|
Post by kungfuzu on Sept 27, 2020 16:37:35 GMT -8
Apparently, it is Hebrew for "bandit, robber." Looks like it came into Hebrew from Greek.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Sept 27, 2020 16:45:17 GMT -8
That sounds reasonable. Matyszak says that the Romans called the Judaeans that, and the Judaeans called the Romans that. So it's certainly a word that one side got from the other. Of course, in Hebrew "listim" would be the plural of "list" (in Arabic, the plural would be "listin").
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Sept 27, 2020 16:45:45 GMT -8
After the dissolution of the U.S.S.R., I tried to explain to people that, at that moment, the U.S.A. was the most powerful nation which had ever existed. It had more power, in absolute and relative terms, than any other nation in history, but more importantly, it had the means to project and exercise this power virtually anywhere on the globe within minutes, hours and a few days. (at the outside.) This was unique.
My concern was what the unique status would mean for the U.S.A. and how it might effect the country.
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Sept 27, 2020 17:34:11 GMT -8
A complaint I have heard about Americans from our friends and those not so friendly is that Americans have a tendency to view the world through American glasses. I suspect Mr. Kung has experienced this also.
Mier Dagan was a proponent of this view and ran Mossad in such a way, that what McMaster describes as American narcissism and Israeli self-interest did not clash. For the most part, Bibi has also followed this course.
The Obama years were consumed with cultural narcissism from the top to dogcatcher. Of course narcissism is followed closely by hubris and the antagonist of both is nemesis. I think we can view President Trump as a Nemesistic figure that is a large part of why the left hates him so much.
Don't forget there is a non-scheduled spontaneous riot at 2100, bring your balaclava and shield.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Sept 27, 2020 18:46:10 GMT -8
I found another amusing comment by Matyszak, in this case discussing sieges. He notes that besieged cities would often use slingers against the besiegers. They often used lead pellets instead of pebbles, and frequently marked them with obscene comments against their enemies. I already knew about that from other reading, but he mentions a case where a couple of traitors wrote secret information on their pellets, and sent them out to the Romans (no doubt making sure not to hit anyone). "This is one of the very few instances on record of genuinely friendly fire."
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Sept 27, 2020 19:24:18 GMT -8
Indeed I have. For decades.
I think a country's rulers should look out for the interests of their country, but sometimes those in power have so little knowledge of the world that they have little ability to judge what is truly in the interest of their country. There is also the case where many of a country's rulers and elites are less than loyal and are bought off by other nations. This happens throughout history, probably more than most realize.
I generally agree with Trump's foreign policy as he is trying to correct decades of misrule by our foreign policy experts. It was quite proper for the USA to form NATO in the late 1940s and to bear the lion's share of the costs. We calculated that the "over-weighted" costs which the USA bore were to our long-term interest.
Once the U.S.S.R. collapsed the out-sized costs borne by the USA were no longer reasonable and were, in my opinion, left in place to the advantage of the military-industrial-intelligence-foreign-policy cabal which have been running the country for some decades. I should also probably include the financial and tech industries.
The same can be said for the endless wars which we have had over the last thirty-odd years. The same cabal has been milking the USA and the world for the payment of these wars.
The fact that Trump is holding other NATO members to account and pulling even a small number of soldiers out of Germany drive this cabal crazy. If one thinks of how much money NATO members have saved by not paying for their defense, and using these funds to "socialize" their population, you will get some idea as to the insidious nature of things.
By far the greatest foreign policy treason which has taken place over the last forty years is the way the USA has supported the growth of the PRC. This became outrageous once the Clinton Administration allowed the PRC to join the WTO and screw us. Remember, the Clintons OK'D the export of missile-guidance technology to China.
I believe that the ruling caste of the USA has always been reasonably corrupt, but the corruption was mainly focused on soaking Americans. Since the end of WWII, I believe the caste has become unbelievably corrupt. There are a number of reasons for this. 1) WWII made government enormous and as all government is corrupt to some degree, enormous government can be expected to be enormously corrupt. 2) The oil-shocks turned the power structure of the world on its head. Piss-ant countries which were of little consequence suddenly had cash being thrown at them in amounts that they had never dreamed of. Some of the rulers of those countries (Saudi Arabia) figured out how to use this money to buy American politicians. 3) China learned the same thing.
