May 29, 2011: “The Palestinians have missed a thousand opportunities for peace”.

This is the new buzz-phrase which is presently “all the rage” in a rabidly-pro-Israel D.C., a take on the Palestinians eagerly echoed by the likes of O’Reilly, Elliot Spitzer, this guy Friedman, just now on CNN, and basically the entire cast of the media vaudeville that entertains us each day on all the channels, with the partial and variable exception of some of the old networks like ABC. It’s easy for “freedom-loving” Yankee newsmen and legislators to kick the Palestinians when their down, but just read the book by this former congressman Findley of Illinois, about the whole Jewish/Palestinian issue, and you will instantly see—if you aren’t entirely blind—that Israel has never negotiated in good faith with these defenseless indigenous people of a thousand years and more. During cruel, interminable decades since 1948 “missed opportunities” for the Palestinians always hidden amid the inevitable Jewish double-talk, and tentative agreements always hijacked by glib impunities of mammoth Jewish settlements on Palestinian soil, spade-work for which was begun before the ink was dry on oaths and promises to refrain from same. Not to even mention Jim-Crow-like jailings, beatings, killings, rapes and wholesale racist discriminations such as would make the very Klan itself blush for shame. While the only weapons the underdog Palestinians have ever had to defend themselves from these often-enough bloody, murderous encroachments have been the home-made, un-guidable rockets, sticks and stones, or suicide bombs for which they are so sanctimoniously condemned. (Indeed, would you do any much different, if some illegally-immigrating bunch of Mexicans, Greeks or Italians came to claim your home and backyard as their own?) Crude Palestinian weapons the likes of which met with universal admiration when they were used by the Hungarians in their revolt against the Soviet occupiers in 1956, most memorably of all with little Hungarian children strapping explosives on themselves in order to detonate under Red tanks under which they had heroically crawled. But Spitzer—the old impeachable one-time philanderer—would show forth his true jackal-like character in an interview with a noble and self-restrained Palestinian official, only the other day, a woman whom he mocked and chortled-at all the while she spoke.

Tell me, with a straight face, which of these kinds of persons “misses a thousand opportunities” for peace and understanding, and which is a victim of misanthropy, tyranny and greed?

May 28, 2011: The subtle nexus between the fifty-year-old parallel government of the drug trade and Vatican Council II.

(Note of 9/14: the interconnection of the rogue council with a host of evils that sprang up quickly in its wake is a frequent theme on this site, with no intention being meant of tiring the reader with a lot of far-fetched diatribe. Most or all of our contentions here are very well founded.)

 

An incredibly dense, complex tangle-of-institutions basically never discussed—a subject the broaching of which is regarded as a laughable species of paranoia, little tolerated in this land of the free—is the veritable parallel government of the illegal drug trade here. Of course, there are stout tentacles involved to the “legal” drug trade as well, another increasingly-criminal activity which has also had its hit-men and victims, whether in outright homicides or protracted, “medicated” deaths. But even more verboten in this democracy-ramroding land is any discussion of the connection this inscrutable monolith has had with the moral revolution that swept the world during and since Vatican II: a synod which took place right around the time that the drug-culture took off here and indeed around the world like a rocket.

After this earth-shaking launch, as if Uncle Sam suddenly became a drugged monkey on some spaceflight, it would take no time at all for crucial social or occupational connections of every kind to be inextricably tied to drug-use and drug-sales, to the “recommendations” (for rent-leases, jobs, club-membership, you name it) of drug-pushers and -users of every stripe. Connections extending easily to hallowed halls of state having become a conduit for the introduction of every sort of fiend into the mainstream fabric American life, and indeed ultimately that of the world: in an agenda which would indeed fit admirably well with the “mum’s the word” regarding traditional morality just then gurgling so pleasantly out of the overflowing palaver of Vatican II. An ecclesiastical policy, a theology of omission, of moral neglect having been inaugurated, amid stock-stirring speeches—hardly of plainspoken biblical fishermen—which would quickly come to replace anything like the old stalwart episcopal and Petrine anathemas, penalties and rigorous salutary deeds. The pope to this very day being a nebulous, touchy-feely figure—one who if recently dead is no doubt nicely “beatified” as well—one who appears on some balcony or in front of some microphone and makes impressive statements—sometimes marginally-traditional in content—but always with only the most anemic, vacuous or fatuous deeds or policies to back them up. This all the while desperate words or deeds of sheep abandoned to the wolves by such a shepherd have all-too-often found in him their remorseless and vindictive satirist or critic, in now-papal-signature piously-sardonic style and tone: in words which can often injure far more by what they don't say than by what they do. Loyal Catholics at every level for decades now being abandoned to their fate in a morally-hostile, drug-infested, increasingly perversion-infected world, while <i>fifty years worth</i> of laissez-faire "window open to the world" papal gestures have stuck Catholic national cultures fixedly in their surrounding mire. The new breed of (anti-)pope and cleric meanwhile discoursing about erudite subjects to the sky, about unconditional-forgiveness-imperatives, with lavish attention poured out upon Jews, darlings of global apostasy since Marx and Freud, Hertzl and Ben Gurion, and before. Papal imposters who likewise take part in Muslim or pagan ceremonials, and then turn on a dime and slander Islam in unfounded historical-revisions, in a novel militantly-pro-Western agenda, in a brave new Vatican world. This pseudo-papal juggling-act concluding with a Mass and liturgy alike allowed to deteriorate into maudlin, gaudy, content-heretical, mostly-Sacramentally-invalid displays.

The new mega-doctrine, in a nutshell—in a close-parallel to simple words often uttered back then by doting parents about a younger generation in moral rebellion, that "they're trying to tell us something"—was that the Church herself according to this new philosophy "had something to learn" from the (biblically-cursed) world. For which purposes windows of the Church had to be "thrown open", as noted above. Indeed, this impious and utterly-unprecedented statement is the real reason that John XXIII was "beatified": discounting for a moment his one, slim "miracle", which in fact doesn't really meet the bar. (As compared for instance to mid-century Fatima prodigies like an eye with continual 20/20 vision without any retina inside). And what this window-opening translated into, in deafeningly-unspoken words, was that all manner of experimentation in "alternate lifestyles"—a word often toyed-with on front-pages of Sunday-morning diocesan new-magazines of the day—were to be tacitly allowed, while Church authorities essentially "looked the other way". (Hence all the triple-divorcees that began to show up at the communion rail, under the broad smile of Father Jim, or the widespread navel-showing that now took the place of the old modesty-of-dress). A new departure indeed with which factions on right and left, as far in either direction as you care to go, would find all too comfortable to make much of a fuss over. After all, the new traditionalist moral-heroism, against such an undemanding backdrop, could be almost anything at all out on the street or on the lawn-chair, as propriety reigned at least nominally at Holy Mass.

Have no doubt then, reader, that in halcyon decades past smug “Catholic conservative” stalwarts like Bill O’Reilly, not to mention regular guests like this coarse-talking Miller guy, once dutifully smoked their pot and sported pony-tail and beard, or at the very least learned all the fawning drug-lingo and body-language of abject peer-and-pusher acceptance: barring which they would likely have gotten nowhere in the media world. Nor for that matter probably even in front of Father Jim, or even before the celebrated nun who taught Bill in school. So that when paragons like this cast themselves as conservatives, it is a posture which resembles a shell or balloon full of hot air.

Here then too the reason for the O’Reilly-decried fiasco on our southern border: because these grim dope-peddling, human-trafficking, AK47-toting hombres own this society from the word go, and with progressively greater security over the past fifty years or so, and with little meaningful resistance at all from the pulpit. Cartels who only leave the USA as marginally peaceful and prosperous as it is because dead or impoverished people make poor dope-buyers. Why, it’s easier by far for most people to socialize with their local mob-installed pusher—and the hyper-correct “social network” at the very center of which he is so comfortably ensconced—than to get an interview with their congressman—and with much greater practical effect resulting therefrom. This is what the “glorious vistas” and “holy men” of the post-Kennedy/post-Vatican-II years have brought us, a world rife with addiction and perversion, rabid O’Reillys and hysterical, rehab-rehabilitated Becks. And if the lives of some of us who although not sinless resisted these mass-moral-capitulations—and subsequent lavishly-praised recoveries—from the start have been more or less “trashed”, there should be no surprise. As we came under the utterly remorseless sanctions and recriminations of this plenipotentiary anti-state, while trying desperately to raise our children therein, and hold down a job, and be let in the front door of the acceptance-ritual church. All the while, at least in first fatal and deciding years, we scarcely had a clue as to the full dimensions of the monster we were actually grappling with.

May 28, 2011: The real problem with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is that the control-bent cabal that runs Washington uses them, like so many other programs, as funding mechanisms for radical-social-engineering projects, both by milking the system dry since Johnson and by means of endless legislative clauses and riders which make the fund a yearly piñata for radical causes.

Hence until it is rigidly recognized and codified that the law of God is the sole source of law, elite-fostered attempts to bankroll social and moral revolution through government programs of all sorts will be rife. The publicly-funded advancement of abortion, euthanasia, institutionalized sodomy, Napoleonic warfare, medically-fruitless embryonic stem-cell research, and so on, being par for the course in today’s depraved policy-world: all the while “right wing” moral Philistines like O’Reilly give the impression that all our woes are mostly a matter of “dollars and cents”. But we pursue the genuinely-Catholic Gospel “more excellent Way” here, which recognizes that law of God as a law of love, a way which cares for ones neighbor, without murderous and perverted collateral strings attached. Under such a good system, Social Security and related programs could have been kept intact, without being looted by the likes of Johnson and those who followed in his nefarious path. Enactments which by now would resemble the old medieval montes pietatis in unshakeable actuary stability and wealth.

May 26, 2011: Loughner, Freud, the Joplin morgue, visions-of-progress and the nanny-state compared against the interior liberty of the 13th-century Catholic Age of Faith.

As noted in a hyperlink below, there is a certain task of interior correlation which has been declared forbidden ground by ubiquitous correctness nannies at every level, with events of any significance being morally neutered by this ever-hovering crew, with multiple happenings in any series of events being considered—with an odd new sort of heroic determinism—as mutually unrelated. With the mental traveler thus as it were carefully concentrating on avoiding the cracks in the sidewalk, so as not to notice where it leads. This is all supposed to be a great tonic toward our mental health, after which we can frolic without reserve, in much-celebrated Yankee-blank-faced raptures, during all-important recreational pursuits, or tip-toe through the daisies as we marvel with wondering eye over the many boons which modern science and technology have brought our privileged way.

Anyone of any other bend-of-mind is of course considered a patented terror threat in this land of the free: but the only problem is that the first beginnings of a modern world of twisted, heinous crimes, against both individuals and humanity at large, began more-or-less precisely at the same time as this sort of hermetically-event-sealed “mental health”. Indeed the very high priest of this “scientific” and incessantly-worried-over point-of-view, Sigmund Freud, would pontificate over a sick world, starting around the year 1900 when he first began to exert such towering sway, a world which would grow mentally and socially sicker in direct proportion to his influence, according to a correlation of the most ironclad kind. He knew indeed how to describe mental illnesses, in a sense even to diagnose: the problem was that in a host of cases these were all self-fulfilling prophesies, spawn of the sex-dominated view-of-life which this multiple-psychotic, with a good deal of help from the radical academia of his day, would institute in the West. A fact with which we can easily become exhaustively familiar, if we would only take the (nanny-forbidden) trouble and time. (Note of 9/14: thus only today confirming massive moral-impunities first introduced by Freud, in a CNN discussion about this latest serial-killer-suspect, in Virginia, some strident, overbearing—and thus undoubtedly Jewish—lady-psychologist ranted and fulminated like a bonafide lunatic about how this frightful and gargantuan Black man could easily be proven to simply be a <i>psychopath</i>. That which as I further extracted, the best I could, from her tumbling verbiage, as long as I could stand to listen to it, means that, having utterly no regard for his fellow man or woman <i>by way of a pathology</i>, he is therefore guiltless of any crime. This classing of all human behavior according to non-normative utterances of modern psychology—as broad, variable and fought-over a field as the most fertile imagination might roam—finding upshot in the disintegration of peace and stability on our streets and in our homes noted in this piece of 2011.) 

The fundamental, underlying problem, as suggested in several articles to date, is that man needs God and the supernatural as his lodestar, his reference point, or everything gets gravely distorted in a hurry. Man is a mystery, not a bloodthirsty Bush/Obama “heroic” warrior nor a congenital sex-fiend, and the modern world since Freud is nothing if not an attempt to force all the incalculable and eternal dimensions of man into this tormented little time-contained Freudian box. Or put another way, and as Freud plainly thought to be his coup fatal, to reduce man to a quantity which can be studied by the "methods of science", the notorious atheist thus preemptively denying any ground to a grace-based theology at all. Science being however a parsing process whose applicability diminishes radically the further we get away from launch-pads, particle-accelerators or nano-microscopes, and prohibitively-so whenever we are considering the utterly-immaterial human mind-and-soul. Capable for one thing of that joy, both natural and supernatural, which St. Thomas Aquinas says sets us apart from the animal world, leaving leagues behind us those other vertebrates who can only slash and bite, like the stooped-shouldered psychopath posited above. For as the Angelic Doctor would likewise undoubtedly tell us: if a human being has no conscience it is because he willingly forfeited it, opting for the depravity which reprobation entails. While again, vaunted attempts of modern psychology to "push the envelop" in these regards has only created a bigger arena upon which exponential numbers of moral-madmen can play out there morbid and implacable fantasies. Hence too finally another image, borrowed from a writer or speaker I don’t remember where or whom, modern life by dint of Freud has become an endless a-spiritual hallway which scrapes the tops of everyone’s head. To treat man as a mere animal—or even as some set of chemical processes—is to rob him of his genuine stature, of what he really is, to disarm him of his own profoundest levels of probity and self-defense.

This sort of man, then, the one who has never grappled with deeper issues, has never correlated them one to the other, who has never attempted to see a deeper or higher pattern to this life—this having been the recreation-obsessed cookie-cutter template into which an abysmally-unhappy youth of today was cast by Boomer teachers and parents, uncles and aunts—this is the poor soul who is then given the inevitable insult of being carefully cushioned from events, let alone from responsibility for his own deeds. Here being poverty indeed, not to be matched anywhere in the drone-bomb-beggared populations of the East. So that whereas the old Catholic psychology of the Scholastics of the twelfth and thirteenth century—disowned in some disturbing ways by the very next generation (of nominalists like Scotus et al)—did indeed recognize a steadily-broadening cleavage in the personality of man—one which widens alarmingly with each new mortal sin (or sin properly-so-called), and can indeed end in diabolical possession, or the entry of another distinct diabolical personality into the body or soul of the unfortunate sinner—Freud and friends would introduce an utterly new level of despair into the grapplings of men with these depraved or pathological extremes. Unveiling multiple incurable conditions variously called the “split personality”, or some species of “schizophrenia”, alongside other pathologies noted above. Far indeed is this from the above Catholic grasp of a separation-of-sorts, in stark contrast with dimensions of an eternal significance, of a “flesh which wars against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh”, a combat which remains with us to the grave. One however dealt-with decisively by grace, the Sacraments and the laboriously-cultivated virtues of the Christian life: a genuine cleavage to be mitigated to a civilized minimum, in souls full of positive potentials of every sort. Freudianism as it developed after Freud historically rather by contrast alleging—although the dark insanities of the "discipline's" turbulent assertions and conjectures aren't so clear on this point—that pathologies are suffered mostly by a certain few, that certain ritual ablutions of passionate release "cleanse" the "healthy" of sicknesses of every sort. Which wild and arbitrary construct suggests further to some minds the stark-polarity of a sanitary opposite, of a perfect, passionless Puritan “elect”. Here a generic indifference taking on all the stature of a sort of secular health and holiness combined, more-or-less epitomized in "The American Dream". That certain quality of cold, jocular detachment—and casual, detached hedonism—which here in the USA opens every door. While later would be introduced this ideal of a genetically-modified race of supermen, as if mere chemical combinations could contribute anything in an arena so unfathomable, so infinitely large. The counselor of Vienna averring that there are different “types” of sick persons—and no doubt some few glorious prototypes of “well ones” as well—the former with different “tendencies”, almost all of which are incurable. The end product of which categorical, deterministic thinking is our bumper crop of budding BTKs, our Loughners, our less-obtrusive sadists and fiends in our black-ops units, who quietly do their twisted deeds upon populations conveniently far away. While conversely any of the many variations and marvelous subtleties properly native to individual persons are instantly and gratuitously made subjects of alarm. Personal particularities which can indeed become sick if not judiciously, and humorously, shepherded but which are the very stuff of our infinitely-various humanity, of we whose souls rub elbows with angels. Potentially-noble, largely-indefinable, unfathomably-subtle qualities and aspirations being lectured, pitied or patronized to death, ham-handedly modified into “harmless” realms, by towering nanny-figures that everywhere abound, in such a Huxlian Brave New World Order world.

