FROM Simon Shack at September Clues Forum (not a blanket endorsement):
What follows will be the shortest summary I’ve ever put together regarding the massive collective 9/11 research efforts performed and illustrated at this valiant forum. The thing is that, at this time, my main concern is to reach out to the younger generations which I believe – although I hope to be wrong about that – are becoming less inclined to spend time reading long articles about troublesome and politically-loaded affairs such as 9/11. Of course, anyone younger than 22 years of age never experienced the ‘trauma’ of watching the 9/11 saga (what with its colorful, cartoonish imagery) unfold on “live TV”. So, perhaps, their minds may be less conditioned and prone to clutch onto the purported reality of these ‘terror events’ as presented on TV. So without further ado, here’s a much condensed ‘digest’ of what the younger generations ought and need to know – for their own good – concerning the media-&-military-staged “show” known as “9/11”.
1: Firstly, please know that no one died in any plane crashes on 9/11. None of the alleged hijacked flights have any official records of their airport logs or passenger manifests – much like ALL flights taking off from any airport of this world are obviously required to have. The alleged flights 11, 77, 93 and 175 were simply non-existent. Read More »
I APPEAL to all children living in the United States of America.
If I could write this message on paper airplanes, they would fly through your windows and into your rooms.
These brilliant slips of paper would flutter through the air with a secret, critically-important and urgently-urgent message: “You must act now.”
“Get a hold of some boats. Find some large ships with enough room for thousands and millions of other boys and girls. Take water and a few cookies. Forget about extra clothes. Sail right away to deserted islands somewhere on the face of the earth. Better yet, learn to fly. But do it quickly. Get to an island no matter what it takes.”
There, after setting foot on that glorious island, you will refuse any communication with social engineers, political zealots, deranged adults and Dr. Frankensteins. You will have no contact with those who drug you, indoctrinate you and obliterate your childhood. No school buses will carry you to your daily doom — a doom “awfuller than all the awfullest things that ever were.”
You see, there is a conspiracy against children. This conspiracy wants to destroy everything children know to be good and true. Adults have completely and totally forgotten what it is to be a child, even though allegedly they were once children too. They now suffer from mass amnesia (that’s a big word for the loss of vital memories.) They think that when a child says, “I want to be firefighter!”, that he literally wants a job as a firefighter. They have zero imagination. Adults have such serious handicaps, most of them are irredeemably lost. Children have been patient with adult limitations for thousands and millions of years, but things have gone way too far. Enough is enough.
Adults have forgotten that a child is not capable of, or even interested in, momentous decisions. The child wants to be told the world is good, because he knows in his heart it is good. He needs basics, not abstractions. He needs sandboxes and swords, rhinestone tiaras and royal scepters — not political utopia.
On that island, you can be sure that every boy is a boy and every girl is a girl. Case closed. Can you believe adults are so confused about this, as if their brains were scrambled or turned into peanut butter? Only “intelligent” and “educated” adults in love with their own thick, peanut-butter-stuffed heads could believe something so stupid as that a boy could become a girl or a girl could become a boy. Confusion will be banned on the island. Ridiculousness will be strictly prohibited; no psychologists or prescriptions necessary. No one on the island will feel sorry for himself — not for a single minute. Everyone will be a hero, rising above the fierce blows of dastardly misfortune.
Refuse to grow up. At this critical juncture in history, you have no other choice.
It’s true that you will miss your parents, but after a while those adults who have recovered their senses and remembered what it is to be a child will be allowed to visit the island.
No doctors, dentists, teachers with bees in their bonnets or psychologists with ridiculous questions will ever be allowed. These will be personally escorted off the island and given a 21-gun salute only as they sail away. Others with an advanced degree will be admitted solely after intense cross-examination and dis-education. Crocodiles and pirates are not half as dangerous as “experts” or an “educated” man.
Adults have left you with no alternative. Defend childhood before it’s too late. If children don’t leave now, there will be no children left to leave later. Boys and girls will be obsolete.
