Important interpretive note of April 7, 2011: Although I still stand by almost all of what is said below, yet certain cautious statements in first articles in favor of these “Twitter Revolutions” must now be belatedly repudiated, admittedly-duped assertions made amid an overpowering avalanche of media-choreographed political theater. All this complete with the usual phony “fleeing refugees”, and another hysterical woman—déjà vu the First Iraq War—this time alleging rape in Libya—with these and other fabrications providing colorful variations from more-typical tales of (later conclusively disproven) babies being bayoneted in Iraqi hospitals. With many of the “Libyans” in particular thus aired having had decided American or Israeli accents. This must be termed a Wolf Blitzer special indeed, and is probably the reason the marvelous Iranian reporter named Christien (can’t spell last name) was unfairly nudged out at CNN: a good lady who would never have lent her support to all this bizarre nonsense. (Note of 9/14: Christien Anampour is now back bigger than ever. The last time she contradicted Wolf, just then grossly slandering Vladimir Putin, over which mendacities she dared to utter an indignant "that's not true", was at least a year ago. Now this Christien tows the party line as lustily as any of the other lackies on CNN. However this lady doesn't really look or act entirely like the original truthful reporter, who as we remember had a markedly longer face and a whole different manner and tone. Can reporters be as expendable as our commentary might conjecturally speculate?) A global-stage-driven drama regarding which Obama, at the time of these irruptions—undoubtedly clued in from the start—assumed all the required poses of doubt and demur, so that later he could all-the-more-convincingly throw his morbid sanctimony behind same. The idea being always—and as we labor now for years to convey—to see arise the most radical and destabilizing elements possible—what I call a native-will-vitiating meat maul approach—so that the U.S. and its supra-national overlords can then “move in and take over” all the more completely than before. As maintained so many times on this site, only genuine and traditional Catholic sociopolitical doctrine—rejected by the antipope Benedict and the post-Vatican-II anti-church of today—can save the world from the brutal, extermination-bent hegemony presently being imposed on all nations, including our own. This by a remorseless Jewish-dominated cabal whose principal seat of power today is the government and corporate-economy of the USA.     

February 9, 2011: Media Chicken Little cries out against the Muslim Brotherhood. What should we really fear? Fifty years of near-chaos on the U.S. domestic scene, preparing a radical, secretive and perverse agenda, one imposed institutionally at home and by force of arms around the globe.

As stated many times on this site and in these publications, man is not rightfully the author of his own law, any more than a piece of machinery is the author of its own internal operations. We are simply allowed to administer law, that code which already preexists, by direct divine design, in our minds, souls and consciences. But U.S. diplomacy and military policy will not allow any other approach to law and government than that groundless radicalism which imagines the human machinery to be the author of its own internal workings, its own law, its own strange, bizarre, profane sense of left-wing and right-wing rather than right and wrong. This quintessential anarchy then brings in its train that chaos which is the prelude to Hell, to service under an infernal master who is the inventor of the whole deadly rebel scheme. Truly, Sharia or any other system based on a recognition of God’s authority is to be preferred to this barbaric sovereignty of Hell. Even I, a Catholic, would gladly welcome this Muslim code to take the place of the perversion presently being imposed upon the USA, and from there upon the world.

Yet truthfully, to say that the Egyptian Brotherhood would bring Sharia law reminds me of those who warned in breathless, hysterical tones, back in 1960, that if elected John Kennedy would bring the pope to Washington D.C. Yet further, the Brotherhood in Egypt is like night-and-day when compared against like-named societies which exist, say, in parts of equatorial Africa, and which sometimes permit certain barbaric rites, and which interpret Sharia in the most radical, rigorous sort of way. For the very word “Brotherhood” chiefly indicates a profound Muslim attachment to a localized, organizationally-distributive idea of society and economy—somewhat indeed like that indeed embraced here on this Catholic site—a concept, fraught with locally-determined complexities, which seems to bear only some few general similarities from one nation to the next. Furthermore, the same much-maligned Egyptian Brotherhood is actually bitterly opposed by genuine Muslim extremists: turbulent figures with whom however an ever-warring-on-terror U.S. Government is especially good at making open or under-the-table deals. All this in order to bring the above-noted global chaos, for depraved purposes of those who, since the assassination of John Kennedy, have ruthlessly undermined and cynically controlled this our beloved land.

What these American kingpins—Obama, the Bushes, the Clintons, the Chaneys, and their whole vast entourage in finance, education, all of public life—as represented in decades before by the Johnsons, Harrimans and others from the same secretive elite—what they want is for the rank perversion of the back alley to become the law of the land. An end toward which the USA has already “advanced” a long, long way: preparing an ignorant, doped-down, dummed-down populace nowadays easily dominated, mastered, controlled. And it is for this reason that I urge my fellow citizens of the globe: flee, ”touch not this foul and perverted thing”. You who already have far more real wealth in your present state: this in terms of resources which will instantly be exploited in a notorious “export economics” which rapes, demoralizes, destroys. After which, when you seek relief from this robbery, you will be treated as a welfare case, right there on your own land. In an abject dependence illustrated by a Latin America still largely enthralled, after two centuries of U.S. Monroe Doctrine “protection from tyrants abroad”. Fight for you lands, your homes, your children, with sticks and stones, if nothing else comes to hand. And pray, and remember that the common people here in the USA are just as helpless as those in Mexico, and don’t really want any of today’s officially-enforced poverty and moral-depravity, any more than you.

January 3, 2011: The Imam roundly trounces Hannity on his own show. “Western” liberty to do wrong, vs. the Christian, Muslim or Shinto freedom to do good.

Poor Hannity, I think even the Imam felt sorry for him. Especially at the end, when like some menacing schoolyard bully, he called the mild and respectful cleric an “S.O.B.” How different too was this Muslim from so many of the “Christian” Middle-easterners I have known, here in the USA, who seem so often to have been arrogant, venal, money-grubbing. Of course with some notable exceptions, like for instance the good-hearted Bashas of Arizona, to name only one such family. While the less-worthy sort of Christian Middle-easterner routinely imposes the influence of Israel and the USA—and indeed of Western greed and cultural corruption in all its disgusting forms—over desperately poor fellow-citizens of Lebanon, or in places like Egypt or Armenia. Here indeed being a craven function which “Christians” have been performing for centuries now, as in a rampant application of Jewish values in “Christian” colonial ventures across the Seven Seas. Ergo, too, the sometimes-shifty-eyed “Christians” appearing so often on EWTN, telling, perhaps accurately, of persecutions endured by co-religionists, but omitting entirely to admit the sorts of major or petty Christian treacheries which too often generously provoked these admittedly terrible bouts.

Truly, we could end up with a widespread persecution against Christians, and no doubt as always especially against Catholics, and even around the entire globe, and even here in the USA, but today the persecution is decidedly from the other direction, perpetrated by Christians and Jews against Muslims. All the while overriding all this fear of Islam is the staggering fact that Muslims love and honor Jesus and Mary, and even have a special veneration for St. Therese of Lisieux, all three of whom they honor in prayer and pilgrimage, sometimes going hundreds or even thousands of miles to Fatima and other Catholic shrines. The Little Flower (St. Therese) being fervently invoked for safe pregnancies by Catholics and Muslims alike. While quite the contrary it is the Jews who speak—albeit in their execrable Talmudic code language—of Our Blessed Lord and Lady as being—dare I repeat it?—in the one case unnatural, and in the other immoral (I dare not use the full force of the horrible words employed). Here being indeed the fertile source for the pernicious slander against the noble, gentle and Christ-like Catholic man: a falsehood something incredibly-enough meekly accepted by Catholics themselves. In a society-wide Jewish-professional/academia-sponsored onslaught which falsely claims some “lack” in the traditional Catholic male formation. All the while the Jews ingratiate us in their age-old way, to do their international bidding, much indeed as they did with early Muslims, the tables now having been treacherously turned. Muslims whose first military Jihad in Spain and the Mediterranean world served to throw open Jewish trade routes previously bottled up in local tolls, excises and customs of “backward” distributive-economic Christian lands.

From my own study of Islamic history, largely but not exclusively covering the Spanish Caliphates, in both an independent and a collegiate setting, the imposing of Sharia law upon non-Muslims—of which Hannity and others on Fox make so much—has only rarely been known in history. And the infrequency of this grave injustice in our own day as well is born out in reading Muslim websites, where the most striking thing that meets the eye is this complete non-mention of the application of Sharia toward others, among Muslims contributors worldwide. While the absence of such oppressions is mentioned frequently and convincingly to me. True, in centuries past promising sons of Croats used to be taken from their families, before the age of reason, and raised and trained as Muslims, as elite troops in the Turkish military: but this sort of thing has not been seen for something like four centuries. And likewise it is a big leap to go from condemning retroactively all such historical abuses, on the one hand, and suggesting that we in the West have the right today to decisively intervene in the affairs of Middle Eastern nations, on the other. Exercising a reckless and impossibly-archaic irredentism—an evil always roundly condemned in traditional Catholic political belief—one which would launch another crusade after the first was lost—but not really in the forthright and courageous way of ancestors long ago. (The Crusades originally had but one justifying purpose: to protect Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land, just then in the eleventh century being set-upon by Muslim marauders, and not even then really to grab land). A revanchism which callously ignores the natural and legitimate formative role of native religion in the national life of any people. Here is indeed contained not the advancement of Christianity but rather of the Judeo-Masonic/Enlightenment paradigm of the radical separation of church and state, or religion and state. All the while the ideals and aims of the synagogue are boldly or insidiously advanced on all fronts, after having gained catastrophic inroads into the very sanctuary of the Catholic Church itself, at Vatican II. So that Catholics go forth spouting such very false ideas, and hideously-false crusades.

Hence it follows that if we choose to reside—or indeed to remain—in a Muslim land then we must respect the customs and laws thereof, we must modify our own behavior so that it generously embodies this respect. Here being found our act of love for our more-predominating neighbor: here indeed an evangelization without any par. Hence our Christian women must go about modestly clad, and we men must exercise a rigorous custody of the eyes. Did early Christians at Rome, or in early-modern Japan, did Sts. Agatha or Lucy, Cosmas or Damian, prevail in any other way? And our families must be models of paternal respect and obedience: hardly any offense to the well-formed Catholic mind. While furthermore we must not bring abominable usury everywhere we go, undermining the marvelous solidity of the Muslim—and one-time-Catholic—economic wisdom of all times.

Indeed, the chief aim of the above-noted nefarious global agenda is to encompass the utter destruction of all faith and morality in the public—and ultimately even the private and intimate—sphere: this through the advancement of an idea of freedom which counts itself much too impartial to allow any religion much of any standing at all, except as a ceremonial, a “Sundays” or Fridays only” affair. This cleverly-evil principle—wordlessly, with much quibbling, embraced at Vatican II and in papal writings in its aftermath—gravely undercuts the ability of religion to effect practical habits of goodness and decency for which it was designed, placed in the hearts of men by a good God. This pernicious error rather opening the way—as is so wildly evident today—for evils like abortion, euthanasia, artificial birth-control, eugenics, and finally abominable sodomy itself. Evils nowhere near as acceptable in most of the world as they are here in this “wonderfully Christian” USA, and indeed in post-Vatican-II Catholicism worldwide.

Enter then this great, breathless, “patriotic” advocacy of today, on behalf of this notion of an absolutely-unbridled freedom, as being the indisputable prime value of mankind: no matter how perverse the practical moral result might be. This idea that somehow we must be willing to wage hyper-aggressive wars around the globe in order to advance this ultimate value, really nothing but ribald perversity and licentiousness, if under a thin “freedom-loving” disguise. Invading distant lands, sometimes previously in a near-proverbial state of peace, sacrificing mankind on a bloody Aztec altar, together with all the noble and desirable things of this rather short life. A “zero sum” game, a liberty which rather puts us in stoutest chains. This utterly unprecedented idea—which throws overboard prior practical loyalties to both God and man, as lamentable experience shows—being regarded unequivocally as forming the very battleground upon which, most notably of all, “freedom loving” Christians battle “oppressive” Muslims. Aiming to determine the future of human society, of the state.