But all this Freudian nannying has become a collective institution as well, no longer confined to hovering solicitudes over ceaselessly-worried-over individuals, with a modern American population now never allowed to grasp the full scope of any disaster, never permitted to view the whole gamut of photos of atrocities at Abu Ghraib. (Note of 9/14: now indeed, in this ominous trebling of weather-disasters, even the weather is no longer discussed on the daily news, the Weather Channel having turned into a kind of sexy vaudeville or a rundown of "frightful" but-<i>safely-past-tense</i> weather-events, even as near-apocalyptic storms are breaking not so far from the studio door. Major news networks seeming in similar proportion to have fired all their weathermen and weather-ladies, or perhaps put them on a part-time, "on call" status for a rare weather-review. The prevalence of hundred-year floods across the middle of the country this past summer for instance having received only the most desultory, "not to worry" treatment, as it were all "just too much for the public to handle".) While noted foreign-policy atrocities are plainly feared capable of provoking national-security-threatening levels of disgust with what we have become. Nay rather we must always be prevailed upon to imagine, indeed to firmly believe—more firmly than in any act of today’s universally-anemic religious faith—that there are newer stupendous “vistas of progress”, of “freedom” and “democracy” to be had if we simply keep chasing this “American dream”: one which must always survive on the bleached bones of a shattered world. And, finally, it is thought better to let survivors reach levels of trauma that are life-long, debilitating, by preventing them from viewing the remains of tornado victims at Joplin and no doubt elsewhere, to see if their love-ones are there. To finally let them “rest in peace”. A policy with the “added advantage” of making possible a radical minimization of final figures of the deceased—which unaccountably decreased in a few hours time from 1500 to 232—no doubt so that America can always be perceived as “a winner”. (This figure later reduced much further to 141, and then, somehow, some months later, further modified to 145: as pontificated by these tight-lipped figures on the news.) (Further note of 9/14: I think the final figure was something like 129.) In a town in which endless whole blocks were wiped clean, often not even leaving a slab, and in which in the first few minutes the media saw the dead being pulled out in frightful numbers, after which only the officially designated were allowed in certain areas and beyond a certain yellow line. Simple mathematics indicating the first frightful figures recorded to have been perfectly dead on. All this while innumerable heaps of metal and wood twisted together, comprising large segments of one-time houses, have yet to be separated—by admission of workers on the ground—and the parts of them carefully examined. Some of the elements within obviously and without a doubt being comprised of human remains.

Here, then, the nanny-state in full, uprighteous and doughty form, indeed “from the cradle to the grave”: a realm in which the human person is abandoned to the worst excesses of which he is capable, with some of these crimes being indeed mockingly elevated to sublime levels of marriage or even mysticism. A mankind whose despised, neglected and uncounted remains—with high official convenience “asked after” by no one, since the whole household was snuffed out in an instant in time—are in Joplin no doubt speedily scooped up by a front-loader, and dumped in the local landfill—as if they were so many stray dogs. Where they will quickly and expeditiously be covered over by newer layers of waste in the ever-hovering nanny-state’s own good time.

Which will you choose, fellow Americans, heir to an eternal destiny, made in the image and likeness of God? For we here on this site do indeed have “a more excellent Way”.

May 25, 2011: Like divinely-punishing tornadoes across the USA, the chaotic vortex of the modern progress-doctrine pulls an entire globe into its churning maws. But faith says “be still”, and has no fear of such things.

This “blitzkrieg” element is definitive indeed to all genuinely-aggressive warfare, as there is something essentially unnatural or profoundly disorderly about the advances of a Napoleon or a Golden Horde, but never before have so many things lent their force to a global conquest which annihilates all in its path like an F-5 tornado. This “progress”-oriented global ground-clearing operation—this real-time “pie in the sky”—being an utterly open-ended projection—an end-time spaceship with a humorless, intellectually-lobotomized crew, their ever-“brave” agenda the remorseless destruction of all monuments, landmarks and mementos that went before. A starship which bulges with mega-preemptive weaponry, like so many sharp-pointed missiles, of every category from death-dealing, citizen-spying or obsolescence-wreaking technologies to a whole host of equally-destructive or corrosive ideologies as well. These latter archetypal “weapons of mass destruction” violently challenging ageless, order-producing loyalties of minds and souls, chief among which is faith in God. While furthermore here is a new Frankenstein which actually gains new strength in the very hideous processes of disintegration and decay, partaking by its twisted nature in the chaos of decomposition, of a prurient separation into parts. This progress-deity radically lacking a defining unity at any exalted level, such as befits sons of men or of God, of minds, souls and hearts, of the genuine polity, rather hearkening to ideals as it were inanimate. As of little boys in the backyard with a new toy, of no loftier merit than some chemical chain reaction, or at best of some display of animal passion, of lust and impurity, of might and main.

Can we not, clearly and in transfixing horror, see in all this coiled violence—a serpent the more dangerous the greater its wounds—the stark outlines of the ever-disorderly Apocalyptic Beast, standing upon the global shores, ready to cow all men to deepest throes of submission, and of eternal loss? And is it not much better that men acknowledge God after the very manner of the Muslims, rather than worship this false if shiny-and-modernistic idol, this perverted Moloch, before which so many “Christians” have prostrated themselves in the most craven possible way?

But Christ can still even such waves as these with His “be still”, or His “have no fear, it is I”. While I for one furthermore put my trust in the promise of Our Blessed Lady at Fatima—in God’s mysterious, ever-beckoning inclusiveness, a Portuguese village actually named after a daughter of Mohammed—that “In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace”. The intervention, the Catholic leadership, of Russia, as I interpret the “Fatima Message” signifying a resounding global peace bred of pious minds and institutions, of a code of law formed after no other constitution than the positive law of God. Grasped in part in the universal law “written upon tablets of flesh”, revealed in its ultimate unity and complexity as revealed by Christ to His Church. Here no coarse, vulgar and perverted idol of a “beam me up, Scotty”, leotard-wearing futurism, no rule of chaotic principles of decay and division—an animated cadaver terrifying only to those without real faith—but rather a law of love, cooperation, constructive enterprise, of an economic or industrial collaboration attended by all the virtues of the Gospel-Christian Way.

May 24, 2011: Obama leaves Washington for Netanyahu to openly reign, a success-ethic Uncle Sam will always favor the over-dog. What is the right of return?

I often write of founding a real nation here between the seas, rather than continue heaping with honors of legitimacy this surrogate state of Israel, this harbor of piracy: as if one on the Mediterranean weren’t enough. And in abject symbolic confirmation of this Israel-subservient position of this pseudo-USA—a world-conquering Masonic paradise built upon the ruins of French and Spanish labors-of-love among native tribes—we have Obama leaving for a whole week, after having, with signature-sickening obviousness, turned “the keys of the city” over to this genocide, this claimer of other men’s lands and homes. The little vaudeville having been dutifully repeated, over which so much was made: you remember, of Obama leaving the microphone and podium for Bill Clinton to take over, this having plainly been a psycho-dramatic skit to prepare a new set of symbols—no doubt now to be used a hundred times hence—to announce the elevation of Israel in particular to new and staggering levels of prestige. Only the USA will not be in a position to do this sort of skit much longer, as God’s crushing punishment bears down in a host of ways.

But what is this “right of return”? I speak of it in an entry below, but put in simplest terms, it is the internationally-recognizing, inalienable, natural-law right of the Palestinians to return to—not necessarily to command or solely-possess—lands now claimed by Israel. What is never mentioned in these long and eloquent speeches of U.S. presidents and Israeli prime ministers, however, is far more important than what is actually said: the latter of which generally speaking bears little or no relation to critical matters at hand. Namely, (1) that the Palestinians, and even Hamas, are indeed willing to recognize the state of Israel, but only as decided through negotiations, only after all pertinent matters have been put forward for discussion, and not before. While anything premature, anything falling short of that timetable, would be an abject pre-capitulation of Palestinian hopes, interests and long-awaited desires. In a word it would for all intents and purposes be a dictation, not a negotiation. A poker-game, if you will, at whose table they would no longer have any negotiable chips, but to which they would rather come as the beggars they are by assiduous Anglo-Jewish efforts portrayed to be. While (2) required of such a justly-conceived Israel would be its constitution as a land that incorporates returning Palestinians—who of course in most cases only represent beloved forebears who were viciously and brutal slain or driven away—as full citizens of the state of Israel, not just border-crossing day-laborers or local shanty-town dwellers without any political say. Palestinians being unwilling to perpetuate present-day brutally-oppressive and humiliating circumstances under a permanent “accord”, to live in an Israel in which citizenship is slated by the likes of Netanyahu to be defined according to the most racist and confessionally-exclusionary terms.

This, then, is what the Israelis don’t want to even mention, this the reason Netanyahu and media crypto-Jews like Glenn Beck launch into towering bouts-of-eloquence in order to cloud the issue beyond repair. So that all the more plainly the Palestinians cannot afford to give up any of their few bargaining chips—like the sovereign and inalienable right to bear arms, to maintain a standing army—especially since, as demonstrated above, they have been gravely and repeatedly wronged. And in the face of the self-elevation of England, Israel and the USA to Pantheon-levels of self-conceited incontrovertible opinion—of deciders of the destinies of other lands—all the while carefully-considered judgments of bodies like the UN, let alone any French/German/Russian/Chinese podia of multi-centricity—are contemptuously classed as “attempts to dictate to Israel”. Over a Palestine, incredibly enough, regarded as “its own sole province”. Deciding in its own sweet way, in its own sweet time, what it will or will not do, with lands taken through the brutal, concentrated might of the chief mid-century powers of the Western and Eastern worlds.

Finally, there is much talk of how “present Israeli gains” were “won through war”, while abstracting entirely from any question of the legality of that “war” or of those gains. Which is basically to suggest that there is no place at all for a UN, or an international tribunal at the Hague. A 1967 war, cunningly pre-arranged by an ever-psycho-dramatic Israel, bolstered by the Johnson USA of the times, an attack upon surrounding Arab nations utterly uninvited, entirely unprepared-for, a blitzkrieg having been imposed upon them in a “lightning strike”, as the newspapers of the times unanimously declared. Over some trivial and contrived “incident”—my memory fails me on the particulars—such as the Anglo-Israeli diplomatic or black-ops world is so good at nursing along, or bringing about. No, just as always today, the Jews in 67 and many times thereafter and before raised a tremendous hue and cry of pretenses over some imaginary Arab overstep, and were backed in this squealing and effeminate enterprise as always by the ever-subservient USA.

May 24, 2011: The USA generously provides the world with an object-lesson, demonstrating graphically that pious devotion to the law of God is a shelter to the just nation, while ribald secularism brings down an irreparable wrath. God calls Uncle Sam’s bluff. We predicted such very things, just before it all began.

There is always the bully who thinks he can push his parents or teachers a little further, can make the law of the jungle prevail, can bring chaos to the classroom or around the table at home. And sometimes he can indeed cause problems for long periods of time—no doubt descending into lewdness and profanity as he wends his merry way—as the very terms and conditions of our sojourn here below allow this miscreant a certain degree of tolerance, in the nature of things, despite stern efforts of mom and pop—to be that biblical “scandal which must needs come”. Yet one doesn’t vanquish this imp—whom divine “woes” will follow to the very grave—by adopting his standards and conduct: no, one looks for the opportunity to roundly rebuke him, and if he isn’t chastened in this way then God Himself will take charge of the hickory stick and the woodshed in His own good time.

Likewise, there will always be lots of guys who are running from some terrible, guilty thing in their own lives, who are ready to “join up” with some black ops unit, to do murder and mayhem at home or abroad, “for the flag”. But it is the profoundest shame that any nation should depend upon such a category of men to uphold its place in the world, to “keep everybody guessing”, to “give it leverage” at the diplomatic table, when all honest methods “fail”. A “pragmatic” policy the USA has indeed followed since Plymouth Bay. Pre-arranging these international traps and ambuscades to justify the most heinous of crimes against humanity from the Mohawks to the Libyans, then calling them “very efficient”, “very effective”, with immense satisfaction, as if after a rare meal. And then complaining bitterly against those few legislators at home who decry such a “policy”, who would cut the funding for such a “noble cause”. Of another Napoleon, another Adolph, another flash in the pan, of a nation which quickly goes down to deepest ignominy in the memories of men. Among a host of other nations who depended “on their own right arm” and not on the law of God, on their own cunning or rapine, on ever-scheming financiers far and wide. Such nations and such people always laugh heartily at those who depend entirely upon God, who look upon Him as their Father in Heaven, those wise ones who think of every laborious detail of statecraft chiefly as a form of worship, after which “all things else will be given them besides”. Nations who don’t only give Him lip-service of a Sunday, Saturday or Wednesday night. And it is a hard lesson indeed they must learn when the Almighty chooses to turn on these “self-reliant” ones at last. When their very Maker chooses to “call their bluff”, as He is doing to the late-great USA as I write.

Hence too this Obama who cannot find anywhere to hide from the face of God: from that God Who sends volcanoes after this crypto-Jew to upset his slap-stick Irish apple-cart plans. That good God Who even now prepares a welcome for this international aggressive warrior back at home in D.C., in the form of a tornado to suck him out the window and onto the White House lawn, before it is all done.

May 23, 2011: Divinely-punished Pharaoh Uncle Sam, now surely you will let my people go.

Ah from your cloud-shrouded Judeo-Masonic precincts you would dictate to a whole world, to Afghanis and Palestinians, to French and Iraqis, to Russians and Chinese, while at home you would swell judicial dockets with the unjustly accused, the pre-condemned, in a thousand trials big and small. But a greater Judge has brought you up short, and lays down the law to you. See your choked and swollen rivers, your ruined towns, your rain run red with blood in your gutters, and bow your head, and obey, oh arrogant one. You who would use the law itself, and force of arms, to spread shameful sodomy wherever you go, who would give men a brand of “progress” and “democracy” which destroys peaceful villages, which starves and idles the poor, at home and abroad, which gives them cocaine or poppy-seeds to grow or peddle as their sole livelihood. Your place, oh Pharaoh, oh towering tyrant, will be taken by a just, kindly and holy king; your global sodomite court-priesthood by a valid and saintly pontiff, once again ascending the papal throne, welcomed by the throngs of pious and decent men.

Tremble, then, Uncle Sam, and obey: let my people go.

May 20, 2011: True militancy, the missing element in the Church and world of today. One of its essential characteristics is precision. The ironic link of its lack with U.S. aggressive war, and with today’s tactical use of the word “terrorism” by Netanyahu. This piece started yesterday, updated today.

Slandered in signature effeminate fashion as “triumphalism” both at the rouge-council Vatican II itself and during its devastating fifteen-year aftermath, Catholic militancy is certainly an intrinsic element of Catholic tradition: with this latter corresponding in turn, or so it seems to me, to the very divine processions within the Blessed Trinity Itself. Modeling the very return-of-devotion of the Divine Word, or second Divine Person, to the Father: with these filial processions providing the ineffable prototype, a sort of groove or channel, if you will, for a faithful flock devout to the core. They who—“backward” and “superstitious” as they are claimed to be—always indeed look backward to a Revelation intrinsically analogous to a Trinitarian Origin or Fatherhood—a Revelation which started with Abraham and ended with the death of the last Apostle, but one whose entire ethos and accumulating mass of cultural, legal and political manifestations would provide in its own right a mold or channel for this Catholic Way in critical-if-fragile body/soul terms. This all the while the same popular devotion looks forward indeed as well, is guided—“lead on, kindly light”—by the same Holy Spirit of Love—the third Divine Person—in the application of this backward-looking devotedness to things present and things to come. By that Blessed Spirit Who even now “brings to your minds all things I have taught you”, couches them, as only a God can do, in the changing patois of present and coming times, modeling in this the Son of God, the Father's own Image, Self-Projection or Word, suggesting the imagery—if hardly an actual reality, in a timeless and changeless God—of a Divine-Procession-mobilized "future", founded immovably on a Fatherly "past". This only authentic "futurism", then, hardly allowing us to despise this Legacy passed down, this language learned from the lips of a God, to find this tradition or translation lacking in any substantive way, rather only reverently submitting it to the cipher of newer palates, patois, landscapes, unfolding applications, other ever-nascent new things. A process in which indeed the cipher itself is changed rather than the Revelation, nor yet inseparably-wedded human accoutrements thus newly embellished in the latest shades. Hence does this Catholic Tradition—with or without a “capital T”—always require, as do all sacred legacies, a vigilant, militant defense: as of ones own mother or spouse. So that there can be no such thing as a valid “progress” or “futurism” which would abstract itself, divorce itself, from this Origin-hearkening stream of devotion, of teaching, of this Catholic/biblical Way, “passed down to you”, coming to us from out of a beloved past. While to suggest that radical trivialities of an inseparable plastic quality of modern technology augur some inevitable plasticity in quiddities of this triune God thus graciously revealed, to suggest that the instability and changeability, the perpetual flux of material things would thus somehow gather its myriad infinitesimal fragments together and veritably mount a coup against the divine Immutability and Majesty: of such a futurist's dream, turned phenomenological nightmare, do Satan and his minions mutter forever in Hell.

But as suggested above it is precisely here—in a bizarre yet clever and insidious repudiation of militancy—that this entire Catholic legacy was hijacked at the once-wildly-celebrated synod, whose revolutionary agenda was so carefully preserved by a string of anti-popes who now dutifully “beatify” one-another as each one dies.

