodotus, and Thucydides. The civilization of Europe, America, and Australia exists today at all only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of civilization, because the victories stretching through the centuries from the days of Miltiades and Themistocles to those of Charles Martel in the eighth century and those of John Sobieski in the seventeenth century.”

“During the thousand years that included the careers of the Frankish soldier and the Polish king, the Christians of Asia and Africa proved unable to wage successful war with the Moslem conquerors; and in consequence Christianity practically vanished from the two continents; and today nobody can find in them any "social values" whatever, in the sense in which we use the words, so far as the sphere of Mohammedan influence. There are such "social values" today in Europe, America, and Australia only because during those thousand years the Christians of Europe possessed the warlike power to do what the Christians of Asia and Africa had failed to do - that is, to beat back the Moslem invader.”

Winston Churchill:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

G.K. Chesterton:

There is in Islam a paradox which is perhaps a permanent menace. The great creed born in the desert creates a kind of ecstasy of the very emptiness of its own land, and even, one may say, out of the emptiness of its own theology. . . . A void is made in the heart of Islam which has to be filled up again and again by a mere repetition of the revolution that founded it. There are no sacraments; the only thing that can happen is a sort of apocalypse, as unique as the end of the world; so the apocalypse can only be repeated and the world end again and again. There are no priests; and yet this equality can only breed a multitude if lawless prophets almost as numerous as priests. The very dogma that there is only one Mahomet produces an endless procession of Mahomets.

Winston Churchill 14 June 1921:

‘The Wahabis profess a life of exceeding austerity, and what they practice themselves they rigorously enforce on others. They hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahabi villages for simply appearing in the streets. It is a penal offense to wear a silk garment. Men have been killed for smoking a cigarette, and as for alcohol, the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in this country falls far behind them. Austere, intolerant, well armed, and bloodthirsty, in their own regions the Wahabis are a distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and to the whole institution of the pilgrimage, in which our Indian fellow-subjects are so deeply concerned….The Emir Bin Saud has shown himself capable of leading and, within considerable limits, of controlling these formidable sectaries.'

Andre Servier, 1922 wrote:

“Islam was not a torch, as has been claimed, but an extinguisher. Conceived in a barbarous brain for the use of a barbarous people, it was - and it remains - incapable of adapting itself to civilization. Wherever it has dominated, it has broken the impulse towards progress and checked the evolution of society.”

Hilaire Belloc who wrote in 1938:

"Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world, which will shake off the domination of Europeans -- still nominally Christian -- and reappear as the prime enemy of our civilization? The future always comes as a surprise, but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam".

Bishop Fulton J Sheen who wrote in 1950:

"Today (1950), the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming hatred against Christianity itself. Although the statesmen have not yet taken it into account, there is still grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return and, with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world Power".

Vernon Richards wrote:

"The true Islamic concept of peace goes something like this: "Peace comes through submission to Muhammad and his concept of Allah" (i.e. Islam). As such the Islamic concept of peace, meaning making the whole world Muslim, is actually a mandate for war. It was inevitable and unavoidable that the conflict would eventually reach our borders, and so it has."

David Selbourne – The Losing Battle with Islam:

"Of course, there are distinguished precedents even for the bleakest and coarsest of these judgements. To Montesquieu in 1748, Islam’s ‘destructive spirit’ spoke ‘only by the sword’; to Schopenhauer in 1819, the Koran was a ‘wretched book’ in which he had ‘not been able to discover one single idea of value’; to De Tocqueville in 1843, Islam was ‘deadly’, ‘to be feared’ and a ‘form of decadence’"

Lord Tebbit wrote:

"The Muslim religion is so unreformed since it was created that nowhere in the Muslim world has there been any real advance in science, or art or literature, or technology in the last 500 years"

And how about this quote from Ayatollah Khomeini from 1942:

“Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world…. Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers] Islam says Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us Islam says Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy Islam says Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] verses and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

In defense of the UK, Winston Churchill 1941:
You cannot tell from appearances how things will go. Sometimes imagination makes things out far worse than they are; yet without imagination not much can be done. Those people who are imaginative see many more dangers than perhaps exist; certainly many more than will happen; but then they must also pray to be given that extra courage to carry this far-reaching imagination. But for everyone, surely, what we have gone through in this period - I am addressing myself to the School - surely from this period of ten months this is the lesson: never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. We stood all alone a year ago, and to many countries it seemed that our account was closed, we were finished. All this tradition of ours, our songs, our School history, this part of the history of this country, were gone and finished and liquidated

Black Professionals Vs. Professional Blacks

BLACK PROFESSIONAL:   Someone, who happens to be Black, who goes about his/her profession/trade (eg Physician, professor, mechanic, home-maker, bus driver, journalist) in a professional manner, maintaining updated qualifications, offering her/his best service to all without regard to race, color, creed, etc..