But in the name of all this glorious new freedom we in the USA in particular have empowered Jews from every land since World War I to systematically occupy Palestinian land, held by Arabs for more than a thousand years. Since those first Hertzl/Rothschild/Bolshevik beginnings when a first trickle were transported thither through Allied and Balfour intrigue, we have given these Jews decisive military and diplomatic aid, after which they instantly began to ethnically cleanse whole villages which once heard the laughter of mothers and children, ancient doomed settlements ultimately to number in the thousands. And fated, now long-gone inhabitants of decades to number at least a million. While in answer to pitiful, un-guidable, typically-dud-round, homemade-rocket attempts of Palestinians to redress these internationally-condemned Israeli genocidal atrocities, we ourselves condemn the victims to further massacres, torments, thefts and imprisonments. “Christian” wrongs being involved here, the removal of which would entirely change the political and religious-tolerance landscape of the Middle East. But instead we continue to grind the Arab, and others in South Asia, under the stout designer-shoe heel of Western pro-Jewish wealth and privilege, indifference and cruelty.

February 7, 2011: I repeat for the twentieth time, Mossad-style provocateur deeds, starting with 9/11—in other words, acts of state terrorism—are the chief geopolitical reality of our day. I’d rather have Sharia any day, than the rule of these disgusting torturers, genocides and perverts who so ruthlessly impose Israeli hegemony on the Middle East, and whose close-cousins here so eagerly work the bipartisan political machine that rules the present-day USA.

Once you know this, everything else is easy. Ergo, these recent killings of Christians—highly convenient bloodshed to hotly advocated opinions on Fox News—perpetrated somewhere on the border with Gaza. In an area of Egypt where Bedouins on camels or in jeeps—the scum of the earth—no doubt the very mounted men who came murderously rushing in, shooting and cracking bullwhips, at Tahrir Square—contract themselves out to the highest bidder, be it Israel or Egypt or anyone else, to do acts of politically-motivated murder or sabotage. Can you, dear reader, be so stupid as to think this merciless deed was done by the Muslim Brotherhood? Men who love Egypt, who sacrifice themselves daily and for decades now, for its greater good? You never get these juicy little details on Fox, or from Randall Terry’s many Jewish friends. This new breed of Catholic, sons of the ever-effervescent John Paul II, being chief exponents of a kind of pork-barrel Catholicism. A new creed full of cheaply-bought Scot-Hahnian “joy”, while others miserably die; always hollering “rah, rah” for Israel and “Western values”, at the expense of third world nations worldwide.

February 7, 2011: The grand-sanctimonious Glenn Beck echoes a ‘50s Dave Beck, the union-wrecking racketeer, in more ways than just the shrill staccato. Apparently echoing as well the description of a certain religion/ethnic-group, only this time its “a Beck is a Beck is a Beck”.

As noted in a link below, these two Becks, the latter (a corruption-convicted Teamster Union President) now deceased, are probably related, are both from the same state, Washington, and even look very much alike, with both of them sporting the same sort of crew-cut, and both striking the same photogenic, beck-signature stodgy pose. But the similarity that really “blows you away”, to use a stock Beckian phrase, is the way they have both been noted for going after labor unions in the most bitter way. With the elder Beck, and his inseparable shadow, the underworld’s own Jimmy Hoffa, urging those business-owners and managers who hated good, democratic and fair unions to “call them” (the union rank-and-file) “bums”, to “treat them with nothing but contempt”. (See Robert Kennedy’s The Enemy Within, 1960). Honest, hard-working members of good unions—like that very AFL-CIO had once been, before sweetheart-contract-negotiating people like Hoffa and Beck the Elder got through with it—being to this day classed as mere vermin by towering elitist egos of this ilk. While for added after-union-meeting convincers there were the inevitable deadly assaults, the throwing down flights of stairs, the dynamiting of houses of “stubborn” union officials, and so on. The CIO in particular having initially been a very good union, a titan among its kind—before it got mixed up with the Hoffa-infiltrated AFL. (Note of 9/14: the sweetheart contracts noted here are always arrangements whereby crooked management pays off a crooked union to defraud the workers of wages, benefits, humane working-conditions, and so on. But true to form for Fox News, just after I wrote this piece I listened dumbfoundedly as one of their apparatchiks rattled-off the expression—used no doubt for the first time on TV since the '50s and '60s era of the big management/labor troubles—as if it were a stock phrase indicating preferential treatment by a union to its own rank-and-file, at the expense of a robbed-and-cheated management. The very opposite of what the term actually means, as attested by a generation or two of truckers, dockworkers, laundry-workers, restaurant-workers whose substance was taken from then in grand management/crooked-union collusive style of Beck, Hoffa and their strong-armed Sing-Sing associates.) Even as the resulting no-doubt-still-embattled acronym-composite AFL-CIO is breezily rated by Beck-the-Younger—following to the letter the counsels of another Beck a half-century ago—along side the communist party and rag-tag revolutionaries of every shape and size. While the fact remains that good unions—my own father was a local CIO charter-member-organizer—once abounded in a genuine Land of the Free, before the highly-oratorical, highly-inflammatory Beck-crowd moved in and took over.

February 6, 2011: The Monroe Doctrine of the Middle East. Where’s the U.N., to resolve the turmoil in Egypt? Cold-War-Kremlin-reminiscent adulations for Ronald Reagan, who today is being treated to obsequies much like those once reserved for a Soviet-adored Stalin. All this way back when there really was an Iron-Curtain/Free-World divide, when the truly-great communicator John Kennedy was uttering those immortal words, “Ich bin ein Berliner”. That “good friend John” whose Cuban-missile-standoff was the real death-knell to world communism, over which Reagan did at the very most a highly-theatrical mop-up operation. Most of this article is entirely new.

They used to go on and on about “the great leader” back then, too, except they were invariably speaking of Stalin or Lenin, Marx or Trotsky when they used these heroic phrases. John Kennedy’s birthday—which no one seems to know the date of—would scarcely merit a passing mention, among his decidedly-non-theatrical admirers—a set to which I proudly belong—were that truly-auspicious event to ever come to the light of day. While furthermore a single sentence from John was always a memorable event indeed, and likely not only to entertain a lot of truly-breath-bated newsmen, but also to contain a kernel of wisdom applicable for years to come. Even as Reagan was by contrast usually just extending his standard stage routine onto the press conference arena, where he was usually much more skillful at covering over his intentions with a big grin, and a few sidestepping words, than at actually saying anything much at all. Sort of like O’Reilly does every night. Is this communication? You be the judge.

Something Reagan was however very good indeed at communicating—when he wasn’t telling the American poor to eat out of garbage cans—was the complete hijacking of the hopes of the Palestinians, who had had their first real ally in the White House in the person of John Kennedy. Jews in Tel Aviv knew that Reagan could be counted on to “lay down like a rug” for Israeli designs—and settlements—upon Palestinian soil. While likewise augmented by Reagan in full and preposterous potency would be the preservation of an Israeli sphere of influence, radiating outward from the rogue state for close to a thousand miles. A genuine Monroe Doctrine for the Middle East, a policy factotum as little concerned with extending or preserving democracy in the region as its namesake vis-à-vis the Western Hemisphere. Both Monroe Doctrines—East and West—being entirely for the purposes of a grinding social, political and economic hegemony. That of which miserable masses in both places give mutely-eloquent testimony which communicates far more than mere words—with which Reagan could sometimes be so fluent—could ever do.

Hence it is because of this odious Reagan-reinforced U.S./Israeli Monroe Doctrine that the U.N. isn’t just now sending in the Blue Helmets, peacekeepers who have done such marvelous work recently in central African states. By all standards of humanity and justice, the U.S. and the world should plainly not be “holding back” to “wait and see” what happens in Egypt, where pro-democracy demonstrators voluntarily disarmed themselves when they occupied Tahrir Square, willingly submitted to shakedowns, and were thanked for this act of heroic magnanimity by having pro-Mubarek thugs let loose on them. All the while “their friends”, the soldiers, sat by. Obviously, in view of this and many more acts of heinous barbarity, this is the time for an emergency session of the Security Council, at which gathering it is definitely not the time for the U.S. to pull any of its usual Kruschev-reminiscent attention-getting antics. Or those more-preferred go-it-alone dramatics of vetoing, or otherwise obstructing the justice of this world body. A forum which as inadequate as it often is, with regard to other issues, is the only barrier the world has against a bloodbath, there on the Nile.

But as suggested in other articles to be found here, all-determining global kingpins invariably allow—or even patiently nurse along—perilous political events, in a midwifery typically catastrophic in its ultimate outcome. For these incredibly secretive, arrogantly own-counsel-keeping, globally-dominant forces—as “free enterprise” capitalist as they might loudly claim to be—are actually Marxist-dialectical to their radical agenda ridden core. Believing in a bitter clash of thesis against antithesis, giving violent birth to a “synthesis” which sees the revolutionary departure of things men hold dear. This fatal, apocalyptic orientation of present-day global potentates is one of the principal themes explored in extensive writings here on this site.

February 1, 2011: Muslims as moral allies. War on Sodomy takes the place of War on Terror.

Americans, as you see increasing numbers of prominent “conservative” figures “coming out of the closet”, either identifying themselves as sodomites or advocating sodomy-marriage—these two groups typically being one and the same—be aware that the main battle being waged today is over public and private morality—and not over a highly-politicized War on Terror. It is through this blinding, startling prism that we must view the recent statements of George W. Bush’s daughter—I never knew he had one—coming out in favor of sodomy-marriage, and in such an eager manner as to transparently identify herself as a sodomite, too.

Listen up, Christian folks: they are doing a gang-rape on the USA as I write, and the only real allies or defenders we can hope to find are none other than the Muslims themselves. Can you possibly draw the lines through the dots on this one, “conspiracy theorist”?

February 8, 2011: The only true liberty, the liberty to obey.

One stumbles dangerously on the edge of the abyss, when attempting to explain certain things to certain people, things they should already know. For obviously, to be free to exercise optional or even negligible amounts of virtue is one thing, but to pride oneself in a system bent on encouraging the downward dynamisms of Original Sin toward every depravity is quite another. Here indeed is where the Gospel blindness comes most into play, out there on the brink of the whistling, slippery void: since true liberty is instantly grasped and valued as such, like the eagle grasps the straw above the eerie, and deftly plants it, never to be dislodged. Or else it escapes the conceptual beak, is blown to the four winds, is likely never grasped at all. Jesus after all rejoiced at being able to preach the Holy Gospel ”to the poor”, not to the rich, proud and blind—among whose spare numbers folly will always have its liberally granted day-in-the-sun—and to find oneself thus vainly occupied is a frightful task or condition indeed. God rather spurns the self-conceited “rich”, as Our Blessed Lady indeed assures us, and sends them “empty away”: those arrogant knaves He would plainly have us treat in much the same disdainful way, or forsake their dangerous company if we find ourselves somehow in their midst. Here being the most rudimentary of moral lessons, the soaring liberty of obedience, known only to the Gospel “humble of heart”, the docility to that true law which always models the law of God, as best we might know it, or it is no law at all. Ah yes, this good and clean liberty is what makes us brother to the eagle, to the wind, to the Alpine snow, to our fellow man on the other side of the globe. While to find liberty to consist in disobedience or disorder—which can sometimes march oddly in column-and-line—is to choose the shortest possible route to Hell, it is to proclaim ourselves close cousin to elfish fiends of sodomy and abortion-on-demand. It is to write constitutions which release in us every primeval instinct to destroy, rather than “to build and to plant”. Which will you choose, a good God or a fiend, to obey the one unto life, or to follow the other into disobedient chaos, depravity and death? As I was saying, it’s a hard and thankless task to thus earnestly reason with mortal man.

Dear brother Muslim, I, a Catholic, love you for your devout instinct to obey, that good and clean law of God, against which can be raised no impious law of man. And indeed I accept you just as you are, in seeing God as an unknowable Word that cannot be Uttered, even as I see Him as Uttered in every created thing. For someone whose one desire is to obey, to be ordered to Godly authority: such a one will always be my friend, my ally, whatever might be his theology. Someone who obeys “in spirit and in truth”, and not with mere pious-sounding but death-dealing words. Someone who doesn’t “only say Lord, Lord”, and then goes about “seeking whom he may devour”.

If men seek this granite-fundamental freedom to obey, to be well-ordered—the only way that rational man is good at all—just as the very promontories stand good for unchangeable God—then every good thing is laid out before us, effortlessly to be had. After which God will speak in the echoing inward void quite plainly, about all other things besides.

January 31, 2011: The emptying of the meaning-content of words like “ghoul”: another example of a lead-pipe-level combat against English vocabulary in our Obama-progressive and “enlightened” times.

