Are these guys nuts -

I saw a very earnest black gentleman on TV proclaiming that the newest and fastest growing religion in America, particularly in the black community, was Islam.

Interesting. The perception among many American blacks is that their ancestors were enslaved and persecuted by Christians, and that Moslems do not have any racial phobias. Not exactly true, by a long shot.

The problem is that the people of this country look at things through the prism of their emotional prejudices and do not check the facts.

So, let’s check some facts. The official dates for American slavery were 1700 to 1865. Even from the very beginning there are records of Christian protests against the slave trade. It was the Christian Abolitionists that brought about the end of the English slave trade. The Civil War was not started nor fought over slavery, but the abolitionist movement managed to sway public opinion and the end result was the total rejection of slavery and the freeing of all the slaves. There were approximately 400,000 slaves brought to America. Look around at the number of black people descended from these 400,000 still in America. Something around 36 million in 2000.

The book and TV blockbuster Roots portrayed the American slave traders as landing from boats and then rushing inland to capture the inhabitants of a peaceful village. That may have occasionally happened, but there are some disadvantages. First off, there is no guarantee that you can get the people that you want, age, sex, health and so on are just pot luck. Secondly, even though you have rifles, some indignant primitive with a spear is likely to object to being killed or captured. Getting a spear though your guts is usually considered a bad economic proposition.

Fact is, the American and English slave traders bought their slaves from the Arab traders who had been dealing in African slaves for centuries.

For the record, one of my ancestors is Captain James Reilly, who was shipwrecked off the coast of Africa, captured and held slave for many years by Arab slave traders. His book Reilly’s Narrative, the story of his slavery and escape, was very popular in the mid 1800s and was one of Abraham Lincoln’s favorites. And may have had some small influence on his decision to draft the Emancipation Proclamation.

Herself Sez: And let us not forget the “Underground Railroad,” operated by Christian households who believed that slavery was wrong, that helped close to 100,000 slaves find freedom in Canada, New Mexico and in non-slave states in the US.

Nowadays, “according to 1993 U.S. State Department estimates, up to 90,000 blacks are owned by North African Arabs, and often sold as property in a thriving slave trade for as little as $15 per human being.” Slavery in the Modern World.

I do not excuse the conduct of slavery under any conditions, and the thousands who died in the European slave ships are a true horror. But let’s remember the basic numbers: less than 200 years, 400,000 slaves, over 36 million descendants. And the countless Christian Abolitionists who protested from the beginning because the fundamental nature of Christianity is love for all mankind.

Now let’s look at the Moslem track record. You know, the Peace-Loving Religion that so many blacks are turning to so that they can say to hell with America.

Mohammed owned black slaves up until his death. The word for slave in Arabic became the common word for black person. “Abd” is the Arabic equivalent for “nigger” in modern America. Except there is no politically correct movement in Islam to keep people from using it. Let us quote Mohammed himself “Do not bring black into your pedigree”.

Moslems still practice slavery to this day. The Moslem Arabs began slaving in Africa from the very beginning. The last public slave auction of African blacks in Mecca was in the 1960s. This is fourteen centuries of trading in African black slaves. There was not and has never been any abolitionist movement in Islam. Slavery is still considered quite proper and meritorious under Sharia Law.

Now for a few numbers. There were an estimated 19 to 20 million African slaves over the centuries. This does not count the probably 50 to 80 million who died before they made it to the Moslem slave markets.

Look at those numbers compared to the American black slave descendants. Look around the Middle East - how many blacks do you see? Damn near none. African male slaves were usually castrated. Not likely to leave many descendants. Also the treatment of the slaves was so brutal that most died young, necessitating a constant flow of new slaves since most did not live to procreate.

Now - you want to explain to me just why Islam is the “natural religion of the black man”? If you really want to go back to the original religion of Africa then you need to look at Orthodox Christianity! I assure you that the Early Christian Church was quite active all through North and Central Africa. Many of the early saints were black. There is not and has never been any anti-black discrimination in the Orthodox Church. One of the most beloved saints on any calendar, Russian, Greek, Syrian, or whatever is St. Moses the Black, who is celebrated in all Orthodox Churches every year.

