Five Myths About Christianity, Islam, Middle Ages

I, very seldom,reproduce copyrighted material. But, this deserves wide attention.

Five Myths About Christianity, Islam, and the Middle Ages
by H.W. Crocker III
10/22/09
Display Full Article/Printer Friendly | Send to a Friend

Does Islam need a Reformation? Not unless you think it would benefit from additional dollops of Puritanism; further encouragement to smash altars, stained glass, and other forms of "idolatry"; prodding to ban riotous celebrations like Christmas and Easter; and support for fundamentalist Islamic schools that insist on sola Korana and sola Sunnah. Indeed, it would seem that Islam has already had its reformers. Railing against the corruption of the West (let's call it "Rome" for short) have been such modern Islamic Luthers as the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the cave-dwelling Osama bin Laden, the voice of young Islam -- the Taliban (literally, the Islamic students) -- and the puritanical Wahhabi sect of Saudi Arabia, which is most assuredly modern as it was not even founded until the 18th century, the age of the Enlightenment.

What would a Reformation bring to Islam that it does not already have? The Calvinists imposed stiff penalties for infringements of dress codes and behavior, but these rules don't go beyond the sharia law of Saudi Arabia. Luther denied the divine right of the pope and affirmed the divine right of princes (uniting church and state, which were previously separate), but that doctrine is already well-established in Islam, where mosque and state are meant to be united. The Protestant reformers repudiated the Catholic Church for dallying too much with classical thinkers and decadent artists (like Raphael); many of them condemned the Catholic doctrine of free will (believing, as do the Muslims, in a kind of fatalism); and they damned Catholics for putting too much emphasis on Thomistic logic and reason, and not enough on the literal interpretation of the Scriptures.

No one accuses Islam of such sins. When it comes to taking Islam back to its pure, uncorrupted form, as embodied by the Prophet himself -- an assassination-approving, polygamous leader of jihads -- it would be hard to outdo bin Laden and his fellow reformers.

Granted, the West is not what it once was. Rather than Michelangelo painting the Sistine Chapel, we have Andres Serrano and his infamous Piss Christ. Instead of the optimism of the Renaissance, we have the modern (pagan) pessimism that sees Nature's gods plotting their revenge on over-populating, polluting humanity. Instead of a confident West seizing its imperial mission to spread peace, commerce, and Christian charity and morality, the modern West is ambivalent about asserting its own values. There are even some in the West -- including its Muslim converts -- who think the Mohammedans' stronger strictures against abortion, homosexuality, and secularism (if not Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, et al.) give them a certain moral superiority over such as the Dutch and liberals everywhere. Still, this remains, I trust, a minority view.

But let it suffice that clearly Islam does not need a Reformation. If the printing press, as it is often said, fanned the Protestant revolt against united Christendom, the Internet has just as surely fanned the Islamist revolt against the West. We've had quite enough jihadists posting their "I protest" theses on the Internet, thank you very much.

But if Islam doesn't need a Reformation, it would definitely benefit from a Counter-Reformation. Just think of it. Wouldn't it be wonderful if Kabul were to become a center of baroque art, if the street corners of Tehran were dotted with choral groups singing the hymns of Palestrina, if the vibrant artists' quarter of Islamabad were full of painters dabbling in the style of Rubens, Caravaggio, and Poussin? Ah, yes, if only. Alas, few expect this to happen within our lifetimes -- or ever.

Despite the alleged glories of Islam's past, we're told that militant Islam is now stuck in the Middle Ages. But Islam is no more stuck in the Middle Ages than it is stuck in the Renaissance or the Counter-Reformation. As Margaret Thatcher's official biographer (and Catholic convert) Charles Moore has written, "' Mediaeval' should not be a synonym for 'barbarous.' Ely Cathedral and trial by jury and Giotto are mediaeval." So, indeed, are the Magna Carta, Chaucer, and Dante. So are the great monastic orders, the invention of the university, and the development of science. So are chivalry, capitalism, and the idea of progress. We don't associate any of these things with modern (or for that matter, historical) Islam.

Granted, the Middle Ages represent a thousand years of history, and the early Middle Ages (roughly 500 to 1000 A.D.), sometimes known as the Dark Ages, certainly had their chiaroscuro moments. The rough playfulness of the Vikings was not universally admired. If you were a pope between the waning days of the ninth century and the opening of the eleventh, you had about a one in three chance of being murdered in office, and survivors could be exiled or deposed. And aside from a variety of barbarians, Magyars, and Mongols, there were the Muslims who in this period jihaded their way over half of Christendom, and were only kept from completely swamping the West by the valiant Charles Martel, who defeated them at the Battle of Tours (and at subsequent battles).

But chiaroscuro is both light and dark, and there was light in the early Middle Ages. It shone most brightly in the monasteries, which not only -- and famously -- preserved classical learning, but also led the West in innovation in agriculture, technology, and trade. The Church provided schools, charitable houses, and the theological rationale for abolishing slavery (as it was abolished in the medieval West, while flourishing in Islam, which was then enjoying its alleged "Golden Age"). Being still Roman, the Church took on many of Rome's administrative governmental duties as well.

The achievements of the "Dark Ages" were monumental. As the historian Christopher Dawson noted, "In reality that age witnessed changes as momentous as any in the history of European civilization; indeed, as I suggest in [The Making of Europe] it was the most creative age of all, since it created not this or that manifestation of culture, but the very culture itself -- the root and ground of all the subsequent culture achievements [of Europe]." Here, as Dawson adds, the Catholic historian has the advantage because he can better understand that these were "not dark ages so much as ages of dawn, for they witnessed the conversion of the West, the foundation of Christian civilization, and the creation of Christian art and Catholic liturgy."

The result was that Europe blossomed in the high and late Middle Ages (1000 to 1500). Wealth and learning spread, and in place of the ruins of Rome, medieval man created a society that was far more humane, far more respectful of women, far more elevating of the individual, far more bourgeois (that is, with a far larger middle class), and far more inventive than the glorious civilizations of the Classical world. The Middle Ages were a wonderful bloom of their own even before they flowered into the Renaissance.

Islam, it should be clear, is not stuck in any previous incarnation of the West, and it is certainly not stuck in the Middle Ages, the Catholic "Age of Faith," when monks, priests, farmers, merchants, kings, bishops, and knights created the dynamic civilization -- the admixture of Classical, Catholic, and Germanic culture -- that is the West. Even in his humblest estate, as a peasant, medieval man was not Taliban man. His assumptions were wildly different. He believed in a suffering Christ who came into the world as a helpless babe and died on the cross, rather than in a conquering prophet who thought it blasphemous to believe God would lower Himself to such indignities. Medieval man believed in honoring God and making merry and for this world gave not a cherry, to paraphrase the poet (and priest) William Dunbar, "the Chaucer of Scotland." While medieval man loved feasts, celebrations, gay colors, and merrymaking, he also believed that service, labor, and commerce were honorable; that self-improvement and progress were possible; and that God had created a world that every man could understand through reason, so that every common farmer -- no matter his vassalage to his feudal lord -- could find ways to improve his agricultural techniques, improvements that benefited himself as well as his lord, because every man was entitled to his own rightful share of his labors.