Here is another of those corrupt cabalists who I was writing about. His resume' is not untypical of the lackeys of the globalist cabal. Get a legal degree, spend a few years in practice, go into government and soak it for all it's worth over the next few decades. Once you see you will rise no further in government, "retire" to the private sector to use and abuse your government connects to enrich yourself and, oftentimes, your family. Go into government poor come out rich.
Which country is paying his lobbying fees?
Oh here are some. The Atlantic Council, whose board Ridge sits on. From Wikipedia.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Sept 27, 2020 19:57:39 GMT -8
One thing to remember is that leftist culture warriors seek to impose their libertinist amorality on the whole world, including many countries (especially in Africa and the Muslim world) which are very hostile to such avant garde notions.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 6, 2020 8:39:03 GMT -8
Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller by Ron Chernow I don’t expect to finish this books so I’ll say a few words about it so far. Generally speaking, Chernow adopts the bland tone of the modern biographical writer. There’s no analysis, no judgment. It’s all plain vanilla. However, the material he has to work with early-on is somewhat extraordinary. John D. Rockefeller’s father was a bum, a rogue, a dirtbag, and an apparently likable snake-oil salesman. Immediately the thought occurs that I want to read more about this guy who regularly abandoned his family, had more than one wife, and took part in adventures unknown than the bland John D. Rockefeller himself. But I’m sure it will get more interesting as Rockefeller reaches age and becomes a bit of a rogue himself, although a more buttoned-down and tight-lipped one apparently. But clearly he got a lot of the entrepreneurial spirit from his father although it was the Avery side of the family that at the time had the money are were respectable. It’s interesting to read that this Titan could arise from suck a cluster**** of family dysfunction and chaos.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Nov 20, 2020 9:15:42 GMT -8
I’m on page 717 of 3389 (on an electronic book reader) so I think the chances of finishing Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller by Ron Chernow are slim. But it hasn’t been dull so far. In fact, Chernow actually dared to step out of the “objective” box of today’s typical biographer and provide some interesting analysis/opinion now and again. The author writes: “Where Rockefeller differed most from his fellow moguls was that he wanted to be both rich and virtuous…”. There’s a lot more to go in this book. But the author has spent a fair enough time telling us, in so many words, how rotten the man was because of his business practices. So far he’s guilty of little more than applying the principle of “cooperative” capitalism. So far, the man doesn’t appear rotten at all. But we’re assured that he is. The best part of the book was a few pages ago when Chernow waxed poetic about Adam Smith’s concept of the evening-out (winnowing-out) process of a free market compared to what big businesses truly wants: even predictability. A good case can be made that Rockefeller smoothed-out a chaotic and often destructively-competitive oil/refinery market. This was before antitrust laws, so cooperating with railroads and other producers was not illegal. And hindsight probably shows that, although many little guys were squashed like bugs in the micro, in the macro perspective, these big, monopolistic cartels launched America’s industrial might. Rockefeller himself was a strange mix of mogul and sincere church-goer. And one of the oddest things (not uncommon amongst the rich, I guess) is that he could spend millions in his business life but pinched pennies in his personal life. To his credit, he was against ostentatious displays of wealth. He was a humble Baptist through-and-through. One of the interesting stories of home life is how he calculated an average monthly cost of gas usage for the home. He then allowed one of his daughters to be in charge of managing the gas in the house. Any savings in the bill she would get to keep. So she managed the house very well by being vigilant in turning off unused lights. This is good that he didn’t spoil his children. But it’s also an interest contrast because this is the kind of guy who had wealth that made it practical to light his cigars with ten-dollar bills.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Nov 30, 2020 18:59:27 GMT -8
I'm nearly done reading Ann Rule's probably final true crime book, Practice to Deceive. It involves a most peculiar murder that occurred on Boxing Day, 2003 on Whidbey Island near Seattle.
The outcome is clear in some ways; the murderer was convicted and the woman who incited him to kill a man he had probably never met was as well. But there is much that is unsatisfactory about it, and Rule makes that quite clear. It's also interesting that the woman was born Peggy Sue Stackhouse -- and Rule'd maiden name is also Stackhouse, though she doesn't know of any link between their families.
