WHY did World Trade Center Building 7 collapse on 9-11? The office tower was not hit by a plane and was not engulfed in flames. It took only 6.5 seconds for the 47-story building to fall to the ground, starting at 5:20 p.m. that day. There was foreknowledge of its imminent fall by city officials.

This remains the most perplexing issue in connection with the destruction of the World Trade Center. Rethink 911, Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, examines the official theory that it fell due to fires on various floors and presents contrary evidence that the building was deliberately detonated. To the untrained eye, it unquestionably appears as if it was demolished by explosives. According to the organization, 2,000 architects and civil engineers have signed a petition calling for an official investigation. Building 7 was never included in the 911 Commission report.

See this video on the building’s free fall: (more…)

FROM Jason Morgan at Crisis magazine: [T]he true losers in Obergefell are the same as in Windsor: those experiencing same-sex attraction. The blessing is that, post Obergefell, there is no more political frenzy to cover over sadness of soul. Those in homosexual relationships will have to face the hard facts of their lifestyle. Many have already suffered under the normative lie that homosexuality can bring happiness, and many more will suffer now that this lie has been quite literally wedded to state power. Those now given the imprimatur of the federal government on the dead-end slavery of sin—and the children who are condemned to witness this slow-motion destruction of human dignity firsthand—are the true sacrificial victims in this war. If we were not praying for them before, let us start doing so today.

ARE we characters in a farce? The man who calls himself "Pope" travels about promoting recycling and environmental "sustainability" while the most powerful nation on earth makes it possible for a man to "marry" a man. Is this reality? This latest episode of the Catholic program Tradcast examines a few of the recent outrages of Jorge Bergoglio in light of Catholic dogma. It would be comedy if only it was fiction. It would be tragedy if this man were truly the pope. As the outstanding host of this program says, the Vatican II Church departs so flagrantly from the teachings of the Catholic Church at this point that even a cursory reading of the New Testament reveals the lie. Bergoglio is the head of a Counter Church. The program also looks at the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling and the irreverence and contradictions of Catholic traditionalists who harshly criticize the man whom they believe is the pope. These critics, explains Tradcast, want to have their pope and beat him too.

SAM writes:

Have you seen this article about a “divorce” firm for homosexuals?

These businessmen know up front that there is absolutely no way most male homosexual couples can form stable monogamous relationships, and they are looking to capitalize. You have to respect their business savvy, because it is clear that they know the forbidden truth about a certain wealthy, flamboyant, and psychologically unstable minority group and they are going to rake in the cash. It seems likely that they had this business plan up and running well in advance of the recent travesty at the Supreme Court. (more…)

THIS 2001 Joe Sobran piece, posted at Henry Makow’s site, is highly recommended:

Getting in touch with my feelings the other day, I realized how I loathe homosexuals. All of them? Of course not. Some of them are funny, kind, intelligent, and otherwise pleasant. But homosexuals in general, yes. I can’t stand them. Especially the ones who are organized under the rubric of gay rights.

I guess this makes me “homophobic.” So what? Homophobia is one of those ugly cant-words — like racist and sexist — that no self-respecting speaker of the English language would use. (Try to imagine Abraham Lincoln calling someone “homophobic.”) It’s a verbal badge of groupthink. (more…)

(more…)

MY family once vacationed in a campground in the White Mountains of New Hampshire where we unfortunately pitched our tent next to a group of campers who were having a wild time. They included a man who every fifteen minutes or so would call out ecstatically for everyone around to hear, “Freedom! Free-ee-ee-eedom! Free-ee-ee-dom!” As the night progressed, and the emptied cans of Budweiser piled up around him, his praise of freedom grew louder and louder. Finally, in the early morning hours, he proved just how committed to freedom he was. He sat right in the middle of the campfire. After that, there was a hush. We never heard from him again.