He was, as we are, Western man, with everything that assumes. As the popular medieval scholar Morris Bishop put it, even today (or in 1968, when he was writing), "A highland farmer in Macedonia, a shepherd in the Auvergne mountains, live a life more medieval than modern. An American pioneer of the last century, setting out with oxcart, axe, plow, and spade to clear a forest farm, was closer to the Middle Ages than to modern times. He was self-sufficient, doctoring himself and his family with herbs, raising his own food, pounding his own grain, bartering with rare peddlers, rejoicing in occasional barn dances for all the world like medieval karoles." The American pioneer and the medieval peasant were us, and we were them, and neither one of us is Muslim. And for some of us, the idea of conversing with a man from the Middle Ages (or from the American frontier) is a much more attractive prospect than the thought of trying to converse with an iPod-attached, text-messaging 20-something whose life is lived in the aptly named "blogosphere."

The myth of the barbarous Middle Ages is part of the ignorance of our age. Protestants originally propounded the myth, secularists have promoted it, and the facts deny it. So let us sally forth like medieval knights to lance five of the biggest myths about the Middle Ages.


Myth One: Medieval Christendom was barbarous, while Islam was refined.

Since we've been talking about the Mussulmen, let's start with the myth that in the Middle Ages, Christendom was barbarous, while Islam was refined. Here's a simple test: Have you ever heard and enjoyed Gregorian chant? If you're lucky, you've done more than that; you've actually heard the work of medieval composers performed on period instruments. Both the music and the instruments are recognizably our own. It bridges naturally to what most people generically call "classical music." (Our system of musical notation dates from the Middle Ages, coming from the monasteries, and most especially from the eleventh-century Benedictine monk Guido D'Arezzo.) Mohammed, on the other hand, like his Talibanic followers, prohibited music. Allah, he said, commanded him to abolish musical instruments, and warned that "Allah will pour molten lead into the ears of whoever sits listening to a songstress" -- or, needless to say, a medieval troubadour.

Thanks to Danish cartoonists, we're all pretty familiar with Islamic attitudes about drawing or painting a likeness of Allah or his Prophet. The Prophet himself, however, actually forbade to his people any visual art that represented any form of fauna, from men to cattle, which puts rather a crimp on artistic freedom -- freedom that was widely enjoyed in the Middle Ages, let alone the Renaissance. While Islamic architecture is rather attractive -- to my taste, anyway -- it is not often noted that it took its inspiration from Byzantium, and in some cases was even built by Byzantine workers. Islamic literature -- aside from The Thousand and One Nights and a handful of other poems or stories -- is paltry compared with the Western stuff; and unlike the Western stuff, it is largely the work of dissenters and heretics. It seems that Muslim literateurs have always tended to play the role of Salman Rushdie to the reigning imams.

As for science, mathematics, and technology, the Muslims were quite good at preserving and adopting the Classical heritage of the Christians (and the achievements of the Zoroastrian Persians and Hindus) whom they conquered. They were rather less good at going beyond it, which is one very large reason why the West made progress and Islam did not. The other big reason is that while Western medieval churchmen taught natural law and that God had created a rational and orderly universe, Islamic theologians countered that nothing -- certainly not reason -- could limit the power of Allah; he was beyond all such constraints; and Muslim leaders were contemptuous of the West. In the twelfth century, Muslim philosophers emphatically turned against the pagan Classics. Practical Western man, on the other hand, cared not for Muslim religion, but he was certainly willing to accept and advance on Islamic learning, just as he accepted and advanced on Classical learning. The West's adoption of Arabic numerals (and the zero, which the Mussulmen got from the Hindus) is one striking example. Another is that when the Islamic philosopher Averroes wrote his glosses on Aristotle, they were more influential in the West than they were in the Islamic world. And the much-maligned Crusaders were no bigots -- they happily adopted Eastern foods and dress and trade.

It was not medieval man whose civilization faced a millennium of marching into the darkness; it was the Mussulman. By the end of the Dark Ages, Islam's "Golden Age" was just about finished. As Norman Cantor, the celebrated scholar of the Middle Ages, has written, "The Islamic world had not yet entered its deep decline in 1050… but by and large the greatest days of Islam had ended…. In the year 1050, in every country in western Europe, there were groups of people engrossed in some kind of novel enterprise. Europe no longer lagged far behind Byzantium and Islam in any way, and in some respects it had surpassed the greatest achievements of the two civilizations with which the Latin-speaking peoples now competed for hegemony in the Mediterranean." The West was always inventive -- even in the Dark Ages. It is part of our spirit, just as the supremacy of the Koran before all else is part of the spirit of Islam.

Then as today, fundamentalist Islamic schools drilled their students in rote recitation of the Koran. Catholic schools, then as now, taught religion, philosophy, mathematics (from accounting to higher mathematics), and Latin, among other subjects. It is a common Protestant jab that Catholics don't know Holy Scripture. It's a jab one can't make at a madrassa-educated Muslim.

In the Middle Ages, it is true, most Catholics knew Scripture from what they heard in church or saw represented in stained-glass windows or what they read -- or heard recited -- from such books as The Heliand, the Saxon Gospel wherein Christ the Champion enters Fort Jerusalem for the last mead-hall feast with His warrior companions. But they accepted the teachings of their authoritative Church and kept themselves busy building breweries, creating intoxicating liquors, laying roads, building towns, and inventing and mass-producing the stirrup, the horse harness, and the water mill (technically, the water mill was invented by the Romans, who made but slight use of it; it came into its own in the Middle Ages). They also created an agricultural revolution with three-field crop rotation and improved agricultural tools and technology, product specialization, land and naval transportation, and the sanctification of commerce.

The sole cultural advance that one might grant Islam over the medieval West is the invention of the harem. Nevertheless, even the male chauvinist might think that the harem rather shortchanges women. The rationalist might add that it creates social pressures that can be rather unhealthy (leaving lots of unattached, untamed men about). The churchman might reasonably add that the celibate monks, nuns, and priests made rather better use of their sexual sacrifice than did the eunuchs who guarded the harems. The Western clothier would suspect that the burkha was invented to hide some of the shortcomings (by Western standards) of the odalisques. And finally, medieval monarchs, like modern Western man, could always get around Church teaching by practicing serial hypocrisy rather than by stockpiling women in special quarters. This monarchical practice has filtered down into business management where overstocked warehouses (harems) have given way to "just-in-time inventory" (serial monogamy), another tribute to Western efficiency.


