It is a little known fact that in some regimes, and especially when lightly loaded, very large aircraft can be more maneuverable than small, sprightly fighters. This is typically true at high altitudes, where the large wings especially of certain kinds of bombers like the B-36 or B-47 made them quite a bit more maneuverable than the fighters of their eras. Now, we’re talking extreme altitudes – one of the reasons why the large aircraft had an advantage is because they in general had a higher ceiling than competing fighter aircraft of the day. This was due to the huge amount of lift they got from their wings. Large wings also mean large drag, but in the very thin air of very high altitude (above 50,000 ft), the drag penalty decreases but the excess lift remains. So there were many stories of B-36s whipping F-86s in dogfights above 45,000 ft. It sounds incredible, but it could and did happen.
However, as fighter aircraft became much more powerful, especially when they received afterburners, the advantage the large aircraft enjoyed swiftly diminished. A B-36 that could give an F-86A a very hard time would be mincemeat for an F-100. The B-52 and the British Vulcan and Victor bombers, being much faster than the -36, restored a bit of balance, but not for long. Which is part of the reason why bomber fleets switched from high-altitude tactics to low-altitude regimes in the late 50s/early 60s.
Even with today’s technology, with look-down shoot-down doppler radars, elaborate electronic support measures and even IR seekers, tracking and engaging a maneuvering target at low altitude and high speed is still pretty challenging.
And that is apparently how an Air Force C-130J from Dyess AFB near Abilene was able to evade (the lede exaggerated a bit) an F-16 of the 457th FS while flying to Carswell in Fort Worth:
Two 317th Airlift Group C-130J Super Hercules successfully employed air-to-air tactics against an F-16 Fighting Falcon during a training exercise July 23, 2014, en route to Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth, Texas.
This exercise demonstrated the C-130J capabilities that will be used during Red Flag-Alaska, where more than 100 aircraft will participate in multiple exercises.
“We replicated a realistic air threat C-130J aircrews can expect to face at Red Flag-Alaska,” said Lt. Col. Brian Storck, 457th Fighter Squadron F-16 pilot and aggressor to the C-130Js. “This operation showed the C-130J can survive against an advanced air threat.”
The crew of each C-130J consisted of two to three pilots and a loadmaster. The loadmasters sat high in the flight decks of their aircraft, looking through a bubbled window in the ceiling. They communicated to the pilots who reacted and maneuvered to ensure the safety of their aircraft. The goal was to delay the fighter pilot’s ability to locate the C-130Js…….
…….”The average person doesn’t expect a 130,000-pound cargo plane to be able to maneuver as nimbly as the J-model does,” said Maj. Aaron Webb, 39th AS assistant director of operations for tactics. “It may seem like we were reacting slowly, but our counter tactics against an area of engagement are pretty effective.”
Now I am certain there were rules of engagement that favored the C-130, like having to make a visual sighting and maybe even limitation to gun-only engagement. Otherwise, it is a bit hard to believe a C-130, chugging along at maybe 250 kts, could evade an F-16, low altitude or no. Now, an F-15E or B-1B at 600 kts, that’s a different story. But, the maneuverability advantage I mentioned above does apply at low speed and low altitude, too. With a huge wing and a light load, a C-130 can probably turn pretty tight.
But overall I have to say this was probably gamed in the -130’s favor.
add a comment
I guess this has been around for over a year, but I had not seen it before. The contrast between an African child with one dirty stuffed animal in a mud hut and a Swedish or Australian kid with a room stuffed full of toys is kind of poignant. There are a lot of people in the world who do not have very much. And probably some with far too much. Not that I am anything but a strong opponent of any kind of involuntary, government-forced wealth transfer, but I am a huge proponent of voluntary wealth transfer in the form of charity to the point it hurts. Thus, my 12 year old truck. A few of the pics:
And my favorite, by far, the only one with any Christian imagery that I saw:
What a great icon of Our Lady! I pray that is significant to that adorable little girl.