If you want to get away from the culture that you grew up in try visiting the Orthodox, the native Church of Africa before the Moslems came in murdering, raping, burning, and enslaving.

But do check some facts for yourselves. I would encourage you to read The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa: A Quest for Inter-religious Dialogue by Dr. John Azumah. At the very least think several times before you act out and commit yourself to a religion which is ridiculously false, and in which the black is always a fourth class citizen in the view of the racist Arabs who are the real top dogs. Or maybe you think that the Iranians - who are really Persians - and who despise everyone else, including the Arabs, do not think that you are fourth class. Why fourth class? Check out the facts of Moslem ranking of slave desirability: First - Middle Eastern, second - white, third - Ethiopian, fourth - black.

“The ape is more capable of being trained than the Negro” - Nasir al-Din Tusi, very famous, influential and respected 13^th century Moslem Persian theologian and scientist. So much for the love of Moslems for blacks. They only want you as tools, fools, and slaves. This is not something that I would call “the natural religion of the black man”.

Gays in the Military -

There are several things to look at here. First of all there are the rights, duties, and obligations of any citizen. Male, female, black, white, or whatever. The fact is that a citizen is a citizen. So, on that level there should be no problem with any mentally sound and physically qualified citizen voluntarily serving.There is another level to this. The practical fact is that there is a great spectrum of people in the military. Many of these people will have no particular problem with people who have some differences. But there are those who do.

When I was brought home from the hospital shortly after birth the first music I ever heard was Mozart’s wonderful opera The Magic Flute. I learned to love classical music, opera, and Baroque - “Ah, Bach” - Radar O’Reilly.

When I was maybe 8 or 9 I discovered my mother’s 30’s and 40’s big band records - old 78 rpm stuff. By the time I was 10 I had discovered jazz at the local library. Jazz from the earliest New Orleans, Memphis, and Chicago. Boogie. Big band. Modern jazz. Loved it all. The library also had the wonderful Folkways series. I learned to love all kinds of real folk music: Andean Indian flute music, Russian Balalaika, African drum chorus, Japanese Taiko drums, wonderful stuff all. (This does all tie in).

In the 8^th grade we baby-boomers had an overflow class at one of the local grammar schools since we had overloaded the local high school. Therefore the 9^th grade was the first time I was actually on the public high school property and had been exposed to older teen types. One day toward the beginning of the school year I was in the band room and one of the older types was going on about the Beatles coming to this country for the first time. You can figure the year from that. Anyway, somehow I got asked about the Beatles and did not know who or what they were. After being told that they were rockie-rollies I must have said something about not liking rock. The next thing I knew I was being beat on by a couple of larger and older types for not liking rock. I quickly learned that blending in with protective camo was a good idea. Minor, compared to having to hide something as large as gay, but instructive nevertheless. Now, this was a persecution for being different, and no matter how right I was or was not; no matter how wrong they were or were not, the bruises were real and I really didn’t lose anything (except more bruises) by keeping my mouth shut when pop music was being discussed. My opinions did not change, just what I exposed. This was only one of the minor things I learned not to blab around groups of redneck boys. These were not really bad boys, I was just different.

Now, what in the hell does this have to do with gays in the military? (Or anywhere else). Well, it is a normal human thing to distrust the stranger. Those who are different may be persecuted. This is a normal pack behavior and we are pack animals. It is all well and good to say that anyone who discriminates against gays will be prosecuted, but if you have been beaten or even murdered that is rather cold comfort to know that you will be avenged. Better to not broadcast your differences and survive. This doesn’t mean that you have to live your life in fear and stay in a closet. It does mean that the correct position is to not rub your difference into others faces. The correct answer to “are you gay” is “that is none of anyone else’s business”.

Go play as you will on leave, but it is not necessary to discuss in bull sessions. The same applies to any workplace environment. If you rub other’s faces in your differences it may be you that gets the bloody nose.

There are two military conditions: not in combat and in combat. If not in combat the main thing you have to worry about is getting beat or shunned. Either is not a goodness. In combat, if your buds think they cannot depend on you, well, you could get shot by the enemy or your own buds. If they think that you are not dependable they may not cover your butt when needed.