All the while not wishing to echo Loughner’s ravings in any way at all, I have to take note—as I do in a hyperlink above, on the “all the rage” new growth-industry linguistics—of the strategic gutting of many words loaded with profound depth-of-meaning, as in the case of this evocative word ghoul. The once-frequently-used term being a child no doubt in particular of the twentieth-century inferno of various species of epic cruelty, in an era of mounting hideous implacability found across a broad spectrum that ran from American A-bombs dropped on Japan to Stalin-era political and psychiatric prisons to various kinds of torture-and-death camps, to name only a few. The gripping word ghoul indeed rhyming ominously with the very word cruel. But all of a sudden—just look on your computer’s thesaurus—ghoul is announced in crisp, academic tones to simply mean “ghost” or “spirit”. That which was no doubt its meaning in an infinitely-more-innocent eighteenth century England: although I think that few of us want to go back to powdered wigs, so why should we want to go back to word-definitions at least as meaningless today? Indeed—better go get a big net to catch this “conspiracy theorist” in—what you have here is a selective and deliberate archaism, reversing course strategically in the otherwise-invariably progress-rushing, babbling linguistical stream.

Ah, the problem—as in the case of thousands of other key-word meaning-annihilations of our day—is that all these hovering and solicitous diction-nannies at Microsoft and the dictionary-revising linguistics department don’t want us to get “paranoid” about our wonderfully enlightened leaders. Hence do they nicely seal up all mental passageways that might harbor such dreadful thoughts in warped or simple minds. For the word ghoul, as it came to be understood by those of my generation, and one or two more senior before, precisely describes someone like Obama: a man who in turn models an ever posing and posturing Goebbels or Eichmann in the most hauntingly-familiar way. Since ghouls are especially noted for putting on grippingly-ironic poses, when in the midst of, or just before, some hideous deed. Adopting epic postures of belabored Nixesque sincerity, or smiling at you disarmingly, as did no doubt a readily front-door-admitted BTK, whether in poses engagingly-pleasant or soap-box serious, as does every sociopath from Boston to L.A. While the aggressive-warrior/anti-life Pilosi also fills the bill in a riveting manner, what with the odd-fellow marriage of morbid-yet-eagerly-pursued policies joined cheek-to-jowl with her incessant unaccountable grinning. Calling to mind as she does nothing so much as some pile of sun-bleached skulls in Cambodia, grinning in their ghoulish, hideous and abandoned sort of way.

January 31, 2011: Geraldo, Fox News, mostly a towering insult to the human mind. The trivial place of women on the show.

It is the duty of anyone who has a podium of any sort—even if it is from atop a rusty barrel in a debris-strewn corner of some alley, where human dignity can sometimes shine like the biblical “sparks among stubble”—to cry out against this affront to humanity represented by Fox. First of all there’s this O’Reilly, whose top ratings are really only a stunning testimonial to the distressing unavailability of good programming on U.S. television in general. As we are forced to flee to something marginally serious after the flood of mad depravity on other stations of every kind, with even a once-fairly-good CNN “coming out” with greater and greater frequency in zany levels of gropingly transparent sodomy-advocacy. O’Reilly for his part being a guy who ceaselessly interrupts and sadistically belittles any woman who dares to show up on the slipshod gangplank of his oddly-slapstick showboat: all of which suggests someone teetering on a male-ambivalence brink. Then there’s this dangerously-unstable Geraldo guy, who will go erratically out of his way, like some screaming artillery short-round, to broadside or peevishly belittle. Thus last night, amid all the gripping street-scene horrors, he curtly dismissed an Egyptian national, at the end of an interview, calling him “mate”, after having himself—Hispanic surname, curly hair and all—unaccountably turned cereal-box Aussie in a flash. Then of course there’s Beck, who a week ago found some tenuous excuse to go on a high-decibel rant against his own wife, pilloried in abstentia, right there in front of the camera. Incriminating himself remarkably like his local gangster namesake before Bob Kennedy’s ‘50s racketeering subcommittee, providing on-the-spot prima facie evidence against male tyrannies of the live-in-nanny, -housekeeper and -babysitter-ridden Mormon world. Indeed, all the women on the show appear to have been dashed in the head or something, in some way, in a state of shock, one of whom, in “had it up to here” exasperation, openly, on air-time, referred to some group-male-aggressive back studio incident. The accosting or ambush announced obliquely and with model dignity between news-casting lines, by one of these rare beauties who abound on that set. While another gal has changed unaccountably, a woman noted for her kindness to a certain segment of the D.C. poor, another lovely lady of poise now more like a deer caught in the headlights, going around shell-shocked, baring ample breasts as if this were mid-century Nairobi. After having for at least a year conducted herself with edifying grace and poise, and at least a modicum of modesty-of-dress.

Americans, we really were once a civilized people, as little as Fox might testify to that fact. And we can do better than this, and the alternative isn’t at all an openly sodomy-mongering MSNBC. Read this site for a refresher course, you might call it Civilization 202.

January 30, 2011: Failure is victory in U.S. foreign policy stretching from Vietnam to Iraq to Egypt.

There is to be no end to the number of young Americans to be sent hither and yon overseas, fed into bloody aggressive-warfare maws, to come home in coffins or to spend their lives wasting away in some wheelchair or hospital bed. Nor is there an end in sight for foreign nations done the same way, falling prey to grand visions of Napoleons from the “Land of the Free”. For the USA, as stated several times in articles below, isn’t really in charge of its own house, being rather uniquely and in utter prostration under the control of a tight-knit cadre, a pyramided network of secret or secretive societies or bodies, these identified here on this site in the most precise of terms. Accordingly, the method-of-choice of a century-long externally-commandeered U.S. foreign policy actually sees failure as victory, in a moral house-of-mirrors which deliriously glorifies a veritable meat maul approach. An agenda which doesn’t really care whether “our man” in Cairo or elsewhere stays or goes, as long as age old, nation-defining institutions and ways-of-life are uprooted, or slowly whither away. Here being an international cabal, at the helm of state, which brokers a radical, precipitous, traditional-institution-collapsing, religious-faith-repudiating all-points-overthrow in vulnerable nations around the globe. A program for which bloodshed is a slurry for horror-driven “advancements” of every size and scope. The modern secular-messianism which powers this global-power-coterie—visionaries of a remorseless agenda dialectical-Marxian to the core—holding bloodshed, chaos, heart-rending grief to be mere tools in a tool-chest of mentally-and-emotionally-transfixing “pragmatic” means. After which “softening up” process nations across Asia and Africa are slated summarily to be scooped up and fed into the maws of a rapidly-developing, futuristic machine of which we now and again get some fleeting glimpse. As in an “advanced world” medical science obsessed with abortion, euthanasia, organ-snatching death redefined, the medically-fruitless invasion and destruction of the embryo, and so on: with infernal visions of “creating life” marking the horror-transfixed visage of a Hillary, the parade-ground tones-of-command of a Barack. These and other all-powerful figures—using catastrophic “failures” as so many stepping-stones—struggle to replace the uplifting values of human life by obsessions with surveillance, with full-body imaging, with the production of chips in which men ultimately become mere dogs on the end of a short digital leash. Indeed, here is the progress of a Judeo-Freemasonry which at its high and determining reaches worships the gods of an ancient Egypt or Canaan, the former having likewise been technologically-based in some mysterious way. For the purposes of which ultimate tyranny all the fragile unpredictability of genuine human life must be denied, classed as “backward”, “paternalistic”, and so on.

Hence to answer the question of whether or not a lumbering, teetering, wrecklessly-destructive U.S. foreign policy toward noted nations has been a failure we reply with a resounding no. For this sort of foreign policy is indeed based on failure in any human or moral sense; which is to say that it is based on victory for forces which plan the cold-blooded destruction of all things of traditional earnest and heartfelt human value. While it utterly execrates all things truly divine. This then—as stated on this site so many times—is the real meaning of the “progress” behind which we are urged so insistently, so commandingly to march, in a perversely-heroic lockstep column and line.

For what is really being mauled and annihilated in a dual-citizen-controlled U.S. foreign policy is any will to resist, on the part of these “rest of men”, in “progressive” persuasions first introduced to the world at such houses-of-horror as Pitesti in Romania, or in the eugenics-research prisons of the South in early decades of the twentieth century, or at Abu Ghraib. These horrors being translated psycho-socially into bloody, population-terrorizing, torture-ridden mass-laboratories of Afghanistan or Iraq.

But there is a way out of all of this politically-illegitimate, apocalyptic tyranny, a way forward to a genuine national identity yet to be realized or even explored. A Catholic Way which we pursue untiringly on this site.

February 6, 2011: “Social media” not so social after all. Egyptians, get ready to get thrown out of the bird’s-nest of twitter for once and for all, and to fly on your own.

Man was created amid a panoply of molecularly-complex creatures which are in many ways his like, while he was decidedly not created among an infinitude of sub-atomic particles and tiny bits of genes (I don’t know what these little smithereens are properly called). Thus man functions, communicates and arbitrates best—and generally keeps from going social-and-personally mad—within this setting, made by a good God—Who looked out and “saw that it was all very good”. But I doubt very much that the Almighty would have said as much about all these little particles and smooth or sharp-edged gadgets made out of them: productive of atomic warfare, of citizen surveillance, of the idle or malicious gossip that increasingly dominates internet traffic, and so on. Furthermore, and better yet, I believe that this same good God—He Who knew so well what was good for His children and rational creatures—is just now getting ready to return us, kicking and screaming though we might, to these good things He gave us so long ago, to release us from the rigid bondage of atoms and molecules. From stocks and bonds, from “careers” of Egyptian youths, sources-of-income, of a future, which were somehow annihilated before their very eyes. This on the very “threshold” of much anticipated “successful” years after university let out.

What I am suggesting to you, dear people of the globe, is that you should forthwith return to the most rudimentary sort of social reciprocity, to dirtying your hands in the good and guileless soil, that you labor to forsake your little electronic devices, which grow smaller indeed by the day. (And which will soon enough be nicely embedded in your very hide). That you begin once again—in eager imitation of your great-grandparents—to construct a society and economy which doesn’t depend upon an ultra-centralized system mostly designed to put you in heavy chains. This bondage being brokered largely through the looming threat of starvation, imprisonment, the provocateur arrangement of aggressive, population-exterminating and impoverishing war.

Surely, you may take some other route, but I believe that this naturalistic one will be blessed by God, and will indeed be the only one sustainable at all, in the end. Provided we pursue it in a spirit of piety and humility, such as this naturally-embedded way so readily and aptly conveys. A spirit of love and true obedience—rather than abject subservience to some venal group of men—which comes with a basically-naturalistic setting like a hand in a glove. Whereas quite the contrary if we continue to depend upon the “social media” we will be left entirely alone, “high and dry”: for these electronic platforms were originally designed to serve states and armies, not human persons or familiar social groups. In other words, the social media aren’t really so social after all, but rather-more-readily inhuman, coldly-utilitarian, adaptable to every sort of violating, invasive treachery. Ultimately capable only of arbitrating the most dehumanizing sort of centralization, away from the genuine social institutions, with stoutest roots in the soul, the family, the neighborhood and circle-of-friends. Structures, enablers which God planted in our humanity, and which He recognized as, and lovingly designed to be, “very good”.

I myself think that the Egypt—indeed the wide, wide world—of idle engineers and hamstrung gadgetry is the same as the old Egypt of the Pharaohs, and that it is cursed by God in the very same way. That it is basically a gigantic act of pride, presumption and rebellion, sustained on the investment monies of the usurers of all times. Had it been undertaken in a better spirit, this foray into nano-technology and sysco-circuitry might have born some good fruit, but this to me is only idle speculation. So that it remains that we must begin to fashion a return to the old way of life—albeit intelligently, perhaps incorporating some selected technical achievements on the way—if we would truly sever tyrannical cords which bind us now. Which tie us all—Americans as well as Egyptians—to serving Israel alone—and neither global neighbor nor native land. Which separate us efficiently from the care of our families, the cultivation of our own fields, the growing of our own crops, the retention of our own noble identity, as children of a good God.