Myth Two: Medieval women were oppressed.

While we're on the subject of the fairer sex, let's dispense with the feminist idea that the Catholic Middle Ages were an era of oppression against women. That's rather hard to square, on the face of it, with medieval devotion to the Virgin Mary; the medieval invention of courtly, romantic love; the practice of chivalry; and the existence of queens and princesses. In every case, we have men making pledges of loyalty, fidelity, honor, and protection to women -- women, it might be noted, with power and favor, whether it be royal, romantic, or divine.

The New Testament has a rather higher estimation of women than does the Koran. Jesus consistently treats women with respect. Christians, from the beginning, did as well. The idea of woman as a "sex object" is profoundly un-Christian in a way that it is not unpagan or un-Islamic. Christianity has no temple prostitutes or harems, no slave girls or houris. The New Testament never recommends scourging women, nor does it compare women to a field to be plowed (as the Koran does). In Islamic law, divorce is a matter of three words ("I divorce you"); women are property, and women have essentially two purposes (you can guess what these are).

In the medieval West, both polygamy and divorce were illegal. Women could govern from thrones or pontificate from the libraries of nunneries, and they could rule the roost of a middle-class home just as any other Western hausfrau has done over the last 2,000 years. Women were free to dress as they liked and could go to the tavern -- even brew the beer -- if they liked. They held jobs and learned crafts and trades. If peasants, they worked the land with their husbands. They could become saints and lead men into battle (like Joan of Arc). Especially if they were in religious orders, they were well-represented in elementary education, nursing, and the other "caring professions" (as we would call them today). If they were noblewomen, they inherited and wielded property (and received all due feudal obligations), joined their husbands on hunts (or on Crusades), and went to a court school where they were taught art, manners, and household management (everything from medicine to oenology, from sewing to accounting, from gardening to how to handle servants). They were also patrons of the arts. If women were barred from classical schools and universities, which they were, it was less on Christian grounds, strictly speaking, than on classical ones -- on the Aristotelian insight that women are the subordinate sex.

Just how "subordinate" women were might be seen in the bawdy -- and quite "liberated" -- Wife of Bath in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. She should put paid to any idea that medieval women were oppressed. The Wife of Bath, after all, selects her husbands -- five in total -- on the basis of money (she boasts of picking the first three clean of cash before they died) or manly chests, including the handsome pallbearer of the fourth. She finds happiness with her fifth (and favorite) husband after trading blows with him and convincing him of her rights. (The fight starts when she angrily rips a page from the book he has been reading aloud, The Book of Wicked Wives.) In all this, she cites Scripture, noting that "I have the power during al my lif / Upon his proper body, and nat he: / Right thus th'Apostle tolde it unto me, / And bad oure husbandes for to love us weel." Her tale -- and life -- is rather more hilarious and scandalous than today's "medieval" Islam would allow. In the Western Middle Ages, however, she was a recognized type, as she would be if she were plopped down in your living room today.


Myth Three: Medieval culture was crude and ignorant.

Chaucer brings us face to face with medieval culture, and far from being crude and ignorant, we regard it as being a still-bright feature of our literary heritage. If medieval castles and cathedrals, art, crafts, and music aren't enough; if Beowulf, the Song of Roland, the Poem of the Cid, and the Morte D'Arthur don't speak to you; if Boethius, Boccaccio, Dante, Petrarch, and Machiavelli are as nothing; if you have no respect for St. Anselm, St. Francis, and St. Thomas Aquinas, to select a mere handful of the literary riches of the period, there's really not much more to say.


Myth Four: Medieval politics were despotic.

Similarly, medieval politics were neither crude and ignorant, nor totalitarian and despotic. Far from it; the Middle Ages -- from the start -- practiced separation (and conflict) between church and state. It was the Reformation, the desire of the state to absorb the Church, that combined church and state with the creation of state churches. Medieval politics supported a wide dispersion of power, which is what feudalism was, and why England's nobles -- led by the Catholic archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton -- were able to hold King John accountable with the Magna Carta. Medieval man believed in the great hierarchy of society, where every man and woman had rights and responsibilities and was individually responsible before God.

Medieval man was never threatened by totalitarianism. A totalitarian state was not even possible until the Reformation abolished the Church as a check on state power. Before that, feudalism preserved an extreme form of federalism, where even city-states (like Italy's merchant republics) flourished. In the Middle Ages, not only could a merchant launch his own business, but twelve-year-old enthusiasts could launch their own Crusade (the Children's Crusade), and a failed crusader like St. Francis could launch his own religious movement. The Middle Ages might be torn by war, conquests, political rivalries, knightly jostlings, and wars against the Albigensian heretics or the Muslim infidels. But politically, the Middle Ages were, if anything, a time when the dispersal of secular power was closer to anarchy than despotism, and the Church was generally on the side of political -- if not religious -- libertarianism in order to protect itself from ambitious monarchs and princes.


Myth Five: The Middle Ages were uniquely violent.

The Middle Ages were certainly violent enough, but they had no Hitler, Stalin, or Mao. The Middle Ages did have its inquisitors, but the various myths surrounding the inquisitions are nowadays pretty well debunked, and anyone who wants to can know from the relevant historical scholarship that the inquisitional courts of the Middle Ages did not strike fear into the people of Western Europe. Their scope was limited, their trials and punishments more lenient than those of their secular counterparts. Inquisitional punishment was often no more than penance, and throughout much of Europe, the inquisition never appeared at all. It was not a major feature of the Middle Ages. From its 13th-century imposition against the Albigensians through the Spanish Inquisition -- the most "notorious" inquisition, which operated under a royal rather than a papal charter -- the history of inquisitional courts runs over the course of roughly 600 years, expiring in early 19th-century Spain. In the 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition, for which meticulously kept records have been preserved, the grand total of those sentenced to death is perhaps 4,000.

When it comes to body counts, the thousand years of the Middle Ages can't come close to the hecatombs of the enlightened 20th century. If the wars of the Age of Faith are to be regarded as a scandal that discredits Christianity, what are we to surmise from the state-authorized genocides, mass murders, and class eliminations of the pagan national socialists and the atheistic communists, who managed in the course of 70 years, less than one man's lifetime, to kill incomparably more people -- by a factor of untold tens upon tens upon tens of millions -- than were killed in the entirety of the Middle Ages?

There was fighting aplenty in the Middle Ages. There were outrages on the battlefield, murders in cathedrals, and massacres in cities. But modern man is in no position to sit in judgment on medieval man as his moral inferior. In the Middle Ages, the national socialists would have been denounced as heretical, a papal Crusade would have been called against them, and today we would be reading books about how the Catholic Church violently and unjustly suppressed -- through inquisition and Crusade -- a "heretical" German movement that only wanted to wear shorts, hike through the forests, sing pagan songs, free the people from Romish superstition, advance secular learning and science, and break the political and religious power of Rome. We've heard that story many times before, as with the romanticization of the Cathars.