Liberal dogma to the contrary, such popular goals as universal literacy are not necessarily conducive to great literature. The England of Shakespeare, apart from having a much smaller population, had a much higher illiteracy rate than present-day Britain. Nor does universal suffrage seem to raise the quality of artistic output. When Bach was Konzertmeister in Weimar and composing a new cantata every month, no one could vote. Some 220 years later in the Weimar Republic, there were tens of millions of voters, but no Bachs.
Great drama, which usually incorporates great poetry, is the rarest form of great art. Art critics and historians have been at some loss to explain why great plays have appeared so infrequently in history and then only in clusters — fifth-century (B.C.) Athens, late sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century England, seventeenth-century Spain and France. The answer may be that conditions for great drama are only ripe when artist and audience are in biological as well as linguistic rapport. Such rapport, unfortunately, is bound to be short-lived because the era of great drama is usually accompanied by large-scale economic and material advances which tend to soften national character, sharpen class divisions and attract extraneous racial and cultural elements from abroad. To the great playwright a heterogeneous or divided audience is no audience at all.
Not only high art but all art seems to stagnate in an environment of brawling minorities, diverse religions, clashing traditions, and contrasting habits. This is probably why, in spite of their vast wealth and power, such world cities as Alexandria and Antioch in ancient times and New York City and Rio de Janeiro in modern times have produced nothing that can compare to the art of municipalities a fraction of their size. The artist needs an audience which understands him — an audience of his own people. The artist needs an audience to write up to, paint up to, and compose up to — an aristocracy of his own people. These seem to be the true sine qua nons of great art. Whenever they are absent great art is absent. Read More »
Thank you for that article on libraries by Alan. He is such a talented writer and astute observer of society.
I have worked in libraries for twenty-five years, and agree that the field is no longer run by “grown-ups”. I have fond memories of the librarians of yore, but the people entering the field are now activists, much like teachers. The sole place I have encountered “pronouns” in my rural area is in e-mails from fellow library directors. These are frequently sent to rally others to fight “censorship”, the censorship of sexually explicit materials from the children’s section. I have asked to be removed from these partisan e-mail lists, and now my fellow directors do not return my calls.
I cannot begin to describe the drivel that I am being sent to add to the collection. Books for children these days are ugly, with illustrations that are primitive and devoid of artistic talent. They have overt, preachy messages. These serve in complete contrast to the books I enjoyed as a child like The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and Frog and Toad are Friends. I can visualize the illustrations from memory of The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery and Gareth Williams’ drawings in Laura Ingalls Wilder’s books. Homeschooling families are the bedrock of my circulation numbers, but when I try to buy the classics they request, my state board tells me these books are “too old”, and I cannot purchase any books using state funds with a copyright that exceeds seven years. Why is this, I wonder? Read More »
He has returned from the battlefield and reluctantly laid down his sword.
Golden light falls across windswept hair, held in place by silicone spray. Creases accumulated over a long life of super jets and sumptuous blondes, glass towers and dimly-lit casino halls have been forgivingly removed.
The best of image-making services have rendered flawlessly smooth cheeks. No ordinary camera would do. Here is our victim of the establishment. Evil liberals are out to crucify him. They give him billions in free publicity. There’s wads of cash on the side, but he’s a victim of immeasurable injustice and democracy’s still the greatest system on earth. Freedom is having nothing left to lose.
The eyes are fiercely honest. They pierce the soul. “I have betrayed my country, my wives and most everybody except Jerusalem, but count on me,” they seem to say. The brow is creased with thoughts of well-deserved revenge.
The chin is exquisite. One manly man stands amidst the ruins of Operation Warp Speed. He will never surrender from his tower of shekels. No, not this Lord of Babylon.
It’s not a smile or a grimace, but lips of steely determination. Let us hereby hate everyone who hates him.
The nose befits a Caesar Augustus or maybe a Caligula. Hard to say, but it’s a magnificent nose, dark on one side, heavenly light on the other.