PROFESSIONAL BLACK:   Usually a Black who uses their position of authority to stir up what remains of inter-racial mistrust in the USA to either maintain their income or to poof-up an already over-inflated sense of self-worth or both. Examples of such are Jessie (The extortionist) Jackson, Al (The liar) Sharpton, Professor Cornel (The Irrational) West AND, unfortunately, too manly others.

Gun Control In New York City

From the information made public, it appears that many of the wounds inflicted during the “Empire State Building Shootings” were by gunfire from New York City's police officers. It is not yet public knowledge if the non-criminal killed was hit by rounds from like and poorly aimed police weapons.

It appears that effective gun control in NYC does not extend to the marksmanship of those officers.

I remind all that the National Rifle Association has, for many years, sponsored and provided marksmanship training to both public agencies and private, law-abiding citizens.

Stealing Elections & Treason

In November, 2012 we will have an election of greatest import in a very divided nation.

If, and only if, the Democrats attempt to steal that election (As they did the last senatorial election in Minnesota and the last gubernatorial election in the State of Washington) I will consider that action a direct attack on the USA and, therefore, an act of treason. .

Prime suspects and candidates for punishment for that most horrid crime would  be all members of the DNC, Democrat Members of the Congress and other Democrat leaders. I am willing to extend this criminal definition to lying journalists and law-distorting judges.

"The Left" should recall:
1. Most of the 1,000,000 large-caliber firearms privately held in the USA are owned by those on "The Right", who know how to use them and maintain stocks of ammunition; And,
2. Those persons are smart and motivated enough to construct alternative weapons  which "The Left" can be expected to be too lazy to do as they usually wait for someone else to do work for them.

On the other hand, any "Left" riots, upon the expected victories of the Republicans, can be dealt with by specially marking such traitors with .32" (The size of "OO" buckshot), 9mm, .36", ,45" and like holes.

Death Penalty, Chaput, The Church & The PEOPLE

I have mixed feelings on Capitol Punishment. If there was a way of determining guilt or innocence, beyond any doubt I would favor it for all unlawful killings---Including that by intoxicated use of a motor vehicle. Baring that, I note that I am more-or-less content with the law in Wisconsin where there has been no legal executions for more than 150-years.

However, Archbishop Chaput (In his "Justice and Death"; NCR; Sept. 23, 2012; Page-8) AND all who join him as to opposing to all or most use of the death penalty on the following grounds.
1. Jesus The Christ did not address this issue; His :"Forgive them..." statement appears to apply only to him as the Son Of God.
2. Saint Paul certainly approved of that penalty even if it were justly applied to him.
3. As my evangelical friends would state "Opposition to the death penalty is unscriptural".
4. The early "Fathers Of The Church" were divided on this issue and have left us no definitive resolution.
5. In providing an effective defense for the Church and its members , St. Bernard of Clairvaux supported the just use of deadly force. [It appears that the State has the right to defend its members by the same force as do individuals resisting criminal attacks as provided for under Natural Law, as individuals OR as the State in this democracy in such jurisdictions as that penalty represents the will of the People.]

The Archbishop is also wrong as to convicting and executing mentally ill. After many, many,efforts to find a better test for either and both the best test known to us is: Did the defendant know the difference between right and wrong?". As challenges to the conviction of such as Terrance Williams are core to the too many appeals allowed in such cases, it would rationally appear that he has been found to have that understanding and, according to the laws approved by the People of Pennsylvania, is justly subject to execution.

Archbishop Chaput was also very wrong in saying that the approval of the People (He used the sub-set of Catholics) for the death penalty does not make it right as the People are the State as supported by St. Paul and the civil principles of our Republic. They are not wrong because they disagree with him.

Pulpit Freedom Sunday

This last Sunday was "Pulpit Freedom Sunday". Many pastors preached on the qualities, or lack thereof, of political candidates and parties. This appears to endanger their Federal tax exemption under current law and IRS regulations. Some had the courage to record such homilies and mail them to the IRS.