But medieval man has had to suffer many such slurs, from the myth that he believed the world was flat (a myth foisted against him by anti-Catholic propagandists in the 19th century) to the myth that Islamist homicide bombers are "stuck in the Middle Ages" rather than part and parcel of 21st-century Islam. The Middle Ages were more glorious and commendable than many seem to know. Medieval man deserves our toasting tankards; better medieval man than MTV or al-Jazeera man. Cheers.

H. W. Crocker III is the author of Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church: A 2,000-Year History. His prize-winning comic novel The Old Limey and his book Robert E. Lee on Leadership are available in paperback; his latest book is The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War. This article originally appeared in the July/August 2006 issue of Crisis Magazine.

The Zen Of Sarcasm

>
> 1. Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of
me, for I may not follow. Do not walk beside me either. Just pretty much
leave me the hell alone.
>
> 2. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a broken fan belt and
leaky tire.
>
> 3. Its always darkest before dawn. So if you're going to steal your
neighbor's newspaper, that's the time to do it.
>
> 4. Don't be irreplaceable. If you can't be replaced, you can't be
promoted.
>
> 5. Always remember that you're unique. Just like everyone else.
>
> 6. Never test the depth of the water with both feet.
>
> 7. If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of
car payments.
>
> 8. Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their
shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have
their shoes.
>
> 9. If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is probably not for you.
>
> 10. Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish,
and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day.
>
> 11. If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was
probably a wise investment.
>
> 12. If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.
>
> 13. Some days you're the bug; some days you're the windshield.
>
> 14. Everyone seems normal until you get to know them.
>
> 15. The quickest way to double your money is to fold it in half and put
it back in your pocket.
>
> 16. A closed mouth gathers no foot.
>
> 17. Duct tape is like 'The Force.' It has a light side and a dark side,
and it holds the universe together.
>
> 18. There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works.
>
> 19. Generally speaking, you aren't learning much when your lips are
moving.
>
> 20. Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
>
> 21. Never miss a good chance to shut up.
>
> 22. Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative
on the same night.

"Hate Crimes" = "Unequal Protection Of The Law"

It appears that crimes against "gays, lesbians & transsexual persons" will shortly become "hate crimes". Such persons are likely to be added to non-Whites, women, persons of various religious beliefs (Does this include "Atheists" who have been declared members of a religion by the US Seventh Circuit Court Of Appeals?) and other alleged "minorities".

As a supporter of Western civilization, the only force for human and humane progress, I object to Mr. B. H. Obama's efforts to include the USA in some UN ("Useless Nations")
effort to outlaw criticism of some religions. This, if it is allowed to override the "free speech" provisions of our Bill Of Rights, it would punish me for making such true statements as: "Islam allows or encourages, if not commands, the use of murder, rape and enslavement, genocide, lying to and stealing from "unbelievers"; perpetual war against such "unbelievers" and the other horrors taught by Mohammed of Mecca and Medina to further the causes of Islam and its adult, male, members; And to this day, practices those teachings throughout the world."

As a citizen and White male I wonder at the fact that Blacks chose Whites as crime victims at a rate about 100 times the reverse; And, wonder why Blacks receive hate crime protection when many claim that Whites cannot be victims of hate crimes.

As a married man with two daughters and a granddaughter, I note the many rapes of Whites by Blacks, when the reverse offenses are so few as to be "statistically meaningless".

Since male homosexuals are still the primary source of HIV/AIDS in the USA, why should this disease vector receive the special protection under the law?

As a battery is a battery, a rape a rape, murder is murder, etc., all with equal penalties under the Law, why should some groups receive more protection? It is because the USA is becoming a culture of "victimogy" rather than one of "responsibility?

Jews VS Muslims RE: Nobel Prizes

Subject: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JEWS AND MUSLIMS


Also, note that on the long lists for Jews - who have steadily won Nobel prizes in nearly every decade in the 20th century - there are none awarded since the late 1990s. I believe it was about then that the Nobel committee took a drastic turn to the left and began to award prizes for outrageous things.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JEWS AND MUSLIMS..I thought you would be interested in reading this..(What a HUGE contrast!)

How could the picture be 'painted' any more vividly?

The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000

ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world's population.

They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature:

1988 - Najib Mahfooz

Peace:

1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat

1990 - Elias James Corey
1994 - Yaser Arafat:
1999 - Ahmed Zewai

Economics:

(zero)

Physics:

(zero)

Medicine:

1960 - Peter Brian Medawar
1998 - Ferid Mourad

TOTAL: 7 -- SEVEN

>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >><<<<<<< <<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<< <<<<<

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000
Only FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world's population.

They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature:

1910 - Paul Heyse
1927 - Henri Bergson
1958 - Boris Pasternak
1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 - Nelly Sachs
1976 - Saul Bellow
1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 - Elias Canetti
1987 - Joseph Brodsky
1991 - Nadine Gordimer World

Peace:

1911 - Alfred Fried
1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 - Rene Cassin
1973 - Henry Kissinger
1978 - Menachem Begin
1986 - Elie Wiesel
1994 - Shimon Peres
1994 - Yitzhak Rabin

Physics:

1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 - Henri Moissan
1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
1910 - Otto Wallach
1915 - Richard Willstaetter
1918 - Fritz Haber
1921 - Albert Einstein
1922 - Niels Bohr
1925 - James Franck
1925 - Gustav Hertz
1943 - Gustav Stern
1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 - Felix Bloch
1954 - Max Born
1958 - Igor Tamm
1959 - Emilio Segre
1960 - Donald A. Glaser
1961 - Robert Hofstadter
1961 - Melvin Calvin
1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz
1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 - Julian Schwinger
1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
1971 - Dennis Gabor
1972 - William Howard Stein
1973 - Brian David Josephson
1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
1976 - Burton Richter
1977 - Ilya Prigogine
1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
1978 - P eter L Kapitza
1979 - Stephen Weinberg
1979 - Sheldon Glashow
1979 - Herbert Charles Brown
1980 - Paul Berg
1980 - Walter Gilbert
1981 - Roald Hoffmann
1982 - Aaron Klug
1985 - Albert A. Hauptman
1985 - Jerome Karle
1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 - Robert Huber
1988 - Leon Lederman
1988 - Melvin Schwartz
1988 - Jack Steinberger
1989 - Sidney Altman
1990 - Jerome Friedman
1992 - Rudolph Marcus
1995 - Martin Perl
2000 - Alan J. Heeger

Economics:

1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 - Simon Kuznets
1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
1976 - Milton Friedman
1978 - Herbert A. Simon
1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 - Franco Modigliani
1987 - Robert M. Solow
1990 - Harry Markowitz
1990 - Merton Miller
1992 - Gary Becker
1993 - Robert Fogel

Medicine:

1908 - Elie Metchnikoff
1908 - Paul Erlich
1914 - Robert Barany
1922 - Otto Meyerhof
1930 - Karl Landsteiner
1931 - Otto Warburg
1936 - Otto Loewi
1944 - Joseph Erlanger
1944 - Herb ert Spencer Gasser
1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
1952 - Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 - Hans Krebs
1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 - Joshua Lederberg
1959 - Arthur Kornberg
1964 - Konrad Bloch
1965 - Francois Jacob
1965 - Andre Lwoff
1967 - George Wald
1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 - Salvador Luria
1970 - Julius Axelrod
1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 - Howard Martin Temin
1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 - Daniel Nathans
1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
1984 - Cesar Milstein
1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 - Gertrude Elion
1989 - Harold Varmus
1991 - Erwin Neher
1991 - Bert Sakmann
1993 - Richard J. Roberts
1993 - Phillip Sharp
1994 - Alfred Gilman
1995 - Edward B... Lewis

TOTAL: 129 -- ONE HUNDRED TWENTY NINE!

The World's Shortest Books

The Worlds Shortest Books

THINGS I LOVE ABOUT MY COUNTRY

by Jane Fonda & Cindy Sheehan.
Illustrated by Michael Moore

________________________________________

MY CHRISTIAN ACCOMPLISHMENTS &
HOW I HELPED AFTER KATRINA

by Rev Jesse Jackson & Rev Al Sharpton

_______________________________________

THINGS I LOVE ABOUT BILL

by Hillary Clinton

________________________________
Sequel:
THINGS I LOVE ABOUT HILLARY

By Bill Clinton

___________________________________

MY LITTLE BOOK OF PERSONAL HYGIENE

by Osama Bin Laden

___________________________________

THINGS I CANNOT AFFORD

by Bill Gates

____________________________________

THINGS I WOULD NOT DO FOR MONEY

by Dennis Rodman
_________________________________

THINGS WE KNOW TO BE TRUE

by Al Gore & John Kerry

_____________________________________


AMELIA EARHART'S GUIDE TO THE PACIFIC

___________________________________

A COLLECTION of MOTIVATIONAL SPEECHES

by Dr. J.. Kevorkian

__________________________________


ALL THE MEN WE HAVE LOVED, BEFORE .....

by Ellen de Generes & Rosie O'Donnel

____________________________________


GUIDE TO DATING ETIQUETTE

by Mike Tyson

__________________________________


THE AMISH PHONE DIRECTORY
_______________________________________


MY PLAN TO FIND THE REAL KILLERS

by O. J. Simpson
_________________________________________

HOW TO DRINK & DRIVE OVER BRIDGES

by Ted Kennedy
___________________________________

MY BOOK OF MORALS

by Bill Clinton with introduction

by the Rev. Jesse Jackson
*******************************************************

AND, JUST ADDED:

Complete Knowledge of Military Strategy!

By Nancy Pelosi

Canadian Humor

Now that Vancouver will be hosting the 2010 Winter Olympics, these are some questions people from all over the world are asking.

Believe it or not these questions about Canada were posted on an International Tourism Website.

Obviously the answers are a joke; but the questions were really asked!


Q: I have never seen it warm on Canadian TV, so how do the plants grow? ( England )
A. We import all plants fully grown and then just sit around and watch them die.

Q: Will I be able to see Polar Bears in the street? ( USA )
A: Depends on how much you've been drinking.

Q: I want to walk from Vancouver to Toronto - can I follow the Railroad tracks? ( Sweden )
A: Sure, it's only Four thousand miles, take lots of water.

Q: Is it safe to run around in the bushes in Canada ? ( Sweden )
A: So it's true what they say about Swedes.

Q: Are there any ATM's (cash machines) in Canada ? Can you send me a list of them in Toronto , Vancouver , Edmonton and Halifax ? ( England )
A: No, but you'd better bring a few extra furs for trading purposes.

Q: Can you give me some information about hippo racing in Canada ? ( USA )
A: A-Fri-ca is the big triangle shaped continent south of Europe Ca-na-DA is that big country to your North...oh forget it. Sure, the hippo racing is every Tuesday night in Calgary Come naked.

Q: Which direction is North in Canada ? ( USA )
A: Face south and then turn 180 degrees Contact us when you get here and we'll send the rest of the directions.

Q: Can I bring cutlery into Canada ? ( England )
A: Why? Just use your fingers like we do.

Q: Can you send me the Vienna Boys' Choir schedule? ( USA )
A: Aus-t RI-a is that quaint little country bordering Ger-man-y, which is...oh forget it. Sure, the Vienna Boys Choir plays every Tuesday night in Vancouver and in Calgary , straight after the hippo races. Come naked.

Q: Do you have perfume in Canada ? ( Germany )
A: No, WE don't stink.

Q: I have developed a new product that is the fountain of youth. Where can I sell it in Canada ? ( USA )
A: Anywhere significant numbers of Americans gather.

Q: Can you tell me the regions in British Columbia where the female population is smaller than the male population? ( Italy )
A: Yes, gay nightclubs.

Q: Do you celebrate Thanksgiving in Canada ? ( USA )
A: Only at Thanksgiving.

Q: Are there supermarkets in Toronto and is milk available all year round? ( Germany )
A: No, we are a peaceful civilization of Vegan hunter/gathers. Milk is illegal.

Q: I have a question about a famous animal in Canada , but I forget its name. It's a kind of big horse with horns. ( USA )
A: It's called a Moose. They are tall and very violent, eating the brains of anyone walking close to them. You can scare them off by spraying yourself with human urine before you go out walking.

Q: Will I be able to speak English most places I go? ( USA )
A: Yes, but you will have to learn it first.


Please send this on to any Canadian (or others) who you think will enjoy it.

Questtions Regarding Natural Law

As to "Natural Law", I have read a little on this subject; But, do not get clear answers from the Church or others as to most of those listed below.
1. Does Natural Law (NL) provide a full right for the innocent to defend themselves against criminal attacks, including the use of deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm?
2. Does NL require or encourage the protection of other innocents against such attacks?
3. Does NL require such defending persons to have ready access to the means (In this time modern and effective firearms) when the civil authorities are unable (Or, unwilling) to immediately (ie "When criminal attacks are in progress or only seconds away, the police are minutes, or hours, away") protect the innocent against criminal attackers?
4. Does NL allow the use of deadly force to protect the means of life (eg Crops, or any product of honest labor) when no authority will do so in a timely manner?