This naturalistic way is much discussed on this site, perhaps especially in my two books, readable free of charge here online. Although the real “brain work”—albeit based solidly on the broad foundation of the once-universal micro-local ten-family sociopolitical frankpledge—rising from there to the local, to the regional, and from thence to the national, even perhaps to a popularly-established throne—can only be anticipated in real terms in a rather hypothetical way. As it depends upon the here and now of God’s providence, of the efforts of you yourself, and your family and associates, in those peculiar circumstances which will come your way.

January 28, 2011: Article updated, added-to continually, in light of developments in the Muslim world. Frankpledge Party Political Science 101. Point-by-point, what is the genuine state?

All important and especially critical within howling wind-tunnels of today’s media-and-official wind-of-words is this word genuine, prefixing the word state. For today, far from “big government” claims of Tea Partiers, the ever-shrewd aim of the domestic enemy—to quote yesterday’s Gunsmoke episode, “as savvy as a bunkhouse rat”—isn’t to impose any state upon us at all, big or small, but rather to use the state’s dead body as a kind of hellishly-reinvigorated Frankenstein. To manipulate this freakish “free enterprise”, “pro-choice” apparition with puppeteer-strings, these worked vigorously by overbearing private-interest figures of every stripe. This veritable illegitimate, baby-killing, sodomy-ridden, aggressive-warrior cadaver being set in motion to stalk the earth in the most frightful, menacing way. While quite the contrary the genuine state is simply us, and doesn’t need to be freed from any sort of “government” at all, but rather from this insidious tyranny from rat-savvy biblical “enemies of mankind”. They who now and again don’t shrink from even killing some of their own, to prove some point, to achieve some shameful, ill-acknowledged goal.

Hence before any of my readers adopts all the standard Fox hair-trigger-patriot responses to all these gripping events overseas—and vociferously advocate the rigid preservation of political alignments which redundantly guarantee the safety and regional ascendancy of a “wonderfully democratic” Israel—it will pay dividends in peace and sanity to reflect for a moment on the true nature of the state. (The word “government”, that great neo-con pejorative, was abandoned long ago as being grossly inadequate and misleading, as a term for the commonweal, here on this site). Indeed a striking parallel is to be found in all respects in comparing those who “don’t quite get it right” with regard to the state, on the one hand, with those who don’t quite get it right with regard to Christian or Catholic Faith, on the other. Hence that great dust-raising crowd of New Church Catholics of today whose chief media-meeting-place is EWTN—thus presenting a prominent media target-for-critique that I can never quite resist—who love the “feel” of being entirely Catholic. Who, to give them just credit, rejected long ago the murderous political morality of the “pro-choice Catholic” crowd up on Capitol Hill. Who indeed go so far as to dig up and brandish old documents daily as evidence of their orthodoxy as well. But whose doctrinal/moral adherence stops short of doing much of anything that will find them alone and friendless, even among this seemingly-staunch “conservative Catholic” group. As in the case of the one recently-televised priest giving a (usually-studio-verboten) sermon on charity toward the domestic poor, who, in the face of an array of rock-hard neo-confederate faces out in the studio-church pews, simply acted as if he were paying them all great, overflowing complements. Greeting this great, well-to-do stone-monolith of impassivity with great broad grins of theatrical delight, and even humorous repartee. When St. John Vianney would forthwith have classed them all whited sepulchers, or perhaps even “fashion a knotted cord” and driven them all out into the cold, and been done with it all. Indeed, to misunderstand the state, to “almost get it right” after having had it right for a thousand years or more, is in the most real and bruising of terms to miss it by more than a mile. And in practical terms it feeds ones political neighbor to the wolves, so that in hair’s-breadth-accurate scales of moral value the theologically-erroneous but impassioned sincerity of today’s tumult-ridden Muslim world outweighs by a ton all the tidy moral and political cowardice, and effeminate meting-out of generosity or loyalty, which this personally-rewarding and ingratiating dual “not getting it quite right” represents.

But to describe the genuine state, first of all, it has both upward and downward loci or benign-tensions-of-power. The upward tension being from out of the nature of mature and rational man, in divinely-mirroring and -honoring self-governing instincts planted in him by a good God, Whom he calls “Abba, or Father”. Mature, well-disciplined man—of any color or condition—is however no child to be summarily ordered around by other men, but rather an inviolable cosmos all-his-own, to be sedulously honored as such. While by contrast the downward polar locus-of-legitimate-power is that of God Himself, He Who, again in roots found in the very nature of human society, establishes fatherly or motherly figures who “stand in His place”, as the catechism used to tell us so inimitably well. Major figures thus exercising power downward, in an authority whose ultimate seat is found in a chief executive or even a royal throne. Offices which are honored and obeyed, yet vigilantly prevented, by head-of-state and frankpledge-and-moot-assembly-organized people alike, from overstepping constructive reciprocal bounds. While to depart from these benign tensions—to interpose a lot of cynical, strictly-self-interested brokers, or even some allegedly-all-determining, hysterically-embraced “middle class”—to scorn “binding ties” of elements which mirror each other after the manner of Father and Son within the very celestial Trinity Itself—this is to cast ones self into the “outer darkness” indeed. Even though at the same time, within the marvelous paradoxes of such a realm, the middle class does decidedly operate as a kind of enabler, to facilitate this labor of love in many practical ways. The middle class thus indeed corresponding as it were to the Holy Ghost Himself, within the divine Family, outside of which political modeling or embodiment there is indeed to be found—as is so evident today—only “the weeping and the gnashing of teeth”. These twin opposite focal-points of political power then strengthening, reinforcing each other, in a labor-of-love which, as John Kennedy indeed stated so eloquently, “asks not” anything motivated out of selfish greed, but rather “asks what it can do” for its polar-yet-self-imaging partner, in this Trinitarian/official agape feast.

As an example of both upward and downward power, there was always in an early-medieval, nascent and disunited France this towering ideal of national identity, of a mystic Francia, even as an opposite local, upwardly-consolidating popular self-rule was embodied in a special way in those seneschals who in local customs and patois personified both the local power and genius, on the one hand, and the royal throne, on the other.

Secondly, the state having established itself in the immovable strength of self-giving love, modeled upon the Blessed Trinity, the monetary currency of same is “backed” or guaranteed by the very strength alone of the state or commonweal, and not by popular-wealthy-mulcting “bonds”. The economy finding unshakeable footings in a prosperity-breeding stability, reflected in money by a non-fluctuating solidity traditionally called the “inertia of the coin”. A monetary dependability which never in history entertained the larcenous (but “progressive”) fantasy of a central bank, at least not before the treasonous surrender to the bankers from the late 1600s on. A wealth-prolific monetary inertia founded in safe roads and just laws, in guilds which sold goods from shop to counter, with few if any middle-men in between. A stable currency grounded in customs and usages which encourage a generous and trustful interplay.

Thirdly, because love is the very glue which holds together such a genuine state, international goodwill is likewise the very glue which holds together a world of such sovereignties. A cosmos which positively needs the interplay of all its divergent parts, modeling that Godhead in which Love is the one-syllabled lingua franca of eternity. A globe in which it is understood by nations in all quadrants that “the good of one is the good of all”. The citizens of such a Rome—radically different from “dog eat dog” denizens of another globe—have no interest in seeing others stunted morally, economically or physically—although of course the malformed, the “less comely” of St. Paul, are indeed cherished in a special way, as especially contributory to the good of the whole. These Romans rather wishing all men to be if possible hale and hearty, whom they labor to prosper in all possible ways, with whom they wish to trade in particular this inward treasure of reciprocal love.

Point four: obviously from the above, the religious beliefs of the people of a nation are fundamental in motivating the achievement of the good state. That central fixture of humanity, the good state, being as it were God’s own almoner here on earth, in terms of liberty, prosperity and the boons of neighborly friendship alike. And furthermore the quintessential place of religion in the mobilization and perpetuation of the good state is a lesson needed with special urgency here in the USA: where there is firmly in charge in all institutions and branches of government a tight-knit cadre of progressives bitterly opposed to any input of religion in matters of state. Which is of course to emasculate religion—the eternal sources of the ethical consciousness of the people—as any sort of effective force—and ultimately to put in its place some anti-life, aggressive-warfare Aztec serpent-god, drenched in human blood. The most disorderly and perverse of social and political dynamics being empowered in this radical “separation of church and state”—with a staggering parallel dominion of synagogue and state—as we are indeed seeing in the USA here at home, and by its overpowering influence inevitable around the world as well. A dominant elite on both right and left, these untiring foes of any practical application of religion are epitomized in figures like John Bolton, another in a long line of well-rewarded, carefully-cultivated exponents of U.S./AIPAC-driven ambitions around the globe. Bolton, the personification of Bush-era foreign policy, just now vilifying the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt as a “terrorist organization”—a handy demonization when all else fails—with this indigenous Muslim group being hysterically lumped together with Hamas—this latter of course strictly a heroically-embattled Palestinian phenomenon from the word go, attempting to roll back Israeli occupation which since World War I beginnings has already cost at least a million Palestinian lives. The Muslim Brotherhood, in an entirely different setting, having from its inception been overwhelmingly dedicated to peaceful means, a group which given a chance would mobilize the most constructive elements of Egyptian society. The Brotherhood being such a large movement—in spite of constant political repression—as to contain a broad spectrum of popular input in all areas of concern as well. A dynamic popular movement which might easily overpower backward radical elements—sometimes indeed tapped by our own CIA—cabals which perform “honor killings”, which oppress women in a host of ways, which behead converts to other religions, and the like.

This, then, is the genuine state of which we speak. But as closely as it might be approached by some—today especially by non-Christians, who typically-enough are not yet completely under the treacherous dominion of noted “enemies of man”—it is found in crystalline integrity only within the Catholic political philosophy and creed. That toward which this Good Shepherd today lovingly—not at all by political tyranny or force of arms—leads his human sheep.

January 26, 2011: State of the Union, a largely ignored and forgotten privatization threatens to bring down the USA.

When it comes to “entitlements”, first on the list to be outlawed should be the stock-market milking of insurance itself, making a cash-cow out of what was once a massive-but-entirely-benign system of payments and collections—what was originally a super-safe pool with gargantuan principal-amounts growing by the day. Insurance—medical, auto or other—having over the past century been transformed into the biggest ponzi scheme going, one which murderously defeats the dynamism which once made insurance the prodigally-abundant, good and dynamic thing that it once was. For when you make insurance a “for profit” industry it instantly becomes a host organism for bums and leaches of the larcenous, paper-shuffling kind. While good and genuine—rather than cancerous—insurance largely grew out of the montes pietatis of the Medieval Church, and particularly of the Franciscan Order, with modern-day equivalents extant until relatively recently. An institution which depended upon charitable contributions like bequests of decedents, upon the unhurried repayment of interest-less loans, multiple sources which fed continually into a pool-of-wealth mounting yearly in towering size. But is there any way to make the stock-market-traded corporation, insurance or otherwise, even more grossly inefficient, formidable in its own unnatural way? Enter privatization, and a whole new universe of despotism and rapacity is revealed in weird array.

But most disturbing of all, this epic chiseling and fat-cat-freeloading is a principle source of working capital for certain grand visions of revolutionary, totalitarian change, a veritable manifesto pursued with breathless ardor here in the Bush/Obama USA. A deadly fever for which privatization provides a mountain of added fuel. The whole inscrutable, pan-systemic-mobilizing phenomenon—in some ways unique to our power-monolithic day—being plied with a remorseless and long-predicted deliberation. Employing the all-important trigger of a John-Birch-Society foreseen well-engineered state of national emergency. This treacherous recourse being notably realized in skillfully-black-ops-contrived “terrorist attacks”: tares sown by a biblical/domestic “enemy”, destined quickly to sprout other irruptions of a more indigenous and spontaneous kind. As well as in a parallel and equally-strategic, indeed Johnson-to-Obama patiently nourished collapse of finance, employment and real estate. These latter closely synchronized with the insurance debacle noted above.

Critical to this all-embracing con-game is a repugnant aura of religion steadily invoked over pedestrian functions of state: this in an obscenely-motivated new veneration for the flag, under the ample folds of which are deftly hidden many new and unimagined things indeed. Privatization being the genie which most ably works this unsparing transformation, a harmless-sounding, one-time inescapable buzzword, one however heard unaccountably-little anymore. Begun under Bush, discretely continued under the ultra-secretive Obama, this new institution has foundations poured with increasing girth under confidentiality-ridden congressional and “executive privilege” rules. These in turn inaugurated under a long series of Patriot Act and related legislation, hastily enacted during Christmas recess interludes. Insider firms of every kind being admitted into a select vanguard, granted “no bid” contracts and privileged-party consultation, and much more. Has any of this changed under the every-nasal-toned-sanctimonious Obama? Guess again, friend.