I did not note this news in my local paper or the broadcast news reports. I will look for such in the next few days. I will not "hold my breath" for hope of such reporting.

Those who oppose this exercise of the free speech provisions of the Bill Of Rights' first amendment claim that it violates the "separation of church and state" provision of that Article. What such persons either forget or dishonestly fail to mention, is that the "separation clause" was inserted to prevent only the Federal Government from establishing a national, state, church as was the common practice throughout the Christian, Buddhist, and Islamic (Where it still exists) nations. In fact, some of the original States maintained official churches into the 1820s.

They also fail to note that the "separation clause" was extended to the Nation: On the basis of a private letter of Thomas Jefferson ; In opposition to then almost 200-years of official, religion-based, statements by the USA's leaders including George Washington and Abraham Lincoln; And, that majority opinion of SCOTUS in the leading court case in this matter was inflicted on us by a one-time active member of the KKK whose dislike of some Christian Churches was consistent with that terrorist organization's positions.

Since Atheism is a religion  it should not be allowed to use the IRS or the Courts to suppress other religions---Which is now the case and is an unconstitutional establishment of a national religion.

If Pastor Doe wishes to declare that Candidate Jones and his Party are morally empty and members of his church should not vote for him or then AND Pastor Roe wishes to declare the opposite from the pulpit and during religious services, both should be allowed (If not encouraged) to do so. [Certainly, many "Black" churches have had political candidates speak from their pulpits in the 2008 and earlier campaign periods---Without penalties imposed by the IRS.] 

Perhaps they should have reminded us that the original "Civil Rights Movement", of the 1840s & 1850s was forced into the public view and public square by sermons from the pulpits.  Such verbal support was supplemented by, for example, Rev. Henry W. Beecher's shipment of "Beecher's Bibles" , being breach loading carbines far in advance of then current army weapons,  to the "Free State" forces in "Bloody Kansas" where a preview of the War Between The States was a violent reality..

I am curious as to why all Christian pastors,  Rabbis and the leaders of other religions did universally forward their right to free, political, speech.

A Most Dangerous US General

The Associated Press  has reported  that USMC General John R. Allen as laid the blame for the increased "insider attacks" or "green on blue attacks" of Afghanistan's police/military personnel against that of the USA and its allies as based on the fasting of Ramadan during a period of very hot weather!

That general, by his "politically correct" but false, comments endangering the lives of our and our allies' troops AND, therefore, endangering our national security!. The real danger comes from those who (Like the traitor NIdal Hasan of Fort Hood infamy) cleave to the basic teachings of that criminal-terrorist movement known as Islam. That ideology requires its followers to wage war (Jihad which is NOT a striving for personal perfection!) against all "unbelievers" until they join Islam or accept the slave-like state of dhimmitude or are murdered.

General John R. Allen is dangerous to the USA and its troops and must be removed from any position of authority.

Vatican-II, Other Religions & Islam

DECLARATION ON
THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONSNOSTRA AETATE
PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON OCTOBER 28, 1965

3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.
Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.
=======================================================================
       The above document was quoted (Although not the section provided above) in a homily at my parish on September 29, 2012 as to toleration, The Pastor dealt more with intolerance towards Hindus who some Catholic call “stupid”. The “highest thinkers” in that religion have concluded that there is only one God and the “gods” worshiped by the People are only facets of that one God just as the facets of a great jewel are not the entire gem.
        The Jews are our spiritual ancestors and, as such are and should-be honored and not persecuted as was the sin of too many Christians (Including my Polish ancestors). They signed a covenant (Contract) with G_d. Such agreements are not had between a tyrannical master and worm-like slaves.

      Jesus the Christ makes us his co-heirs in the Kingdom and his brothers-in-love. Although asking for peace among men of good will, his last “General Orders” to his disciples (Luke 22: 35-38) was to do all that was needed to obtain the means sufficient to defend themselves. .

        The Sikhs, lately come to the World's religions, worship a universal and just God. They are great sustainers of equality between man and women and between all human beings. Their teachings advocate for peace; But, specially emphasis the right of self-defense and the duty to defend the innocent against criminal attacks. They also support practical charity and what we know as Charitas.