On a larger scale the Church and others provide food, medications and other like aid to the Christian and Pagan peoples of the Darfur region of the Sudan. Yet, those people cannot use these gifts in peace as the Islamic irregulars, very strongly supported by the Islamic government of the Sudan, kills, maims, rapes and steals from these non-Muslim victims.
Neither the Sudanese government nor inter-national bodies will protect these peoples.

Does NL suggest that these charities should make their gifts meaningful by supplying them with the means (AK-47s; light anti-armor and anti-aircraft rockets) and military cadres to train them to defend themselves as no one else seems to be willing and able to do so?

I doubt that the Christ meant his People to have the "Peace Of Desolation".

Comments?

Book Of Note: Webster, Alexander PhD. & Cole, Darell, PhD.; The Virtue Of War.

Blog: Crusader Knight
Post: The Church, Guns & Self-Defense
Link: http://crusaderknight.blogspot.com/2009/01/church-guns-self-defense.html

Blog: Crusader Knight
Post: When Talk Fails
Link: http://crusaderknight.blogspot.com/2009/03/when-talk-fails.html

Blog: Crusader Knight
Post: A Human Life Concern Ignored
Link: http://crusaderknight.blogspot.com/2008/05/human-life-concern-ignored.html

Blog: Crusader Knight
Post: Property = Life & May Be Defended
Link: http://crusaderknight.blogspot.com/2007/12/property-life-may-be-defended.html

Is B. H. Obama Really "Black"???

Is Mr. B. H. Obama really "Black"? I doubt that on a variety of grounds.

First, from the point-of-view of genetics he appears to be as sure of being 50% White as any person-of-color in the USA can be. Unless his White mother had a "touch of the tar-brush" somewhere in her background, her producing Mr. Obama with a real Black African make it so. Unless we wish to regress to the old, Southern, "one drop of Black blood makes you Black" rule, Mr. Obama could be considered White as much as Black. (By that old and fortunately defunct rule, I could be considered "Asian" as it appears that I have a few drops of Tartar blood.)

Mr. Obama's education was certainly very different from most American Blacks. His early years were, in part, marked-or-marred by enrollment in an Indonesian school with a very Islamic theme. He then went to one of Hawaii's most elite private high schools. Thereafter, he attended Occidental College and the Yale Law School. I do not know who paid for this elite education; But, it was certainly far distant from that of most (Even collage graduates) Blacks in the USA.

Mr. Obama and his publicists have certainly NOT made public any "sweat of his brow" work performed by him to "earn his way" through college or to support himself. Certainly Mr. Obama has no small business experience or being part of a larger and free-enterprise company or, even, in the truly private practice of the Law.

I have no doubts that Mr. Obama was the target of some "racism"; But HE moved in circles which protected him from much of such and where "racist" is the worst term which can be applied to others. (As I have been the target of "hate speach" I know of hurt.)

What, then, does Mr. B. H. Obama have in common with this nation's Blacks???

For myself, I do not care if Mr. B. H. Obama is Black or Pink or Saffron or Brown or "Green With Big Purple & Orange Stripes". What I do know is that I would NOT buy a used car from him or lend him money or support most of his "destruction for USA" policies.

Three Strikes & Out For Obama's Health Plans

There are three issues which can and should kill any Administration supported health care plan(s).

1. Any plan which does NOT provide verification of US citizenship (Or, legal residency here)
before granting health-care benefits AND severe punishments and instant deportation for illegal aliens who attempt to get any tax-based health care will NOT meet the approval of the voters (And of legal immigrants, many/most of whom have applied for citizenship as will allow them to vote in the very near future).

2. Any health care plan which approved funds for tax supported abortions will meet the most severe disapproval of most Catholics and Orthodox Christians, many other Christians and others who hold to high ethical standards. (Do NOT measure this reaction against the Pseudo-Christians found in many places, especially in the Congress!)

3. Any health care plan which is biased against the old-and-infirm (As to limiting or withholding health care) by means of bureaucratic rules (As in Oregon) or other means will be a political death sentence to any Member of the Congress who votes for it.

Could Obama Do More Harm To USA?

I cannot but wonder at the harm that Mr. B. H. Obama has done to the USA! He has attacked and severely damages the free-enterprise core of our economy (Especially as to small businesses) and his various "health" and other proposals will do more of the same.

He has "dumbed-down" the level of political debate and discourse by flooding the media, airways and minds of our citizens with lies, half-truths (Which are worse than lies) and the double-talk more usually expected of a low-class used care salesman OR the Chicago machine politician (Of the most radical variety) he is.

As to national defense he has injured it by his coldness and,perhaps destructive hostility, to Israel (The only democracy and educated society in the Middle East) and to our most staunch allies in Europe, especially the UK, Poland and other like still democratic societies.

His "warmness" towards Islamic dictatorships and towards that hate-filled ideology, Islam, is a matter of great concern to those who study history and learn from it!

Learn From ACLU & "The Adams Project"

The "Adams Project" of the ACLU has been showing photos of CIA operatives to terrorists at Guantanamo (And other places?). Rather that rant-and-rave about this we should learn from them and follow their example by posting on the internet the following data.

1. The (Public record available) names, photos, home addresses and auto license plate numbers of the leaders of the the ACLU and the noted project; And,
2. Advertisements for those companies which provide the following goods and services to the public: Auto alarms; Remote auto starting devices; Life insurance companies specializing in high-risk persons; Private security companies (Especially those who specialize in terrorism cases); And, other like companies.

After all, this is personal and commercial free speech as so loved by the ACLU.

First Amendment, Churches & The IRS

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". That is the first part of the USA's Bill Of Rights and should be clear enough even for congress-critters and law-making judges.

Yet, the Congress has made such laws as allow-and-command the IRS to limit the content and timing of "political statements and publications" by pastors, rabbis, immans, "elders" and, I suspect, even avowed atheists (As Atheism is a religion per the US Seventh Circuit Court Of Appeals; Please see citation below).. The same restrictions apply to the publications of "religious" organizations.

Now, I am not an attorney and am unskilled in the 1984-like "Hate is love; War is peace" reasoning of our courts; But, it certainly appears to me that the noted IRS power (To punish such persons and churches) is well beyond the limits set in the First Amendment.

It should be clearly remembered that the Churches of New England and New York were (By sermons, publications and provision of the most modern firearms) basic to the Abolitionist movement before the Civil War (OK---War Between The States) Is there any doubt that the election periods sermons and publications of the USA's Black Churches (And others who supported them) were basic to energizing the "Civil Rights Movement"?

If Elder Jones of the local Church wishes to sermonize and publish in the Church Bulletin that elected Dog Catcher Smith should not be reelected due to his corruption or bad moral character or opposition to the teachings of Mr. Jones' church, I see no reason that he should be penalized for doing so. I also see no reason why the same should limit him as to any House Representative, Senator or other partisan candidate or Party. All those statements are "free speech" and the "free exercise of religion"!