This is not to say that gay and military cannot go together. Nuts. They can. People mocked Clinton’s don’t ask/don’t tell policy, but it really is one of the better things that he did. You must understand that I am not a Clinton fan by any means. In combat, you must absolutely depend on your buds and they must be able to depend on you. Any weakness in the unit can be fatal.

It is possible that over time it may even come to the point that sexual orientation is irrelevant compared to the many good things they like about you. But that will take time. No matter how much legislation is passed, you will have to prove yourself as a person and as a soldier before anything else is accepted. Legal props mean nothing in combat. Laws are irrelevant to a corpse. Not fair, I agree, but that is the reality of combat.

I was a Marine. Perhaps the best advice I can give you is: “Just shut up and soldier”.

BTW - rednecks are not the only dangerous group. Try being a conservative around a crowd of libs. Just as bad. Oh, they might not get physical, but the persecution will be just a vicious. They don’t go for the throat, they go for the groin.

Farts and Mother Earth -

It seems that the latest craze amongst the leftier environazis is the call to eliminate cows. After all, cows make farts, which have methane gas, which - horrors - destroys mother earth. Humans are bad - humans eat cows - therefore humans need to eat less meat, reducing the cows and the cow farts.Where to start? I don’t know about you, but I find that this is more hot air than facts. First off, don’t the nuts realize that cow farts are a natural product? We had somewhere around 70 million buffalo on the prairies before the hunters wiped them out. I submit that if 70 million buffalo farts didn’t cause mother earth to overheat, our modern food and dairy animals won’t.

Secondly, if we don’t eat red meat, we have to eat a rather complex veggie diet to make up the nutrients. This is ok for adults, but there are some nutrients that can only be gotten by eating meat and it is child abuse to not give them to the kiddies. You can pull it off if the kid is kept on mother’s milk for a looong time. But you can’t just whip a baby into a vegan diet. They don’t grow well. Back to a veggie diet. To get a complete protein from a veggie diet you must eat a fair amount of bean and grain combo stuff. Has anyone here spent any time in a vegan community? I have. The after dinner farts in a vegan community sound like the campfire scene from Blazing Saddles. Thunderous doesn’t even cover it. How then have methane emissions been eliminated? Sounds like the environutzies are just on another dictatorial kick - “for your own good” - of course.

Third - shouldn’t we therefore be logically thinking about eliminating the vast herds of grazing animals that are still on the African plains? Millions of Wildebeests are still pumping farts into the air of Africa. Not to mention the antelope, gazelles, and so on.

California has succeeded in running Interstate Bakeries out of business in Southern California. Reasons cited are high union labor, excessive state mandated employee benefits, and the impossibility of meeting state mandated CO2 emissions limits. Fact is, yeast makes CO2 as part of the metabolic cycle of making bread rise (yeast farts). All the legislation that California is putting into place will just about make baking impossible by 2020. PI is still 22/7, not 3.0 no matter what stupid legislation is passed.

California cities are also beginning to legislate how many fast food joints are allowed in a given area instead of letting the market decide. Looks like the legislators think that people are too stupid to vote with their wallets and must be protected from the consequences of their own decisions. “For your own good” is usually the excuse of the worst kind of tyranny.

The bellwether libs of California seem to be more interested in getting rid of cows, bread, burger joints, etc. than they are in ridding themselves of gangs, murderers, illegals, and drunk celebrity drivers. Lets you know where their real priorities lie. Actually, bellwether is a good term for Californians. Comes from Middle English. A bell was tied around the neck of a castrated ram (wether), which would then lead a flock of sheep wherever the shepherd directed. Draw your own parallel.

The Plains Indians and the early settlers did use dried buffalo patties for fires. They weren’t dumb. If, instead of trying silly ideas, some smart lefty (contradiction of terms) were to think up a way to capture cow farts and process same, he just might have a good alternative fuel. Methane burns nicely and could contribute to energy independence. Renewable resource, don’t you know. Course that might take work and thinking, both processes being foreign to environazis.

And, of course, solar activity has absolutely no effect on the environment, Only human activity. Oh yeah, sorry. It is only the American activity that pollutes the earth and leads to global warming. Africa, India, China, Europe, and all the rest don’t matter, even when they do the same or worse than we do. Only Americans are bad, irresponsible and greedy. Only Americans are causing global warming. Only by punishing Americans can the world heal itself. No wonder the America hating left does not want to defend us against the current Jihad. When the Americans are ruled by a Taliban, there will only be a fraction of the people left to pollute mother earth, for the rest will be dead and so will modern technology. And free thought, and the Internet, and ….