How do we do justice to this much-controverted idea of militancy? Well, militancy is many things but preeminent among them is an ironic quality of being mercifully precise: resembling in a sense a kind of sword-thrust which dispatches an enemy promptly, without undue and protracted agonies, in earthly combats of a physical, in spiritual combats a moral or interior, kind. That fatherly, charitable directness of the old ecclesiastical counsels and statements, writings and decretals, those beloved anathemas which used to resound in transepts of cathedrals to the support of the good, the salutary humbling of the proud. These however being destined to suffer summary replacement during Vatican II by this novel spectacle of an endless quibbling or shifting-of-posture over every subject under discussion, and later over every doctrinal or disciplinary decision against errors or real offenders: this even as stout champions of truth and tradition were fated to be roundly humiliated at every turn. Mercy meanwhile having been redefined as unlimited and unconditional clemency, a two-edged-sword whose other cutting-edge was however all-the-sharper in the unmitigated destruction of those who would oppose such a view. They against whom no penalty was considered too harsh; a host of which victims suffered the most terrible of fates; some of which are detailed here and there on this site. For it was critical—for this profane and perverse revolution to succeed—for it to be religiously believed that we had “turned a corner” in the Church—a place of radical transition marking the arrival of a veritable new super-dogma—within whose blinding light all others would pale into merest triviality. A hysterical exaltation in which indeed the super-council itself would from first to last be perceived. Here being the epiphany not of Catholic Truth but of a long-awaited secular-messianic progress doctrine, if one often artfully cloaked in the most cloyingly-sanctimonious of terms. There being here no hint of a possibility of question or demur.

The new “enemy”, then, became anyone “whose yeh was yeh and whose nay was nay”, and the new “son of the church” was to be he whose mode of communication, according to Christ’s own words, was “from the evil one”. Here indeed being contained the line in the sand which separates most decisively the biblically-predicted latter-day “remnant, selected out of grace” from the ever-quibbling New World Order crew, ushered in so brilliantly and insidiously, in so many ways, at Vatican II. So that this kind of “Catholicism” could indeed become the veritable cloaked “religion” of the post-Kennedy USA: with Catholics at the White House, the FBI, Fox News, MSNBC, Blackwater and a host of other major entities constituting in many ways the very palace guard of this new, falsely-brave, double-talking, philistine state. While no doubt most distressing of all is the fact that these two bitterly-divided, mortal foes—this holy remnant and this profane-but-all-powerful crew—mean something entirely different with every significant word they say: so far has advanced, been empowered and elevated, this flux, this murderous fluidity of concept. A divide destined in our own day to be cast in concrete in a field of “linguistics” which now codifies—both formally and through a constant regimen of collegiate ridicule—the new and substance-gutted understanding of ideas. Overthrowing in a trice the mind and soul satisfying wealth of meaning which once capaciously filled the most common as well as the most uncommon of words.

Hence, in view of all this new facility with words and ideas, sometimes-key concepts which could be dispensed or dismissed at will, there was dispelled with little effort and seemingly forever, as a laughable gratuity, the marvelously manly, calm and church-fatherly ethos of pre-Vatican II. As represented for instance in the once-rigidly-upheld requirement that the old militancy and its attendant incisive precision weren’t at all directed against human persons as such. Hardly would be needed any longer the Church’s little-recognized scrupulous observance from earliest catacomb days of Holy Scripture, of her powers being used exclusively “not against flesh and blood but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness”. For contrary to tirelessly-plied slanders of lengthy-and-expensive, church-coffer-emptying conciliar days, there had been very little real animus against men in earlier well-remembered times, generally speaking little if any passionate recrimination, even against the genuine doers of wrong. As for one thing there was quite universally recognized, in that “backward time”, that, alas, “but for the grace of God, there go I”. Hence does it go without saying that the old Catholic militancy among laymen had to be pushed to the furthest extremes before it could ever contemplate physical injury or aggression. For the old Catholics of my beloved childhood memory, my own good and universally-loved father foremost among them, were above all things men of peace, lovers of hearth and home, constructive tenders of flocks and homes, builders of cities, planters of fruitful groves. So that the absence of this deeply-ingrained spirit—bred on the sweet milk of true and unadulterated doctrine—likewise goes a distance in explaining the deterioration of the physical sphere in this our own day and time: in a wholesale abandonment of our inner cities, the rape of resources, the deterioration of the biosphere. All these accelerated dramatically after the much-trumpeted council to end all councils, with its “aggiornamento”, its pitches of excitement and hysteria, working a profound if-ultimately-trivializing influence among the sons of men, the way they approach things, their ordering-of-values, and so on. But even more significantly and disturbingly, there was required above all else this gutting, this emasculation of the whole idea of tradition, of militancy, of its age-old merciful precision, in order to clear the way—to “sweep and decorate” the modern mind—before the “war on terror” Albigensian/Nazi military “mission” of our day. For now, since this new love-affair with passionate or even “compassionate” imprecision—that yawning chasm which more than anything else separates the good from the bad today—all that is necessary at all is to be told that the call-to-arms came from “our leader”: that innocent-sounding word which in German translates into the word fuerer. And thereafter any questioning of ridiculously-questionable motives or circumstances—some of them telescoped almost comically, as to the predictability of the pre-planned Napoleonic outcome actually desired—or of questionable deeds behind hotly-spoken words, whose real meaning was now a plastic extruded glibly, with impunity, and at will—continues, indeed in mounting measure, to be remorselessly classed as disloyalty, indeed even treason. As no precision at all is required—either in the identification or indeed even the combating of alleged enemies or domestic foes—by this ever-uprighteous new crew, and the many they have lead astray, whom we have about our ears so clamorously today. Hence netting a terrorist out of a “bag” of twenty villagers blown to bits by a drone-bomb—after the lone offender had departed the night before—is just “the breaks of the game” in such a bravely imprecise new world.

But chief honors in this dubious coming of age of the language of quibbling and imprecision—of a yeh which is never really yeh and a nay which is never really nay—must be accorded to the modern state of Israel, particularly in it use of the word terrorism as applied to Palestinians in general and to Hamas in particular. The whole mendacious complex involved alleging a Jewish-West-Bank-settler immaculate moral conscience, a “high ground” indeed which abstracts itself entirely from any acknowledgment of the shameful, genocidal origins of the whole kit-and-caboodle of the present Jewish occupation of Palestinian soil of a thousand years. For as recounted in the memories of rare survivors and in many scholarly publications, the first Jews to arrive in Palestine—deposited there without warning while World War I was yet raging—Jews tentatively welcomed with open arms as guests even under these startling conditions, embraced lovingly by now-hated and -despised Palestinians—these first Jews began immediately to “clear the ground”, so to speak. In such wise indeed that groups of Palestinians of all ages and both sexes, these self-same generous hosts, were to be found lying in ditches butchered next morning after many-a long and harrowing night. All this having of course been carried forth with the generous non-interference of British forces, always good at looking the other way in such cases, and under a British military/diplomatic arrangement—the Balfour protocols, as I believe they were called—with absolutely no foundation in either natural or international law. This sort of “ground clearing operation”—to the annihilation of whole village populations, the removal of all traces of the former occupants, and the demolishing or confiscating of their homes—this destined to become the well-recorded modus operandi of the Jews as they steadily widened the “borders” of “their land”, steadily accruing to themselves as well the silent-partner approbation and final formal recognition of fawning nations far and wide, chief among which courtiers would of course be the USA. (Hence seen to be quite just and reasonable are rather modest Palestinian claims of the “right of return” of Palestinian refugees of these many decades in time.) While of staggering interest as well, during the same general era, of the expanding occupation of Palestinian soil, especially during the 30s and 40s, it was Hitler, himself a Jew, who sent perhaps the greatest number of Jews—not to the gas chambers—but to this newly-budding “state of Israel”, built upon the very blood-soaked ground of an innocent Palestinian people. This whole massive Israeli hoax suggesting indeed, at least to me, that many of the much-celebrated films of Jews getting on trains, with the commentator telling us in solemn tones that they were bound for Auschwitz and death, were actually headed for the same “state” on the Mediterranean, there to carry out a genuine holocaust, if one of their very own ghoulish kind. Hence when so criminal and repugnant a person as Netanyahu uses the words “terrorist organization” when referring to Hamas—a group which, like any UN-recognized combatant, has the undeniable right to bear arms until “things are settled”, especially in such a singularly-heinous case—for such a popularly-elected group to be expected to “acknowledge Israel’s right to exist” after such a treacherous history—and before the opposing parties have even come to the negotiating table—this must be confessed to be a case of “chuspah”—a Yiddish word for quibbling or the linguistics-of-deception—brought to an entirely new plane. But a great many Americans “eat it all up”, especially they at higher levels, because this whole culture of “never saying what you mean or meaning what you say”, this whole gutting of word-meaning and idea-content, has been in full swing here for a long, long time. While finally a fundamental dovetailing of aims and methods of the rogue state of Israel and the present schismatic, anti-pope Vatican, as augured in the adoption and promotion of such a shared verbal culture—a convergence much insisted-upon on this site—must be sufficiently evident from things recounted here as well.

May 15, 2011: Ron Paul’s Enlightenment/Newtonian world without enemies answered on this Crusade by the indomitable Integral Catholic political philosophy.

As I labor to convey in my two books of 2004, to be read above full-text and free-of-charge: public issues of government and economy cannot by any stretch be solved according to simple axioms of a sentence or two. And if I do indeed myself manage to come up with a couple of these gems now and again, it is instantly evident in my case that they only act as gateways, if you will, to a thousand subsidiary questions and considerations, to a million institutional configurations of a living and breathing kind that follow from principles thus enjoined. Indeed, if government and public office were a simple matter of “guarding freedom”, if the only enemies we have were those meddlers, nannies and molly-coddlers who would limit this idyllic absolute liberty-of-action “for our own good”—“do gooders” I myself generally oppose with might and main—then I would confess that the good physician is right on every score. What could be better than to be so free, in such a basically-harmless world of spinning ideological spheres?

But in fact this world is a battleground between good and evil from first to last, and the challenge is thus phrased more realistically: how do you retain some modicum of a culture-of-freedom amid the manifold necessities of national and individual self-defense that press in upon person and state at every turn? To have this modicum, in turn, we must have an accurate sense of what is right and wrong, upon which to pattern our laws, and according to which we erect a barricade against genuine—rather than erroneously-identified—foes. Who would make us abject slaves indeed.

What is that culture-of-freedom, as it might be delineated in terms of a political/economic/organizational system? That which guards those freedoms which are truly sacred, demanding for that purpose the interplay of the masses of citizens in its defense? That system is in a general sense distributism: which states that the smallest possible unit must be given the greatest possible agency over the greatest possible number of things that might come under its reasonable purview. While furthermore this system is to be found in its most advanced, nationally-and-culturally specific, institutionally-interwoven form in what I call Integral Catholicism, or the social, economic and political philosophy of the Catholic Church from its inception. That marvelous gem of human sovereign interaction which has whole libraries devoted to it, in parchments a thousand years old, could hardly be capsulated in a few ringing sentences, whose inexhaustible riches of wisdom, of painstaking specificities, have still not been plumbed by any means. That Catholic system which puts the eternal destiny of man first, and thus cannot fail to put the most personally-sacred of rights and realities first in priority in every conceivable setting; that system which is indeed based upon the doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ in its fullest form. Namely that form which finds the nation, the town, the neighborhood to each play an essential role in both the freedom and prosperity of the state and the salvation of the soul.

Yet it’s not even as simple as all that, since according to the central thesis presented on this site there has sat on the papal throne a string of anti-popes since 1958, the first of whom called a rouge council from 1961 to 1965. In a hostile infiltration—of which Church history has seen several—whose chief synagogue-commissioned aim has been to deny the above-detailed two-thousand-year-old Catholic teaching on the state. Namely, that all valid law (St. Thomas Aquinas) is based on the law of God; that when we say “Jesus is Lord”, as enjoined in Holy Scripture, we are most pointedly saying that He is Lord of all states and governments, that He truly reigns—and must ultimately be thus recognized—as Christ the King. That Catholic statehood—not to be coerced, but toward which nonetheless nations instinctively aspire—which it has been the insidious project of these anti-popes to discredit, to ridicule in a smiling way, to allow to “die on the vine”, as the Catholic generations become less and less acquainted with its marvelous properties, its Heavenly sweetness and balm. “Throwing open the windows of the Church”, in the once-celebrated phrase of “Blessed” John XXIII, to the mockeries and profanities of the madding crowd outside, suggesting that things ancient, “passed down to you”, must always somehow be stale, dysfunctional, “obsolete”. Even though our entire profession-of-faith testifies that we partake of eternal things, of truths come to us most fruitfully and tellingly in the affectionately-regarded customs of forefathers blessed through centuries of hallowed use. While furthermore this smooth-mannered denial of immemorial Catholic teaching—taken for granted in millennia past—is being used to great effect today by this Benedict to see to the abandonment of Muslim states in their mortal struggle against the tide of paganism and vulgarity presently being forced on them by the West. This by insisting upon the rigid separation of the state from all religious belief—according to the same above formula—that which must be considered the most radical of ideologies, such as would have been accepted nowhere only a few short decades ago, even in the secularist world of today.

I intend to proclaim this truth—as well as this black betrayal—until my very tongue falls out of my head—even here in a nation allegedly built as no other upon “separation of church and state”. I do this simply because it is right, but yet-more-urgently because “our backs are against the wall”; we are being closed in upon by our mortal enemies. And we have nowhere to turn but to that refuge of humankind, Holy Mother Church, in all respects, but specifically as considered here in her manifold civic institutions. She who has been brutally, cynically denied, by her own children and shepherds, yet who even now opens up her arms wide to receive us as her beloved children.

That political philosophy, Ron Paul, is simple enough for me.

May 4, 2011: Confessions of a “conspiracy theorist”.

Ah, but the most paranoic thing going on today isn’t conspiracy theory at all, but the “conspiracy theory” theory itself. This piece of insanity being the most irrational of all constructs, advising us forcefully—under threat of not-inconsiderable social, occupational and other costs—that we must utterly disregard all public and many private, interpersonal danger signs of any kind, and step off blindly into the arms of those we instinctively, and by rueful experience, distrust. Of course, the aim in all this laughingly insisted upon bonhomie is to disable all these instincts of moral/personal survival, so that we become mere non-volitional non-humans, claiming our places in a thunderous mass-exclamation as the Hebrew goyim we are supposed to be. Poses taken up so eagerly by those recently seen dancing in the street over the latest carefully-edited, laundered-and-processed News-speak about the “capture and killing” of the “terrorist of all times”.

No, Mr. Obama, I’m not at all afraid to acknowledge that you and your ilk will always be the enemies of free men everywhere—since I don’t really need you or some other nanny to tell me who my enemies are or aren’t—nor do I have a shred of respect for a right and left wing media which swoons over you today. While likewise I am supremely happy that there is an entire globe that is equally against you, much of it literally “up in arms”. But unlike so many others, I have a real answer to your ugly sodomy-advocating, village-decimating and mind-regimenting treacheries, part of which solution, were the Frankpledge Party to gain power, would involve a speedy trial for Obama, Bush and associates for treason and crimes against humanity.

May 2, 2011: Article expanded. “Navy Seals” assassinate the evidence along with “Bin Laden”. U.S. foreign and domestic policy pure yin/yang Marxist chaos. But look at the sky, Obama, and watch the waters rise: this kind of treachery is coming to an end.

This immense fabric of techno-arbitrated fictions called the “war on terror” comes to a sort of final stage of perfection in this carefully-pieced together narrative about Bin Laden. This guy who died in 2001, just after 9/11, and just before two (of course “disreputable”) Asian newspaper articles duly reported his death, and just after a long bout of wasting liver disease, but a Bin Laden who could nonetheless be “profiled” to provide the perfect terrorist Houdini, to keep a highly-profitable Napoleonic “search mission” in high gear. Since as noted in earliest writings here, the most clever, daring and above all illusive of these terrorist bugaboos are obviously to be found among the dead. And of course the manifold “marvels of modern technology” take care of all the rest, complete with a “dead body”—which were it really Bin Laden’s would have been waved around like a flag til it rotted off the bones, Islamic custom or no—which mustn’t be identifiable, must be hastily disposed of—you guessed it, “for security reason”. With “authenticity” being assured through highly-bit-map-able photos—of a body with much of its face blown off—do next-of-kin ask any better at the morgue?—real-time evidence of which sequence of fantastic fabrications must of course be kept top secret for the next century or so. After all that, it’s just “blast off”, let the feverish rumors fly—during which Presidential foot-dragging the crypto-Jewish Mexican Geraldo become a prophet, “sensing” what the news is going to be—while amid the fanfare, the jetting of major military figures to and fro, the hushed secrecy, the President at last steps up heroically, if of course with legendary “magnanimity” and “restraint”, to the podium. Telling us in preferred undertaker tones how his “hard working” sleuths and torture-chamber attendants got matters all sown up. And of course too, “now we have them”, we can do whatever we wish, we can issue belligerent statements, and start new wars, far and wide, as the techno-arbitrated bombast and prestige debouching from all this—of course with help from the world-Jewish media, academic and financial communities—will set us permanently at the vanguard of the glorious march forward into the Orwellian new progressive world state.

Here again repeated for duped Americans are the essential outlines of the “assassinate the assassins” tactic/strategy employed in the killing of the Kennedy brothers, in both separate cases. For by such pitiless planning, as students of black ops activities know so well, the hyper-critical trail of living-and-breathing evidence is wiped out, and other associates-in-homicide are likely to be connected thereto only by hearsay or indirection, if and when it all gets to a court of any kind. Hence in parallel fashion what was “assassinated” here—in thus disposing of any possibility of ever questioning the captive—in thus with such abandon consigning his remains “to the waves”—against any standard or convention, against anything intuitive at all—what was assassinated was any chance to answer a host of critical questions that have plagued us all along. Indeed, just as in the handy 1865 killing of “John Wilkes Booth”, found so handily trapped in a burning barn, shot so handily by a trooper who “just got impatient or something”, allowed so handily to burn so that his remains couldn’t be identified in any conclusive way. In staggering parallel fashion, wasn’t it “handy”, too, how our “mistrust” of the Pakistanis made all the haste seem so “appropriate”—at least to some minds—especially as the aircraft of our “allies” was just then lifting off, and we just couldn’t allow these “shifty eyed” bunglers to get involved.