This is one of those matters that is not entirely clear yet, but given the massive scandals at the IRS and their seeming gleeful willingness to persecute just about any group or person to the right of Vladimir Ulyanov, I would not say this is nothing to worry about because it hasn’t taken shape, yet. The fact that an atheist group is suing the IRS to monitor the content of church sermons for “violations” of their tax-exempt status should give one pause:
The next time your pastor delivers a pro-life sermon or urges the congregation to stand up for pro-life values in the political or public arena, he could be taken to task by the IRS.
Alliance Defending Freedom asked the Internal Revenue Service Tuesday to release all documents related to its recent decision to settle a lawsuit with an atheist group that claims the IRS has adopted new protocols and procedures for the investigation of churches. [You can hear hard drives crashing all over IRS headquarters in DC]
ADF submitted the Freedom of Information Act request after learning of the IRS’s agreement with Freedom From Religion Foundation in a press releasethe group issued on July 17 concerning its lawsuit Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Koskinen, which accused the agency of failing to investigate churches the way the atheist group would like. [This "foundation" and its leader, Mikey Wienstein, are virulent anti-Christians. You could say he is much, much less worried about other religions than he is about the terrible "violations" of the false doctrine of separation of Church and state by Christians than he is by any other religion. Once again, the sexular paganist hatred (Wienstein is a secular Jew - or is he?) of Christianity manifests itself]
……..According to the Freedom From Religion Foundation press release, “The IRS has now resolved the signature authority issue necessary to initiate church examinations. The IRS also has adopted procedures for reviewing, evaluating and determining whether to initiate church investigations.” [If this diabolical foundation is pleased, you can be sure that is very, very bad news for the Church]
The release mentions the ADF annual “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” event as one that promotes activity by churches that violates the Johnson Amendment, a federal law that activist groups often cite in an attempt to silence churches by threatening their tax-exempt status. The Johnson Amendment authorizes the IRS to regulate sermons and requires churches to give up their constitutionally protected freedom of speech in order to retain their tax-exempt status.
Which raises the question again (I’ve discussed it many times) of just how much muzzling churches are willing to accept in order to maintain that cherished tax-exempt status. Sure, that status on not paying taxes on their income is extremely handy, it effectively increases revenue substantially, but at what cost? In years past, before this country ditched its remaining Christian ethos and (among the power and media elites, anyway) went full bore towards persecution, it made sense, but does it still?
More and more we see how the cozy relationship the Church has enjoyed with the federal government for decades is costing it dearly. HHS Mandates (due to federal funding), tacit or overt control over the direction of many Catholic charities (Catholic Charities and CRS funded over 90% by federal dollars), demands to perform abortions in federally-subsidized “Catholic” hospitals, etc, are all ways the federal government, as its leaders and the culture go more and more into outright anti-Christian bias, tries to control the Church. There has always been a tacit threat that if bishops say “You cannot vote for Obama, because his policies are evil,” they would have their exempt status revoked.
That is the usual claim when millions of scandalized souls ask why Canon 915 has never been enforced against Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, or any of a number of public figures who are brazen in their heresy.
There is no question foregoing tax-exempt status would hurt a great deal. There is no question much good (if it is good – often it is not, or just Alinskyite organizing at a different level) now being done with all the ways the federal government subsidizes the Church would be greatly diminished should that cozy relationship cease. But at some point it may have to, as the influence of progressive hatred of Christianity in government spreads and government adopts more and more anti-Church policies. Some, like me, have argued that point was reached long ago, and the Church in this country made a terrible mistake in ever becoming dependent on the government teat (which was one of the main reasons the USCCB and its predecessors ever came into being, to be a central agency to receive and direct federal funding).
This dependence on federal funding also points back to fundamental understandings of the primary purpose of the Church – is it to be a worldly do good society, or the transcendent and exclusive Body instituted by Jesus Christ for the salvation of souls? Prior to Vatican II, the answer was clearly the latter, but since, the emphasis has been much more on the former. Not that the Church cannot be both. But overemphasis on worldly works has played a role in deranging the Faith from its true purpose.