        The Allah of Islam (And NOT that of Arabic speaking Christians) demands a slave-like obedience to irrational and unpredictable commands. Islam also supports, if not commands, the use of the slavery of human beings and the sexual-slavery of girls and women. Islam also allows, permits and very often commands the use of murder, genocide, lying and stealing from “unbelievers”; aggressive war and institutionalized revenge.

 The noted document is one that “subtracts from the sum-total of human knowledge”. In the voice of the People, it is poisonous garbage.

Votes, Fraud & Revolution

Many years ago I enlisted in the US Navy. It was only later that I realized that a part of my contribution to the national defense included the defense of the sanctity of my vote. [During my active duty I was in one of the four most dangerous (Enlisted grade) positions. My duties including sitting, too close and too long, too near radiation-leaking A-Bombs.]

When I now read or hear the comments of citizens (?), politicians, law making judges, journalists and others who deny the existence of fraudulent voting and the democratically passed laws which would suppress such, I remember the violent birth of the USA, the fate of those loyal to the most undemocratic rule of The Crown and the fate of those loyal to such misrule. I then open my gun safe and think dark and revolutionary thoughts.

War, Peace, Pacifists, Realists

The following three quotes define the difference between: Realists and pathological pacifists; Patriots and pathological pacifists; Those who study and learn from history VS pathological pacifists; And, sane persons as opposed to pathological pacifists.

1. "Peace" is that glorious-and-short moment in time when the non-thinkers stand around "feeling good" while smart people are reloading.

2. A "Veteran"(Whether active duty, discharged, retired or reserve) is someone who, at one point in his/her life, wrote a blank check made payable to the USA and its People, for an amount including her/his blood, limbs, horrid pain AND life.

3. Si Vis Pachem Para Bellum!
If you wish peace, prepare for war!

Against Over-Seas Telephone "Services"

For many months I have responded to transfers to telephone service centers by the following means:
1. If, by spoken accent of (As occurred in one case) defining background music or foreign language voices, I suspect that the "service center" in in another nation, I demand to be transferred to a center in the USA, which is required by our laws (For the most part this law is obeyed); And,
2. Too often this demand does result in long waits for service or being "cut off", which results in my writing a "nasty letter" to the prime company noting that I will not do further business with them.

If anyone knows to which agency I should file complaints about such overseas matters, please add a note to this posting or write me a .

"Reasonable Limits" To Constitutional Rights

The constitutions of the USA and of Wisconsin (And most other States) state that the keeping of arms is a right. The Supreme Court of the USA has confirmed that the keeping, if not the bearing, of arms is a personal right. Before that decision there were some limits placed on that right being: Felons may not keep arms; And, many modern, military level, arms are kept from the People as was not the case when the US Constitution was ratified.
We have already, in Wisconsin, put limits on full right to bear arms by charging a fee to obtain a CCW license AND restricting that right to adults over the age of 21-years. An Administrative Rule has been proposed to require task-specific training before the full exercise of bearing arms may be had by the People.

OK---But, let us look at imposing other "reasonable" conditions on the exercise of other and basic rights.---Even if it requires amendments to our constitutions and changes in our laws.

Voting is a right already limited to adult citizens over the age of 18-years who are not serving felony sentences. If, and only if, those free citizens from 18 to 21 years of age are too immature to CCW, then they should not be allowed to wield the much more dangerous ballot or sign contracts OR marry or enlist in the military (Without parental or judicial consent).
For some reason, law-making judges have fought requiring proof of citizenship for voting although parallel proofs are required to obtain a CCW license or purchase a firearm. After that tyrannical interference with the democratic enacted decisions of the People is suppressed, then we must require the same "reasonable" limit, of providing photo ID, on voting as it is on purchasing a gun (Or, alcoholic beverages or manly other "freedom" activities).
For exercising the constitutional rights of both voting and holding public office we might require current exposure (No testing needed) to course work (At their expense) as to laws regarding voting and, for elected officials, the laws regarding bribery and other "misconduct in public office" matters before they are even allowed to run for office. This is like the proposed, required, education/training of those who will, in the future, apply for CCW licenses.
Since fees are charged for the full execution of the right to bear arms, then I see no reasons not to charge a like fee to vote or hold public office. Another fee is charged applicants for CCW licenses for a "record check" to insure that no excluding criminal conviction exists. Such a check is considered reasonable and should be for both voting and holding public office. Oh, I know that "poll taxes" were considered unreasonable limits on exercising a constitutional right; But, according to today's "thinking" on such limits (As to the "right to keep and bear arms"), that should no longer be a block for such voter licensing fees.