But just as significant to me, and in line with the above, is that mere par-for-the-course electronic evidence is what will be counted upon, instead of the old grubby-but-incontrovertible “hands on” sorts of evidence that used to send people to the chair, or to the firing squad. Indeed, this sort of digital evidence, so we are led to believe, is fast achieving a stature for itself that surpass the testimony of sight or sound, at least before a media audience allegedly transfixed in a credulous, Hitlerian-leader-worship trance. Indeed, in this case, as in growing numbers of others in all “good guy” fields, the captors were also the executioners, although they had forty-five minutes to take their time and sift through a mound of paper and other scraps of evidence, and thus could presumably have spent at least a good deal of that period making sure to catch Osama alive. A Bin Laden who as it is now counter-confirmed did not pull a gun. “Oh what webs we weave when first we practice to deceive”.

But why would we not want to take Bin Laden alive, when we so obviously—by the very accounts that come to us—could have done so. (Will there be another “handy” revision of events?) Surely we would have wanted to question him about his notorious network—here indeed would have been the hotly-argued opportunity to water-board—which we did to a thousand others for a thousand times lesser cause. And secondly: since when have we stopped taking high-profile prisoners—indeed war criminals—to the Hague, for trial before that august tribunal? Was this Bin Laden only a small fry, compared to Milosevic, Mladan or indeed even Saddam Hussein?

No, by their own deeds these our leaders incriminate themselves in the blackest and most foul and treasonous way. We are under alien—that is to say Jewish—occupation—just as has been the fate of so many great nations for the past two thousand years. But I have an answer to this terrible plight, to be mentioned in a line below.

What do we here at the Frankpledge Party and Anti-sodomy Crusade think actually happened in this “great, heroic operation”? Alas, here enters the “fog of war” indeed—of a war against the American people by their own leaders—for as stated above, once the “assassinate the assassins” strategy is put into play, gathering up substantive evidence is almost impossible to do. That which was assassinated here being of course the whole body of reasonably-admissible evidence that we should by all standards of reason and patriotism have carried away. Rather are we left with the usual evidentiary-off-scourings—regarding the adjudication of the most momentous crimes-against-humanity of the past decades since the first Gulf War—highly-modifiable electronic data, together with some easily-forged papers, and perhaps with a few stooges (Mossadists?, Blackwater mercenaries?, black-ops crews of every grizzly kind?) to come forward at last, to claim that “they were there”. “Gone with the wind”—or rather with the waves—being now any reasonable admissible evidence not only as to who they caught and killed—if indeed they caught and killed anyone—but of much-more-staggering importance—evidence about the whole skein of events and purported events since 9/11. Now-forever-irretrievable evidence not only about Bin Laden but also about that whole alleged elaborate global spider-web of spies and soldiers, suicide-bombers and propagandists that we have been told nightly for ten years have been eagerly conspiring about our ears. On Yankee shores and around the globe. (Indeed, just now on CNN Jeremy Scahill of The Nation magazine just told us firmly, sternly, even with respect to this purely-electronic “evidence”—some form of which is all we in the public will of course ever see—that “the most we will get will be a few grainy images”…”it is understandable that these events will have to stay under wraps for a long, long time”.) This later reporter’s phrase seeming indeed to have been the last brainwash curtain-call of this whole elaborate stage-play. Rather in the place of momentarily available mountains of critical—allegedly life-saving—evidence, far beyond films or paper-scraps that can be modified at will—a blank-faced “trust your leaders” is supposed to suffice. (For as always haste was paramount, “we had to run”, and leave it all behind, like a photo-finish scene from Clear and Present Danger. Or otherwise the Pakistanis—terrible thought for such a fearless Superpower to conjure up—might have gotten involved. Maybe these red-button-happy “fanatics” would even have forthwith blown up an atom bomb or something, without any further ado.) Ah, so this is the democratic America for which we die and invade other lands, that we have been taught so to love. To be acclaimed with a few bouts of dancing and beer-drinking out in the street; and a few hoarsely-sung lines of the National Anthem or God Bless America.

9/11 was a cornucopia of many things for this treacherous U.S. leadership, in place since 1963 and partially even before, for after that carefully-staged latter-day cataclysm—or so we are led to believe—it doesn’t really matter how doped-up, dummed-down or sexually-perverted the USA becomes. No matter what, this gloriously martyred land will always in the end have the “right” to march into any nation on earth and lay down the law. At least as long as the likes of the Bushes and Obamas are at the helm: which promises to be for a very long time, if things remain as they are. In all this indeed we have become a powerful global caustic or solvent, eagerly advancing a violent form of “progress” which is Marxist/dialectical to the core. For which victory of Spartan sodomy-warriors of course a great multitude of “eggs must be broken”, all the while we loudly proclaim loyalty to a capitalism which is really only the ideological parent of the latter turbulent Judeo/Leninist cause.

Our foreign policy is shear conquest by catastrophe and profound destabilization in every quadrant of the globe, one in which, as in the case of the present drama of the Middle East, we don’t necessarily even care who wins. For whoever is left standing will be so exhausted, after all the carefully-orchestrated, externally-engineered Hegelian/dialectical strife, as to offer no effective opposition to the Hillary/globalist “blueprint” that will forthwith be imposed. The USA having from the very beginning been the passive instrument of Jewish practical and ideological global dominion, now putting on a marathon media performance in which noted utterly unsubstantiated statements about Bin Laden are repeated without end, amid heroic postures designed to make the next foreign invasion a “shoe in” before an overawed, terrified world. Indeed, as noted in articles below, when you have 100 million Jews, in key positions of power in all fields worldwide, then you really don’t need anyone else, and mankind can be bullied, shouted down or shamed to death at will.

This is a very easy foreign policy, since it assumes an inward attitude that hijacks, runs perfectly counter to, the generous impulses and aspirations of “the rest of men”. All we have to do is to be juvenile enough to convince ourselves of a handful of heroic reasons for doing something, and the rest is easy. In this way allowing ourselves to be propelled, animated, motivated much like a shark, homing in on a host of defenseless prey in the most effortless way, and “feeling good” about it, too. Why, there was even once a popular song that counseled that very policy, a hit with a proper twangy voice and guitar to go along.

It will take more than some Enlightenment era system of checks and balances to save us from the fate that looms ahead, as God takes up the cause of the “widow and the orphan”. After God is through punishing us, as He is doing now, which will take a good bit of time and a great many more lives, this country must turn—openly, solemnly, officially—to the two Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary as the dual refuge of all nations, taking the places as they do of the sinful Adam and Eve as the new parents of mankind. This ”more perfect way” being that of much-maligned Jesuits of early modern times, who built oases of love and prosperity across the Western Hemisphere, among native tribes we would quickly destroy. Thus America need not be a Marxist warrior-kingdom after all.

May 1, 2011: Ideology Trumps all, as gleaming metallic left/right axioms march on parade.

Today we consider the right, as the left is so nefarious as not to merit any consideration at all. But rightwing fallacies are ample enough to keep us busy for years to come. Thus all this “cutting taxes for the rich” is a prime case in point, where those “rich” who presently pay so dearly aren’t really rich at all by any fair comparison, yet are dragged remorselessly over every inheritance-tax and other tax-pothole in the road because of the nature of their income, and not really its size. These small business owners who do get an occasional modest mention on Fox, while the truly rich—they who above all others would benefit from these “don’t tax” enactments—leap in leisurely fashion through every dividend loophole or corporate tax shelter, and pay nothing or almost nothing. But by the time you take a breath to explain such a point, ever-doughty proponents are “gone with the wind”, off on another tirade.

Indeed, the Laffer Curve only worked back in the eighties—if only partially, with not-inconsiderable concurrent costs—because the big boys wanted it to, just then: while now, in sharp contrast, this “cut taxes for the rich” jump-start-factotum only sees them smugly squirreling this money away. But things really gear up to prime form when you get guys like Donald Trump dramatizing some “hard nosed” portrait, “taking the gloves off”, so that pure ideological bombast and profanity suddenly makes even the usual vaporous factual content a weak sister, a contemptuously-regarded “waste of words”.

True, you try to “grow your way” out of a recession—let alone a depression (nasty word)—by encouraging private-sector commerce, industry and so on—but this isn’t going to happen when corporations smugly use dearly purchased tax breaks to passively cushion themselves—self-interest-driven Beckian knights in shining armor that they are—from any future loss. And neither are these breaks going to help out Uncle Sam and his unemployed masses when the same big boys go global with their jobs, stimulated though they so generously be in such tax-cutting ways. Oh, I know, “it will all come back to us through the marvel of the global free-trade, free-enterprise system”, as Obama himself, of all people, assures us, at which words we are to strike our breasts with heartfelt joy. Those exported jobs allegedly arbitrating brightly-mushrooming other jobs, in the purportedly leak-proof supply/demand parity which is said to make it all tick so marvelously well. But in fact we find out way too late that the whole contrivance goes nowhere, it only goes “yaddy-yaddy”, it is all ideology, and in today’s world these are the kinds of cows that never come home.

But Uncle Sam and the globalists do have one bright idea: war. That is what has always rescued Glenn Beck’s ecstatically-espoused capitalist system. For the fact is that the whole supply-and-demand machina breaks down after there is some “historic breakthrough” somewhere, as is presently taking place in China, where David Rockefeller is presently squirreling away much of his money. Since according to Schumpeter there’s only need for so many factories, laboratories, product-delivery systems, colleges or rocket-launching pads: and then men learn again the hard way that it is much easier, healthier and happier—in the ever-looming long-run—to simply make most things by hand. For somehow, I don’t think human blood tallies up very well with commodities prices on these mammoth global scales.

April 30, 2011: “Evidence” against Syria and Iran, as conspiring to kill American G.I.s in Iraq, or Jews in Tel Aviv. All part of a massive deluge of misinformation, especially across the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa, which drives us ceaselessly into ever-newer military and quasi-military entanglements.

Outside the endless incantations and diatribes of the American media, or the ravings of this rabid Professor Fouad Ajami of CNN, sources which are entirely inflammatory, whose sole aim is to provoke war, there isn’t a lot of enlightening material written about these issues. Syria’s Assad has vigorously denied these allegations of treachery against an ally, the USA: claiming quite convincingly that the border between Syria and Iraq is a long and open one, and that their forces couldn’t possibly insure against all incursions, “try as it might” and as it indeed did. The same Syria over which vindictive accusers vociferate in the same breath but over a polar-opposite cause, citing Assad’s brutality in being so eager to help the USA, having reportedly offered torture-chamber services to military-age-youth-abducting U.S. operatives, carrying “political” or “military” prisoners thereto. All these portly thousand-dollar-a-day “experts” who make all these allegations doing so in a droning monotone whose well-practiced accents should be supremely familiar to us all, after these many years since a “make the world safe” invasion of Iraq, already under George I. While Iran, the last I researched the matter, also ceaselessly denies the same basic charges, of military involvement everywhere from Iraq to Palestine to Lebanon, allegedly supplying extensive arms and other major weaponry. Indeed islamonline.net used to routinely rebut these hotly-advanced charges in both cases, before that site—the last I checked it—had completely changed its tone—having become far-less substantive in what it had to say on the geopolitical scene. For as stated in a piece below, it seems increasingly that the entire global media has basically been taken over by a few U.S. conglomerates, or had pressure applied to them in some especially-convincing way, with even news of regional interest being syndicated from sources like the New York Times, in nations along the South Asian straits.

But just consider the eagerness with which Israeli commandoes kill, maim and destroy, as they air-drop themselves heroically into relief ships merely bringing humanitarian aid, in order to realize how little substance there can be to these reports. So that contentions of rockets, guns, land-mines, ammunition, you name it, traveling in a steady stream from Iran or Syria to places like Lebanon, can be seen to be unlikely indeed. Any reasonable approaches to Lebanon—let alone a “terrorist” Hamas—with even so much as a care package—let alone these bulky and unstable war materiel—being highly-problematical, being channeled through gnat-choking Israeli inspection-points and other fiery hoops of the most prohibitive kind. However it is quite an easy matter for the Mossad, the Israeli Black-ops unit, or its look-alikes in forces of England and the USA, to nicely blow things up almost anywhere, in vast regions of military/diplomatic chart blanc, or even gun down some “friendlies, when some “Palestinian bad-guys” are especially required, to make some foreign policy point “perfectly clear”.

Everyone talks about the “stupidity” of our having become abjectly dependent upon Middle Eastern oil—all this entirely since the demise of the Kennedy brothers—but when you begin to grasp the “big picture” involved there isn’t anything stupid about it at all. For we are on a treacherous, alien-interest-benefiting, dual-citizen-led fast-track to global conquest, typically in regions where factual information is almost impossible to get. So instead we have these “career diplomats”, “career mercenaries”, and “career CIA operatives”, grinding out from well-paid positions a rationale which heroically “just doesn’t quit”. Much like the “ironclad case against Ghaddafi”, over which the Libyan Government never really “confessed”, as is so commonly assumed, but basically declared a sort of “no contest” so that it could be released from the deadly strangulation of an ongoing Western blockade.

April 30, 2011: More on managed weather, managed news, managed disasters, “bright vistas for the future” in tornado-stricken lands.

All the ponderous effort of the media/government monolith is now hastily geared toward appearances of various stages of “the aftermath”; alleging that the size of the disaster has been accurately mapped and measured, with skill and dispatch; that there are only some dozen or so now missing, unaccounted for, across the entire tornado-stricken zone. A big collective sigh of relief, as intoned by the undertaker-like Obama, being evinced by all figures of national stature, in the midst of which however the locals aren’t quite as sanguine as all of this. As amid inevitable cries of “we promise to rebuild” there was noised inconspicuously just moments ago the heretical fact that there are actually still hundreds of people missing in Tuscaloosa alone. How many does that imply over the whole region? You can guess as well as I. Maybe an also disaster-team-on-the-ball Katrina gives us a good forecast, where bodies were still being found a couple of years later.

But just as disturbingly, just as vigorously sidestepped, mentioned only in a spotty or fractional way, is the fact, warned-of with a trembling lower lip by the ordinarily staunch Hailey Barbour, that the Mississippi and countless tributaries are starting to go into unprecedented flood-levels, extending way up into Illinois from the state of Mississippi where he spoke. Rivers and creeks destined to cover another ten or more states, to varying degrees, to the North and West.

But all of this yawning bonhomie is only part of the tiringly-familiar spectacle of a U.S. Government and attached corporate, educational and ruling secret-society world constantly assuring us that “everything is well in hand”, that “this war will be the last one”, that “this disaster will be energetically surmounted”, that “the spirit of the people will triumph in the end”. Did they make such hopeful exclamations, I wonder, when God closed up the doors of the Ark against those clamoring outside, watching the flood-waters rise? Did they speak of a “bright new future” when fire and brimstone were rained down on that nation that courted sodomy, and no doubt also abortion-on-demand, so long ago? Just as does the USA today?

Of course, this uniform species of hoveringly-optimistic “we mustn’t let the people get upset” is the newspeak of Orwell’s book, 1984. Such a kindergarten tutelage being the much-hailed “price of progress” that we allegedly must so religiously pay. This is a world in which we are told how we must react, or be considered some sort of security risk; in which any tendency to be serious and reflective is taken as some child-or-adult species of A.D.D., or of "man about to go berserk". But I myself don’t believe that this is the final chapter in the history book of this earth, even of this nation. Read on for details of a biblical “more excellent way”, the “freedom of the children of God”, rather than the mechanical passivity-instincts of an automaton.

April 30, 2011: The Anti-sodomy crusade is primarily a youth-advocacy crusade: hardly are we frowning condemners of today’s young, but rather we are zealous promoters of the ability of every person to lead a natural and normal, pure and holy life.

          Indeed, as stated many times here, we are most deeply afflicted by the manner in which the very best of youth are being entirely destroyed in today’s media- and educator-, government- and corporate-ramroded ambush of the goodness and purity of girls and boys, young women and young men. People with the blush of innocence on their brow, mercilessly led into this miserable moral killing-field, this death of the human personality, this loss of the soul, that today’s all-points onslaught of sodomy-advocacy represents. Indeed, it is the very best, the very cream of the crop, which is targeted most viciously by this New Age breed of calculating fiends: they who rule today’s Democratic Party in an especially complete way. The way toward this hideous defilement of the human person—“made in the image and likeness of God”—having been prepared already a half-century and more ago—in the dark and Hellish confines of torture-camps like Pitesti in Romania, and more recently in sinister places like Abu Ghraib—where phantasmagoric reaches of cruelty and passion were examined in today’s signature clinical, laboratory-like way. Where the human personality was experimented upon to render it vulnerable to every moral disease, in a diabolical official agenda of which today’s advocacy of sodomy and sodomy-marriage must be considered the long-awaited climax, the very epitome.