Thus, by returning to roots and stopping this slide into NGO irrelevance, the Church, through renewed emphasis on Her unique nature and role, would inspire more fervor in souls, which could well result in a net positive gain, monetarily, over the status quo.
But surely that’s just too radical to consider.
France grants asylum to Iraqi Christians, Obama administration continues cold indifference July 31, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, paganism, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
The Foreign Minister of the ragingly
traditionalist endemically Catholic socialist and religiously indifferent government of France has offered, as a humanitarian gesture, to grant asylum to persecuted Iraqi Christians. Meanwhile, muslim Alinksyite President Obama remains completely indifferent to their plight, even as he moves to “fundamentally transform” America through his encouragement of unconstrained immigration over our southern border. So, it’s not that he doesn’t like immigrants…….it’s something else entirely:
The French government says it is willing to grant asylum to Iraqi Christians in the face of a jihadist onslaught against them.
“We are assisting displaced persons who are fleeing the Islamic State’s threats and seeking refuge in Kurdistan,” Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said in a joint statement this week. “Should they so wish, we are prepared to offer them asylum on our soil.”
In Washington, meanwhile, a leading religious freedom advocate on Capitol Hill slammed both President Obama and Congress Tuesday for their “silence” about the plight of Iraq’s Christians, which he said amounted to “genocide.”
“The silence in this town – in Washington – is deafening,” Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.) said on the House floor. “Does Washington even care?”
That’s one of those questions that doesn’t even need an answer.
It is interesting the lengths to which American progressives will go in their hatred of Christians. And by interesting, I mean terrifying.
That is why I say the American left, ignorant and muddle-headed as it is (with each generation more blindingly ignorant than the one before), will don the burqa before they would convert to Christianity, because they have turned being anti-Christian into one of the pillars of their deranged point of view. To be Christian, in the pov of the left in this country, is to be ignorant, superstitious, backwards, afraid, etc – all the things the left really is, but desperately wants to believe it is not. Thus in their usual projection, they have defined an enemy they can never reconcile with because the enemy is ultimately themselves. Even though, as a religion, Christianity, even very orthodox Christianity, is far more compatible with many aspects of progressive thought than is islam, which is hostile to everything that is not inshallah. But that matters not, blinded by bias as they are.
Two rebuttals – there are progressive “Christians,” but the left accepts them as agent provocateurs within Christianity to make it acceptable to progressivism – that is, to turn it into just one more impotent NGO. Secondly, aren’t almost all those Hispanic immigrants Christian, and the left loves them, right? The left loves them not because they are Christian, but tolerate their Christianity in pursuit of the larger goals this influx can achieve. They have no interest in bringing Iraqi Christians here because a, the primary reason for their coming would be their religion and b, Mideast immigrants tend not to break so decisively in favor of the democrats in terms of voting. Plus, the populations from the south are just much more convenient.
Meanwhile in Pakistan a muslim mob killed a 7 year old girl and her baby sister and grandmother due to a picture on Facebook that was deemed offensive to the pathological religion of islam. “Yet, such violence is viewed by these extremists to be the act of truly faithful Muslims and pleasing to God.”
But these people don’t need to convert to be saved, right?!?
Oh, another final note. While the USCCB is falling all over itself promoting Hispanic immigration, has one US prelate visited the persecuted Iraqis and Syrians as a number of French bishops have?
The USCCB’s flawed left-wing approach to immigration ignores Leo XIII while overstressing post-conciliar ethos July 31, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, error, foolishness, Immigration, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society.