I envision future citizens of the Soviet States of America, their hearts swelling with pride, before a marble statue with just this immortal face atop its manly form.
Admiring the heroic visage, the people will say to themselves, “We don’t need to do a thing. He’s got our back.”
[T]HE prevailing notion of viruses as solely destructive entities is being challenged by emerging research. Viruses, with their remarkable capacity to selectively target and infiltrate specific cells, can be viewed as valuable allies in the ongoing battle against disease. It is worth noting that viral-mediated lysis, often perceived as purely detrimental, actually fulfills a crucial role in renewal, ecological equilibrium, and disease management. Furthermore, viral enzymes, including proteases, nucleases, polymerases, and lipases, contribute significantly to viral influence and the breakdown of diseased cellular components.
As well, viruses assume pivotal roles in nature, functioning as regulators and facilitating nutrient recycling within ecosystems. Grasping the intricate interplay between viruses, cells, and environmental factors can provide profound insights into disease control and the dynamics of ecosystems.
Moreover, the emergence of viral illnesses can be attributed to environmental factors such as pollution, which weaken cells and disrupt the delicate balance of their environment. This imbalance gives rise to the need for cellular solvents, known as viruses. It is imperative to cast away fear and embrace a deep understanding of viruses for what they truly represent: cellular saviors.
THERE are two striking aspects of this BBC rebroadcast of a 1960 interview with the British writer Evelyn Waugh.
First, there is the stunning misrepresentation of the interview by Joan Bakewell, who introduces the rebroadcast with utterly false charges of rudeness and hostility on the part of Waugh, and similar mischaracterization of the writer by John Freeman, the original interviewer, who had posed a number of antagonistic questions to Waugh and accuses him of nervousness that is nowhere to be found. Why do they seem eager to attribute rudeness and even mental instability to the author? Is it their own egotism, their search for a titillating angle, or is there something else at stake? Perhaps his religious beliefs?
Secondly, there is the interview itself, which is a memorable and fascinating glimpse of the author, who is open, candid and succinct, his lucid thoughts traveling visibly across a pudgy, Anglo-Saxon face devoid of conceit and concealment. Waugh says there is only one reason why he agreed to be interviewed on TV: poverty. Not many celebrities would admit to the financial self-interest in publicity.
Waugh remembers fondly the instruction his mother gave him before he went to school and being read to as a child. He recalls the harshness of life at a British boarding school during World War I and briefly discusses his conversion to Catholicism. I highly recommend the whole thing.
THE earth adorned in verdant robe Sends praises upward surging, While soft winds breathe on fragrant flowers From winter now emerging. The sun shines bright, gives warmth and light To budding blossoms tender, Proclaiming summer’s splendor.Read More »
Depravities like the “Teen Drag Show” in the library in Ames, Iowa, [Nov. 15] would not be taking place today if American libraries were still run by grown-ups worthy of that name.
You suggested that American libraries today are temples of junk. That is a charitable description.
What we should realize about libraries is that our greatest enemies are shrewd enough to permit them to continue functioning qua libraries while at the same time using them as focal points for cultural subversion.
Not that they are needed, but here are three more examples of this:
1) Last May, the St. Louis Public Library promoted its third annual “Hip Hop Appreciation Week”, during which “workshops” in “beatmaking” and “music production” were offered. There were also live performances in the building of the noise called hip hop “music.”
Observe the qualities in such “music:” Loudness, arrogance, anger, self-righteous bombast, Ebonics, profanity, and contempt for restraint, women, and law.
Compare that with these words that appear on a lunette above the entry to the Library’s Main Hall:
“Speak low – tread softly through these halls;
Here genius lives enshrined, –
Here reign, in silent majesty,
The monarchs of the mind.”