Across the media, in the droning correctness no-man’s-lands of the schools, this issue is hotly polemicized, and a bottomlessly-deep sort of yin/yang polarity is espoused. But it takes grace to understand what is actually going on; it is no mere weighing of earthly factors that is primarily involved. But it was Freud who set the stage for this terrible ambuscade; this Jew with an undying hatred of the Catholic creed, of its love of goodness and innocence, of its age-old embrace of the infinite uniqueness of the human personality, especially as it is touched, vivified by divine grace. That human nature which the Church has always regarded as basically good: “God looked upon all these things, and saw that they were good”. Indeed, it is the proponents of sodomy who are the real nay-sayers, who have a morbid and sadistic view of human life, personality, sexuality, who see it all in terms of draconian relationships of towering dominion and abject, sniveling, characterless submission.

After this short preamble, I think the rest is much easier to understand: but our media and educator polemicists will never let us get to this point—of “defining the terms of the debate” in a way which accords with the innate dignity of man—with issue-evaluation based such solid standards being decidedly a thing of the past. Nay rather are we debarred from such staid-yet-exalted considerations, pulled back down to the slathering precincts of a giddy moral-back-alley Hell. And one of the prime ways this is accomplished is by erecting an utterly false idea of sexuality, of manhood and womanhood, flouting a Hollywood-dramatized melodrama of polar extremes: of a male who is exploitive, aggressive and brutal, and of a woman who is senseless, a toy of passion. That false sexual cosmos upon which the relationship of sodomites are a further ridiculous parody, and without which male/female misconceptions sodomy would have a great deal less ground upon which to stand. Between which polarities is likewise sandwiched this notion that serious thought or depth-of-conviction “pour cold water on sex”: when in fact the more exalted elements in our humanity make sex much more appealing, while to emphasize the “meat on the hoof” banalities of the body alone is to leave oneself unsatisfied, entirely cold. Even as a further fallacy ceaselessly engendered in today’s take-on-sex is this idea that all feminine worth is to be found in a womanhood which is as impassive as iron, in a woman who veritably has to be forced or cajoled, and in a manhood which similarly treats any woman with utterly merciless contempt and exploitation who shows any genuine kindness or trust, mildness or mercy at all, especially in her dealings with men. Those very qualities however which make her a woman in the first place. So that in this stark and twisted view is found the basic elements not only of modern sodomy-relations but also of that satanic error which has confounded mankind form the beginning of time: namely that Albigensian or Nazi idea—so rampant today—that human mercy and frailty—the very currency of human relations of any kind—are themselves evil. And thus that the passions therein inseparably-woven are base, worthy to be despised. So that in the final stages of this Gnostic barbarity unbending cruelty alone is held worthy of the prize, of a sort of self-exalting ecstasy-of-pleasure of the most infernal kind.

Hence is it from this position of disrespect, of immovable coldness and cruelty, that an array of false ideas about manhood and womanhood, about sexuality, proceed: among which, again, sodomy must take a shameful pride of place. There is always this incredibly bleak and remorseless standard that is put forth, in some way, shape or form—usually changing constantly with the latest sitcom or hit song—a spurious standard which everyone is rigidly required to observe, or at least in some craven way to bow reverently to, if they would go anywhere at all in today’s “success”-obsessed world. The whole monstrous fallacy being thus left largely undefined, limited to quasi-absolutes—of “machismo”, or of coarse feline feminine appeal—actually material of the most stiff and lifeless kind. A monstrous existence which readily despairs into sodomy at every turn. Passion when thus uncoupled from virtue, from will and character, connoting not really life but mostly inhuman passivity, being readily twisted into the most vicious or perverted forms. For here Satan really does have his biggest day. This while a whole host of ponderous “studies of sexuality” are ceaselessly announced by towering, condescending “experts” who vigorously keep the pot stirred. Unanimously anti-life forces with power in high places, who advocate sodomy as the “up and coming thing”.

Thus desperately needed today is the reinstitution of the moral standards of old, the fashioning of laws and behavior norms, of decent speech and music, of modesty-of-dress—in schools in particular, but in all public places—after that law of God which is the only truly free and impartial standard we have. A good law not imperially engineered by some towering elite over “the rest of men”. While by contrast passion once thus publicly stampeded—rather than virtuously shepherded—becomes entirely irrational, hard, brutal, diabolical, to the utter destruction of both the state and the marvelous promise of youth. Over whose sexuality each is his own indisputable measure: not to be held to some trivial standard of those who would display something essentially sacred in a contradictorily-public way, for all to see. That youth which comes to full flower—not as some brute animal out in some pasture—hardly after the shallow fashions of “machismo” and feminine seduction—but rather in the exercise of a multi-faceted virtuous life which plays like sunlight upon the uniqueness of each individual person, of each heart, mind and soul, bringing the needs and powers of the body up virtuously behind: admittedly not without a good deal of penitential effort being required. Human personalities which can only be heterosexual, and any deviation from which will be punished by God in this life and the next.

It is this, then, which the National Anti-sodomy Crusade boldly bears aloft. For love of God and country, and of our youth, and not at all for their condemnation. And furthermore, we can hardly rightly hold as enemies those Muslims who have an especially well-developed, tradition-loving sense of sexual purity, heterosexual vitality, modesty of dress and comportment, and so on, all the while the pundits, educators and foreign-policy-setters of the West shoot off into the stratosphere of “progressive”  pan-sexual ideas. Promoting a bizarre, perverse and promiscuous hardcore-porn worldview which is utterly destructive of the soul, the human personality, of sexuality itself, as examined above. Indeed, I a Catholic can only think of as brothers and sisters those sincere Muslims who so typically uphold the moral law written on the tablets of the human heart and soul, they who so commonly treat with reverence the human body, the interior personal life of the soul. And even if I differ with them on certain specifics, yet I vigorously support them in their desire to have societies formed after the pattern of the divine law. Hence it is these embattled, persecuted people who are the real friends of all good and upright Americans, all the while Western governments oppose them in this good and innocent wish, over which we can hardly legitimately pose as inspectors, from the outside looking in, seeking to impose upon them by force of arms today’s sexually-perverse radically-secular idea of the state. Indeed, can we be surprised that Muslims attempt aggressively to counter-attack by spreading Islam far and wide, in a demoralized Western world? No doubt saying to themselves, “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander?” They whom we betray to the venal ambitions of a paganistic State of Israel, in finding excuses to send thither our drone-bombs and armies, and in a thousand other ways.

April 28, 2011: Hear the word of God and obey, Obama: “Let my people go”. Government info-managers back to work amid staggering scenes of divine wrath.

Taking on all the unapproachable tones of divinity, FEMA directors rope-off massive areas of towns devastated by the wrath of God; by which means they would diminish our appreciation of the magnitude of His towering rage. His anger against our sodomy-society, our obsession with magic as in the Harry Potter films and several other such forays into diabolism: that which must be considered a chief source of this plague of sadism, perversion and effeminacy which now grips the land. This while the crypto-Nazis of the interconnected Bush/Obama administrations carry on their tight-lipped program of global conquest and sodomization: the very innermost yin/yang of Satan’s rule. In an Obama USA which absolutely worships science, technology, mathematics, ever-smaller hand-held electronic devices become so many talismans for fevered idolatrous minds. Even as other better men, under the guidance of a good God, prepare an infinitely better system based on real and positive skills, not giddy digital or mathematical wizardry. Better skills which keep wealth in the hands of the people, not electronically ferreted off to speculative hoards of the few.

But returning to the scenes of horror: the government mummery-experts will no doubt once again tell us only a fraction of the actual number of the dead, as at Katrina, for under their arrogant view we are, in standard Talmudic fashion, considered “less than human”, while Obama and his crew wish above all things to hide the extent of the divine wrath. As if such a thing can be hidden, when God chooses to have it all out. Oh, Obama, He will tear your little playhouse down like an oat-sack; He will pluck you out of the White House like a maggot out of a piece of fruit. Your lies will no longer prevail.

But for now the people are held back, presumably even from helping to uncover missing relatives and friends. Just as in other major disasters, where the U.S. Government kept others from landing portable field hospitals and toilets, from air-dropping thousands of pallets of drinking water. Oh, no, it must all be done “in column and line”, with Obama like a drill-major, twirling his effeminate baton, demonstrating to all the world how miserable will be the fate of those who “don’t go along”, who “don’t measure up”. To the “American Dream”. While this is likewise the fate of a nation which once goes down the winding road of privatization: where all things, even human life in dire emergencies, are tallied up as profit-versus-loss, vitiating mortally that devotion to the common good which defines the genuine state, and against which we have a ruling elite class which has turned traitor to the core. Judases who bring in their train thousands of "cyber-security" operatives, veritable web-termites to spy on and deceive—as with carefully-doctored false news, delivered on fantastically-doctored front-pages of major news outlets—so as to make the courageous "blogger", in commentaries to follow, look like a madman or a fool. In cowardly assaults that are a well documented testimony to the utter perfidy of this finance-and-technology-based synagogue onslaught. As the digital world is one in which anything visible or audible can be falsified, after having been atomized into millions or billions of "bits", and thereafter readily refashioned, rendered something entirely different than it was. As we learn more and more what it is to live under those biblical paragons who consider themselves “not like the rest of men”, and as FEMA officials minimize it all scornfully, asking us why we are so surprised at this “tornado event”, telling us dismissively “it’s only Springtime, that’s all”.

No doubt Obama has Blackwater mercenaries just now keeping people out of the worst-hit areas, again, as at Katrina: as this is a Frankenstein who will not relinquish the tiniest particle of totalitarianism left to him by G.W. Bush. Spending huge sums, expecting to borrow even more. And indeed when you control the entire globe, and all its media, and cow all its nations into trembling submission, then you expect to be able to neatly pull off such an evil scheme.

But the game is up now, Washington traitor crew. Watch as more storms come, and other catastrophes, and dig you out like so many rats in the ground, or worms in a piece of rotten wood. And then surely you, or those who survive you, will let my people go.

April 27, 2011: God warns Pharaoh Obama’s aggressive-war, domestic-tyranny machine: “Let my people go.” Counter-terrorism: the biblical fear of shadows, of a noise in the night, the “fear where there is no fear” of the guilty state.

Why don’t we try doing good things to other people and nations for a change, instead of perpetually siding with a mostly-pagan Israel against the defenseless Palestinians, and mounting self-righteous program of regime change against a host of others across South Asia and the Middle East? While likewise carrying forth robber-baron forms of resource-rape, as in trade-dealings with Latin America, wherever it suits our fancy? While hardly do we imitate a good God in these dealings, giving third-world allies “a serpent instead of a fish”, in the peddling of perverse and effeminate lifestyles around the globe. Indeed, the bully is always afraid, and credits others with having the same sorts of unwholesome or aggressive motivation as himself, and so is always thinking of new ways to criminalize others; or terror-stricken, to “defend himself”.

But God is now joining “the terrorists” to “terrorize” Uncle Sam. Just look at the fires, the floods, the tornadoes, the strange new crimes and disasters that shock us each day on the news. Would you be so foolish, my friend in the striped pants, as to mount some sort of “Patriot Act” legislation, or some kind of defensive weaponry, against the Almighty? Or maybe, Lucifer-style, make some hare-brained attempt at regime change among the Heavenly Choirs?

April 26, 2011: “Surely now you will let my people go.”

Obama has a sort of pyramid-building Egyptian agenda he pursues, having been named president by the many-tentacled, secretive cabal that rules this land, after which any effective opponents at any level have either stepped aside, like McCain, have been overwhelmed, “pecked to death” by the ceaseless effeminate heckling of a bought-and-sold media, or, as a last resort, have been cheated out of fair elections through the dead certainties of fraudulent electronic voting machines. Hence is this tyrant as firmly in place as any Pharaoh ever was, as he pushes through a gamut of blank-faced fiats, largely through exploiting or expanding various states of emergency: these having indeed been carefully fulminated, over decades, precisely in order to pour-in-concrete his coming onerous regime. Just consider the way he now pre-institutionalizes Obama-care, at an expense no doubt ultimately to approach another trillion dollars nationwide—even though it might all have to be abandoned in a year or two—and this at a time of impending financial collapse. While he likewise patiently nurses along another staggeringly-expensive war, this time easily extending over the entire Middle East—perhaps even to culminate in Armageddon itself—and the Master Plan becomes transparently clear. Indeed mocking us arrogantly from behind a thin and gauzy veil. While finally his media minions can claim that any determined opposition to his tyranny is “racist” in nature: enlisting that reverse-psychological, trivia-catering advantage which his skin-color gives him, and which indeed forms much of the reason he was thus chosen in the first place.

We do God an especially grave disservice when we listen to the captivating speeches or statements of this throw-back to ancient-pagan times, as most of the power of these diabolical figures is in a sort of spellbinding spiritism, a sort of hypnosis, after the fashion of that Adolph Hitler, and those two Bush presidents, all of whom came to us via the satanic Skull and Bones (or Thule Society, the “Brotherhood of Death”, in Europe). Although unlike these forerunners, Obama’s occult persuasions are less to be found in burning eyes than in a fluid body language and a diction that drones and soothes like that of a shaman, rising and falling like some dirge or plaintive moan. And although the hyper-secretive Obama gives us few clews as to the cult-related origins of his peculiar version of diabolism, it is every bit as potent as that of his likewise-bloody-handed forebears. Beware then, fellow Americans, and “touch not the unclean thing”.

In view of the above, just as the ancient Israelites—the shadowy prefigurement of the (genuine, Tradition-observing) Catholic Church—desperately needed and longed-for “the Deliverer”, Moses, so do we languish in the absence of an equivalent today. A political system by itself, especially the frustration-prone one we have, can do absolutely nothing against such strategically-mobilized satanic might, wielding over our heads a citizen-spying, militaristic technology undoubtedly akin to that of the Egypt of ancient times. And we are indeed fools to imagine that it could. Hence even as we await this Deliverer for our own very times, predicted repeatedly in Catholic prophesy, discernible in the very lines of the Bible itself, we take it upon ourselves to predict, as we did already just before Katrina—among massive punishments we augured after the cruel thirst-and-starvation death of Terry Schiavo—warning just recently, much as did Moses of old, of the successive scourges being inflicted upon the USA. In tornado, fire, flood, earthquake, weird and unnatural events. Emergencies indeed, such as the traitor Obama most requires, but of such a sort and degree as he doesn’t at all have in mind. Scourges inflicted upon this land which has turned away from worshipping God in any serious way, and has devoted itself instead—much like the Israelites under Dathan and Core—to abjectly worshipping and fawning-over this Obama, this golden calf, this unnatural fiend, this sodomy-priesthood Aztec Quetzaquitl of these our “enlightened and progressive” times.

But God will finally prevail, and Obama and his minions will be forced to meekly obey.

April 26, 2011: The “social-conservative nut-case”, the laboriously-erected symbol of backwardness, who today must stand alone against Patriot-Act-empowered aggressive-warriors, super-correct sodomites, and the all-powerful media and Administration allies of both. The creation of artificial hype and artificial issues, to mental and morally exhaust the people, in this way increasingly, if willy-nilly, bringing them under a totalitarian scheme.

As noted several times in articles below, in the media-jaded public perception the level of depravity required for this sort of regimen-of-evil, aiming at a sort of diabolical possession of the human mind, of the polity, and thus the likelihood that it will ever actually occur in the real world, borders on fantasy: and it is precisely because of this sense-of-the-unlikely, indeed of the preposterous, that such treacheries are so deliriously prized by controlling U.S. elites since the gunning-down of the Kennedys so many decades ago. A perception magnified many times in eloquent assurances-of-public-goodwill, coaxed along as John Q. is by an ever-shepherding media, education, and increasingly maternal and hovering corporate/professional milieu. But the “devil in the details” in this particular case is perhaps best explained when we realize that all the tyrannies of history have nurtured some such suspension-of-judgment, tending overwhelmingly, and with a suffocating, overbearing solicitude, to “lay all our doubts and concerns to rest”. As some White House press secretary might indeed phrase it, in the now-favored padded-cell, “killing me softly”, Rose-Garden patois. All of which only goes to confirm that there really is a devil and a Hell, and that the U.S. Government has appointed itself a sort of gatekeeper—or prison-guard, if you will—for same. Hence it is the very preposterous quality of the schemes we must endure that makes them all the more effective, as any exposure of them instantly brands the intrepid investigator involved, you guessed it, as a "conspiracy theorist" of the nth degree.

The problem is that when nations become over-centralized and top-heavy the opportunity for tangled schemes of control becomes endemic, and you quickly end up with something like Tsarist or Stalinist Russia, with its Okarana or its KGB, with tyranny’s fabled, centuries-old networks of spies, informants and protégés. While by contrast good government can exist in extremely sophisticated forms but it always sedulously observes the cardinal rule of distributism: that the smallest possible unit must be conceded the greatest possible agency over the largest practicable purview it might command. This configuration alone puts power and authority on a short leash, in the hands of those closest-at-hand, of we ourselves and of people we familiarly know, and especially the common man. While in this way keeping policy-concerns of the sort and at the level that serve him best, eschewing lofty realms of military conquest, or citizen-monitoring technology, or fringe-elite-catering social engineering schemes. Projects such as the modern superstate so single-mindedly and indeed fanatically pursues.