The government has NO overriding interest in limiting statements and publications by churches---Especially just before elections. In fact, the public interest should require that as many voices and points-of-view be widely known before such basic acts of democracy.

Most certainly, there is no "clear and present danger" (As in falsely crying FIRE! in a crowded theater) in allowing such wider freedom.

Of course, a cynic might claim that such restrictions are all part of the hidden "Congressional Full-Employment Act For Members Of Congress".


Blog: Crusader Knight
Post: Atheism As Religon--PER Federal Courts
Link: http://crusaderknight.blogspot.com/2008/03/atheism-as-religon-per-federal-courts.html

Ted Kennedy---For His Tombstone

RIP
Edward Moore Kennedy
(Alias "Ted")
Born 1932--Gone To Judgment 2009

Murderer, Liar, Adulterer, Supporter of Partial Birth Abortion And
Other Forms Of Genocide, Abuser Of His Wealth And Power,
Tax Cheat And Otherwise
Enemy Of Our Constitutional Republic.

May GOD Have Mercy On His Soul!

Who Is B. H. Obama?

I cannot but note the following about Mr. B. H. Obama.
1. He as taken a very hard stance against the State of Israel, consistent with the popular feelings of most Muslims;
2. His State Department sometimes refuses to admit that Jerusalem is the capitol of that outpost of democracy and progress in the Middle East.
3. That same DOS has made special (And probably unconstitutional) moves towards specially forwarding the teachings of Islam in its programs.
4. Mr. B. H. Obama was, in part, educated in a Islamic-dominated school in Indonesian where he was listed as a Muslim.
5. He strongly supports abortion-on-demand knowing (Or should know) that Muslims do not abort---Which may account for their population growth in Europe VS that of "real Europeans". (ie Those committed to individual and collective freedom, creativity, democracy).
6. His Cairo speech was full half-truths and outright lies about the history of the USA as to Islam (eg The first foreign recognition of the USA was by a Dutch salute to an American warship and NOT by a North African Sultan; Our first foreign war was with the very Islamic Barbary States; Islam is very intolerant of dissent from its views, very war like and the source of most of the terrorism in the world today by those majority of Muslims who support Mohammed's teachings on Jihad); And, Islam tolerated Jews and Christians if, and only if, they had a very inferior social and legal position and were clearly made to understand their "inferiority").
7. His long time association with a sort-of Christian Church and its pastor was marred by that church's and pastor's expression of hate towards Jews and, more worrying, their support of the very hate filled "Black Muslim" movement.

At this point, please note that "paranoia" is only the unreasonable fear of others and things.

Who or what them IS Mr. B. H. Obama?

A. Is he a brilliant politician who knows: Which statements to make, which not to make and which to fill with semantically empty content; Which heavy contributors and other politicians or organizations to "stroke" with favors, policy-positions and recognition; And, how to avoid being pinned down so as to avoid blame for failed policies and programs?

Until recently that could have well described him. However, he has been pinned down and has alienated his left-wing supports and many (If not most) moderates, as well as hardening the expected opposition of the right.

B. Is he just another used-car-salesman-like Chicago and Illinois ward-healer and, in a subtle way, pay-for-play politician with the worst-possible political background and associates (Many "thrown under the bus wheels")? You decide!

C. Is he someone who has used a Black Church and Christianity as a door way into elected office knowing that association with main-line Christian groups. Buddhism, Islam or too-obvious self-worship would not get him the same advantage? You decide!

D. Or, is he some sort of "sleeper agent" for Islam, a crypto-Muslim, a sort-of Manchurian Candidate? Only history will be able to evaluate this!

Four Objections To Obama's Health Plan

After listening to many, without shouting, pro-and-con arguments as to the various "health plan" proposals made by Mr. B. K. Obama and members of his Party I wish you to note the following objections and comments.

OBJECTIONS

1. I most strongly object to any such plan(s) or collateral legislation which uses my tax dollars to provide on-demand abortions (Except for cases of a clear-and-present danger to the life of the mother) in the USA or, through foreign aid, other nations through the UN (Useless Nations) or "Planned Barrenhood"or other agencies.
2. I am equally opposed to any direct or indirect furthering of plans which would withhold palliative or corrective or pain-control therapies for the old or infirm on any "life expectancy" or "usefulness-to-society" basis as such is much too like that practiced by the Nazis and very much against my most deep moral judgment.
3. To only a slightly lesser extent I am opposed to the coverage of illegal aliens as they have, by their illegal entry, avoided the (Full) jurisdiction of the USA as required by the Fourteenth Amendment to to the Constitution for coverage of "rights" under that document and our laws.
4. But, I am even more opposed to any such plan as does not require the President, Vice-President, Member of the Cabinet, Members of the Congress AND their dependents to receive "health care" through any private plans or private pay, with a $10.000/day penalty for doing so AND a provision that any judicial or legislative nullification of that provision will nullify the entire plan.

COMMENTS

A. It will not be enough to merely exclude the objectionable items noted above from any "health care plan"; But, it will be necessary to both contain enforcement clauses to prohibit them and to make impossible any collateral legislation which would "sneak them in

Shouting, Revolutions, Obama & His Supporters

With all of the controversy about the "shouting" and and about the various "Town Hall Meetings", regarding "health care reform", there is something forgotten or avoided by editors, reporters, TV's "talking heads" and, most specially, Mr. B. K. Obama and his arrogant congress-critters and other like supporters.

That is that many revolutions have begun or continued with shouting. The series of bloody Mexican revolutions began with the "Grito de Delores"; The very bloody French Revolution began with shouted arguments in the 1789 National Assembly and continued with the mob shouts at the storming of the Bastille and at the beheading of those seen as tyrants; Our own first Revolution was prefaced by a shouts of of Hurray at the taring-and-feathering of the officials of a tyrannical central government, of the "mob" in Boston, "Give me liberty or death!" AND began with a shout at Lexington to a group of armed citizens: ",,,but if they want war, let it start now!".

The above-noted persons (AND, all of our citizens) should and must remember that the American Revolution began with a reaction to an effort of a tyrannical central government to seize a supply of (Then) modern weapons and munitions from citizens.

To paraphrase: "If you do not learn from history, you will be condemned to repeat it". Mr. Obama et. al. should consider that statement and our US History.

Storm Troopers In Our Future?

The most interesting thing about the New Left's responses to American Citizens exercising their free speech and "petitioning the government" (Congress Critters) at the recent Town Meetings regarding health care was the use of "designated goons" to suppress dissent---As so typical of early union organizing by some labor movements, including Germany's Nazi Party.

These are very different from, as an example, the riot of very leftist mobs and reactive police during the 1968 Democrat Party Convention.