1 comment so far
I almost said “obsessively promoting post-conciliar ethos.” A really good post by an author I’ve not read before, who explores how the USCCB’s selective reading of the dogmatic Magisterium has led it to promote dangerously flawed and destructive policies with regard to immigration:
The issue, of course, can be defined differently—as a “border crisis that has raised humanitarian concerns,” but the document disparages that definition and, by implication, the US citizens who hold it. It declares: “The US and its regional partners must avoid the simplistic approach of addressing the forced migration by forcing children back through increased border enforcement. This response is akin to sending these children back into a burning building they just fled. Instead the approach must prioritize protection for those who are displaced from their homes, especially children, the most vulnerable.” (This is hardly a responsible consideration of consequences. The bishops ignore the likely effects of failing to enforce the border—encouraging the countries of origin to continue neglecting their social problems, rewarding the lawless “coyotes” for violating US laws, and most important, subjecting the children to deprivation and physical/sexual abuse during their journey and hardship thereafter.) [We also need to understand the huge play on the word "child" going on. 50% of this immigrant flood are males 15-17 yo. Many have prior drug and gang history. These are not innocent 6 year olds with Dora jammies and a teddy bear trying to make it 1500 miles to a desert border crossing.]
The USCCB document devotes considerable space to [almost exclusively post-conciliar] Catholic social teaching, stressing the idea that all people are created in the image and likeness of God and therefore possess an inherent dignity and fundamental human rights. Citing John Paul II, it claims that illegal as well as legal immigrants possess these rights and the illegals’ rights should be balanced against “the rights of nations to control their borders.” Note that the quoted phrasing compares people’s rights with nation’s rights. Is this a fair comparison? Should it not be the rights of certain people (immigrants) versus the rights of other people (citizens)? More about this when I discussRerum Novarum. [It is not a fair comparison and is in fact a deliberate and Orwellian twisting of language, again. People generate sympathy, powerful nations, rarely so. But nations are comprised of......people. And the people of this nation have MORE rights, according to Aquinas, in this nation, than do those trying to immigrate. Just as the people of Honduras have more rights viz a viz the expat Americans who live there.]
Perhaps the most revealing characteristic of the USCCB document is that it speaks almost exclusively about the response of governments and the Catholic Church to the “humanitarian crisis,” but says virtually nothing about the response of American citizens, taxpayers, or even Catholic parishioners. For example, it declares that “the institutional Catholic Church in the United States has played a critical role in the care of unaccompanied children.” That wording is highly misleading. In reality, everything the “institutional Catholic Church” does is financed by citizen’s taxes (awarded in the form of federal grants), by the generosity of Catholic parishioners, or by both. [The vast majority comes from confiscatory taxation, at the end of a government gun] The focus on institutional efforts is therefore an insult to the millions of Americans who actually fund the works of charity and mercy. It is also, in effect if not intent, a subtle denial that legal US residents also possess God-given dignity and rights. [Dang right, and a huge point. And that is why I think so many Americans feel so strongly about this fake "crisis," because they see their rights - as taxpayers and people who have often given a lot for this country - being trampled on in favor of recent immigrants and narrow elite interests, like the incredibly corrupt and self serving US Chamber of Commerce.]
[The author Professor Ruggiero goes on to list elements of Rerum Novarum ignored by US Bishops, then gets back to his arguments.......] By omitting any reference to Rerum Novarum, the USCCB document conveniently ignores a theological argument that challenges the bishops’ argument. [Gee, wonder why they left it out, then? Surely not because they have some self-interest?!? Perish the thought! In fact, how much pre-conciliar Catholicism has been dropped or attacked for that same reason?!]
If we apply Leo’s ideas to the present US immigration crisis, we will conclude that citizens of the United States are also children of God with fundamental rights that should not be abridged, especially not by the State. [As I briefly allude in this post] Those rights include secure borders and protection from unfair taxation to provide entitlements to illegal aliens. [And disease vectors, terrorist risks, open venues for drug smuggling (how much of that could be prevented with a fence?!?), destruction of national unity, escalating gang violence, more drunken violence, higher crime rates, higher prison costs, families broken asunder, divorce, growth in santa muerte......I could go on a long time. The costs of unconstrained immigration are very, very high, and the USCCB ignores almost all of them] Moreover, again following Leo, we will conclude that, though we all have a debt to our less fortunate neighbors, it is a debt in charity rather than justice, and we are answerable to God, rather than to the government, for its fulfillment.