If we consider the amount of physical and other abuse of students (From primary grades through university) inflicted by teachers, perhaps such instructors should be licensed after having been subjected (At their expense), every five years, to some instrument as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory to minimize the risk to those students. Exposure (At the expense of those teachers and professors) to formal instruction as to those laws governing the behavior and liability of teachers should also be required as a "reasonable limit" to the alleged right to hold a teaching position and, therefore, to "academic freedom".

Considering the impact of editorials and editing news, it might be well to consider editors (And their parallels in the broadcast media) as we do teachers and require the above, same, "reasonable limits" on freedom of the press and be likewise tested and licensed.

Of course, there are alleged and other "reasonable limits" could be inflicted on other matters of right as we do on the right to fully "keep and bear modern military arms". Of course, such efforts might very well lead to either non-violent or violent revolution!

By Tim Schimdt
USCCA Founder
Dear responsibly armed citizen,
Whether you’ve owned guns for decades or are going shopping for your first gun this weekend, chances are you’ve heard more than your fair share of opinions about which guns are best for personal defense.  One of the most common factors that I hear people talk about is accuracy.
“Can the gun shoot tight groups at 10 yards?  15 yards?  How about 25 yards?  After all, you’re going to need your shots to be accurate if you’re going to take down a bad guy.”  I’ve heard this one thousands of times, and I’m sure you can relate.  Most often these types of questions are good to ask, but sometimes they can over complicate the decision-making process and cause people to the wrong gun.
FBI research shows that 81.4% of gun fights happen at a distance of under 20 feet.  This means that the average attack on a victim unfolds very quickly and at a close distance.  This is not always on people’s minds when they are buying a personal defense gun, and it’s certainly not on most people’s minds when they are at the range.  So what is the most important thing to look for when considering which gun to carry for personal defense?

Democrats & "Crime Cities"

If you cast aside knee-jerk responses of "racism", the reasons "crime cities", are governed by Democrats is that they have large Black populations who: Have a considerable portion of those residents who have subscribed to the sub-sub-culture as described in Professor Thomas Sowell's Black Rednecks And White Liberals (If you have not read that book, stop here-and-now and read it lest you lack essential data!); Have subscribed to and demanded goodies from governments who supply them rather than quality education and a lack of interest payments on city debts; And, have self-enslaved themselves to both the Democrat Party and the culture-of-professional-victims.

The difference between the mayors of those cities and their other pimps and drug-dealers is only the scale of operations and the degrading products they peddle.

Luke 22: 35-38---A Different view

                                         Luke 22: 35-38
[35] Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
"Nothing," they answered.
[36] He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. [37] It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."
[38] The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
"That is enough," he replied.”

INTRODUCTION: The above is a more-or-less standard translation of the noted verse. From reading the many different interpretations of these three verses I can only conclude that the various commentators are so divergent as to lead me to doubt that they have a handle on this tidbit of the Gospels. The following comments provide a base for a very different view of these words.

Could it be that something happened after the Christ's earlier sending-out of disciples on the lawless roads of that land? Could it be that his concern for His People (As we are) as moved Him to have them take such measures as were needed to protect their bands?

ON SWORDS IN JESUS' TIME: The sword of c.33AD in the Roman world were the ultimate personal weapon. There were the AK-47s/AR-15s of that time. As all weapons of that era and most of today's they could be used for offense or defense.

Swords required much more metal than axes, daggers, spear points and other weapons. They also required very much more skill, effort and time in their manufacture which made them more uncommon in private hands than not and more costly than otherwise.

The writers of that era (Including those of the Gospels) were very aware of Roman and other weapons and, unlike some of the historically uninformed commentators on the verses noted above, not prone to confuse “swords” with “daggers”.

JESUS' NATIVE LANGUAGE: There is little doubt that the native language of Jesus was a form of Aramaic. He appears to have known enough Hebrew for the purposes of the Synagogue and may have known some Greek, the lingua-franca of the Eastern part of the Roman Empire as demonstrated by his interactions with Pontus Pilot who, as most members of the Roman upper class, spoke Greek.