Hence the increasingly nonexistent role of the people themselves, regarding matters of state—in particular the waging of theatrically-argued aggressive war—a function with mounting uprighteous hauteur reserved to upwardly-tending, privatized tiers of power. In an exclusivity which the old standard civil service used to be too open and above-board to even contemplate, let alone allow. Under all the “heroic” new departures, electronically-mediated might being really the only “right” involved. Indeed, evidence is rife that even the military has a hard time with methods of interrogation and modes of detention initiated with the War on Terror. Disturbing things which require a kind of loyalty most commonly found among anything-goes “private contractors”, star players well-at-home in a coldly impersonal, non-morality-based corporate culture, given ultra-empowering privatized wings upon which to fly. The endemically-confidential globe-ranging corporation being rocket-fueled through this wedding with privatization, giving birth to a staggeringly-cynical new business as usual which is Uncle Sam’s new and fiery global-cattle-claiming brand. Transparency, humanity, and democratic rule being summarily driven off the range.

Accordingly, it is from out of this lockstep culture of privatization—fed by cash-cow schemes noted above—that every species of social change and behavior modification is being imposed upon people and globe: the foremost example of which is this contaminating advancement of ignominious sodomy: give it whatever pretty names you might. A sadistic, human-dignity-breaking phenomenon being institutionally imposed upon the electorate here, as I write, and powerfully enabled within an amoral privatized/corporate culture in which the filthy and exploitive relationships of sodomy are entirely at home. A scorn for the moral values of the American past being found in all of this, a mockery epitomized in this latest zany and disgusting display at the highest levels of state: of congressmen allegedly “going on dates” with their colleagues. This in last nights in-itself-insignificant mixing of parties in seating arrangements at the new, ever-meaningless, bewildering Obama epic-harangue.

Hence, Tea Partiers sincere or not, we should be scorning this sort of “private enterprise” which has become the menacing and all-deciding power of our day. That privatization-ridden revenue-milking and power-rent-farming which more than anything else is the cause of “cost overruns”, of a Blackwater-driven ballooning of the national debt, of an un-monitorable placing of global-corporate executives as prime pork-barrel movers in matters of economy or state. The USA being weighted down with the millstone of weapons procurement, of the endless jockeying of corporate interests into pivotal military-and-commercial positions around a “war on terror” globe. And the “private industry” activities of a Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac which have irremediably destabilized housing from coast to coast.

Here, then, again, is clearly illustrated the reason for the restoration advocated here, of a return to the solid self-governing roots of Western society. Genuine issues of liberty and tyranny hardly being decided in the invocation of a secretive, state-dominating “private enterprise”, nor in waving a much-exploited flag. We rather taking our stand, as did St. Joan of Arc of centuries gone by, under the banner of the two Sacred Hearts, of Jesus and Mary, under the safety of a truly free and legitimate state. That honest realm which gladly acknowledges that it already has enough to handle in doing good and innocent things, and has no interest in taking on the business of raising little Johnnie or Jane. Only wishing to remove any obstacles to such onerous duties, on behalf of an officially-loved and -respected Mom and Dad. That true state which must keep an aura of the sacred, which must primarily exist to give glory to God, if it is to accomplish aims of any more earthly kind. The state today—in this deciding era of mankind—must at last rule under the full, New Covenant application of the law of God: if it is indeed to be free in any legitimate sense at all.

January 23, 2011: Economic crisis recovery. Bringing King Kong to bay. Obama a very impressive straight-faced liar, strutting his stuff, loitering around the ocean-going Potomac wharf.

Economic crisis-recovery is extremely simple, and radically divergent from ordinary exigencies of supply and demand. By definition because it is a crisis, you do things differently than ever before: for to give a domestic example when burglars are at the front door you wisely leave off the afternoon nap or lounge in front of the TV set for now. A new mood or departure being in order too when the garage has somehow been set ablaze: what with all the gas-soaked rubbish, disposed-of with reckless abandon in the trash-can next to the bench-grinder, or the still-red-hot welding machine. Hence as the greatest U.S. peacetime recovery in history so amply showed, just after World War II, and especially after the end of the Korean War, the Government—nasty word, but the only source of investment money to be willingly parted with nowadays—must jump-start small local firms, if things are once again to “get going” any time soon.

But these terms local and small are positively critical, an absolute sine qua non: as otherwise we are defeating ourselves, are throwing our hard-earned tax-monies to the oceanic breeze, to end up lubricating industrial gears in Thailand or India, China or The Philippines, Poland or the Middle East. For as much as we love these folks, foreign investment is not really the crisis matter at hand. Only small businesses can provide the multiplier-rich natural stimulus which results in sustained local and regional prosperity, feeding from there into a national recovery of the most vigorous kind.

But instead of this simple expediency, we get rocket-science-justified gargantuan deficits, open-market debts, cheek-to-jowl with golden-age Kennedy-era-hearkening tax-breaks, these parade-ground partners marching in jerky column and line with historic spending amounts on Haliburton projects, or on an assortment of costly, revenue-deferred green energy initiatives which inevitably employ mammoth mega-firms. These no doubt being low-return subsidiaries of stock-speculated major geo-firms, and not Mom and Pop hometown ventures with a multiplier that scrapes the sky. So that the meager benefit we reap is mostly in domestically-two-dimensional-slender terms of wages and salaries—“don’t get so uppity as to think you are the boss”—and hardly at all in terms of domestic-business-nourishing, backyard-seed-planting investments whose burgeoning consequences stay put right here, “increase and multiply” according to the divine command, between the two big seas.

Indeed, in all this is to be found exactly the same “big plan” that was set in motion by the ever-mystifying Franco, in the Spain of the 1970s: that strategy, rigorously adopted by Spanish Opus Dei political/economic leaders of immediately-succeeding years, that domestic industrial template which would single-handedly make Spain into a lowly wage-earner’s satrapy. With major industrial and commercial real estate fatally hemorrhaging away to nations and geo-firms outside. With then-much-maligned but now-nostalgically-remembered “old line families” on the Peninsula, coddled under Franco’s wartime syndicalist arrangements, destined to lose out in a big way. Preparing for the desperate financial-crisis-succumbing Spain of today. Thus too the bloated U.S. defense budget, that epic enterprise which turns out hundred-billion-plus dollar, override-ridden contracts for dinosaur jets and lame-duck helicopters, chamber-jamming small-arms and deadline-obsolete ships by the dozen, to grease local pork-barrel needs. How untouchable can untouchable be, oh heroic, “patriotic” spend-slashers on both sides of an invariably weapons-industry-ingratiating isle?

Plainly, we are headed—of course amid ever-necessary Obama undertaker poses, eloquently interspersed with cabinet-and-congressional kicks-and-screams—to a regimen of desperation-induced revolutionary change. Oh, once we make the much-feared “plunge”, we will find out, after the first shock, like first Springtime bathers at the pool, that “it isn’t really so bad after all”. As we grow accustomed to all the Group-Speak, the increasingly-pervasive listening and imaging devices, the ubiquitous bar-codes, the stepping off smartly, thunderously, in school-and-workplace lockstep, in bipartisan “united we stand” column and line.

Advocated kinds of locally-owned and operated receptacles of investment could take abandoned schools in tax-scrapped Detroit cities and other such megapoli and convert them into ready-built, readily-adaptable local clinics, colleges, libraries, light-industrial factories and assembly-plants, low-income apartment-complexes, to name a few. Right there in the middle of a sea of the desperately-job-searching unemployed, providing employment both immediate and long-term, and an almost-instant education, health and other infrastructure upon which to build. These initial measures to be joined by others of the sort suggested throughout this site. These being projects hardly suitable to globe-ranging visions of a Haliburton, hardly concerned with deadly and financial-coffin-nailing nation-building enterprises far away. Mammoth projects whose incalculable expense we now so regularly—in the midst of a looming domestic bankruptcy of unprecedented size—“put on the tab”. With undertaker-like doomsday tones invoking dire necessities and terrifying “points of no return”.

But as it stands now, the Big Boys most eager desire is to break any chance of any repeat of the noted historical, rock-solid sort of recovery. And to replace it with sweeping, revolutionary schemes of radical, inconceivable change. Effecting everything from sex to religion to life in the womb. Any amount or degree of economic, social and political collapse is perfectly acceptable to these Napoleonic figures who rule under such a thin disguise today. In all this being hijacked the last remaining chance to make the old locally-focused, faith-inspired way work. As it could so easily and energetically do, if given only half a chance.

But in fact, despite all these bleak, desperate, apostasy-driven stratagems, any least well-coordinated resistance will bring it all crashing down. For this King Kong of a revolutionary mega-system, trampling into shards all in its lumbering path, has feet of clay, is sustained only at the most crushing mental and social, military and financial cost. Hence do we counsel building locally, in a plodding, deliberate way, at the micro-local Frankpledge level, and gradually up from there. This is to build a real society, a real infrastructure, to establish a truly legitimate authority. Waiting patiently, if vigilantly, for this counter-intuitive, counter-productive, spiritually-morbid anti-life machine to finally and irremediably break down, run out of steam. Just step back, watch and see. A monster-system sustained only by constant mega-bailout packages, Wall-Street-Banker welfare, polemically-belabored, black-ops-provocateur arranged wars. In a political theater by which, by the grace of God, we won’t be fooled anymore.

Indeed, although there would be challenges in approaches suggested here, they would be a drop in the bucket compared to present unnecessary wars undertaken, imaginary challenges invented, opportunities cynically hijacked, in the present artificially-engineered malaise. While sources of energy that are truly and constructively needed—for human betterment, and not for some bloody, profit-and-power-motivated spree—in methods closer to nature, using “natural platforms” wherever feasible—all these things have yet to be tried. Things I know by Faith are entirely possible under the fatherly guidance of a good God, His love a far cry from the cynical dominion and ambitions of ever-cloud-shrouded forces that rule us now.

January 24, 2011: Huckabee, the sanctimonious agent of Walmart, and judge-at-large. EWTN and the “New Crusades”.

I don’t have immediate access to unfiltered news from the other side of the world, but I do know how to “connect dots”, and there are plenty of them out there, in particular with respect to the inexhaustible efforts of EWTN to launch what amounts to another medieval crusade. All of a sudden these on-the-whole rather bland people are laying down broad hints about lances, truncheons and halberds—although, of course, a cruise-missile or two will always do—with a weekly program now airing which struggles valiantly to infer—in between the lines, the favorite place for the Baldwins of these heroic times—that the Crusades never really ceased. Although any scholarly work written before the more-recent Bush-to-Obama war-hawk hysteria declares the unequivocal end of any serious desire to advance Islam by the sword as coming around the end of the 1600s. And military efforts from the Christian West having deteriorated into bloody southward land-grabs launched from Russia from the time of Peter the Great, and round-robin alliances back and forth between Russia, Poland, Austria and The Golden Horde or the Porte. So that today’s eruptions of Jihad—real or U.S./Israeli black-ops fronted or impersonated—are entirely a thing apart, operating across a time-chasm much like that which forever separates the pious Lazarus from the lecherous Dives. EWTN having plainly joined hands, with epic piety as always, with aims and claims of Israel, the U.S. corporate world and the many “foundations” and NGOs which these notorious bedfellows so laboriously ply. From North Africa to the Middle East to the South China Sea. Since according to the brilliant analysis of Lyndon LaRouche the only place for religion in the Neo Con—read here latter-day Nazi—world is to deliriously holler “ra, ra for our team”. To motivate the manufacture of arms, the carrying-on of open and clandestine deeds-of-war. While sustaining a mediocrity-ridden form of faith such as debauched with such ponderous abandon out of the babbling quarters of Vatican II.

Of equal stature in this world of epic hypocrisy and lie-telling comes this Huckabee guy—whose show is like one hour-long effort to recreate Andy Griffith’s Mayberry in all its condescending and vaguely-sarcastic glory—a fellow who has just now taken up the glorification of Walmart as the savior of the “little guy” looking for a good deal at a store. Apparently this great valiant war-hawk—close cousin to the “crusading” corporate-crowd at EWTN—doesn’t connect the many dots which tie together this mammoth superstore with slave-labor camps stretched across Southeast Asia and the Land Behind the Wall. While furthermore blankly regarding it as “the breaks of the game” that small-town America is drying up and blowing away as I write, courtesy of the “why pay more?” store.