Even if the US bishops lean toward the thinking of Gustavo Gutiérrez, [that is a nice little head snapping point there. I like that] they are surely familiar with Leo XIII’s landmark encyclical, [I would not make that assumption! Most have probably heard of it, but I bet the vast majority have not read any of it. The scandal of atrocious formation has been ongoing for decades and applies to bishops too, now] and they should therefore understand its relevance to the present discussion of illegal immigration. [Maybe they should, but it's inconvenient knowledge, so it goes in the memory hole.] When they dismiss a line of thought consistent with Pope Leo’s insights as a “simplistic approach,” they do Pope Leo, their fellow Catholics, and the Catholic theological tradition a grave disservice. And when they pretend that only their perspective is compatible with Christ’s exhortation to care for those in need, they deepen the offense. [All very true. But once again, maybe most of the bishops really do believe there was a "new pentecost" and a "newchurch" born in 1965, and that anything that came before that is inconvenient, contradictory, or just not "with it" enough, and can be safely ignored and marginalized]
I don’t know a thing about the author – although I like the piece and respect the thinking in it – but I know a lot of people have started wandering through Rerum Novarum, Quas Primas, the Syllabus, Trent, etc, and started wondering…….why have I never heard of this? Why have I never seen this wonderful, clear cut catechesis? And then they come to start wondering, how did we get here? What happened? How on earth can I reconcile 1900 in the Church with 1990? After cutting through the propaganda on the non-dogmatic uber-council, then they really start to wonder!
I don’t know if this professor, a good deal older than I, is on that path, but it’s a doozy!
A small data point from the sodo-marriage debates July 29, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, manhood, paganism, Sacraments, sadness, sanctity, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
Many readers will know that my family and I relocated from north Dallas suburb to Irving to be nearer to the local FSSP parish. I have been very glad to make some truly trivial sacrifices along the way so that my family can enjoy assisting at Mass much more frequently and generally being much more involved in parish life. It has been an enormous blessing for all of us. I am so glad we moved.
We had a bit of a rough time with our first realtor, but after some sturm and drang found a great house just minutes from the parish. God truly smiled on us in this. But one thing we did not realize at the time we bought our wonderful house was that our next door neighbors consisted of an all-male couple. We found out a day or two after we moved in. There were initially two guys there (yes, this story gets a bit……involved), one of whom is highly “passable” as “straight” and the other less so. Later there got to be a third guy, and there were also many men (and sometimes women) coming and going at all hours of day and night. It has been a little bit of a circus.
Now, some of these were family and business associates, so it may not have been completely sordid, but it has been strange. Nevertheless, through it all there was the “less straight” hispanic guy and the more straight partner. They moved in several years ago and spent a ton of money fixing up their house into something really very nice. But I found out last night that the Hispanic guy is moving out and that their relationship is now over.
I have no idea the hows or whys, any relation to the constant stream of visitors, and don’t want to know. It’s quite beside the point. The point is that these guys were perfect candidates for the kind of couples that demand marriage be “redefined,” or really destroyed, so they can get tax benefits, have a big party, and all the rest. They were “stable.” They’d been together for years. But when things fell apart, apparently very recently, less straight dude started packing and will be gone within a few days.
The point of all this is that while just one small datapoint, it is illustrative of many of the problems and outright falsehoods being put forth regarding this most morally offensive of lifestyles and the prevarication that it any way can be compared to marriage. Aside from exceedingly rare exceptions, these couples are not stable. They are not monogamous. There was a lot of obvious ickiness going on. Living next door has been an object lesson in the mass falsehoods being perpetrated by adherents of this lifestyle and their allies on the ideological left regarding its true nature and radical difference from marriage. Unless one wants to consider 12 time divorced swingers as the default marriage nowadays.
But even more, marriage simply isn’t what these guys or any other perverse combo is. Marriage is the contract between a man and woman for the reservation of those faculties ordered towards the creation of children exclusively for one another. On any number of fronts, fake marriage between two men, three women, a man, a dog, and an orangutan, or anything else is just that, fake.