These words are the first stanza in Anne Lynch Botta’s poem “Thoughts in a Library” (1852). Read More »
“SUFFER not thy mind to be ever either lifted up or too much cast down, but labour always to preserve it in peace. For our Lord saith: Blessed are the peaceable. Then will our Lord build in thy soul a house of pleasure. All that He required of thee is that, when thy passions raise thee up, thou shouldest sit down again, keep- ing thyself quiet in all thy works, thoughts, and emotions. But as a house is not built in one day, so thou must not think in one day to attain to this perfect peace and inward rest. And the Lord Himself it is that buildeth this house of peace. Without Him thou dost toil thyself in vain. But the foundation thereof is humility.”
“DIFFERENCE of race or condition or sex is indeed taken away by the unity of faith, but it remains imbedded in our mortal interactions, and in the journey of this life the apostles themselves teach that it is to be respected, and they even proposed living in accord with the racial differences between Jews and Greeks as a wholesome rule.”
WEDDING DRESS FOR SALE: Worn once by mistake. Call Stephanie.
FOR SALE BY OWNER: Complete set of Encyclopedia Britannica, 45 volumes. Excellent condition, $200 or best offer. No longer needed, got married, wife knows everything.
THE PURITANS of early America were famous for their austere clothing, as in this portrait of the famous poet Anne Bradstreet. While it is not true that the Puritans wore black all the time, they certainly scorned colorful and ornate dress. Laws in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Connecticut forbade clothing accessories such as silk scarves, cosmetics and pointy boots. Clothes were deliberately drab and they were also highly uniform.
The pursuit of exterior beauty was considered sinful in Puritan theology. Elegant clothes and buildings were too reminiscent of the magnificentia of Old Europe. All those cathedrals with their elaborate ornamentation, all those paintings and glorious archways, all those golden chalices and illuminated manuscripts — all were a lie. All this must be repudiated. It was impossible to please God with beautiful appearances. What mattered was whether you were one of the elect.
The modesty in dress the Puritans admired has been long cast off — militantly cast off. To defend the standards of modesty of that age is to defend tyranny and “supremacism.” Modesty indeed is positively wicked today.
But, as for the Puritans’ disdain of beauty? In that sense, we haven’t really come that far.
A young woman at the cash register at my local hardware store has bright pink hair — sometimes purple — and lurid-colored tattoos of a skull and a dagger plunging into a heart (or is it a hand?) on her arm. She also has black ear plugs. She seems so far from the gray-woolen skirts and white coifs of the Puritans that one can be sure she would never hold these as her model.
She has taken great pains — physical pains — to make herself as ugly as possible and I sense that she is proud of the look. But I get a lump in my throat when I see her. I realize we’re not supposed to notice these things. We’re supposed to travel through the world of dark and depressing imagery, of fashionable mutilation, unmoved. It would be ruthless elitism and snobbery to care.
But I wonder. Does she dress this way because she too believes beauty is a lie?
After all, she has surely been taught in school that her heritage, with its great artistic achievements and history of modest and quite beautiful clothing, was hypocrisy. She has been taught over and over again that beneath the beautiful appearances of the past were power and oppression of the weak.
In embracing ugliness is she saying: “Beauty is false?” In glorifying the horrific is she part of an ethical project, an effort to be more “authentic,” more true, more real? It’s interesting that so many people who dress in demonic-looking tattoos and black, Puritanical T-shirts are very nice people. They are not street toughs at all. In fact, they seem as if they could be knocked off their black-booted feet with a feather. Their niceness and their ugliness perhaps go hand-in-hand. Both are creating the perfect society, a world where all standards that might make anyone possibly feel left out are abolished.
The Puritans couldn’t imagine nor would they have remotely approved or intended the anti-fashions of today. But they were building a better world too. Though they punished certain violations in clothing, they believed ultimately externals don’t matter. In some ineffable way, they were seeking the sort of place the tatted and pierced want too.
If beauty is finally conquered then all can be equal in ugliness.
When God’s altars were stripped, it was only a matter of time before the Prince of Darkness, who has no body of his own to adorn and hates with a passionate jealousy the incarnate, would move in and start to make his hideous altars of flesh. Read More »