Hence there is indeed a powerful body of men busily employed by today’s global/corporate super-state: yes-men who run a gamut from Glenn Beck to Blackwater to the grizzly Mossad/SAS/CIA regime-change crew. People who positively thrive amid extremes of confusion and financial meltdown—devilishly inhabiting shadowy regions of the human mind, of the popular will—in their grim and counterintuitive way facilitating “sad but necessary” foreign-policy involvements of every shape and size. They whose grizzly work is celebrated in a hundred best-selling spy or black-ops novels, typically-enough written by ex-operatives of the most certifiable type, men with long-time hands-on experience in vile, deceptive and treacherous deeds whose real time recognition nonetheless and invariably finds you branded, again, as a "conspiracy theorist" unworthy of either respect or belief. Ergo, the noted black-ops crew who from hidden perches regularly gun down skillfully agitated protestors in every nation upon which the noted superstate cast a covetous eye, an Anglo-Israeli monolith which then of course duly blames the “government sniper”-inflicted bloodshed upon some Assad or Ghaddafi, Mubarek or Hussein. All the while men like Beck “stir the pot” from exalted media heights, making sure the same cloud of confusion reigns in the ever-courted American-public mind, shouting especially hoarsely in proclaiming the absolute rectitude of Israel vis-à-vis the grindingly-oppressed, genocidally-decimated Palestinians. As well as advocating the remorseless pursuit of regime change—as for instance in Sudan—wherever Anglo/Israeli interest may thereby most be served—all the while pretending to be against the whole idea, in any other place. Beck being one of those characters who tell you about 80% of the truth, who really do say some good things in a stirring way: tumultuous figures who are however the most important con-artists of all in this mammoth con-artist’s dream. People whose very simple commission is to take charge, to provide a highly-impressive leadership to a popular opposition which they actually hate and despise. So that they might ultimately grind it under their elite-catering heels, making eager, hyperventilating followers into fools, buffoons.

Beck says just enough about religion to give it a black eye, to associate Christianity with his mean-minded and hysterical rants: for it is absolutely essential to the ascendancy of pro-sodomy social-liberal crackpots like Obama, Nazis of a New Age whom Beck actually and obligingly serves, that the sane and self-possessed image of the social (read here moral) conservative be utterly annihilated in the public eye. Again: who can be thought of as being so incredibly sinister as to come up with such a devilishly-insidious agenda? But there are indeed devils in Hell, and crowded about the human mind, and it is precisely along such tortuous inner byways that the spiritual traveler is waylaid, morally-defiled: by trends, events and people that seem impossibly counterintuitive, conspiratorial, prompting the reaction, "what will people say, if I voice such an outlandish concern?" All the while down deep we know there is nothing outlandish about it at all. For man-as-man is not simply flesh, but “spirit and life”, or he is not really man at all. Hence have such once-well-regarded persons, these social-conservatives, been destined to be transmutated into this image of maniacally-suspicious or raving and infantile fools—and this with disastrous consequences for the public good—upright men who conspicuously thrived during the mid-twentieth century.

Indeed, true conservatives were to find one of their first genuinely honest prototypes—in stark distinction from the weasel Beck—in an Admiral Forrestal who first saw the dark shadow of U.S. totalitarianism spreading across a crypto-confidential U.S. Government landscape: this from a vantage-point of the most commanding view. For which reason this rising star in the U.S. Navy of the early fifties was suddenly and unaccountably found to be “suffering from a nervous breakdown”: after which he was forthwith confined to Bethesda, and some day or so later found dead, in the most gory sort of way. This veritable rock of mental stability having allegedly “jumped from his sixth-floor window”, still clad in his straitjacket. The only problem being that the window was considerably higher from the hospital-room floor than he was tall, so that he could hardly have gotten up there, unlocked the window, and jumped, in his straightjacket, unless he had sprouted wings.

Then there was Joseph McCarthy, an eminently reasonable and practical-minded man from Wisconsin, a valiant defender of traditional Christian values, who in the middle of his Sub-Committee on Un-American Activities hearings suddenly began to make statements of the most hysterical and unwarranted kind. We of today can recognize such symptoms as those of someone who has been surreptitiously treated to mega-doses of behavior-modifying drugs: but to the gullible people of the ‘fifties, fresh from the shock of the Forrestal “suicide”, the tale began to be believable that “social conservatism” might well make you vulnerable to any number of mental diseases at every turn. While to “take the cake” in all such matters would be the soon-to-come anti-council, Vatican II, which—albeit in the rambling, devious language of the crypto-Jew—would basically take up this same cant against good and pious Catholic souls, such as Joseph McCarthy himself indeed was. Interestingly, too, McCarthy wouldn’t live that long afterward “to talk about it”, like a great many pious priests just after Vatican II: one of whom was a certain stigmatist in Chicago, to whom I myself once spoke. While of a similar character, and short life, was a certain Brother Joachim I also once knew, the very lynchpin of my own spiritual life back in my early youth, a Trappist lay-brother who died in the most sudden and mysterious way, in the hospital, as I remember, ostensibly from some rather routine cause. The native-Irishman, moments before being discovered dead, having last been seen by the staff and visitors smiling and kidding in his usual, angelic way (that good spirit which I was to find a year or so later was quite common on the Emerald Isle). While others too, in entertainment and other walks-of-life, others of the same general high-profile “social-conservative nutcase” kind, were to meet their demise rather young, sometime in the late-1960s or early-1970s.

It isn’t that we “social conservative nut cases” are averse to trust and goodwill—that we wish to go around coiled up like a snake or a spring—you need only have known the angelic Brother Joachim to know this isn’t at all the case: rather do we grasp that the social or moral liberal, wittingly or not, would completely banish any good and trusting spirit from the earth. Purveyors among whom morbidity reigns supreme, plying a fanatical over-solicitude, impugning a spirit which “lives not by bread alone, but by every word that cometh forth from the mouth (or moral law) of God”. Strangers to a good and exalted spirit upon which law must be based if it is to be law at all. And neither are we “social conservative nut cases” at all averse to freedom: since obviously-enough to pursue legislation and court-decisions which, under the full weight of “the law”, would ramrod the unreserved “acceptance” of every conceivable lifestyle—making the most bizarre, tentative and questionable innovations as publicly honored as those which come out of the customs, traditions and heartfelt beliefs of the people—this is to forcibly produce a nation without any character at all, being driven before the wind like a straw. (Alas, to some fools, that's precisely what freedom is.) And there are indeed certain things which once thus amply accommodated will infallibly bring about this deadly, caustic result: that which l contend is very obviously the desire of those who lead us now. A result for the sake of which these moral-revolutionaries—utterly unfamiliar with the scruples of the just—are willing to “crack a few eggs”, even indeed to make martyrs for the very cause they so eagerly espouse. For theater is what they are most undyingly after, and it is at all costs what they will remorselessly bring into being. Again, with the very preposterousness of  the whole remorseless idea being its chief source of iron-hearted dependability.

But it is much easier, after all, to invent your own social conservative crackpots, interlopers like Beck and several others who are actually cold-blooded Orwellian loyalists to the core: since genuinely good and moral men with conservative—or in other words sensitiveconsciences are much too unpredictable, being after all free men in the deepest and most indomitable way. And their brutal and perfidious demise always leaves a foul taste somewhere in the public palate. Thus does Beck provide the perfect photogenic nut-case, raving over financial woes which he details correctly about 80% of the way, but then drives the bus into the ditch with incredible claims which his statistical charts and graphs are somehow twisted to support. Or foams-at-the-mouth about an Israel whose ever-threadbare defense must be invented in a lot of false religion and false scholarship, over which “the G-man” glosses in the loudest, hastiest and most sanctimonious way.

No, the way of the good is simple, honest, kind; and the way of a good economy is much the same. These are men and economies without tumult, whose “yeh is yeh and nay is nay”, who don’t need to shout at you or insult you—even with myopically-construed graphs and statistics—to get their point across. That’s how you tell the difference between a real social conservative and a Glenn Beck.

Now of course it has gotten to the point that all this blush-and-bother about “nut cases” is a chief pillar upon which American society is raised, forming a disturbing preoccupation which will bring it all crashing down someday, if given the chance. This “correctness” being something of which almost everyone is paranoically aware, and if you’re not a kind of hyper-correct, morally-indifferent social-baboon, then you’re in for a rough ride indeed. Whether you’re at school, applying for a job, or walking into a dentist’s office for the first time, there is a whole gamut of things you must say and do—not just some plainly-reprehensible few you must negatively refrain from saying or doing—that which was the old-and-free, non-totalitarian standard-of-old—if you are to be considered normal, or even sane. Here the Bush/Obama “national emergency”-driven profiling comes into special prominence, as more and more self-important bores—including the one who fondled the little girl in the airport security-line—are suddenly lavished with impressive new powers. For the new breed, taking over more and more by the day—shunning the old personally-unique, often-polished, always basically-virtuous manner of the “social-conservative nut cases”—are utterly unlike King David in the psalm. They don’t at all “walk in their integrity”, which to social-liberals is to walk in a “stiff and inhibited” way. Nor indeed do their “feet stand in the right path”, nor yet do they beg God to “gather not my soul with men of iniquity, nor my life with men of blood”. This new breed—of the “correct”—rather heartily welcome such dark influences, as their mutually-identical, “let it all hang out”, cookie-cutter gait and manner so profoundly portray. All of which is held to be “well worth it”, what with the new-model cars, the ever-smaller and more-prestigious kinds of I-pads which these new success-hyped supermen possess. Ah, what you have given away, America, for these trinkets and trivialities, like seventeenth-century East-coast Indians giving away Manhattan for some strings of beads. Was it your own very soul with which you parted in this way? Of course, to men like Beck and Obama—undying allies in the end—this is all progress and “the American way”.

April 25, 2011: Bluebeard talks himself into another war.

You know that’s what he’s actually doing, when you see the “old salt” stumbling down the boardwalk along the dock, far from his old haunts, mumbling to himself incoherently, arousing the ire of his fellow-pirates with a new-found lack of the old blood-curdling determination that used to set him so apart. Cleaning out the merchant vessels of a whole hemisphere at-a-time, as was his wont, sending crew and passengers alike, without a blink of a sea-weathered face, to “walk the plank”, downing a flagon of the brew in one gulp, in immense satisfaction, when it was all done. That’s the old Bluebeard: where has he gone?

But “not to worry”, for when you see all this, know ye that the old species of fish-bait, due to some “entirely unfair” criticism of his “entirely blameless” methods, has gone to talking himself into each new global involvement. After all, a duly-privatized privateer—not really a pirate at all—cannot afford to be thus slandered—must present appearances of humanity, benevolence, forward-looking zeal. But it is a hard new change, understandably enough, for the old mariner: all this business of finding new—indeed “noble and humane”—excuses for “defense” procurements of ever-greater size. Hence the specter of this peg-legged paragon, just now personified in John McCain, arguing with himself as he ambles down the alien stretch of dock.

Rest assured, then, have no fear, for as all his old buddies know—veterans of booty-hauls of decades—the long, rambling monologues of the old white-haired ex-hippy have one unerring objective in mind: regime change. After all, isn’t that what all the new ring-eared messianism is all about? But this time he has to “do it proper”, to have his human wave, his hoarse-throated “coalition of the willing”, out there in front, this time. Where every self-respecting new Genghis Khan would have them, shouting shrill invectives, fearful of losing any of the Bluebeard’s components-contracts, or his gluttonous demand-pull trade.

”After all”, to quote the scurvy pirates, bunched up nervous and owl-eyed out on the windy dock, “nobody wants to end up like Saddam, or Moamar, now do they?”

April 24, 2011: Now all the wonderful “Libyan freedom-fighters” are raping little Libyan children in refugee camps. Seer-predicted Three days of darkness, so soon to come, will put an end to U.S.-sponsored terrorism and perversion around the globe.

These “valiant Libyan rebels” sound remarkably like the ilk we have been cultivating here for decades: at home, hoards of “liberated and advanced ones” taking the places of “religious fanatics” of the old Leave It to Beaver crowd. Around the globe, a close-cousin crew set in place by the CIA and the Mossad to “topple repressive governments”. All the tight-lipped, hip-booted Johnson-through-Obama heroism steadily ratcheting up ever since the Kennedy assassinations, starting with “free love” under the bushes of the college admin building in ’64, in the ‘70s hatching “streakers”, in the ‘90s sodomites like toadstools in a morning sun. Manifestly, these so-called Libyan “deliverers” are a crew eminently worthy of such a “make the world safe” global Bluebeard: being admirably suited to sail gleefully on the corsair of the biggest butcher and pervert the world has ever known.

The USA will very soon be stopped short in its campy, King-Kong world of playing God, whether in its ceaseless black-ops-engineering of aggressive wars, it highly-imaginative “creating new life from off-the-shelf DNA”, its butchery in the womb, or upon the human embryo, or in its chemical/biological warfare upon the domestic population. This latter as carried out in countless instances, as for example when our own Atomic Energy Commission, sixty-some years ago, first hushed up the disastrous effects on brain and other tissues of fluoride (a major element in the manufacture of A-bombs): with towering cynicism joining DuPont, the major A-bomb manufacturer, to opt to promote the lethal chemical as “good for your teeth”. Since hardly could a better criminal-damages-defense be devised by an ever “making the world safe” Uncle Sam than to hail fluoride as a “great discovery for the health of humankind”. A gigantic con testified today in countless tooth-enamel—and “new and disturbing” brain-tissue—anomalies which continue to appear by the day.

As we have warned so many times here, watch the night sky for new comets, Uncle Sam. And watch the tornadoes tear your cities into smithereens. I won’t ask you to pray any longer, with anything like a humble and sincere heart: since to do so seems only to harden your heart all the more.

April 29, 2011: Today’s faithful are like so many road-kills, brutally-if-efficiently flattened by a powerful minority in command in both church and state, trying somehow to piece together their demise, to pull themselves up from the pavement.

This same general thing has happened repeatedly throughout Western history, which only goes to show that God isn’t with these powerful interlopers, and they ultimately never prevail; but they can make a lot of trouble and cause a lot of pain. Indeed, they provide a central feature in the salvation drama which is this life; that “scandal must needs enter into the world, but woe to him by which it comes”. But ironically the good have as it were an inbuilt weakness—detailed throughout tradition spiritual writings—a quality which is inseparable from their very rectitude itself: for they may as well have come from another planet when it comes to dealing with their crafty opponents, the biblical “sleek and the strong”. For all the while the wicked and cynical are laying snares for the just, these latter are looking unconcernedly up at the sky, “waiting for the clouds to part”, as they indeed often do, in a certain very real way. For the way of supernatural life—the only one that gains us entry into Heaven—cannot by its very nature become consumed by “the cares of this world”, which is by contrast the very medium in which the wicked live and breath, the fevered atmosphere in which they lay their grizzly traps. Those consuming preoccupations which in the Gospels are compared to weeds which choke the good seed. How, then, you might well ask, can the good possibly prevail, if the wicked maintain this deadly advantage over them? Especially in times like these, when the very Church itself has in many practical ways been entirely overcome?

Alas, this is a school in which saints are made, or souls are damned, and it seems there is little room for any middling or mediocre souls in between, in such times as these. But in order to prevail, we must depend upon two things: first upon God Himself, Who allows us to be tested but never abandons us; and second, upon the Body of the Faithful, the Church, if now however only to the extent we can reproduce its basically-absent outlines in our own homes, and among those we know. We must picture, harbor-inwardly, anticipate, as it were, once-familiar outlines of a sanctimoniously-abolished Christian neighborhood and state—we must spread abroad, disseminate—as if to cast a large conceptual net—the memory, “that which was passed down to you”, that within which alone is found the Christian Faith—of what it is to have good and Christian laws and customs. We must stand out like a lighthouse by the sea, indicting those nations which rigidly separate church from state, charging them with giving their citizens “a serpent instead of a fish”, “a stone instead of a loaf”. Abandoning the good soul, forcing it to face wicked forces—which the state is uniquely equipped to oppose—entirely, miserably alone. The state in upholding the law being by nature the inseparable partner of the church in upholding moral goodness as well, or it isn’t upholding the law at all. Since the state after all isn’t some sort of glass menagerie where every weird lifestyle is given fantastic form, for men in some hypnotic condition to foolishly admire—and every twisted, benighted moral-system given “equal time”—to work its deadly sorcery upon our young—the state is rather designed to be a nursery of goodness, virtue. And the genuine concord, prosperity and ruddy health that these bring. Preparatory to a life in Heaven “which hath no end”. There can be no other state, and anything other than this—which so pretends to be a polity—is nothing but a band of pirates, extorting a tyranny which would banish all good and wholesome things from among the sons and daughters of men.

No, there is no “equal time” for Baal or the Brotherhood of Death; for God and good, here we stand, and are ready to die, or suffer what hideous miseries our enemies might indeed have in mind.

But when the enemy, as today, has charge of the public narrative, then this need to spread abroad this net, to laboriously rebuild these footings for this new kingdom of God—now of necessity after the very blueprint of the eleventh-through-thirteenth century Age of Faith—is infinitely harder to achieve. Yet “with God all things are possible”, and we must try. Hence, the appearance to some, that we “box with the air”, since our Catholic clergy and would-be Catholic leaders have left us entirely unaided in these momentous, comprehensive, interminable struggles, have rather become our most treacherous critics, our remorseless and crafty, mocking and patronizing foes. They who have such a heart as would put their own mother through the most exacting inspection, would subject her to the heartless mockery of the passing crowd. They who have turned a dour and cynical eye upon “that which was passed down to you”, have aroused a whole host of false issues, of right and left, spawning debates which would make our handed-down convictions laughably “irrelevant”. That one word which formed the very battle-cry of the revolutionaries who took over the Catholic Church at Vatican II. They who still control it as firmly as ever, although the reigns of power have been turned over to those co-conspirators who are less outwardly fanatical and more inwardly so. Those Pharisees of selfishness, elitism, who would make the Catholic Church a country club for the wealthy, aggressive-warrior few. But this Caesaro-papism, this Judaized Catholicism, has all been seen before—was decried repeatedly in the Sacred Page—and it will go down soon in ignominy just as surely as in ages past.