Freedom as an end in itself doesn’t make sense. If freedom is the power to harm or even destroy oneself it is not freedom at all, but a kind of slavery. On this national holiday, when we love our country and celebrate our heritage, we can commit ourselves to a wiser understanding of freedom than the one mindlessly promoted as the epitome of American patriotism. There is no political freedom — for individuals or society — without moral freedom. Moral freedom consists in the power to act in accord with the order of being and eternal law.

As Pope Leo XIII wrote in his majestic encyclical Libertas Praestantissimum, On the Nature of Human Liberty, dated June, 20, 1888: (more…)

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ruled today, in the landmark case Scarsbury v. Scarsbury, that under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, children are entitled to establish their own bedtimes and eat whatever they darn well please. The 5-4 ruling was the culmination of years of struggle by children’s rights advocates. It was widely hailed as a victory for equality.

Eight-year-old Zachary Scarsbury spoke at a press conference outside the Supreme Court Building. “My parents made me do so many things I didn’t want to do,” he said. “I didn’t have any rights at all. This is a victory for equality.”

Zachary has been living in a five-bedroom condo funded by George Soros’s Children Rule campaign while awaiting the decision. “I finally can go back home,” he said. “With the federal government backing me up, my parents understand their obligations and probably won’t give me anymore trouble.” Zachary prefers macaroni and cheese without any vegetables on the side.

Mr. and Mrs. Scarsbury, who sold their four-bedroom house two years ago to meet legal expenses, appeared somber as they addressed the press outside their mobile home. They said from now on they would do whatever Zachary ordered them to do. “We were living in the past,” Dan Scarsbury said. “It’s time to move on.”

Parents across America reacted to the ruling with indifference. “I’ve been letting my children do whatever they want for years,” said Heather Jones, a single mother interviewed on the street in downtown Columbus, Ohio. “I think everyone should have equality. My children prefer double-crust, cheese-stuffed pizza from Pizza Hut.”

Richard Helward, interviewed in Macon, Ga., said he gets angry whenever he thinks of how parents controlled their children in the past. “If my son wants to play video games for 12 hours a day, I think he has the right to do it. Who am I to say, no?”

The court also ruled that parents are no longer permitted to impose their religious beliefs on their children. Under the First Amendment, no family can establish a religion.

“My parents kept forcing their fairy tales on me,” said Zachary, who is an atheist. “I felt sorry for them.”

“They can still give me presents at Christmastime, but that’s it.” (more…)

A READER writes:

Some months ago I stopped following “the news.” I know mainly what’s going on by following a few blogs but I cannot bear to look at the poisonous culture and vicious propaganda of the new regime. I used to check Drudge, the Daily Mail, the Post or Daily News… no more. I won’t even read the New Yorker for their cartoons, or the New York Times real estate section, which used to be a Sunday morning pleasure. I stopped watching TV years ago. We don’t have cable, I don’t watch modern movies. They turned us into zombies with their toxic mass media, the devils. If I am not already imprisoned in the cell next to yours I will be honored to visit you in jail. Or maybe I could organize a jailbreak — the storming of the Bastille, in reverse. I wonder if I’m too old and cowardly to strap on a sword and ride out for the Lord. All I really want to do is read beautiful books, hear beautiful music, see beautiful art, make beautiful things with my own two hands, and commune with beautiful souls. Is that too much to ask? Yes, it’s an ironic question. :-) The world keeps shoving its ugliness in our faces. (more…)

THE Canadian professor Douglas Farrow makes a couple of important points about same-sex insanity in this piece at First Things. These points have been made here before but they deserve repetition, endless repetition.

He rightly points out that the problem with the Supreme Court decision is not, as the dissenting judicial nincompoops argued, that it usurped the legislative branch or popular referenda. If every single American had voted to institute by Constitutional amendment same-sex insanity, it would still be an act of tyranny. As Farrow points out, marriage is a pre-political institution. (more…)

A “CORRESPONDENT from an Occupied City” writes:

Josh F., in the previous entry, stated:

“This desire [for self-annihilation] has passed the critical threshold. We’ve crossed the event horizon. Western Man measures his freedom in the metric of self-annihilation and daily grows closer to more primitive “man.””