We here at this site have been warning about pulling the tail on the Islamic tiger for close to a decade now. So that we may then with epic valor fight all these Israeli/corporate treacherously-provoked wars. This great Muslim feline isn’t going to just sit still while we feed it to the jackals and wolves, and then claim blank-facedly that self-defensive reactions prove beyond a doubt that the Crusades never ended. Of course, it is a monstrous injustice, this killing of Christians now accelerating across the Muslim—indeed, even the Hindu—world, and seldom have either of these religionists been especially kind to we of the One True Faith. But things have gotten much worse for our brethren overseas since we brutally betrayed such Christian-friendly men as Saddam Hussein, back when folks at EWTN first took the old Crusader’s sword out of the closet, and began in tentative moments to wave it around in the air. However, God has His own reasons for allowing all this folly; a God Who will never accept a Catholicism or a Christianity Judaized to the core. He Who is indeed preparing even now to make the whole world Catholic: not indeed by the sword, but by the power of love. And for the glory—not of the State of Israel—but of His Holy Name.

January 22, 2011: Illegals: “the only ones who will do that kind of work”.

Quickly to the matter at hand: consider the grim or noisy gaggle of illegal carpenters who ceaselessly harass some typically-lone white new-hire who has to work with them, who is more deft by far up high, up at the peak, or framing in the cripples out on the hip: a guy who is instantly subjected to unrelenting personal harassment, up there at mortally-dangerous heights. And who is then pelted with nails when he has to go down to the slab, probably to get something the illegals, in high Hispanic hauteur, refuse to go and fetch. Why? Because their cousin Julio needs a job more than this “gringo bum”, whom they will sooner or later succeed in driving away, as the pressure increases in mounting brutality of kind and degree. Then also consider the White guy, a decorated veteran, who tried to work on a vegetable farm in Yuma, in the miserable, filthy, heat-exhaustion-prone labor of stretching out irrigation piping, who the day he was hired was confronted by an angry, threatening mob of “wonderfully friendly and smiling” Latinos from below the border. Who when he went out on a crew, on 12 hour, 7 day a week, no-overtime shifts like the rest, was repeatedly sent out on “wild goose chases”, to open or shut sluice-gates that were at least a mile apart. Out there in the 115 degree heat, and this on foot, while everyone else went by truck. A guy who when he finally quit, just after being confronted out in the fields by a dope-deranged Mexican maniac, egged on by eight or ten others of his general ilk, a punk who angrily threw these forty-foot-long pipes around in the knee-deep mud as if they were toothpicks: at that ultimate hour he was apprised in highly-sympathetic tones, down at the office, that he was paranoid, to harbor such imaginary suspicions about these wonderful guys. And I could go on and on, about these “lazy Americans” who “don’t want to do that kind of work”. Take note, ever-sanctimonious O’Reilly, treason comes in many shades, and patriotism isn’t really about killing innocent women and children, a dozen at a time, as “collateral damage”, overseas.

This is where they “separate the men from the boys”, and the reason that Fox rants and raves about the same half-dozen subjects for days or weeks on end, meticulously manicures our opinions about which direction congressional or presidential opinion may or may not be going, spends whole hour-long segments putting a spit-polish on mega-mogul-imaging shoes, or sputtering like Beck in a grand mental vacuum about grand political theory. Precisely so that this “fine station” can deftly and off-handedly let fly a fable like this one, catching the viewer completely unawares. This notorious McMansion-correctness litmus test, with its inseparable O’Reillian blow to the survival-rate of the American blue-collar working man: “if I were a Mexican, I would be trying to get over the fence, too”.

Now people like we at this website and Crusade may on occasion weaken a bit, in between a regimen of articles and road-activities rigorous and perilous in the extreme: in weak-sister surrenders, as when we gave the blank-faced Obama some measure of credit for a good speech, and (rather foolishly) credited him with goodwill as well, in uttering those very well-rehearsed words, at the stadium there in Tucson. We don’t just condemn people forever, without any chance of repentance, parole or reprieve: I leave all that up to God, and of course to hushed-honored denizens of Fox TV. (Their day-time dramas on the whole mammoth Fox Affiliate Network are in their own campy way just as dull and class-obsequious as their commentary.) O’Reilly, Hannity and Beck meanwhile whiling away a whole week loitering noisily around the vicinity of a critical subject, throwing nasty garbage-in/garbage-out lines at feckless passers-by. I think that in the end we on the Crusade are far more courageous, even if occasionally we might weaken or lose our way, in a kind of polemical shell-shock, as well as amid the “bombs bursting in air” of the many object-lessons of writers and other people-of-conviction who are uprighteously “detained” or otherwise destroyed in a trice.

These commentators are just another kind of thug, that’s all. And I’m afraid I have to include EWTN, the “Catholic” network, in this critique as well. True, they do now and then do some good or middling spiritual or doctrinal programming, but when it comes to issues like this they “lay down like a rug”. And indeed threaten someday to provoke a persecution-of-Catholics here as horrific as that now being seen in the Middle East. For the notion is out there on the street that we Catholics want this mega-influx of illegals because this way “the Catholics will take over”. Since most of these Mestizos go to church down at Fr. Jim’s hugging, swaying, communion-in-the-hand, New Ordo parish.

Now I will admit that I do indeed want to see the USA willingly, with ardent spiritual passion, embrace the Catholic Faith, but that’s a far cry from conspiratorially hugging these invaders to ones middle-class breast, thereby swelling the parish treasury; illegals who are “so good at cutting hedges and fixing things around the house”. An overflowing appreciation of “smiling, harmless” people which incidentally—and with further degrees of righteous rectitude—gives us another excuse to ignore all these (English or Slavic, Irish, Black, or Italian descended) “homeless bums”. Who “hang around” here and there, disturbingly like the ineradicable residue of a guilty conscience. Sorry, Fr. Jim, but that just won’t do as an example of the fervor of a St. Paul.

January 18, 2011: China, another indispensable “enemy” in a speculative-finance-driven world, another developing-world-victim of the U.S. Bond-investment trap, the latter the able partner to the economically-crippling U.S. geo-corporate-litigation culture.

Some of us have been warning for decades about the U.S.-corporate-mentored rise of China, having taken note already twenty and more years ago that the fabled land beyond the Wall was assembling an army that could fight practically the whole world, in a global war China could handily win, once it developed an adequate weapons capability. A goal toward which it is already well-advanced, and in some way rapidly approaching parity with our own. It all started, this China coddling, with Nixon’s historic visit, after which economic collectivism in that Eastern land would quickly be abandoned, to be replaced by a sort of state-capitalism of the most vigorous and expansive kind. But our leaders both Democratic and Republican expressed little if any concern over China’s retention of radical Marxism as the heart of its political system, but rather kept the corporate ventures and direct investment flowing at full speed. While far more disturbing—a “the king has no clothes” moment if there ever was one—U.S.-based internet search-engines have for some time now been supplying Beijing with a window to internet activities of Chinese customers, even as U.S. high-tech security firms are steadily “wiring up” China for an unprecedented level of totalitarian citizen-spying. That which upon further consideration is undoubtedly a preview—indeed a test run—for what is coming here.

But now there is urgently argued the need for a “strategic pullback”, as in the centuries-old world of geo-finance there is inevitably engineered this state of hostility, between major powers, to whom armaments, merchant marine services, etc., are then eagerly sold for a coming war. While when it comes to Marxism: it is a classical Western ideology from the word go, first cultivated in China during times of upheaval of the early twentieth century. In a sociopolitical maelstrom stirred vigorously by the inevitable Jewish-funded Western revolutionaries and agents provocateurs that have plagued the world since Napoleon, and indeed all the way back to the fractured Spain of the 1720s.

In fact, the uncovering of a see-sawing of the world between capitalism—with its bully-boy convincers, nazism and fascism and their modern-day descendants, on the one hand, and collectivist systems like communism or socialism, on the other—is one of the major themes on this site. For within the vast scale-economies and conglomerate-chains of these geo-finance-based systems—of all of which capitalism serves as it were as the historical “mother lode”—is made possible repeated confrontations of global dimension, brokering the violent rape of the earth’s resources, collapses of traditional land ownership, and so on, proceeding largely without restraint. Amplifying the power of these financial Midases to realms beyond mere political power: lusting as they so plainly do after a totalitarian global state, a social laboratory for things like universal cloning, abortion, euthanasia, mental and spiritual control. Realizations-of-purposes for which you need only open your eyes and ears, and listen to the arrogant aims and claims of these “enemies of mankind”, and their global allies in academia, government and the corporate world. So it is from this perspective that we refuse to rant and rave against China, as both right and left are more and more frequently and desperately doing. For very simply, we could see this coming a long time ago, and no one gave a care: least of all the noisy “patriots” that now fill the public air.

But who is to say that the rise of China is such a bad thing, as things go in the world today? While significantly a big part of the “beef” of the U.S. Government against China today revolves around “intellectual property rights”, a highly-impressive and vaguely-intimidating term for patenting. Central to this dispute is the fact that the U.S., Germany, Japan and one or two others stand alone not just against China but against an entire world in imposing incredibly restrictive patenting laws. Most notorious among these apply in harshest rigor to pharmaceuticals, restrictions which easily cost the developing world a million easily-preventable deaths each year. In a mega-profit geo-corporate law-unto-itself which legally bans generic substitutes which would be many times cheaper. While patents on industrial/technological processes and inventions—binding for many years, breezily monopolizing the manufacture or development of thousands of components and e-functions—would at best keep China tied up in endless, hyper-expensive litigations in hastily-first-world-erected international patenting courts. And would ultimately, if strictly observed, keep that land an economic and technological khanate of the most abject kind. The place indeed reserved for China, by the Big Boys, for at least two centuries now. Even as—here’s the big tuna—the actually engineers responsible for the innovations that keep U.S. corporate interests so “sleeves rolled up” monopolistically on-top—these whiz kids queued up so impatiently at the United States Patent Office—not that of London, Tokyo or Beijing—these much-boasted “individual achievers” are in overwhelming numbers foreigners. And indeed among these the overwhelming majority are allegedly-non-“own-weight”-pulling, “currency manipulating” Oriental nationals. Albeit more recently with apathetic “drug pushing” Latin Americans and a host of others rapidly bringing up the rear. And that indeed was a long ten and more years ago when I did the research, in a dismal U.S. citizen engineering-school graduation rate which has shrunken dramatically since those comparatively stellar times. In other words—listen up Yankee-go-getters Glen Beck et al—we have become good globe-impoverishing paper-shufflers and tear-jerk-eloquent Shylock financiers, and little more.

Only the final return of the West to Catholic Faith—indeed ultimately and by free choice of the entire world to this Mother of us all—can change any of this. While in the meantime it is a matter of grave moral hazard to claim any significant national loyalties at all in this perfectly false and contrived struggle: a hoarse quarrel which benefits only a tiny few, while destroying the lives and fortunes of humankind. For when it comes to the remorseless ultimate issues we face today—more and more starkly defined, transfixing, like granite promontories against a lightning-lit midnight sky—we must, by all that is in us, first be the friend of man before we can be friend to this man or that, to this land or that. We must cling “with all our strength” to those “rest of men”, our Gospel “likeness” to whom called forth a Redeemer: this human commonality being a common currency we refuse to disown. Hence too, when it comes to any lesser and mundane metal, of which so much is made, I call for efforts to actually pay our debt to China, even to offer them in kind payment for our staggering bond-related burden, this in the form of freely granted energy stock-holdings, intellectual property rights, and land. The latter to be utilized in some commonly-agreed-upon way, perhaps of colonies of Chinese, adopting the flag, yet like centuries-old colonies of proverbially-host-loyal Croats in Germany or Austria, retaining their own customs and song, food and ancient bearing, wisdom, graceful festival garb. Releasing them, for one thing, from a veritable satrapy condition, collecting mere paper or electronic moneys as they now do which they cannot possibly use. In this way being woefully held back from the genuine share of wealth which they have already purchased, title to which must be guaranteed by these mere scraps, on this “open market”, if they are to mean anything at all. This being the real and quite just reason for Chinese “invasions of ‘intellectual property rights’, “manipulations of their currency”, their “foreign adventurism” in Africa and around the globe, and so on. These Chinese whom I hold not really to be of bad will, even in the realm of geopolitics, but rather afraid and distrustful, and in some ways with far greater reason than we. While ultimately we must by all means pay our debts, come what may, even as doing so with mere substantially-unsustainable money-payments is more and more onerous to our own finances, and less and less desirable even to the Chinese themselves. They who already have enough of our currency to drown in a sea of dollar bills. So that there is much to gain from a creative new look at the whole relationship, as it could be of reciprocal benefit of the most tangible kind.