We will not accept this -

A dear friend once asked me what I meant when I said that most of us conservative types would not object so much to homosexuals if they behaved themselves in public. She said that most of the gays she knew did behave. The above is a good representation of what us straight types object to.

From the Orthodox perspective (which is where I come from), we are more sorrowed by the Roman Catholic Bishop giving these people communion than surprised. First off, communion implies being in accord with the doctrine of the church at hand. It is clear from the dress and behavior of these people that they are not in accord with the doctrine of Rome. Further, their web site makes it abundantly clear that they are not Christian in any sense. They are an anti-Christian parody.

This doesn’t particularly surprise us Orthodox types. First off, in the Orthodox Church, you are given Communion by name. So - you must be known by the Priest. It is considered normal to check in with the Priest before you plop yourself into a Communion line. Even when the Bishop is visiting, the Priest, or a Deacon who knows the parishioners will be standing beside the Bishop to tell him your name (and to indicate if you should not be communed). If you are an unknown quantity, the Priest or Bishop will query your standing: what is your name? What is your home parish? When was your last confession? Have you fasted? Are you properly prepared? Since we firmly believe that this is the literal Body and Blood of Christ we are not going to Commune someone who is not prepared by prayer, confession, and fasting. It absolutely is the duty of the Celebrant to safeguard the Precious Gifts, not to throw them to the unworthy or unprepared.

This issue here is not whether someone is homosexual. We do not condemn someone for being attracted to someone else. We do condemn any sex outside marriage. We will not Commune an adulterer or a philanderer - that’s a matter of Church Doctrine and is rather firmly enforced. When the woman caught in adultery was brought before Christ, He did indeed say “Woman, your sins are forgiven”. But He also said “Go and sin no more“. The sin no more is often overlooked in this non-moral age, just as the sins forgiven was ignored in the hyper moral atmosphere of Puritanism. Christ did not waste words. He meant all of His words. We cannot Commune someone who is not earnestly striving to sin no more. This does not mean that we will make it. But we must try. In-your-face celebration of sinning is not a possible Christian position.

When nailed on his communing of Nancy Pelosi, whose beliefs and actions are clearly and publicly not in compliance with established Roman doctrine, this particular bishop just shrugged his shoulders and said that he was not a “gatekeeper”. This is not in accord with the Orthodox understanding. In the Sacrament of Ordination, the Bishop places the Lamb into the Ordinand’s hands and says: “Receive thou this pledge, and preserve it whole and unharmed until thy last breath, because thou shalt be held to an accounting therefore in the second and terrible Coming of our Great Lord, God and Savior, Jesus Christ”. I have talked with many Priests about this, and every one of them states that at that moment their knees just about buckle. They know that this is serious business. And they regard their priestly function as one of grave importance. This is not to say that we don’t have some bad priests and bishops, we do. They are human. But it is proportionately very few. A shepherd most certainly is a gatekeeper.

As an Orthodox Christian I cannot tell the Roman Catholics what to do in their church, but I can comment on behavior which is clearly not in accord with Christian doctrine. And this is certainly not defensible on any level. Of course, we are not terribly surprised since we regard the Romans as schismatic and the first protestants. In this country, our culture descends from Western European (Roman) culture, and we have been taught that the Orthodox East left the Roman West. Well, t’aint so. See my earlier article about why I am Orthodox for a discussion of this point.

Apart from my reaction as an Orthodox Christian there is my reaction as a United States Citizen. I see little difference between this in-your-face offensive behavior and a deliberate punch in the face. Both are deliberate assaults. And these freaks know it and glory in it. Why is immoral behavior “progressive”? There is a great deal of difference between the behavior of a reasonable and thoughtful and considerate person who happens to be homosexual and the antics of these demented self-hating creatures who are trying to be as offensive as possible. The responsible gay community does not do itself any good by tolerating these pervert’s behavior without condemnation. What this does is strengthen the opposition of the “Religious Right”. And, while laws may get changed, there is little chance of acceptance by “middle America” until these people are publicly and clearly rejected by the majority of the gay community.