Russel Douglas had a troublesome marriage to his wife Brenna, and they were considering divorce. But tey were also discussing reconciliation that Christmas. It no doubt helped that he was good with his children, though Brenna would trash him to the investigating officers after his body was found a day after his murder, and had probably told her friend (and landlady) Peggy Sue Thomas that he abused his children (which he didn't, by all indications, despite his disputes with Brenna). Peggy Sue probably told her then boyfriend, Jim Huden, who had been badly abused as a child and was happy to punish another abuser. (This is the best indication of the motive.)
Huden had recently picked up a gun, so he was equipped for murder. Obviously, the sensible thing to do was to dispose of it afterward when he left Whidbey, traversing Puget Sound. But it was worth a lot of money, so it ended up in the hands of a friend, who eventually turned it over to the police -- who linked it to the murder, pretty much sealing Huden's fate.
That is, they sealed it once they got hold of him. Realizing what was happening, Huden took advantage of a hurricane to go to Mexico and start a new life there. Eventually the police got his wife to tell where he was (she was facing a long term in the slammer for drug charges if she didn't squeal). The trial faced all the usual delays, made even worse by the fact that Whidbey Island has small police and prosecutorial staffs. It would be 2012 before first Huden and then Thomas went to court.
An interesting aspect of the trial is that in his first closing argument, the prosecutor pointed out, "Facts are stubborn things." Indeed they are, and those facts got Huden convicted of first-degree murder. Did the prosecutor get this quote from its original source (John Adams), or had he encountered Brad Nelson's site (assuming it had been set up by then)? Probably the former, but who knows?
I will add that Rule, as usual, goes back into the history of the people (and their families) involved in the case. Peggy Sue's family had a horrible tragedy in its background (but before her birth) when it was victimized by a monstrous neighboring boy who should already have been in jail. He was after that, and as of the writing of the story was still there and unlikely to leave. (They did parole him once, and it took a couple of weeks for him to get back to his old trick, violent rape. At least this time the victim lived.)
As usual with Rule, this is quite an interesting book.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Nov 30, 2020 22:11:26 GMT -8
Sounds like an interesting book. I tried to open the link, but nothing happened.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 1, 2020 8:38:07 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Dec 1, 2020 8:40:45 GMT -8
Peggy Sue Thomas ended up pleading guilty to a lesser charge, which resulted in a sentence of 4 years in prison, the most the judge could give her. So she's probably out now. Her defense team was worried that the jury might dislike her enough to convict her and give her a long sentence. The prosecution was worried that the evidence against her was weak because a key witness was sick and unavailable. Jim Huden received to inculpate her in any way, and some others didn't want to testify, so they had a shortage of evidence.
Rule sees her, in essence, as a sociopath. Everyone she meets matters only for what they can do for her. Its unlikely this has changed. But she's a very pleasant person when she wants to be, and has probably landed on her feet.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 1, 2020 13:44:24 GMT -8
Yes!!!
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 1, 2020 13:53:19 GMT -8
Facts are no longer stubborn things. They are blurry things difficult to pinpoint in the cacophony of misinformation and baloney. I like the connection to Whidbey Island. I haven't been there in like forever. But I have been there. If Stackhouse had confined her actions to the streets of Seattle, she would have just been written off as a patriot fighting for Black Lives Matter.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 3, 2020 22:51:57 GMT -8
This sounds like a book worth reading. The link is to a review of the book, "Dominion."
I noticed the front cover of the book is one of Dali's Cruxifictions. Many years ago, I saw one in the National Gallery in D.C. His and Matthias Gruenewald's Cruxifiction are the most powerful I have ever seen.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 4, 2020 9:43:10 GMT -8
I totally understand the approach of, “Christianity is a useful smorgasbord of ideas but it’s not really true.”
The first review for the book I saw on Amazon titled his review, “The Secular Case for Christianity.” This is the general trend these days. It’s not really true but Christianity can be a vehicle for worldly material concerns — which, after all, is all there really is. This book could be the charter for the current Church of England or various “progressive” Christian churches. It’s not really true but we can bring material comfort to people because, after all, the moral aspect of Christianity (rooted in a loving, but judging, God) is simply not really true. It’s most important that we “accept” people, not impose moral duties.