So we here at this site continue in this unaided task, constructing the above-noted gossamer conceptual fabric, in the form of a sense of what is to come, some of which is found here written down, other further-developed elements of which we prepare even now. For such a Heavenly kingdom as this deserves such obscure, heartfelt labors, if even our unworthy enemies would expend so much energy in the pursuit of things so perverse and repulsive, base and profane.

April 21, 2011: Donald Trump, the most logical next choice of the bipartisan robber-baron king-makers who rule this land, as a self-incurred U.S. debt day-of-reckoning approaches, and military conquest is invoked to gobble up creditors and foreign-nation resources alike. The very Napoleonic sequence predicted here on this site since it first appeared in 2003. A short look at the ugly spectacle in depth.

The only thing is, Donald, that the game is up on this sort of “Wild West”, kill the Indians and take their land, “bright idea”: God will not have it anymore. Appeal to a desperate, quick-fix-addicted American electorate all you want, with your lead-pipe agenda and vocabulary: this King Kong vision of the USA will be stopped dead in its tracks. And the mild and pacific sociopolitical reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ will finally, at long last, take its place. Read on, Donald, for an apprenticeship worth having.

Furthermore, to fellow Americans I say, gather in your ten head of household Frankpledge groups and build a new and real nation from there: rejecting with contempt this barbaric monstrosity which we have increasingly become, as good men should that of some new Hannibal or Genghis Khan. A world-conquering machine headed by fiends like Trump, Obama, the Bush family, the Clintons, the whole sodomy-advocacy camp, that so imperially rule today. Herein being found the elitist purveyors of a global aggression not indeed seen since the Mongolian invasion of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, that tide-of-blood which at least had a note of honesty to it, as the fearful Mongol averred without a blink that he was nothing less than the “punishing hand of God”. While it is left to our “democratic leaders”, like the very Gospel “father of lies”, to invent the most elaborate tales against every vulnerable nation on earth: believed by a people with a twisted, heretical view of human life. For instance standing by while the Hague drags a General Gotovina of Croatia away to an imprisonment destined to consume the rest of his days, a hero we set up, arming his troops “to the teeth” for that very defensive drive, after five years of a blockade that prevented Croats from taking up self-defensive arms. Defensive war being the only kind we interdict or oppose, while having a “profile” for every non-North-Atlantic nation, a template-of-treachery bursting with quick excuses to “put boots on the ground”, or drones in the air, whenever desired.

I say again: there is no other aggressor today on the globe, since it is we and our Anglo-Israeli interlopers who touch off every brushfire war, fanned into flames, exploited in all quadrants toward the ultimate goal: the collapse of all local resistance against a faithless, Godless, full-body-imaging, Orwellian 1984.

Thus too Sudan, Libya and Chad nearby, Somalia, Syria, Iran: we have a little fictional narrative we have developed over decades—a neatly-convenient “Hariri assassination”, “a million rapes” in Sudan, an especially well-acted-out one in Libya: a little campy and threadbare, that time, for want of more time. Then too the “cluster bombs”, down the throats of cable-network cameras, while the world looks on. (“Now we are forced to send in the village-decimating drones”.) Black-ops butchers meanwhile making it all look both real and surreal. In what I will uncover til my last breath as the Judeo/American global-conquest-narrative, in bloody real time, whose sole unwavering purpose is the global destruction of morality and faith of any kind. As we see taking place in the USA as I write, after John and Robert met their martyred demise. Turning the world into a slaughterhouse, and what is left of it after that into a Nazi, racist, sodomite, anti-life Hell.

Only look, AIPAC-America, look at Bush-Texas burning. Aha, bold heroes. Look as the twisters plow up your cities from coast to coast, the flood-waters destroy what is left. Sic semper tyrannis, McCain, Obama, Jeb Bush, bringing up the rear. It will all burn.

The problem both for the U.S./Anglo/Israeli superpower and the “rest of men”, that which makes the one so vulnerable and the other so sick, is that what is being introduced is a new take on humanity, a sort of cancer, which incubates rapidly, which overpowers surrounding human tissue of nations and neighborhoods, yet which is utterly incapable of sustaining itself without more tissue to devour. An Ayn-Randian mortal storm spawning ever-newer diseases of heart, soul and mind. In a word, it is satanic, unnatural, that men should seek thus radically to depart from the loving and cooperative nature of man, given us by a good God. Calling this abominable serpentine progression “progress”, forsaking our ancient flocks and forests, herbs, vineyards and communities—fraught with the complexities of a hive of bees—to march instead in mechanical ranks, in columns and lines. Preparing for rocket flights of months in time. No one else wants any of this Hillary, besides your little cadre of perverts and fools, atop which you reside. Truly, these are the biblical “last times”, and the USA and its allies and minions the forerunners of Antichrist.

April 21, 2011, Holy Thursday: New Wine in old skins, the Fox/EWTN Judaized take on patriotism and Christian Faith. This sort of doughty nationalism always considers religion the subject-matter mostly of “old women”, demanding an ultra-secularized state which serves mammon instead of God. This being increasingly the legacy of the Western state since Luther.

Far different were those beloved “Christian kings and princes” prayed-for in the old and orthodoxy litanies: mild-yet-courageous men who saw things within a Christian worldview, who couldn’t have conceived of a state in which law was in any way divorced from the law of God. Hence did there develop a whole way-of-life which happily made innocence-of-habit a relatively easy thing: this being the “sweet yoke” of a wholehearted adherence to New Testament Christianity. That very manly single-mindedness which is nothing other than genuine, civically-established Catholic Faith. Hardly, then, did these old systems turn out laymen “so over-pious as to act like monks”: even if they did attempt to put some of the virtues of the religious life into their own daily existence, allowing themselves to be thus “leavened” in a way eminently-fitting to their “state in life”.

Indeed, to give this discussion a tone fitting to the Sacred Triduum of Holy Week, which begins today, the easy way (“My Way is easy….”) is actually the Way of the Cross: a paradox which meets us coming and going throughout the wending byways of life. While as suggested above this whole idea of a juridically-established Christianity is really nothing other than the New Dispensation whole and entire, without any admixture of any quibbling, biblically-abominated “Judaized” strain. That which always makes a way that could be easy into one very miserly, grudging and hard. That Judaization—the Epistle-descried curse of New Testament ages—ever arbitrating an ultra-secularized view of the state which by contrast paves a biblical “broad way” for evils of every kind. For to cling to the spirit of the synagogue after “the curtain over the Holy of Holies was rent in twain”, this at the very moment the blessing bestowed on Abraham was formally transferred to his (Pauline “singular”) Offspring, Jesus Christ, upon the Cross: this is to “pour new wine into old skins”. Which is to make for the “good things” of Mary’s Magnificat a hard way indeed. While in parallel fashion to deny the legitimacy of an essentially-Christian framing-of-laws is to class Christianity as a sort of second-class creed, in stark contradistinction to a Judaism which always, whether openly or “by hook or by crook”, rigorously molds the law—wherever it ”manages” so to do—according to its own contours and prejudices, whether in Old Testament times or today.

Reference was made some months ago on a certain cable-network channel, to a guy “apparently with advanced degrees” laying the blame for all the world’s ills at the door of the Jews. Of course, I don’t know if that particular interviewee meant me--indeed, I don’t care whether anyone reads any of this at all—since I announce the truth because I love, indeed worship it, in worshipping that Christ Who Is “the Way, the Truth and the Light”. And would announce these things were it even in the solitude of a cave. Yet I can’t help but notice that many things I say end up on Fox or some other station within a day or so, perhaps twisted or “spun”, and likewise that there has been a certain program on my hard-drive which I can’t get rid of, although I specify it in proper technical terms, a file named foxnews.net, or something like that, no doubt an info-gathering Trojan of some kind. Indeed, and as the above notable complained so bitterly, my treatment of the lost people who called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior may seem redundant to some, yet today’s sweeping dominion of all-things-Jewish which I chronicle here is the most significant single phenomenon on the secular and ecclesiastical scene. And furthermore, many others—not to be confused with us at all—treat of this urgent subject in the most unworthy possible way—a fact which we attempt to redress. For as stated many times here, we don’t hate the Jews, but only give them the respect that is their proper due: to wit, the recognition that it is they who hate Catholics and Catholic Faith with an undying passion, and not us them. Catholics rather tending to follow that “path of least resistance” of lukewarm souls, of being far too indulgent with these ever-scheming men. Confessing as I do that it is the synagogue—or a Saint-Paul-excoriated “Judaized” Christianity—which is a trap into which vast numbers of Catholics fall today, indeed very much like the biblical “New wine in old skins”. Being destined thereafter to “burst forth and fall to the pavement”, and probably likewise to their eternal demise.

Hence for example the recent changes which find us once again celebrating Holy Week during the Jewish Passover, as has always been stealthily arranged during various times of schism or heresy, both local and universally within the Church, over the Christian millennia, and such as we experience today. While in times of solid Catholic orthodoxy the two seasons—because of this very tendency of Catholics to fall into this faith-quibbling, synagogue-plied Judaizing trap—are carefully kept a good distance—usually at least a month or so—apart. Lest the New Wine of true Faith fall by ever-insidious association into the decayed old skins of those who delivered up the Savior. That one contamination which absolutely destroys the “savor”, the force, virility and integrity, of Christian Faith. That which is the full fulfillment of genuine Judaism, and apart from which any “Judaism” is a false, decaying shell. A discarded cocoon from which the divine Butterfly has long ago emerged, nevermore to return.

These “Christian” Judaizers cruelly now deliver up their fellow man—much as did the Jews vis-à-vis the Savior—today as I write: Muslims who if in moral good faith are all “members of His Body” as well, at least in a certain way. Westerners today laboring each day to find some new way to decimate Arab, Southeast Asia and North African populations, always of course “for freedom’s sake”. For just as the Epistle with staggering plainness and generous prodigality reveals: “even the Gentiles” are at least partial and occasional recipients of necessarily-Mystical-Body-participated Heavenly grace, even before actual formal Baptism and incorporation. Here—in this universal partial, occasional, potentially-full incorporation—being in great measure that which was “consummated” so fervently on the Cross: every bit as much as that full consummation achieved in the Baptism of water. This entire individually-distinct panoply so obviously being a “chalice” drunk to the dredges joyfully, something rapturously accomplished, done with. That Gospel “victory” which has “already” “robbed death of its sting”. to be played out thereafter in particulars of person, place and time.

Directly in this same vein—of the pouring of the New Wine of Faith into the old skins of Judaism—mention is made below of the tumultuous Glenn Beck, who goes daily from meek lamb to ranting fiend, resembling in his studio ravings nothing so much as the possessed man of Gerasa in the Holy Gospels, wandering among the tombs, wailing, cutting himself with sharp stones. A good meditation indeed for us all, during this Sacred Triduum of Holy Week. But Hannity is really much the same: this Sean who cannot contain himself at all, who veritably foams at the mouth with hatred against certain kinds of folks. (Who on one show indeed called someone an S.O.B., as he dismissed him from an interview). Who however at the same time—calling down upon himself a much more formidable cursemocks Holy Scripture each and every night, and that repeatedly. This by way of his ironic/sardonic intonation, “let not your hearts be troubled”, out of the blue, irrelevantly sandwiched between bits of news, or just after standard quasi-Beckian bouts of hysterical rage. Here does Sean mock the very Holy Spirit of peace, committing a blasphemy perilously after the fashion of the Pharisees of old, one which “will not be forgiven either in this life or the next”. Thus, then, does Faith—and all sanity—flee, escape from the wine-skins, when one tries to combine the Christian doctrine of love, of constructive thinking, with the tumult-ridden modern “progress”-ideological/Judeo-Masonic take on life, as do Hannity and Beck. For to take the compelling dogma-of-love of the Christian Faith and to cynically infuse it with a “the end justifies the means” Marxian-dialectic of global Jewry—and then to power the resulting perverted, inscrutable world-system with Jewish global intrigue and financial might—this is to spawn a ruthless, gargantuan, Napoleonic military machine. A veritable Apocalyptic “beast emerging from the sea” which is today’s one and only real threat to world peace, and a calculated corrosive to the survival of humanity at large. Such being the America we have since the demise of the truly-Catholic Kennedy brothers some fifty years ago.

April 20, 2011: Beck and the possessed man of Gerasa, raving, breaking his chains, wandering among the tombs, cutting himself with sharp stones.

Glenn Beck would bring us a tumult-ridden Religion of America in rare form, a fanatical, turbulent, unquestionable belief in the divine inspiration—or perhaps indeed even the divine nature—of two things: capitalism, on the one hand, and the American democracy, on the other. This, then, is no mere bland matter of pinning Party-buttons on lapels, or even of laying down ones life for the flag: no, this is an act of worship of the most abject, self-effacing kind.

Now, leaving the realms of mysticism for a moment, it is demonstrable enough to say that one might live under such a humanly-devised system reasonably well for some time—as we in the USA in some respects did for extended periods. But even to suggest something far-short of deification, namely, that this combo of the three-branch democracy and of the capitalist economy is the answer to the world’s present woes: even this is shown daily and in lurid colors to be entirely unsubstantiated. So what Beck’s contention lacks in substance he makes up for with a great deal of angry shouting and abusive language: something that indeed beckons to a certain sick quarter in the American heart, soul and mind. For there is indeed something wrong with a people who could ever have been satisfied with such a superficial take on human life, as to believe—and to testify in a thousand fervent ways—that the deepest aspirations of mankind can be summed up in a mere economic and political idea.

But this kind of delirious, delusional thinking has a long history, with Beck and his ilk only representing the radical-ideological tendencies of modern times—in veritable messianic fixations succumbed to by Hegel, Schopenhauer, Marx, Spencer (the ideological father of radical capitalism) and a dozen more—hotly-held creeds which invoke a host of divergent “do all and end all” secular systems in just such a divine and exalted way. Beck’s being a system in which the worship of God is allowed a modest place on Sundays, and maybe Wednesday nights, but only a negligible impact on public or popular life. Hence does Beck represent the opposite of (genuine) Catholic social and political philosophy, which sees secular systems, power structures, posts and projects as fulfilling certain needs, even urgent ones, but as legitimately operating only under the pale of the law of God, and ultimately under the moral authority of His Church. Without which shepherding there can only be turmoil, poverty, injustice, war. Unrest such as indeed makes Glenn Beck resemble, in his agitated frustration—by the time his hour-long show gets “cranked up”, preaching the false gospel of a fatally-flawed, allegedly-plenipotentiary system—nothing so much as the noted biblical possessed man of Gerasa, crying out pitifully, cutting himself on sharp stones. While here indeed—in this obsession with the American system as the towering pinnacle toward which all human life must aspire—is found the unfailing source of the very same “encroaching government” which Beck so vociferously fights. Since a political ideology conceived in such Elysian terms must always thus monopolize, preempt and supersede the humble-but-noble tendrils of true human life, let alone of the ever-soaring life of the soul. That which “lives not in any tabernacles built by human hands”.

This salutary message—that only under the teaching authority of Christ and His Church can mankind be saved in all respects social and economic, political and personal—was announced by Pope St. Pius X around the year 1900, in his encyclical on the Sillon, a document which however only summarizes and epitomizes the essential and indisputable sociopolitical teaching of the Church of two thousand years. The Sillon having been a French movement aspiring to solve “the social problem”—which perplexed the minds already of those earlier times—simply by the cooperative interplay of various religions and groups. Much indeed as Beck thinks that the bewildering tangle of American corporations and institutions, and cleaver-like divisions-of-power, can do the same. This modern-day approach, wrought amid the din of hotly-held ideology and political belief, being in stark contrast to a Catholic Way which is marked by profoundest peace. A “peace which the world”—and Glenn Beck—“cannot give”. A peace—promised indeed by the Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima, little more than a decade after the letter on the Sillon—one even now soon to be inaugurated worldwide by a Church emerging at last from a fifty-plus-year reign of anti-councils and anti-popes. While as suggested the starkly-divergent ambiance to be expected from the Becks of this world—for whom World Jewry, capitalism and American democracy are the only Trinity honored in any significant way—is very much like that of the possessed man of Gerasa, described in the gripping biblical passage paraphrased in the heading above. Do you think you deserve to be raved at and abused by this morbid tomb-dweller each day on Fox? Then you are a stranger to the only real freedom—and its attendant peace—that matters: the freedom of the sons of God.

April 19, 2011: More on the media, on the liberal-biased polls (viz., “most people want sodomy-marriage”) that are constantly cited, the war-reporting that calls an embattled, UN-sanctioned Hezbollah and Hamas “terrorist groups”. A media that calls Ghaddafi acts of self-defense “firing on his own people”, while attacks of revolutionaries are terms “heroic acts of defiance”. When we go to the media, we are going to our worst enemies, who don’t wear turbans at all.

Before the Kennedy assassinations—surgical operations performed of course by ever-conveniently-appearing “madmen”—the American Dream was to live an innocent, peaceful and productive life—accepting ones lot, refusing to cravenly surrender to biblical go-getter “cares of this world”, while nonetheless at the same time not giving up on marginally improving that human condition. This was a time when the general weal was uppermost in everyone’s heart, not ones own shining star of success. Back then, we of good training absolutely scorned such paragons, so soon to take over everywhere, a veritable tsunami-wave of agitators on left and right forecast indeed centuries earlier in the treatment of Indians across the continent. That which with slavery would be a heavy curse whose penalties we are beginning to reap as a nation as I write.