HERSELF SEZ: The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence is now an international organization with a missionary agenda. If there is not a chapter near you - - there will be. Just wait.

Philosophy of Slavery –

The history of slavery precedes written records. It is conjectured that when man turned to agriculture slavery became practical. In the hunter/gatherer society the numbers are small and the tribes diffused across the land. There can be no higher concentration of people than the land will freely support. Those who are not strong, diligent, intelligent and talented die. When primitive agriculture is the norm, muscle power becomes paramount. The land is plentiful and cheap, or free. The labor is scarce and expensive and needed. Does slavery happen rapidly, as in one tribe just wakes up one day and decides to pillage another for forced laborers? Or is it slower, the less able to provide for themselves voluntarily taking service with someone who can provide for all? Is it the easy path from voluntary servant who gets life’s necessities in return for allegiance and labor to full blown slavery in a few generations? It is unanswerable at this time, but it does seem to have happened at one time or another in all cultures. However, once slavery is established it seems to self-perpetuating until it becomes economically impractical. Or until that society is conquered by some stronger culture. Then the masters also become slaves. Be it noted: most slaves didn’t really see anything wrong with the system. They just wanted the roles reversed.

We should define and examine the various kinds of slavery. There is total slavery, with the slave owned by the master and totally at the mercy of the master. These can be bought and sold and families split up.

There is slavery where the slave is bound to the land, not directly owned. This is usually called serfdom or peonage. The serfs cannot be sold or families split because they belong to the land, not the master.

There was also indentured servitude where the slavery was for a contractually limited time in return for some consideration. This was mainly limited to the settlement of the American colonies in modern times. Frequently indentured servants were treated worse than owned slaves. Most people will take better care of their own property than they will rental property.

There is also the slavery where one individual has some hold over another. This is more a modern phenomenon and does not usually have legal status where practiced. Think of prostitutes held to a pimp by a dependence on the drugs that the pimp supplies.

The things that distinguish slavery are:

· No freedom of movement
· No freedom of occupation
· Receive no recompense for labor other than necessities
· Bound to do the will of the master with no alternative

For right now we will concentrate on legal and condoned slavery. One of the things that people seem to overlook in discussions of slavery is the economic side of it. Humans don’t generally do anything that is not economically advantageous. The myths about slave ships showing up at coastal villages in Africa and just running in and capturing a whole bunch of people are pretty much fantasy. It is dangerous to run into a village. Some cranky guy just might shove a spear through you. Death is generally considered economically undesirable. It did happen, but not all that often.

There were thriving slave markets in Africa when the Europeans showed up. It was much better to purchase existing slaves and load them and ship them back. The markets were run by Africans, for Africans, selling Africans. When the European traders started buying it was the beginning of a two hundred year economic boom for the suppliers. Of course they had to raid further and further afield to gather fresh merchandise. It is of interest to note that a good bit of the African slave trade is tied up with the spread of Islam and a good many of the slave traders were Moslem. The early African Christians did not practice slavery.

The Moslems practiced slavery up to the present. Slavery is still practiced in the Sudan. Note that Louis Farrakhan has visited the Sudan often. He has never seen fit to criticize the slavery in the Sudan or the forced servitude in modern Saudi Arabia. I guess it is only wrong if the master is white. One of my ancestors was Captain James Riley. He was shipwrecked off the west coast of Africa and after a harrowing ordeal in the Sahara, was captured and enslaved by Moslems. The story of his torture and eventual bid for freedom are chronicled in his memoirs. His book had considerable influence in the mid 1800s. You can look him up on the internet.

There is not a human on the planet who does not descend from slaves and slave owners. The talk of reparations is just foolish distraction. If your grandfather murdered my grandfather do you owe me a life? Money? Foolishness. More crap from the professional “victims” of the world.

Back to philosophy and history. The slavery that comes to most modern minds is that African period of the 1600s to the 1800s. Using Africans had several advantages:

The first and obvious was that they were visually different from the European masters and thus easy to spot. Less opportunity for a runaway to make freedom. Better economics.