JESUS' LAST “GEMERAL ORDERS” ABOVE IN ARAMAIC: The interlinear translations of the above verse, in the Christ's own mother tongue, yields the results: “They are sufficient”. This variation from “they are enough” is more-than-sufficient to cast serious doubts on the comments of some that Jesus was being sarcastic about his disciples' reaction to his declaration that they should have swords about them in the future. The first translation implies a dismissal of a wrongful reaction to His earlier statements; The latter a clear statement that two swords are “sufficient” to meet the needs of travelers. [This mistranslation is as wrong as giving “Thou shall not murder!” as “Thou shall not kill!”.]

After all, the roads of that time were not secure from bandits and other ill-doers as Roman and local “law enforcement” provided little security even within cities, let alone on the roads.

THE BIAS OF TRANSLATORS & COMMENTATORS: After reading the many and very varied translations of the noted text and the even more varied comments on it, I can only conclude that some of those persons put into those words what they wished them to mean, too often by convoluted arguments without sound premises or tempered logic. There is certainly no consistency on the interpretation of these verses. Some of these individuals could well be described as “Pathological Pacifists”! They might have done better by applying Occam's Razor and accepted that the words meant what they said (In Aramaic).

IRONY AND SARCASM: I am neither a biblical scholar nor an expert on language usages. However, it appears to me that even the most emphatic and pointed of Jesus' corrective teaching and chiding, often in parables, is ironic and without the harshness of sarcasm.

       Therefore, there is great doubt as to the validity of the statements of commentators who declare that the Christ was being sarcastic in his (Mistranslated as “That is enough”.) “That is sufficient”.

MOSAIC & NATURAL LAW & DEADLY FORCE: Here I will diverge from the actual verses noted above and travel to the related question of the use of force as appears to bother too many who fail to understand the history of this subject.

       From the Talmud (Moses killing the Egyptian attacking the Hebrew slave; And other verses as to slaying evil-doers) to the Torah (It is permitted to kill a night time burglar or trespasser The foundation of some jurisdiction's “Castle Laws”?) to such luminaries of our Anglo-American Law as Hobbs, Locke & Blackstone to even the very recent US Supreme Court's majority decision in District Of Columbia VS Heller the Natural Law right of self-defense (And defense of innocent others) has been supported. The means (Modern handguns) to enforce that right was the real cause-in-action for the Heller case, where the majority decision relied on Natural Law to support its decision.

        For the Orthodox and Catholics explaining the meaning of the scriptures gives greatest authority to the Ecumenical Councils of the Church and, to some extent, the lesser councils and synods. [If anyone can inform me of any decisions of such as to the use of force to defend self and innocent others against criminal attacks, I would be happy to receive such information.]

       Catholics, of course, accept the rare ex cathedra decisions of the Pope as to (Only) matters of Faith and morals [Same request!].

       Both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches also give great weight to the early Church Fathers. Catholics, at the least, grant those persons designated as “Doctors Of The Church” great authority in matters of Faith and morals AND in interpretation of the meaning of the Gospels.

       The only “Doctor Of The Church” who, as far as I know, directly addressed the use of deadly force was St. Bernard of Clairvaux who (In his De Laude Novae Militae) mentioned the “two swords”, closely outlined when Christians may use deadly force AND noted that “the edge of the sword” could be used to defend Christ and His Church.

        He also noted that St. John the Baptist did not demand that soldiers give up their profession; But, only that they not abuse their authority.

        The Christ, of course, gave great honor to the Centurion (A professional soldier and, if you will, a professional killer) and to his Faith.

"PUT UP YOUR SWORD”: To my mind, Christ's command to St. Peter was a “special case” as Jesus's capture, death and resurrection was necessary for the salvation-of-mankind; Such a special case not being a model for other situations or for such lesser persons as ourselves.

LEGIONS OF ANGELS: Yes, the Christ could have called upon “Legions Of Angels” to protect his followers as well as himself. Yet, as to His followers, that would have eliminated the virtue of their becoming witnesses (Martyrs) to Him and his teachings before the world's authorities of that time, rather than having the protection of two swords against common bandits. As to Himself, the same applies as in the paragraph above.

SWORDS AND THE STATE: Of course, those (eg Mr. Mark Shea) who place special weight on the words of St. Paul should recall his approval of the State's use of the sword to punish evil doers.