I always point out the synagogue origins of all these ills, of the rise of the unparalleled cruelties of modern slavery, of the divide-and-conquer political/military/economic doctrine which has long ruled the West—not indeed because I hate the Jews but only to give them the respect to consider them as they really are. And not in some Glenn-Beckian fairyland in which it would seem that they themselves—as realistic as they claim to be—would hardly wish to be caught dead in.

With this little introduction do we consider here the way we are being funneled down a path of no return, here in the USA, where for one thing we are subject to a systematic radicalization of every concept of any consequent to the human mind, soul or social-body. An onslaught, a tsunami, of propaganda, indeed of brainwash, which uses a tightly-synagogue-controlled media and education as its primary tools. And one of the chief instruments of this wholesale indoctrination—more sacrosanct, Hillary-intoned than any recognition ever accorded true religion on these shores—is found in the use of these ubiquitous polls. Here being a factotum which began with a black and infamous history, to wit, in the Kinsey Report, appearing as it did just in time to pervert the morals of my own generation, the “Boomers”. For as we didn’t find out until some fifteen years later—when most were getting their first crop of gray hairs—this poll was completely false. This in terms of the only truly-significant element involved: namely of the base population under consideration—they who were found out—after Boomers had mostly become dope-smoking, promiscuous boors—to have been mental patients, addicts, perverts, ex-convicts, skid-row-dwellers and others impaired or miscreant, back in the decade when the survey was done. A poll whose “results” were foisted off on the Boomers as “proof in the pudding” of the need to “get with it” in a hurry. Which so many forthwith did. And we here on this Crusade suspect strongly much the same to be the case with the endless polling of today: where the “population”—those who fill out the questioners, or answer the phone-calls or e-mails—are undoubtedly ferreted out by the pollsters—if not this time in sodomy-ridden, dangerous dives—then in areas around likewise-sodomy-friendly college campuses, around middle- and upper-middle-class malls. You will seldom if every see pollsters in regions where the poor are mostly found, common folk often quite disenchanted with the free-sex hype that however rather-efficiently guarantees you good grades and social acceptance at the university and its high-class environs.

Finally, in this consideration of polls and polar extremes: stations like Fox don’t even nicely stay on their far side of the see-saw where they claim so stoutly to belong, averring a blank-faced impartiality in the noted sodomy-“marriage” issue: that hot-wire debate where quite obviously to claim impartiality is to put oneself decidedly in the ultra-liberal camp. For the ever-MSNBC-noised demand is simply that we stand back and “don’t get involved”, let these sodomites have their own “private” way. But in fact to meekly accede to these wishes as Fox so redundantly—and with high Chaney-corporate-hauteur does—is to be so radical as to veritably throw up ones hands regarding the future of the family in the USA. Yet because of the curtly-argued theatrical harmlessness of the position of Fox, the courageous stand of the good is liable to be eagerly abandoned by a great many that might otherwise stand their ground. Since to differ with Fox on this point—to insist on the abominable wrong of such an understanding of marriage, let alone to acknowledge the divine wrath which this nefarious debate has already brought down upon our heads—this truly-conservative position instantly places you in the camp—to quote dozens of pundits and politicos on Fox—of the “social-conservative nut-cases”. Treason, anyone? Then too, illustrating these polar alliances in rare form, there’s this “guy next door”, goody-two-shoes Sheppard Smith, for about a year now unaccountably going after Rod Blagojevich like a pit-bull. Mocking him, on his “impartial news program”, answering sometimes-impassioned televised statements by the ex-governor in defense of himself with a “sure, sure”. By this means dramatically amplifying the effectiveness of the Obama-camp—otherwise opposed with might and main—in its unprecedented, predatory legal-ambush against Rod. That political blood-letting which is indeed based entirely upon mock-sober Nixonesque hyperbole, choreographed to stand good for accusations of any serious kind. Smith thus plainly having been commissioned by his masters to help Obama destroy an honest-if-overly-temperamental politician who stood in the way of Rom Emmanuel’s Orwellian dream for Illinois. An odd place, on such an extreme end of such a teeter-totter, for an arch-conservative Sheppard Smith to be. A grinning, mealy-mouthed guy bent upon making “Blago”, as he with juvenile disrespect calls him, not only into a laughable fool, but one in a striped suit, too.

Thus do we see the way the twin pincers of the ultra-left/ultra-right camps and supporting media are being used with rare skill to hijack some crucial Christian position, or to destroy some uncooperative figure who “doesn’t quite fit in” with the Obama/Hillary “march of progress” machine.

Of this you can be sure: until the final triumph of the two Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, which will accomplish a stunning national salvation, this treacherous employment of political extremes will continue to reap dividends for the worst enemies of the USA. Guaranteeing us dominant fringe-polar camps which guarantee nothing but an accelerating agenda of totalitarian/moral-revolutionary change. Both sides catering to a White House obsessed with a global military conquest eagerly pursued in each new “hot spot”, skillfully brought to a boiling-point by black-ops intrigue. Ramroding at home and abroad a new, Boomer-inaugurated “American Dream” which is a nightmare for a moral majority of mankind.

April 19, 2011: The latest leftist/atheistic media lie: “Judaism and paganism don’t believe in a Hell”.

The truth, quite the contrary, is that the vast majority of Jews don’t believe in any afterlife, don’t believe in either a Heaven or a Hell: following as do most Hebrews besides the Hassidic in the footsteps of the Sadducees of old. Here the ancient Jewish craftiness in the use of words, using trusty surrogates like MSNBC, is revealed in full form. A determination not to announce or uncover the whole and unvarnished truth, but rather to present a deceptively pleasant or repugnant conclusion, primarily to trick or deceive. What is more correct to say is that the vast majority of Jews believe in a human existence which is nothing so much as a long corridor with a ceiling that scrapes everyone’s head; an existence where the needs of the body are the only ones recognized or considered valid or legitimate. Ergo, the kinds of zoo-like legislation and court-rulings that our synagogue-dominated courts, Congress and Presidency impose remorselessly upon us, gradualistically accumulating an all-enveloping public-and-private atmosphere in which a good or holy thought veritably suffocates, cannot survive. This being indeed the most fitting description of today’s Hellish, perverted Bush/Obama USA: the infernal yin/yang Nazi-warrior, Hertzl/Hitlerian, Canaanite/Albigensian, capitalist/communist convergence of modern times. A global empire whose major minions get together once each year at Bohemian Grove in California (just outside Monte Rio, just off the coast) and worship Moloch, the Owl god, offering him his ever-demanded infant sacrifice in the form of the effigy of a male child: of course one deceptively labeled or described. A ritual sacrifice which rather obviously stands good for the very real infant sacrifice of today around the globe, in the forms of abortion, standard abortifacient “birth control” (the routine, “marvelously antiseptic” killer-of-billions), the heinous Hillary drone-bomb destruction of innocents in foreign “wars”, and in several other (no doubt to Hillary neat and nifty) ways as well.

When it comes to pagans, on the other hand, these people haven’t always deliberately, with full malice and forethought directly denied the Savior, as is the case of the vast majority of Jews. Nor do they, again like the Jews, tirelessly slander and discredit both Him and his followers. Rather are those of these typically-primitive pagan forms-of-religion only baffled and confused when it comes to the truths of everlasting life. And although it is impossible to be saved without belief in “one God Who is the Rewarder of the good and the Punisher of the wicked”, yet many pagans undoubtedly have some obscure ambient form of this genuine belief, even if it must struggle against a heavy backlog of primitive fantasy, of an ancestral devotion—sometimes seemingly quite sincere—to various spirits or gods. And I don’t take it upon myself to judge how each will fare at the last moments of life, in the solitude of their own consciences: even though the compelling draw of the truth must be the lodestar of each soul, and a consistent refusal to follow the inner urgings of genuine divine Faith, sent to all by a good God, in however vague a form, must indeed be eternally fatal in the end. But the thing about paganism is that, much as in the plodding stages of millennial Old Testament Jewish theology, belief in Hell is invariably found in some way or shape, although not usually in any well developed form. Since only in Catholicism do we have the complete and utterly-unerring Revelation of God—indeed the very fulfillment of the promise—on many planes—of the ancient Temple or synagogue. That integral body-of-doctrine which He condescends to reveal nowhere else: so that by consequence other men are left to the obscure travails of “the blind leading the blind”. Hence even the Hindus—those pagans we see so much of here in the USA—they who would seem to be hesitant about the notion of eternal damnation—nonetheless religiously condemn the vast majority of mankind to a miserable existence, here on earth, an earthly travail which resembles nothing so much as Hell itself. This in the form of a doctrine of Untouchability, allegedly held only by a certain sect—the Janists—but in practice actually the legacy of most Hindus, if with some notable exceptions. A belief clung-to so stubbornly simply because—strikingly like a certain modern species of dog-eat-dog, robber-baron conservatives—it is so convenient to believe in such a self-serving idea. On the part of those powerful enough to impose it on those many unfortunates who have no power at all. (Just show up at some Hindu-run motel looking worn and poor, wearing a humble aspect of soul, and with an old-model car or truck, and you will probably find out instantly what I mean. Where you may quickly become so untouchable that they will refuse to perform many standard services for you, will give you a ramshackle room. Even as the well-to-do, only looking for economy, will undoubtedly be treated to a reverential ceremonial, to a bowing-and-scraping of the most abject kind). Hence in Hinduism it is your neighbor who condemns you to Hell, and not a good, just and merciful God, He Who “made us in His own image and likeness”, and expects us to behave accordingly. Hinduism—next to Judaism—being in my own opinion the next worst threat to American Christian culture that has yet appeared. As we allow these pagans, indeed in stunning Horatio Alger style, to trample the less fortunate under their ever-willing feet.

”Who will deliver us from the body of this death?” Read on, brothers and sisters, read on.

April 16, 2011: “The middle class” quietly nudges the working man out of the political picture again, just as in the late middle ages.

As facts grippingly testify in studies by excellent historians like Nicholas (see bibliography of Integral Catholicism, 2004), and as I myself hypothesize in the same book, a tremendously-productive working class of early medieval times was doomed to be pushed out of its position of political and economic agency and vitality through the machinations of a world-trading coterie which was after nothing short of world dominion, already in that early day. Hence were these tremendously industrious and inventively-prolific workers gradually to find prior gild operations fatally modified, so that this celebrated entrepot which once handled goods through all the value-added stages of production, all the way to the counter, was to find a worker who with great satisfaction once performed all these phases, ultimately consigned to the obscure shadows of the workroom alone. After which the value-added price of the goods—whether of furniture, drapery, weapons or wine, or even of “services” like carpentry and the like—was skimmed off the top by these same ever-scheming “go getters”, the strictly “behind-the-counter” crew of those staggeringly-consequential times. While finally and inexorably the franchise itself was effectively lost to the working man, for instance in the French Etats General, which originated well before French revolutionary times, the four estates found labor and the peasantry decidedly excluded in late medieval times. Their earlier moot-connected places being taken by, you guessed it, “the middle class”.

From there the catastrophic loss of popular political liberties was to proceed apace: namely those rights that really count, namely the right to do good and constructive things in an independent way. And not some hellish “right” to do wrong: an abominable opiate planted in men’s minds by the fiend. After which first beginnings of disenfranchisement, Europe’s future was in a sense sealed. These kinds of liberties being inseparable from a law patterned after the law of God, while law thought of simply as “the expeditor of commerce”—the protector of the property and business interests of those towering figures “behind the counter”—together with a last-ditch “protection of life and limb”—this kind of “law”—of the modern commercial pirate—will always find loopholes for the monopolies of these biblical “masters of deceit”.

Indeed, just as galling to those medievals was the soon-to-be-common use of this word “middle class”, or “merchant class”: so soon after they themselves had been both artisan and merchant, and guild-insured conveyor of quality goods bought thereby. For perhaps most significantly of all, membership in the gild merchant—as these all-purpose, shop-to-counter guilds used to be called—brought with it all the veritable pomp and circumstance of burgher status, complete with a franchise of the most consequential kind. But when the worker lost the right to sell his own goods, and a number of other prerogatives attaching thereto—and this ultimately by grim statutes chiseled-in-stone—he would very quickly lose both the prestige and the franchise that went therewith as well.

The Jews, the ever-wealthy Freemasons and their many associates and protégés who touched off Enlightenment-era and later revolutions in Europe and the Western Hemisphere: these ever self-advancing men have in intervening years always proven extremely uncomfortable with civil liberties as assumed by common working men. Hence the soon-to-appear ceaseless invocation of this term “middle class”: since that is precisely the class which displaced the working man from any input into the manufacture of his goods, or into the political processes of the community in which he lived, back so long ago. But the trick today is that the loss of these estimable liberties always has to be couched in words and slogans of a heroically-libertarian kind. We must convince the worker that we are only challenging him to new heights, while we take away one by one both rights and respect. Hence the standard ploy, of an unspoken allegation that these liberties—supposedly possessed by everyone in a democracy—must be “earned”; the title to them must be proven. How? Simply—and here’s the big tuna—though the golden key of success. Ah, beautiful word for some, deadly and treacherous one for a far greater number of others. Our disenfranchisement today being nowhere near so clear-cut and honest as that of the medieval laborer, but one nonetheless spelled out in daily minutiae, in exclusions of class-related pseudo-“custom”, of “connections”, and the like. With this idea of “middle class” being adhered to with a theatrical undying loyalty, as witnessed ad nauseum on Fox: even if its prime practical symbol is a “dog eat dog” dagger in the back. All of which round-about studio, taken together, amount to an all-encompassing practical disenfranchisement/disempowerment of the worker: he whose very innermost identity seems to be bound up with an unwillingness to sell his soul, along with some craven obeisance, some bolt-of-cloth or bundle-of-goods.

Thus then the historical etymology of the ceaselessly-invoked cry of today’s politicos about The Middle Class: they who—aside of course from an unmentionably-sacrosanct upper class—are always the ones praised or mourned, “rescued” with “bailout packages”, or “unjustly abandoned” by the opposing side. Never is the working man specifically mentioned in these tear-jerking debates, so that his position in society as it were dies on the vine for lack of voice or even of any much detached, third-person attention. A mute condition which quickly leads to a lack of legal and economic standing as well. Precisely the fate of the late-medieval tradesman and peasant—the latter of whom commonly had his own highly-estimable, near-equivalent set of powers and prerogatives, there on the manor—but worker and farm-worker alike now without a pro-active Church to see to the reverent and respectful care of those who inevitably fell into need. While the downward descent of the villein peasant—previously for largely-unrecorded centuries a prosperous self-employed farmer with a standard of living which rivaled in real and hyper-substantial terms that of our own upper middle class—would finally come to be synonymous with criminality, as the modern word villain indeed so graphically portrays. So that we of the working class—a name I proudly wear—can at least share a sense of brotherhood with these our beloved ancestors, who like ourselves were destined to be subject to a great deal of slander as time went on. All this to culminate in a Revolutionary Era which more than anything else would ultimately seal their fate in stone. Namely, that of our very own.

Finally, that which sets the working man, the “lower class”, if you will, apart from the middle class in the most striking way—at least in those normal times entirely unlike our own, those to me well-remembered times of my early youth when so many still clung to the peculiar virtues of their own social position or estate—is their childlike love of a good and even fatherly leader. The old laborer, having no media-and-educator-nourished “instabilities” or “ambivalences” about his own father, about his parents “standing in the place of God”, as the old sound catechism used to say, likewise—quite the contrary of a too-often ever-agitating middle class—would have had little if any problem honoring a lord, a duke or king. Since for one thing the good of the king and that of the common man always terminates and finds its fullest measure in the good of the realm, and not entirely in some strictly-private good which “go getter” middle-class abilities can sometimes so eagerly pursue. And here is a good clue as to why the erosion of the worker’s place in society advanced in such inexorable strides, a progression, indeed a “progress” which had been assiduously monitored, shepherded, stealthily harbored, against the whole pyramided concept of authority, as coming from God. At the top of which legitimacy-on-earth stood supreme the moral sovereignty of the Catholic Church. The Jews—as warned against in countless royal and ecclesiastical statements and writings, laws and decrees—having taken to themselves the remorseless task of destroying, like termites, the fundamental, liberty-and-equity-distributive authority-structure of the state, and of replacing it with their own weird, top-heavy structure based on their own self-arrogated superiority and greed. This was to be a state—such as we have today—with no genuine devotion to the common good—but rather one carefully constructed to serve the needs of a tiny few—while consigning the biblical “rest of men” to enslavement, to arbitrary synagogue-brokered powers over life and death. A treacherous end toward which the middle class would so often co-conspire, ever-eager “go getters” ready as were some to “sell their own grandmother” if the “need” should arise. A rigid and totalitarian state whose inner motivational mainspring would be the above-noted “progress”: one which, full of alluring gadgets, gismos and baubles—and ringing with loud cries of “liberty”—though it might be, is designed carefully and entirely toward the popular disenfranchisement described in this piece, toward the loss of immemorial and inestimable good things, of the very “liberty of the sons of God”. Genuine, virtuous, common-good-pursuing liberties based upon structures, teachings and customs “handed down” from that “Age of Faith” that went before. That which we here on this Crusade intend, by the help of God, to bring once again to full flower.