The second was that in the new lands of the Americas and the Caribbean area, the Africans were more heat tolerant and stronger than the indigenous Indian tribes. Many of the Indian tribes practiced slavery, but not on so wide a scale as the Africans. The Africans were culturally used to the institution of slavery and fared better mentally. The Indians tended to die when overworked, the Africans survived. Better economics.

The third was that the existence of the large African slave markets. Since slaves could be bought rather cheaply at the markets, it then boiled down to simple transportation and housing to get them to the New World markets. The ships could be built so that a maximum number could be shipped with minimum loss. Read dead or permanently damaged people from horrible conditions. Chained in the holds and unable to move about. Stench, heat, boredom and terror constant companions. Hell. But a Hell designed to be just barely survivable for 90% or so. Your profits went down if too much stock died. Therefore the shippers provided the minimum expenditure for the maximum return. Good economics.

The price of slaves went from a low of around $40.00 in colonial times up to $1,000.00 in the 1850s. The average return on a slave after all costs was around 5%. This factored in shelter, clothing, sickness, death, runaway loss, and any other losses likely to be incurred. It was generally considered cheaper to buy slaves than to breed them. The slave was not considered fully functional and profitable until around age 14.

This may be compared to a general cost for sex slaves in Thailand of around $1,000.00 initial investment. The general return is around $35,000 until death from abuse, HIV, or drug overdose. There is no economic incentive for the pimps to cease this lucrative trade. There is no particular incentive to take good care of their stock. People come from all over the world to partake of the sex market. It is a significant part of the tourist trade. The world community has not seen fit to punish the country for condoning this trade. It also occurs in surrounding countries, none of which are being punished with UN sanctions. This kind of trade does occur in all modern countries. However, in the west it is not openly or legally condoned and carries some risk of prosecution.

The fact that slavery is morally repugnant does not enter into the thinking of the practitioners. One of the abilities universal to humans is to either demonize or de-humanize others, particularly if there is some group difference. Most people are not deliberately cruel, but can be quite malicious when thinking about others as some sub-human group rather than as human individuals.

Of interest is the constant historical emphasis on the degradation of the enslaved. A small point here – an individual cannot be robbed of his essential humanity and dignity if determined to keep it. Even in horrible circumstances. From a Christian perspective, the corrosive effects of slavery on the soul are far more dangerous to the master than to the slave. This is not to say that many of the preachers of the time did not blind themselves to the incompatibility of slavery and Christianity. Indeed, many of the preachers of the day condoned the practice. Unfortunately, the economic arguments far outweigh the moral for the majority of humans.

Man is not a rational animal. He is a rationalizing animal.

Liberal Hypocrisy –

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is a convicted felon and heroin junkie. He has stated that anyone who disagrees with his extremist environazi position is a traitor. If someone on the right stated that anyone who disagreed with them was a traitor the liberal press would crucify them. For days. Look how long they howled for Don Imus’s blood. The Duke Lacrosse case got tons of press when they were after the player’s hides. I noticed a whole lot less coverage of their clearing and the crazy DA’s indictment. Bobby, Jr. won’t have this. He is a liberal, and so is the press. They like him.

Dianne Feinstein is guilty of using her senatorial committee position to steer military contracts to her husband’s arms firm. You don’t see that one in the press. They like her.

Edward Kennedy is a drunk. He is either a murderer or guilty of drunken incompetence while leaving Mary Jo Kopekne to die a horrible death. The press likes him.

John Kerry is a liar and a giver of aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States while in a condition of war. He met, as a private citizen, with the representatives of the North Vietnamese government while shooting was still going on. This is a matter of public record. It is also recorded at the North Vietnamese museum, with Kerry shown as one of their heroes. It is also against the law, and can carry the death penalty. This is beside the issue of whether or not he has lied about his service in Vietnam. His stories have been inconsistent and the Swiftboat Veterans were there. The press wasn’t. But they like him.

Joe Kennedy made his money as the banker for the mob. Edward owns lots of oil company stock. (So does Michael Moore).

And so on. Not that the Republicans are any better, but the press does crucify them. If they blow their noses wrong. Whether there is a real story or not.