I picked the below from JP Sonnen’s site, I pray we have more defenders of marriage who can speak so clearly and eloquently on this subject. Ryan Anderson absolutely destroys the special pleading and morally bankrupt (and philosphically unjustifiable) argument of the poor lost soul desiring sodo-marriage:
What is tragic is that so many people are so wholly malformed by the culture, their own whims, and the dread effects of centuries of protestant/endarkenment/rationalist thinking that they simply cannot get through their heads: MARRIAGE HAS BEEN, IS, AND EVER WILL BE STRICTLY A UNION OF MAN AND WOMAN! But as we see above, no matter how eloquently argued, this basic truth that 99.99999% of all people in Western civilization knew as an absolute metaphysical truth even a few decades ago, is now utterly lost on a huge and growing swath of the population.
Because everything, even timeless, bedrock institutions of all humanity, should be subject to the whims of moment and the lowest desires of our loins, and the highly unpredictable but certainly incredibly destructive consequences be damned.
Testimony of Iraqi Catholics: told By radical islamists to give them all their money and leave, or get a bullet in the brain July 28, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Holy suffering, horror, paganism, persecution, sadness, secularism, sickness, Society, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
WARNING! EXTREMELY GRAPHIC IMAGE AT THE END. ALLEGED ISIS ATROCITIES! ABSOLUTELY NOT FOR CHILDREN! ALSO NOT FOR THOSE WITH SENSITIVE CONSCIENCES!
This is the death cult religion so many in the hierarchy of the Church fall all over themselves extolling and praising. This is the so-called “religion of peace.” How long must we put up with this prevaricating charade? How long must we hear lies that bear the stench of death?
God bless that woman for her faith. She just gave a great testimony of it, and of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Wow, what a calamity. There are simply not words. Rorate’s coverage has been quite good and thorough. I am heartened to see that some in France, at least, seem to be getting it.
This is a genocide. This is the greatest humanitarian crisis the world has seen in decades, at least since the nightmares in Rwanda and Burundi of 20 years ago. The barbarities that are being committed are simply beyond what decent, civilized people can imagine. At the following link – AND I CANNOT WARN YOU ENOUGH HOW GRAPHIC THE LIVELEAK VIDEO IS! – there is footage of human beings, perceived enemies of this new satanic death cult islamic “caliphate,” who have been chopped to pieces in slaughterhouses like animals. There is footage of even muslim “enemies” of extremist islam being mowed down by the dozen in ritualistic killings. That is how the radical muslim behaves towards all those who do not include “inshallah” in every cursed phrase they speak, who do not adhere to their stupid and evil wahhabism.
The link just above also provides powerful contextual evidence of the relation between this present genocide against Christians in Iraq and Syria and that perpetrated against Armenians in Turkey after WWI. In fact, in both cases, the radical muslims insist that killing Christians is an “acceptable sacrifice” to ‘allah'” – which it may be, if “allah” is indeed satan, as many ancient Christians maintained.
But our first muslim president (in effect if not in fact) can not be bothered to reply. He has shown himself to be a bitter enemy of Christianity in general and the Church in particular throughout his presidency.
WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGE COMING BELOW!
Oh Lord give us strength to pray and fast! Lift this terrible scourge from Your Church! We know we have been unfaithful, we know we have strayed so far! We know that right worship of You has been perverted and that heretical, sinful error abounds! We know sin abounds in what little remains of Christendom – may Your Grace abound more!
All you good Saints martyred by islam – pray for us! Pray for our Church! Pray especially for the souls suffering these nightmares! End the scourge of this evil, perverse religion around the world!
“The mohammadan is either at your neck or at your feet.” – Winston Churchill Say what you will about the man, he knew people. I wonder if he knew that the progressive left would eventually choose islam over Christianity (at least, by all available evidence)?
FINAL WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGE NOW! IMAGE SUPPOSED TO BE OF BEHEADED CHRISTIANS IN IRAQ!