Some others had thought that the “two swords” referred to the division of authority between Kings (Civil governments) and the Church. This is not scriptural as it derives from the Reformation and is, at best, a strained argument.

AN EXCELLENT PRINTED DISCUSSION: The following book is worth reading on general principle and especially as to the use of force and justified war:

Webster. Alexander F.C. (Fr.) & Cole, Darrell (Professor);

The Virtue Of War: Reclaiming the Classic Christian Traditions East and West;

Regina Orthodox Press (Salisbury, MA);

ISBN 1-928653-17-1.

       This volume's positions and arguments can be extended, in part, to personal self-defense when the State or international-organizations are unable or, sad to write, unwilling to aid the innocent from criminal attack (eg By the Jihadi in the Sudan against the Pagan, Christian and some Muslim peoples of that nation/criminal-organization).

INSULTS & TURNED CHEEKS: Yes, the Christ told us to respond to insults, even to a slap to the face, by “turning/offering the other cheek”. That is, even the most gross insults are not an excuse for such evils as revenge.

       To better understand this, it must be remembered that for time immemorial any blow to the head or face was the worst of insults in most cultures. Even in the “civilized” Western world, it has not been so many years since such a blow would result in two “gentlemen” standing ten-paces from each other with pistols in hand and murder in their hearts.

        Yet, I do not find in the Scriptures any instructions to accept murder, rape, genocide, mutilation or even robbery/theft (The taking of that part of a honest person's life expended in earning property) without taking effective and immediate actions to forestall the execution of such crimes. Such are beyond insults and are dealt with, above, in the “Natural Law” section of this essay.

CONCLUSION—AN ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION: It appears that Jesus had sent his disciples out before the time of the noted verses without anything and with some very restrictive commands. Perhaps, some of them were confronted by evil men on the unsafe roads of that time. Perhaps, Jesus then wished them to have the “sufficient” protection of “two swords”, being enough to ward off bandits without giving the appearance of an armed party. This appears to be the simplest explanation of those verses and, therefore, the best one.

Aurora As Gun Free & Free Fire Zone

According to Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist, Mr. Eugene Kane, the entire city of Aurora is a "Gun Free Zone" to the extent that the carrying of concealed weapons is illegal there.  This provides an answer to my questions|: "Why was there no citizen who used his/her concealed handgun to "double tap" (ie Two rounds to the head) the Aurora Theater shooter.

Aurora Colorado may now be added to such places as Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, Northern Illinois University, Nebraska's Westroads Mall and, so hard to believe, Fort Hood. That city can now also be added to those places who welcome terrorists, "crazies" and other criminals to their "Free Fire Zones" and provide some guarantee a very good measure of protection to them from law-abiding and armed citizens.

The citizens of that city should question their public officials as to the sanity of their
anti-CCW measure

REFERENCE:  Kane, Eugene; "Gun laws do little in case of theater killings"; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel;
July 24, 2012, Page-2A)

External View Of Obama & USA

      Business leaders and public administrators sometimes find it necessary and useful to hire "outside consultants" to take a new and, hopefully, independent view of their operations. Sometimes it is equally useful AND necessary for the "body politic" of the USA (ie Its citizens and legal immigrants) to do the same.
      Fortunately and at no cost to us (So unlike our various governmental units) a newspaper in the Czech Republic has provided us, free of charge, such an evaluation of our voters.

Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way that you can quickly understand them. This quote came from the Czech Republic.Someone over there has it figured out.  It was translated into English from an article in the Prague newspaper Prager Zeitungon:


"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president."

A Confession Of Racism

<http://www.fredoneverything.net/FredIsRacist.shtml>

Jnne 21, 3012

Yes, alas, it is true. Oh, I am a poor sinner, and have offended against the Lord, and lived in the dark night of racism, and it presses hard upon my soul. Oh, how it does. But now, having seen the light of goodness, I repent and will own like a man to my transgressions. Yes, I will say it here, before God and man: I have believed that things should be done without regard to race, creed, color, sex, or national origin.

The shame, the shame!!!!

I will make a clean breast of yet more. I have been against all discrimination by race or sex, against affirmative action, racial set-asides, special treatment for women, quotas, and favoritism by the government and the media. Oh the guilt I feel! I have been a beast, worse even than the Grand Flagon of the Invisible Umpire of the Ku Klux Klan.