I see that the Kerry’s have several limousines and SUV’s. I don’t see them with any hybrid cars. I don’t see them with ethanol, which doesn’t work. Corn has to be subsidized to make ethanol from corn even vaguely affordable. When corn is used for ethanol, the price of staples goes up. Taxes go up. The price of fuel goes up. The poor are the ones that suffer most. Some compassion. But wait – Brazil makes it work nicely! Well yes. They do. They use sugar cane for ethanol, not corn. Corn is a lousy energy hog. It takes more energy to grow it than it yields. Sugar cane is pretty efficient. We don’t have enough land that is available for sugar cane to amount to beans where fuel is concerned. Anyway, where was I. Oh yeah, the Kerrys are not called to task. The liberals like them.

I see private jets used by all these rich, environmentally conscious liberals. When (rarely) anyone in the press has the temerity to question the use of private jets, the rationale is that “emission reduction credits” are used.

Let’s see. Emission Reduction Credits. ERCs. That’s where you don’t reduce your own pollution, you buy these credits from someone who has reduced pollution below the mandated levels and can therefore sell their credits.

So, the conclusion here is that if you are rich enough, you can buy the credits to maintain any lifestyle you damn well please. Kind of like the indulgences that the Medieval Western Church was selling. Rape, murder, adultery, whatever. Just buy your way out. Of maybe it was more like the draft in the Civil War. You could buy your way out of the draft. If you had $300 you could avoid service by paying someone else to pay the final price. I don’t see a whole lot of difference.

I don’t know that I have a lot of beef with people who honestly believe that we should reduce environmental impact. That is a worthy goal that should be everyone’s. We might disagree on how to get there. That’s ok. What does really bite is the worship of these lying hypocrites that lead the libs. If Republicans act anywhere near like these people, the outcry from the press and the mass of libs is loud and long. I only ask that the playing field be level. Hold these lying slimeballs to the same standards. Hate speech is hate speech, whether by RFK, Jr. or some wild-eyed ethnic hater.

It is popular on the left to characterize the Nazis as right wing. Not so, totalitarianism is the last thing a conservative can embrace. A conservative is interested in individual freedom. For everyone. Any group that would use the power of government – read armed force – to force a particular view and behavior on the populous is to be in the same bed with the Nazis. Whether the goal is power for the sake of power, or to eradicate some hated group, or to force the use of certain light bulbs, or to force some type of salvation on everyone else. Including environmental purity. Using the force of law to effect social change is always tricky and highly dangerous. What is started with the best of intentions (the road to Hell is paved with) will almost always be hijacked by extremists if there is any force involved at all.

If we really have a climate change problem – and the final scientific proof does not seem to be here yet, but there does seem to be anecdotal evidence – then instead of panicking about a light bulb or using one piece of tissue paper, or expecting cars to go away, we had better figure out the consequences. We had a climate change back in 535-536 AD. (And have had others throughout recorded history). We didn’t have any industry to blame, but the consequences were rather severe. Including famine. Do we need to think about preparing for a famine? Even the back-to-the-earthers are going to be in a hurt if crops won’t grow. I submit that if we are having climate change, then coping with the consequences and good scientific examination of the causes and possible cures are more important than trying to base public policy on a populist movement. If we waste our effort in going the wrong direction, we may feel warm and fuzzy and virtuous, but people could die if we are wrong. Lots of people. If it is within out power – doubtful, but possible – and we are to achieve any significant cure then this must be a coordinated worldwide effort. This will take people and nations all working together. Not trying to grind the ax of blaming the US for everything. Not exempting the Chinese and Africa. (Both pollute more than the US now. Both have worse human rights records than the US ever did). Everyone. Together. Rationally. No more killing because someone’s religion is different. How are you going to persuade them to stop?

Saints and other interesting critters –

English is an interesting and polyglot language derived from many sources. People don’t seem to realize just how much the language used affects the thought process. But, the fact is, we cannot conceptualize without words. Words wind up carrying overtones and flavorings which go beyond the mere dictionary definitions.

The word saint derives from the Latin sanctus, which does mean holy. The early church did not write in Latin, but in Greek. Now, in Greek the word is άγιος (hagios), which also means holy. The difference is that that hagios carries the additional overtones of “holy one”.

In the Western Roman church the term saint carries a whole concept involving the whole canonization process. Emphasis on the legal proceedings, canonical court, devil’s advocate and all that stuff. Emphasis is put on outward and visible miracles and all that. Saint’s wind up being almost a different category from most humans.