While I love Josh F.’s description of our current stage as having passed the “event horizon” I don’t necessarily agree that we have reverted to primitive savagery. I think we are much worse off because we are primitive savages with nuclear weapons – the nuclear weapon of a vast, far-reaching legal apparatus, the nuclear weapon of all-encompassing corporations. (Try to boycott one and see how far you get.) (more…)

STEVE writes:

In light of the two recent Supreme Court decisions on Obamacare and, especially, on “gay marriage,” it has become almost impossible to put off the two questions that have been circling the country like satellites for at least a decade:

“Is it time to resist?” And, “Resist how? (more…)

(more…)

IN THIS two-part video, Ryan Sorba of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality debunks the immensely influential myth, deliberately propagated by the media, that people are born homosexual.

A “Correspondent from an Occupied City” writes:

Apropos of your pointing out that same-sex “marriage” has solid corporate support, I was accosted by an “LGBT” rights campaigner on the street last weekend. Against my better instincts I engaged with him. Never again, it’s not worth it.

I said to him, “You’ve got marriage, now what?” He screamed (yes, screamed), “You can legally fire a gay person or transgender person in 28 states!” I responded that I thought that was fine, an employer should have the right to hire and fire at will, and that I didn’t want a man in the bathroom stall next to me, and went on my way. (more…)

FROM Goodbye, America (in a photo).

These children, by the way, are merely political pawns. They can have no idea that the rainbow flag stands for tyranny and perversion. (more…)

In the Shadow of the Prodigy by Frank van Dun

Reviewed by Thomas F. Bertonneau

I happened to have been reading Frank van Dun’s novel In the Shadow of the Prodigy (2015) during the week of the United States Supreme Court’s latest trespass into the constitutional domain of law-making, formerly reserved to the legislative branch. The same week saw several new instances of Islamic savagery – in France and Algeria – and the collapse of the Greek economy. It is difficult to say whether these events colored my assessment of van Dun’s prose or the other way around. I have been carrying a knot in my stomach for days; my brow has been creased. One way or another, In the Shadow of the Prodigy is a book for our time, breaking up the white dazzle of overlapping crises that constitutes the contemporary scene into the refracted strands of its elementary colors. Van Dun’s story is a mystery, so I will be calling attention to it in such a way as not to divulge too many of its plot-points.

In the Shadow of the Prodigy narrates the collision of naivety with evil. The novel’s various manifestations of evil appear banal but are no less wicked for their appearances. Indeed, as van Dun sees things, contemporary shoddiness and a fixation on low stakes belong to the prevailing corruption. The vileness that drives men and women to wanton deeds is as paltry in its objects as the evil is banal. Van Dun sets his action twenty-one years ago, in 1994, on the verge of that epochal event, the Internet, which serves the author for one of his chief symbols – a creeping multi-tentacular but invisible monstrosity that ensnares the multitudes of the unwary. (more…)

FROM a letter by St. Louis Grignion de Monfort to the inhabitants of Montbernage, France on the occasion of his banishment: “I stand in face of many enemies. All those who love and esteem transitory and perishable things of this world treat me with contempt, mock and persecute me, and the powers of evil have conspired together to incite against me everywhere all those powerful ones in authority. Surrounded by all this I am very weak, even weakness itself. I am ignorant, even ignorance itself, and even worse that I do not dare to speak of. Being so alone and poor, I would certainly perish were I not supported by Our Lady and the prayers of good people, especially your own. These are obtaining for me from God the gift of speech or Divine Wisdom, which will be the remedy for all my ills and a powerful weapon against all my enemies. “With Mary everything is easy. I place all my confidence in her, despite the snarls of the world and thunders of hell. I say with St. Bernard: ‘In her I have placed unbounded confidence; she is the whole reason for my hope.’ …. Through Mary I will seek and find Jesus; I will crush the serpent’s head and overcome all my enemies as well as myself for the greater glory of God. “Farewell then but not goodbye, for if God spares me, I will pass this way again."