There is still more. I have read, and believed, and steeped myself in the pernicious theories of known racists, such as Martin Luther King, who once said openly, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Yes, yes, I too thought this and—oh, woe—was even proud of thinking it. I believed that behavior counted, not race—that if a mob of teenagers gang-robbed a convenience store, they should be horse-whipped, regardless of their race. I thought they should be judged by the content of their characters. I could not see the injustice of equal justice. I did not yet grasp that being against racism was proof positive of racism.

Understanding was not yet upon me. I thought before my salvation that people should take responsibility for their actions. If jack-booted Nazis beat a black unconscious because of, well, pretty much anything, I figured the newspapers should publish their names and photographs, and the courts should give them a minimum of thirty years, no parole, in which to ponder the wisdom of doing it again. Crimes should not be hidden, I believed, nor the criminals protected, according to race.Or anything else. The same laws for everyone, I told myself. Oh, fool that I was.

I was wrong. I now see that a belief in equal treatment under the law is the foulest form of racism. It discriminates unfairly against criminals. All I can say in defense of myself is that other racists, such as Thomas Sowell, led me into these moral swamps. [Sowell: “Similar episodes of unprovoked violence by young black gangs against white people chosen at random on beaches, in shopping malls or in other public places have occurred in Philadelphia, New York, Denver, Chicago, Cleveland, Washington, Los Angeles and other places across the country. Both the authorities and the media tend to try to sweep these episodes under the rug, as well.”]


In Washington, where I once worked, Intensely Good people encouraged me to correct my thoughts. For example, I was told repeatedly by my moral betters that crime and illiteracy flourished among our black population because blacks were deprived and oppressed. I didn’t believe it. No. Instead I hearkened to Walter Williams, a perilous Simon Legree and known Klansman. A very devil, he wrote “I graduated from Philadelphia's Benjamin Franklin High School in 1954. Franklin's students were from the poorest North Philadelphia neighborhoods — such as the Richard Allen housing project, where I lived — but there were no policemen patrolling the hallways. There were occasional after-school fights — rumbles, we called them — but within the school, there was order. Students didn't use foul language to teachers, much less assault them.”  He also asserts that the kids could all read. Racism, pure and simple.

This, note, was when discrimination and oppression were real. So why, I asked myself, heartless racist that I was, can’t black kids read and behave now when discrimination favors them?

Yes, I know, now I know, when it is too late, that only a racist could think that black children could learn to read, and therefore damned well ought to if other people were paying for it.You see, I was in those days socially dangerous without realizing it. Being a racist, I thought that everyone could learn to read, obey the laws, avoid beating people into brain damage, and behave civilly.

Now, permit me to turn to the environmental consequences of racial virtue. This is a more serious matter than many know. It is a question of clogging. When I was in the nation´s capital, a strange, gummy, yellowish substance began washing up on the banks of the Potomac. It killed fish. Chemical analysis showed it to be PSAG, Polymerized Self-Admiring Goodness. The sources seemed to be the neighborhoods around the Washington Post, and the socially conscious regions of upper Connecticut Avenue and Montgomery County. I began to study the racially virtuous whites who lived there.
I found that those who were most vehemently Self-Admirigly Good regarding blacks didn’t know any blacks. They didn’t send their children to the city’s black schools. They stayed out of black neighborhoods. I had known some of them for twenty years and never been with them in a restaurant with more than a token black or two. Thais, Chinese, Italians, Salvadorans, yes. Blacks, no. They had no black friends that I saw. I didn’t ask them when they had last gone to dinner with a black family. Being a racist, I didn’t think I needed to ask.

The devastattion wrought by PSAG. Fred with the last alligator of Lake Chapala, Mexico’s largest lake. A lot of gringos live in the hills above the lake, many of them self-admiringly good, and PSAG washes into the lake in the rainy season. Note that the alligator appears to be gagging.


In fact, these Righteous Washingtonians seemed to have no interest in blacks at all, other than avoiding them, but just wanted to feel good about themselves. If I mentioned that the black schools of Washington were horrible, which they were and are, the response was to call me a racist. Which I was, of course. But how does that help black kids who, generation after generation, are being turned into adults whose only ability is to produce similar generations?

Being deeply in error before my enlightenment, I mistook their hypocritical condescension to blacks for hypocritical condescension to blacks. This latter is a known ingredient of Polymerized Self-Admiring Goodness. Everything fits.

Now I shall go and slit my wrist