But I wonder if the author deals with the very likely reality that *if* there was the God of the Bible (New and Old Testament) and *if* there was a real, actual, moral underpinning to the universe, and *if* people believed this then, and only then, does the idea of “morality that transcended tribal boundaries” get implemented. If we look at the easy acceptance of abortion and a number of ills by “progressive” Christians, we might see this is so.
From what I’ve read of the review, it seems the author skewers a number of secular conceits. That’s good. But I just wonder if ultimately his entire point of view doesn’t fall under what Dennis Prager calls “cut-flower ethics.” If you cut off the ethics in the Bible from their source, they may survive for a while. But without the nourishment of being rooted in the Divine, those ethics will wither and die.
I think what we see today is many people trying to drive a secular Christianity through the eye of the needle. I’m sure this book makes some great points. But, ultimately, if written by an atheist, I guess I can understand why it’s 624 pages long. He couldn’t get to the above simple point.
Anyway, that’s my take without having actually read the book.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 12, 2020 11:16:15 GMT -8
One of America's most insightful public intellectuals has finally caught up with my forecast made almost 50 years ago. I continue to warn people that what is happening in not about communism. It is about wealth and power being accumulated as it generally has been throughout history. The huge American middle-class with its expansive liberty is an anomaly in history. We are going back to government controlling the means of production combined with totalitarian rule. Fascism is modern-day feudalism. The Coming Neo-Feudalism
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Dec 12, 2020 12:57:34 GMT -8
T. H. White, in his various Arthurian works, had Arthur visiting an ant colony. (It was originally put in The Book of Merlyn, but when the first 4 were combined into The Once and Future King, it was moved into The Sword in the Stone.) It was portrayed as a totalitarian state, albeit more akin to the Nazis who were the immediate threat at the time. The entrance had a sign saying (in ant language), "Everything not forbidden is compulsory."
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,022
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Sept 19, 2023 11:30:08 GMT -8
We now turn our attention to Tessa Harris' The Anatomist's Apprentice. This book is roughly similar in tone and scope as the Dr. John Thorndyke books...which were admittedly hit-and-miss all though that series. The writing style of Harris is generally adult and literate, and not particularly woke. In fact, this novel smooths along at 60% of the way before running out of steam. This was never, I suppose, going to be a fairy-tale story (and I have just a few chapters to go yet). But the book is more depressing than it needs to be. It's a relatively short book and I'm sure Mr. Flu could blow through it in a couple sittings. But dare I recommend it? Well, unfortunately, I can't. This is yet another book whose plot and characters turn quite goofball. The Lady Lydia, for example (a true damsel in distress) allows herself to be bullied and controlled by her own lawyer...in her own house. There is no explanation for this, especially since it's made very obvious that this guy makes Snidely Whiplash seem like a saint in comparison. So now the novel, instead of finishing with some satisfying and perhaps clever turns, bogs down in illogical muck. I was about halfway into this and remember thinking, "No, I don't this this book will self-destruct near the end. The ending may not be to my liking, but the writing seems too solid for any major offramps into literary absurdity." Well, I was wrong. And I really wanted to like this book. And there is much to like about the first half. It's a particularly gritty look at an American doctor fulfilling the role of a medical examiner. This is set in England in the 18th century, seemingly just a few years before The American Revolution. Dr. Thomas Silkstone (the overindulgence in Dickensian naming shows throughout the book) becomes drawn into trying to prove (or disprove) the innocence of Lady Lydia's husband, commonly known as "The Irishman," for the death of his brother-in-law, Sir Edward Crick, lord of he manor. Anyway, it's a shame that the author couldn't finish this book and make it of quality. One Amazon reviewer has it right: "Mediocre mystery and cliched romance . . . Over-plotted and under-developed characters make for a bad mix. **SPOILER** We can't have just one murderer - oh no, we have to have two. No wait, there's three! Maybe there's more, I started losing count of who did whom in, and why."Honest, all I want to do is sit down and read a good book. It must be that "90% of everything is crap" rule playing out.
|
|