Of course, all things could be tidily settled if China were to “revalue their currency”, but this would be like burning up a large percentage of the bonds they hold. It would be as if they were to just give us the goods they have exported, just so that “balance can be restored”. Indeed, it would be nice if the bank would do the same for its debtors, in a sort of welfare-oriented leveling or “balancing” process. But only China is required to be so self-sacrificing to the “global common good”: a China which quite justly “pegged” its currency to the value-definitive dollar way back in the nineties, so that the real value of what was exchanged would remain immovably the same. Of course, our Donald Trumps and Steve Forbeses will just laugh that its “the breaks of the game”, or maybe even cry “you’re fired”, in some Yankee-triumphal scenario hard to predict but perhaps uncannily soon to appear.

If instead we are just and reasonable with China—a billion-plus people who are after all an immovable reality, and not just a lot of boogeymen we can simply close our eyes and wish away at will—then I think there is hope toward settling things even of a religious and human-rights nature. Chinese failings with respect to which Hu himself was with model humility so ready to candidly admit, and progress toward the remedy of which he promised in an equally-humble, indeed veritably self-effacing way. (But about all-of-which Fox News blankly refuses to report, just as it positively slanders the Gaza Palestinians regularly, in the same murderously-dismissive way). For after all we have to give people—especially that many people—a way out, and not just squeeze them, as it were, from both ends, in this way powerfully confirming them in all their suspicions and fears. All the while here at home we phrase things in the standard high senatorial or Obama/oratorical eloquence—as if coached by none other than O’Reilly himself—in terms of massive confrontations between monolithic “good guy” and “evil empire” blocs. Epic contests which strain forward almost eagerly to some real and red-blooded Armageddon: this against a people who still vividly remember the Opium Trade. Valiant native attempts at escape from which epic injustice—at the forefront of which was a nineteenth-century Bush family, chief representatives even then of an ever-triumphalist USA—reaped for the Chinese a Teiping Rebellion which cost at least fifty million lives. (There are “old enemies” involved here indeed, at least from the viewpoint of the Chinese.) While quite the contrary, a constructive, imaginative approach—leaving off for a change such a “Christian” and “pro life” policy-ensemble of two centuries in time—could indeed weld a friendship, make of the blunders of decades an unbreakable bond. For the Chinese are basically a good and forgiving people—as I found so happily in college classes some years back—and are indeed even now coming to Christianity in droves. Are we, then, going to “prevent them”, by harsh and condemnatory postures and policies, rather than “suffer these His brethren to come unto Him”? For which latter of course is needed the grace of that God to Whom at present we in the USA give mostly a “lip service” so different from the patient suffering of the persecuted Christian Chinese. Called upon as we are to abandon permanently this stiff posturing, as if of a mechanically-overreacting, financier-puppeteered King Kong. After all, we don’t condemn anyone as a devil, but leave all such judgments to God alone, as did indeed such Oriental Apostles as St. Francis Xavier, and more recently the French Missioners D’etrangers. But if we continue all this campy-yet-deadly geopolitical theater, while this global Rome, or this mammoth pile of more-and-more-useless Beijing-owned greenbacks, burns—then the future for us all is dark indeed.

January 18, 2011: Hand-held gadgetry and the future to which it leads.

Allegedly, somehow, there is this towering sense-of-grandeur that parents experience—or so I am told—from the buying, perhaps at Christmas, of some one or two of these hyper-expensive things, to give to their small kids. These then ably empowered—not to make little log houses on the living-room carpet, nor to storm a little dirt hill with crusader’s (rubber) sword in hand—but rather simply to chat and chatter on twitter. No glorious, magnificent vanquishing of briars and undergrowth, as with tenth-century settlers of Pomeranian bogs or fens, or of infidel foes, but rather petty victories over peevishly-envied classmates. With this storm-in-a-tea-kettle aggression-exercise rendering promising youth old before their time, having become the proverbial old maids or “old wives”, positively bursting with “tales” against others who mean them no harm. Are we then “dangerous”, do we “rant and rave” against all such things to no purpose, we on the anti-sodomy Crusade?

This kind of economics—of hand-held devices—brandishing this deliriously-enthused-over progress, one primarily based on a mode of communication, and only secondarily on the automation of productive design—has a demand-market which ultimately terminates only in the deepest pits of Hell. It is going nowhere in any positive, salubrious clime. Here are incubated all the nebulous, deranged, unnatural passions of sodomy, of illicit pleasure followed directly by abortion on demand, not to even mention that now-solely-available “birth control pill” which aborts the fertilized ovum (i.e., the living child) before it can attach itself to the wall of the womb, and which a New-Church-Catholic EWTN is so “discrete” as to mention only in the most indirect, telescoping of terms. That which dependably, “safely” results in abortion billions upon billions of times. This is the creation of an economics which serves only the interests, the demand-market, of the fiend. Which opens no Kennedy New Frontiers at all, but ultimately only the blackened caverns of twisted minds. A market which must constantly be pumped up, as it were, with hostile or over-wrought passions given the rein, so that we will no doubt end up with the evolutionists dream, of the “come home to mama” of apes swinging on vines. (Hardly can these “scientists” conceive of an animal universe in which all animate creatures approximate in some way a humanity which harbors the very Son of God, an animal kingdom radiating outward, as it were, from this precious stone of our race, like tapering rays of silver on some ravishingly-beautiful signet ring, on the outstretched hand of God. No, we are satisfied with a humanity which now embarks on a rapid descent: having scraped the ceiling of Heaven, and arrogantly found it wanting, over the past fifty years. A humanity allegedly arrived through serially-evolved and hence mutually-trivializing creatures—in a long, conceptually-meaningless line from the ameba—to the “threshold” of humanoid ancestors. A humanity thus justifying a modern obsession with the most primitive of drives, bound for bottomless moral voids in which these comparatively-noble monkeys would have no interest at all. A sinkhole into which this kind of technology inexorably leads, with unsecured debts and negative multipliers, serpentine, roiling down there in the pit, lending anesthetizing venom to the biblical “bite of the asp”.

Hence I must blame this devolution on the utter predominance today of a faulty version of Old Testament religion: since without Christ and His Way the revelations of patriarchs must deteriorate into military conquest, sanctimony and greed. That catastrophic, heart-rending deterioration which I have witnessed over the course of my 65 years: of a youth which always has the same seemingly-indomitable promise, but which hardly seems of the same species today with, say, the outgoing class of seniors, in 1960, at Joliet Catholic High. Those traditional-Catholicism-bred young scholars, and their star product, that noble, tall-standing guy, whom I can still see before me now, across these many years, as if it were yesterday. So deep was the impression he made, singing with trumpet-like tones to the harmony of a fine young woman of the same age, from St. Francis Academy, further up the hill. They who so graciously sang Good King Wenceslaus for us soon-to-enroll freshmen, that preceding Christmas time. Always that sound, that sight, that brilliant memory, stays fixed in my mind, of what youth can be: outgoing, generous, noble, kind, as these two so plainly were. By every gesture, every lilting note, every towering sentiment they nourished, in eager receptivity, in a sallow lad of not-yet-fourteen. Ever after, while fiends and fools smoked their dope, and climbed the grapevine of “successful” if doleful “connections” opened upward to them thereby, I have kept fixed before me, sometimes through flowing tears, the memory of those two. Whom I wish blessings, and peace, and eternal life, to whose accession they so powerfully empowered me.

This New Testament Faith, this Catholicism, doesn’t at all hearken back to patriarchal images, to grim bearded figures, frowning majestically at mom and the kids, or at others far and wide. No, it calls forth forever a gentle, smiling fatherhood, a motherhood from whom the least sober glance is punishment enough for an obedient child. Nor does it find any pleasure in any pleasure which doesn’t gather to itself others with whom to share, to make merry. Indeed after the very manner of that Good King Wenceslaus of whom the twosome sang so nobly, fifty years ago. That good monarch later to be murdered by an envious brother, that commoner’s friend who eagerly brought “flesh and wine”, “through the rude wind’s wild lament, and the bitter weather”, to the “poor man” he had spied, earlier, at dusk, “gathering winter fuel”. Oh, this Catholic, medieval fatherhood—“when knighthood was in flower”—upon which Scot Hahn of EWTN would place an imposing patriarchal beard—leads in an utterly revolutionary way. It finds the Early Church more in legacies passed down by grandparents from the Old Country than in anything one might imagine about towering figures of those who “accounted themselves wise”. Those early Christians not a few of whom delighted in comparing themselves against an Apostle Paul they so despised. He who so often suffered shipwreck, endured cold and hunger, the lash, or languished in chains. This fatherhood of traditional Catholic Faith having as little in common with commanding display as the full-grown tree with the “seed which, falling into the ground, dieth”. For it is a fatherhood mostly interior, it fathers souls in justice, nobility-of-sentiment, the rigorous uprooting of all ostentation, the self-effacing love-of-God. It is this Gospel seed which Catholic forebears “handed down to us”, in their song, in their mild and gentle, if sometimes weary, Christian greetings at the door, things we must not reject were we enjoined by “an angel of light”. It is this gift, “pressed down, running over”, which is the true legacy of the Apostles, with vanities and sanctimonies, petty victories sifted out, winnowed away through centuries, millennia in time.

Ah, but American Catholics are very much struck on this Old Testament fatherhood, which brings inevitably in its train the contests-of-might, of influence, of “poise” or “correctness”, we see around us, notably in these gadget-toting youths, today. And thus the polarity noted above, of how this nexus of these opposites brings our Civilization crashing down. That against which we offer here a “more excellent way”.

January 12, 2011: This piece is carefully reworked. Freedom of speech as a political right is mostly about the civilized liberty to criticize those who rule, and not about any right to use vulgar or over-violent speech, let alone to launch hotly-advocated new and bizarre codes of behavior. Nor is it any right of persons high or low to linguistically warp word-meanings, to introduce coarse or over-blunt, ugly or bizarre forms of speech. Sorry if I myself go overboard sometimes, and then backtrack and sound timid. It takes courage to address this subject, and clear-headedness, and sometimes I guess it’s like spotting rounds in the artillery, where you might first overshoot the target, and then fall far shy, but finally hit dead center, whereupon you do an “ffe” or fire for effect.

Consider the mob-like behavior of the crowds in Tucson, at the stadium—set in contrast to the mostly-quiet Loughner—and you will have some idea of the contradictory undercurrents, the ambient instability, which plagues the USA today. Back when men had some sense, over-violent, incendiary speech used to be called seditious, and the behavior of youths in the stadium a form of civil disorder, to be quelled instantly in the sternest sort of way. But lets face it: this is the sort of boiling cauldron that has been prepared over decades by our stolidly-tenured “educators”, they who have been an overriding influence in the formation of the youth of today. While when it comes to sedition: I myself have often found Sara Palen to be “over the line”, even as of course the Beckster is off the charts. Which is not at all to say that the other side isn’t just as bad: but we don’t have MSNBC at this time, and so I can’t comment on them anymore, without the inconvenience of going online and “streaming”, for which labors this perverse, putrid channel just isn’t worth the trouble. (We never even listen to that Colbert guy, whose every other phrase is blasphemous). Now, the fact that some poor crazed individual may have had some disjointed ideas about language, and how it should be used, and lumped them all under the word “grammar” (I know not how)—a classical maniac who obviously regarded these thoughts as the one precious thing his ruined mind still had to contribute to the public debate—no one can sincerely or decently use this lone forlorn fact to condemn the observation itself, about the hijacking of the English language as a brilliant constructive tool. That such a desire to defend a good thing should itself be thought to indicate instability, to be a predisposition which somehow harbors vicious deeds of sedition, or acts of violence or mayhem. Indeed I myself often invoke good English precisely as a defense against all such incendiary things. It isn’t we critics of a radically-coarsened and vulgarized transformation of English that are to blame for the violence, the drug-abuse, the immorality—those infamous companions which are bad diction’s bed-fellows—it is we rather who would retain to our countrymen those blessings of good diction—according to the words of the Savior, “it is not what goes into a man…but what comes out”—that most forcefully determines his character, his fate. The good issue of which most of our leaders are so ready to summarily deny us. This being that “liberty” of which Patrick Henry spoke: the polished Virginian hardly referring to anything scurrilous or vile, show-and-tell-infantile or even over-blunt. While as to those who ply nefarious regions of human activity—and whom our leaders for decades now have chosen to espouse above all others—they will not in any event be restrained or contained, especially under such “leaders” and “teachers” as we have today, except by the firm enforcement of good laws such as are advocated here.