I do wonder what the New Left's response would be to such real mobs attacking their speakers at Town Hall meetings! Mr. B. H. Obama's call for a "Civilian National Security Force" may provide the response of today's Democrat Party. This kicks in my historical memory of the development of Germany's SA (Storm Troopers).

Perhaps there are sound reasons for so many Americans stocking up on guns and ammunition. Perhaps we and they remember that the Second Amendment protects the First Amendment and all other rights of citizens. Considering the age of some attempting to exercise the above-noted rights and the physical strength of the opposing Storm Troopers, it might be soon past the time for "punching back" and time to "shoot back".

between the lines Joseph Farah Obama>'s 'civilian national security force'
Posted: July 15, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

With all the reporters covering the major presidential candidates, it amazes me no one ever seems to ask the right questions.

For several days now, WND has been hounding Barack Obama's campaign about a statement he made July 2 in Colorado Springs – a statement that blew my mind, one that has had me scratching my head ever since.

In talking about his plans to double the size of the Peace Corps and nearly quadruple the size of AmeriCorps and the size of the nation's military services, he made this rather shocking (and chilling) pledge: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Now, since I've never heard anyone inside or out of government use the phrase "civilian national security force" before, I was more than a little curious about what he has in mind.

Today's Worship Of Ba'al

The titular god of the City State of Carthage (In North Africa) was Baal to which the residents (In times of crisis and at other times) would throw their children into a raging furnace.

At that time Rome was still a republic, maintaining "Roman virtues", in an era before that city sate degenerated into the worship of death in the Arena, bloody civil wars and extinction of some entire peoples. At that time Roman Senator Marcus Percius Cato would end every speech with the words Carthago Delenda Est (Carthage must be destroyed)---Without regard to the subject of his speech. It is unknown if this was due to the economic-political rivalry between those two cities OR in disgust of the barbaric child sacrifices made in that North African state.

In this era many Muslim fathers and mothers send out their child to explosive death as "suicide-homicide bombers" and take an unholy and Carthage like pride in such child sacrifice, even educating the very young towards that fatal and barbaric goal. It appears that too many Muslims have taken the pre-Islamic word Allah (God) to really mean Ba'al (Or Shaitan or Iblis). Since this regression to the Jihad mentality is built into the teachings of Islam, I say to the whole world Mecca Delenda Est.

Yet, the USA and the balance of the West should not look down on Cartage or Islam! We sacrifice many, many, hundreds-of-thousands of babies to the false god "abortion on demand" by such equally horrid means of dismemberment (Thing 'death of a thousand cuts"), piercing the skulls and sucking out the brains of children capable of feeling pain and probable of thought and the fire-like and horrid death through the use of corrosive chemicals. The proposals of some in the current Western governments (Including the USA) include killing off the aged and wise by encouraging them to commit suicide---A horror even beyond that of Cartage or Islam. To them and the world I say "Fill In Name***" Delenda Est!

It appears that "talking" with such evil persons, in Islam or in the West, has not reduced the evils noted above. The alternative is the execution of our Natural Law rights and duties to defend the innocent---By any effective means available to us (NOT as a matter of revenge BUT of justice).

*** Any person or organization which supports abortion-on-demand (Except to counter
a clear-and-present danger to the life of the mother) or the pressured suicide of the aged

The Prayer Of A Soldier

As there appear to be "pathological pacifists" (And others) who deny that fighting men can "know God" AND have a "personal relationship" with Him, I offer the poem below in English and, better yet, in the original French.



God, give me what you have left;
Give me what no on ever requests.

I am not asking for rest,
Nor tranquility;
Neither that of the soul or of the body.

I am not asking for wealth
Nor Success, or even health.

Your are asked for all of these so often
That you must have none left.

Give me, God, what you do have left.
Give me what no one wants.

I seek insecurity and disquiet.
I see torment and combat.
And, God, give them to me indefinitely;
That I am sure to have them always
Because I won't always have the courage to ask You.

Give me, God, what you have left.
Give me what others don't want;
BUT, also give me courage, strength and faith.

Found on the body of Lt. Andre Zimheld, French Free Forces, Parchutiste
KIA 1942



1. Mon Dieu, donne-moi la tourmente,
Donne-moi la souffrance,
Donne-moi l’ardeur au combat.
Mon Dieu, mon Dieu, donne-moi la tourmente,
Donne-moi la souffrance,
Et puis la gloire au combat, et puis la gloire au combat.


2. Ce dont les autres ne veulent pas,
Ce que l’on te refuse,
Donne-moi tout cela, oui, tout cela.
Je ne veux ni repos, ni même la santé
Tout ça, mon Dieu, t’est assez demandé.


3. Mais donnes-moi, mais donnes-moi,
Mais donnes-moi la foi
Donne-moi force et courage,
Mais donnes-moi la foi, donnes moi force et courage,
Mais donnes-moi la foi
Pour que je sois sur de moi !


nb

Not being as creative, I go back to my Slavic roots and say the best prayer:
"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God,
Have mercy on me a sinner"; OR, in the alternative,
"Mecca Delenda Est; Deus Vult!"

Is Obama A Citizen Of The USA---Again?

From "GOPUSA"

According to published reports, Barack Obama's legal team has been paid over one million dollars, so far, to STOP anyone from seeing his birth certificate, or, for that matter, ANY of his actual identification documents:

* Actual long-form birth certificate (NOT an easily-forged electronic copy of a short-form document that is not even officially accepted in Hawaii)
* Passport files
* Harvard Law School records
* Columbia University records
* Occidental College records, including financial aid that he may have received
* Punahou School records, where Mr. Obama attended from the fifth grade until he finished high school
* Noelani Elementary School records, where Barack Obama attended kindergarten (according to the Hawaii Department of Education, students must submit a birth certificate to register -- but parents may bring a passport or student visa if the child is from a foreign country)
* Complete files and schedules of his years as an Illinois state senator from 1997 to 2004
* Illinois State Bar Association records
* Baptism records
* Obama/Dunham marriage license
* Obama/Dunham divorce documents
* Soetoro/Dunham marriage license
* Soetero/Dunham Adoption records

The issue of the Occidental College records is especially pertinent. The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) served officials at Occidental College with a subpoena to produce records concerning Barack Obama's attendance there during the 1980's, because those records could document whether he was attending as a foreign national. You see, Mr. Obama attended the school on a scholarship -- and there are questions as to whether the financial aid he received was reserved for foreign students. The Obama attorneys have bent over backward to block us. He doesn't want anyone to see those records. Those financial records STILL have not been released.

WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide? WHAT is he afraid of? WHY doesn't he just release these documents to prove that he is a natural-born citizen and, therefore, qualified to serve as President -- especially his actual birth certificate?