In the Eastern Orthodox Church the whole understanding is different, not “saint” like a military title, but “holy one” as in participates in the Kingdom of Heaven. The sense is that, as in the New Testament, the saints are among us. Indeed, anyone who is or will be in Heaven is holy. There is no particular formal mechanism for canonization. A saint is declared as such when the people of some area decide that they are. No courts, no investigations, no formal legal proceedings. There are thousands of local saints that are not on any official list. A given saint may be placed on a national church’s calendar when enough people in that area decide to honor that person. This can result in otherwise unsavory people being venerated as “holy ones”.

I have met many living “holy ones”. There is one abiding characteristic among all – the overwhelming love that pours from them. You do not have any doubt that these people love God with all their might. You also do not have and doubt that you are loved. It can be rather overwhelming to be in the presence of these people. It draws like a magnet. It can also be frightening. Other than this holy and heavenly love, there is very little else that these people have in common. They may be genius, they may not have a full deck. They may be highly educated, they may be quite ignorant. They may be urbane and charming, they may have the manners of a pig. They may not even be housebroken. They are real people. They can even be people you wouldn’t want in your home.

Some of the Orthodox saints are rather unsavory, at best. St. Moses the Black comes to mind. One of the many African Saints. Oh yes, many people do not seem to realize that Africa had a ton of early church activity and that many of the early Saints were black. Anyway, Moses was a bad boy. He was an escaped slave, gangster, robber, and murderer. He was a huge, powerful and terrifying man. He and his gang attacked a monastery to pillage. Moses was so impressed by the abbot that he repented. Long, agonizing story short, he became a monk, a priest, and an abbot himself. He was martyred in 405 by the Berbers, at 75 years of age.

There are a whole series of “transvestite nuns”, a remarkable group, mostly women, who dressed as men and lived as monks in the Eastern church. Most of these are recorded from the 5th to the 9th centuries. Of course, in the current culture, we would assume that anyone who cross-dresses is also sexually active. This was not the case. These were people whose bodies did not match their genders, and in a celibate monastic life the gender of the body is somewhat irrelevant. There were also men dressed as women in the female convents. Somewhat less frequent. Not only did this not really bother the Orthodox, but note that several of these people are now recognized and loved as holy ones.

There is also the intriguing group known as “fools for Christ”. Юродивый is Russian for Holy Fool. The original inspiration is 1st Corinthians 4:10 - “We are fools for Christ’s sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honorable, but we are despised.” There are all kinds of theology and discussion to go along with the whole concept. The fact is that a lot of these people did not play with a full deck, yet were nevertheless recognized as “holy ones” by the people around them. Contrary to the delusions of some, Harvard or Yale are not like Heaven. An IQ test is not required for entrance into Heaven.

The man known as St. John of San Francisco was John Maximovitch. He was quite recent and current, he only died in 1966. In the Roman way he would not even be eligible for consideration much before 2066. In the Orthodox Church he is a saint on the calendar of the Russian Church Abroad and has been for several years. His veneration began almost on the day of his death, his holiness was recognized during his life. He was Bishop of San Francisco and would frequently scandalize some of the more staid parishioners. He had no patience with social convention and would often interrupt social occasion to declare that there had been enough frivolity, it was time to pray. The children of his cathedral once made him a paper mache miter (fancy bishops hat). It looked pretty dreadful. He stopped the service, removed his golden brocade and jeweled miter, set it aside and placed the paper mache miter on his head. He did the rest of the very formal and beautiful service with this garish thing. He said that the children’s loving gift was far more beautiful and pleasing to God. Some of the stuffier parishioners were totally horrified. He would give his shoes to someone homeless and then wander into some important meeting in the Cathedral barefoot. In Shanghai when his church was closed by the communists he celebrated the services in the middle of the street using a card table. At considerable risk to his life, the communists had already martyred several of his people. He was loved all across the globe for his direct and loving (and tactless) approach to the Christian life. He served as priest or bishop on every continent of the world except Antarctica.

The Kingdom of God does not follow social convention. Neither do all the holy ones. Some very peculiar and surprising people have been models of faith and love. Maybe we need to rearrange some of our American notions of what is “proper”?