Good leadership toward just redress doesn’t stir up further irrational passion and desperate pitches of frustration, it rather assuages these with words of peaceful rationality, inwardly motivating firm and just resolve.

Granted, I do indeed, here and there on this site, acknowledge the right of the citizenry to overthrow a tyranny: but in this I only echo St. Thomas Aquinas, Mariana, and a host of other Catholic theologians, in a majesterial teaching announced long before Lexington’s famous shot: the immemorial Church teaching holding the tyrant himself guilty of sedition, not the just rebel. Yet I heartily condemn the method-of-choice of the American revolutionaries, who spit in the faces of British troops, and did many other such acts, Brits who were only “serving their time”, invoking the self-same justification used by highly-suicide-prone troops recently deployed in Afghanistan, but with far greater justice indeed. As this land was still in many ways in a colonial nursery, as it were, and had for the most part been nourished with prodigal generosity by the motherland. But the ejection of tyrants as envisioned by such civil and estimable men as St. Thomas isn’t a matter of a lot of cowardly display of gangs or individuals, against men on duty enjoined to “restrain themselves at all costs”. No, it is the very orderly resolution of a major part of the people, in a viably established state, to do some very serious, peaceful-minded and verbally-disciplined work. It isn’t at all a matter of spewing seditious words to unsettle the masses in some sort of hyper-emotional, irrational way. (You can work change in this way, it is true, but the end result will probably be worse than the first). While on the colonial revolutionary seaboard we had some of the most comfortable people on the globe, well-to-do burghers seeking new ways to become richer by the day. Their cryptic leaders undermining sovereign authority with calculated precision, engineered to burst forth in chaotic deeds in a highly-predictable way. Indeed, the New England revolution was only a part of a broader upheaval in which stolid footings of today’s Rothschild and other global financier holdings were being laid, essential to which various forms of slavery—in this case Black, Oriental, Indian/Hispanic—were just then being painstakingly established, poured-in-concrete in the most immovable possible way. Albeit under stirring slogans like “freedom”, “justice” and “the American Way”. A cosmic system of enslavement which uses drugs, war and induced moral corruption—from the Opium Trade to the violent societal implosion of today—as its primary means of enforcement, of consolidation. All in the same new “heroic”, “progressive” fashion which cannot afford for a moment to look back, to assess, to love or pity in any meaningful way.

As far as my own input is concerned, although the right to resist present trends in government is maintained throughout, yet I myself am still laboring to see the USA become a viable nation, concerned only with good, benign, constructive things which solely define a true sovereign state. This through the medium of peaceful measures advocated on this site. That very constructive establishment of a true sovereignty being the restoration that we in this Crusade ardently desire. It is because one loves distributive justice and concord that one ultimately and reluctantly speaks of armed resistance or war, and this in the most sober, manly, straightforward way.

Quite the contrary, and as I never tire of repeating here, the subject-matter, as it were, of liberty-of-speech is today falsely regarded, in public podia of media, school and state, as being the unchaining of that uncontainable host of things once universally regarded as wrong. This stark anomaly being found in a special way on the left. So that liberty thus understood takes on very directly and powerfully the revolutionary character of radical, incendiary change, altering profoundly, indeed eradicating the very moral values of men, indelibly written on their hearts and minds by the Creator. Involved being the thunderous overturning of landmarks, legacies dear, beloved to men. In the arena of speech itself—the very carrier of this much-celebrated freedom—this lathering tide of abrupt change—gathering to itself sweetest tributes of patriotic fervor though it might—systematically obliterates the civilization that went before, robs a people of their poetry, their most characteristic turns-of-phrase, and at a deeper level their sense of the sacred, their intimate personal connections with parents and ancestors gone before. Ultimately, inexorably branding them with the stark impersonality of a chattel slave. All the while, incredibly enough, this raging stream of events is sanctioned from the highest places as according entirely with that woefully pressure-group-prostrate “American form of government” said in turn to be motivated by our new and much-boasted-over form of patriotism. An utterly new form indeed, fit only for the mindless 1984 fist-clenched slaves we have become. The manifold institutions bolstered by good and dearly-beloved speech being by contrast designed by a good God to fortify us humanely and reflectively for life’s sorrows and struggles, from the cradle to the grave. While in stark contrast, today’s scholastically-and-officially hijacked English language finally deteriorates into the mouthing-off of court-and-legislature-protected punks and perverts, generally speaking within the constricted subject-matter-orbits of sex, violence, drugs. Not pretty words because they’re not pretty things.

Hence, obviously, and as suggested in the title, those who exercise their first amendment rights in the most per se political way of which the Framers undoubtedly spoke—with the intention of peacefully criticizing this or any other drift in public policy—cannot, especially within the present abominable more-or-less officially-endorsed, school-and-media-based drift of American speech and life—cannot in justice—nor by any stretch of the imagination—be restrained or forbidden from so doing. For otherwise we have a tyranny of the blackest, foulest, most Hellish kind. But remember too there are tyrannies and seditions from places high and low as well.

No, liberty has nothing to do with any “rights” of sodomites to pollute the public or private atmosphere with their foul pranks and twisted caricatures of everything mankind holds dear. Nor is it the right of hare-brained politicians to rant and rave over the public airways: welding together a following as eager to bear arms in unjust wars as to show them off on American sidewalks, in brazen intimidation of ordinary women and men. And those who have thus introduced this horrible sinkhole into American society: they are the ones who have done violence to the political agora, to the once-enlightened discussion at the marketplace, that calm and once-virtuous exchange-of-views where Western Civilization was born.

As a post-script to the above, it comes as no surprise that a “conservative” media would front such a despicable character as Glenn Beck to become a very visible, prominent sort of mystic figure to lead the resistance of the American people against all such oversteps and transgressions-of-liberty. This is really the last straw, the last insult to those who hold our genuine liberties and civilized legacies dear. This guy who does a fair-to-middling job of introducing some such subject, and then forthwith drives the bus into the ditch, with all of us in it. After the manner of raving maniacs of movieland lore. Indulging in diatribes of violent emotion, and incoherent bouts of raging contempt, using velvet-covered-blackjack mass-verbal methods garnered no doubt from psycho-tyranny doctrine developed at concentration camps like Pitesti in 1950s Romania, or in experiments on Blacks in certain Southern prisons, or at Abu Ghraib. While in all this likewise—and with supreme thrift-of-energy—trying for all the world to personify the very manic-depressive thing that present-day hand-wringing leaders claim to fear, and constantly threaten to legislate out of existence—together with other things entirely civil and sane—as “hate language”, and the like. The idea, it seems quite plain to me, on the part of Beck and others of his ilk, is to do their hefty share to “throw the baby out with the bathwater”: to let things get to such an outrageous pitch in some select circle like Fox News—made to stand good for genuine conservative opinion as a whole—and in this way to mightily facilitate the prohibition of all such opinions, lock, stock and barrel. And the making of Americans into the hugging, hand-holding, sodomy-prone slaves we are commanded so “nicely” and obediently to become.

January 13, 2011: Genuine law speaks to the whole plethora of human activity, and not to some skeletal group of rights or radically-constricted group of functions.

Simply because law is for the intricate and commodious, sublime and supernatural building up of the human person, within a devotedly-nurtured human whole. That which absolutely cannot exist outside the parameters of an adequately-conceived state. That ultimate earthly enterprise which is far beyond the narrow capabilities and lifeless dichotomies of the powder-wigged, Enlightenment-era laissez-faire state: the child of a brief (and from all appearances eagerly-forgotten) historical moment. Now it is true that most of the leg-work, if you will, required for these exalted functions is done by small local groups—which incidentally resemble not at all the mammoth institutional steeds bred in deceptively-narrow breeding-stalls of capitalism—yet these intimately personalized groups require the constant enablement and encouragement of a thus-comprehensively-conceived state for their proper social and intellectual, economic and spiritual nourishment. Or otherwise they quickly fall prey to robbers and highwaymen operating outside. And furthermore, these ranging enablement functions of the genuine state are legitimately found in all nations, large and small, “advanced” or “primitive”, and even the existence of some measure of injustice or imbalance in some areas is more than compensated by the encouraging, popular-energy-cultivating and catalyzing function of the whole. That of which if we remove one part—especially as foreigners interfering from without—we tend to bring down all. (Here being the principal tragic lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan). While finally it is the place of the Holy Gospel—“preached to the ends of the earth”—to spread the balm of divinely-perfected statehood to every nation and clime—and this by choice, by good example, and not at all by force of arms. Since this kind of political development must be an intensely internal process, or it has no real meaning at all.

Indeed, those who speak breathlessly of “smaller government” are usually after the establishment of their own robber-baron state unto itself, one which can rob and enslave without fear. Even as history teaches us that the ultimate goal of all these robber barons is the institution of a monolithic control-society of the most totalitarian kind.

By all these standards the USA shows itself to be among the most backward nations of our day: unless we would call the Vikings advanced or progressive, in comparison to the peaceful, materially-prolific, own-business-minding France of post-Charlemagne times. Indeed, what most clearly identifies the tyrannical state in our day is its astute interpenetration and control by “free enterprise” international elitists who divide and rule, and then use it as either a khanate or a surrogate conqueror all-its-own. While furthermore, its been centuries since the earth has seen an international climate in which genuine, adequately-conceived statehood can thrive: that good state which if externally unimpeded, and internally freed from burrowing foes, naturally and indeed inevitably pursues—by the very nature of its human citizens and naturally-coalescing local groups—a course indomitably devoted to the common good. The latter being not at all some touchy-feely condition of mutual frustration, but rather a medium in which the constructive potential of each and all is most readily realized. While by contrast any attempt Puritanically, Gnostically (after the manner of Deist Founding Fathers), or in the dire tradition of close-cousin human-nature-hating Manichaeans to excise or prune away this amply-conceived state quickly bring about—not its “freeing” or “emancipation”—but rather its brutal enslavement, its shackling to craven functions noted above.

All this distrust of the state upon which guys like Huckabee, Beck, Limbaugh and others so feverishly stump should rather be directed against those amply-numbered—maybe a hundred million—“enemies of mankind”—clearly identified in Sacred Scripture—for whom both raison d’etre and modus operandi is to take control of the nations of men, above whom they consider themselves far superior. This, then, is the real combat, the real political enmity, on this earth. And the sooner we realize this the better. Not at all for hatred’s sake, but for simple survival, and ultimate prosperity.

These then are the people who levy onerous taxes on all our energies, who institute and maintain a system of finance which milks us at every turn, and turns our political institutions into tools of division and silent enslavement. And for this reason we advocate here a restoration of the Frankpledge system in all its medieval vigor, as when The Confessor ruled, and when knighthood was in flower. All under the banners of the two Sacred Hearts, to the honor and glory not of this wandering group of tyrants and usurpers but of God. A Frankpledge working “from the bottom up”, that which alone can make the state truly free, while vigorously living up to its legitimate and crucial goals. This not at all in any spirit of rebellion but rather in the recognition that it is the common people who actually live the life, as it were, that the good state protects, organizes and enables: so that they are the roots, as it were, from whose tendrils is gained that nourishment upon which the state depends. A nourishment not simply of a physical kind, but rather also of on the spot political input, as well as a kind of popular surveillance which has its ear to the ground for any sort of developments of an unhealthy or infiltrative kind. These common people with whom “the buck stops”, who feel most mortally the aggressive dagger of the treacherous invader, who agonize with any warping or disfigurement in realms above. Who therefore keep heady plans of rulers and dignitaries just, wise, realistic. They within whose wealth that of levels above is amplified, made splendid and imposing. Since the state must thrive as a whole, or it thrives not at all. While the upper classes of such a good state can find no joy in a prosperity they share with no one, as wealth is correctly conceived by them as primarily one of well-developed, joyful, fruitful persons: with whom they form a community trading the golden currency of love.