Dutch orchestra storms out from muslim proselytizing July 28, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Christendom, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Grace, persecution, secularism, Society.
Two quick stories on the “interreligious dialogue” front; first, a Dutch orchestra was giving a performance with Queen Beatrix in attendance. Some musselman had been invited to lead the orchestra, I guess. He proceeded to try to proselytize the audience, including the Queen. He had apparently been trying to reach the Queen for some time, and took his chance when he got it.
Note the outlandish error: claiming Christ, who constantly worked miracles that gave total proof of His Supernatural Reality, was subordinate to Mohammad, who never once performed a miracle, which even islam claims (a supposed “night flight” to Jerusalem, which no one saw, discounted). And then we have the difference in the conduct of their lives: Christ, constantly virtuous, the most virtuous Being ever on this planet, Who also never sinned, and Who willed to die for the salvation of mankind, against Mohammad, who spread his religion by violence, cruelty, and barbarity, whose life was incredibly sinful, and who didn’t suffer for anyone, but in fact caused others to suffer. He also repeatedly changed the beliefs of his false religion based on who he needed to please or entice from one moment to next, while Christians have a 2000 year record of constant belief going back to the Apostles and early Church Fathers.
The effrontery of this act is simply staggering (thanks to reader D for the link):
As D noted elsewhere, I don’t think these musicians are walking out because they had their Christian sensibilities offended. They are walking out because they had their secular sensibilities offended. But as islam grows stronger in Europe, we can expect the secularists to either remain silent in future events, or to willingly go along. The above event occurred in 2012, when Beatrix still reigned.
UPDATE: The article of the Malaysian prince converting was apparently fake. Pretty good fake, I rarely fall for such things.
And yet the interreligious crazy train rolls on along. Because……..oh, I don’t even want to bother right now.
I know there have been many reports of the depredations of the lunatic islamists currently ruling large parts of the Fertile Crescent. But here are two you might have missed. First, the muslims seized the 1700 year old Mar Mattai monastery outside Mosul on Sunday (naturally!) this week:
Jihadist militants have taken over a monastery in northern Iraq, one of the country’s best-known Christian landmarks, and expelled its resident monks, a cleric and residents said Monday.
Islamic State (IS) fighters stormed Mar (Saint) Behnam, a 4th century monastery run by the Syriac Catholic church near the predominantly Christian town of Qaraqosh, on Sunday, the sources said.
“You have no place here anymore, you have to leave immediately,” a member of the Syriac clergy quoted the Sunni militants as telling the monastery’s residents.
He said the monks pleaded to be allowed to save some of the monastery’s relics but the fighters refused and ordered them to leave on foot with nothing but their clothes.
Christian residents from the area told AFP the monks walked several miles along a deserted road and were eventually picked up by Kurdish peshmerga fighters who drove them to Qaraqosh.
The Syriac cleric said five monks were expelled from Mar Behnam. Christian families in the area said there may have been up to nine people living at the monastery.
The incident was the latest move by the Islamic State, which last month declared a “caliphate” straddling large swathes of northern Iraq and Syria, to threaten a Christian presence in the region spanning close to two millennia.
That is to say, there were Christians there centuries before mohammad mounted his first goat. Or nine year old, for that matter.
In other news, the raging islamists, driven by Lord knows what kind of massive inferiority complex, blew up Jonah’s tomb this week, after previously ransacking it. And I thought muslims held the Old Testament prophets in esteem? Or is it just blood they worship?
This tomb contained not just the remains of Jonah the great prophet of Nineveh, but also many other priceless works of antiquity. But that does not please crazed Salafist Islam which has been exported around the world by Saudi oil money (and the Saudis and Gulf states basically funded ISIS into being, as well as most of the Syrian “opposition” movements, because this is part of a larger struggle between Persia/Shia and Saudi/Shiite islam). One almost wonders if it’s not time use their oil fields as an open air repository for our nuclear waste.
Just a quick compare and contrast – which great Prophet remained completely chaste and constantly counseled same? Which one counseled peace, benignity, and even suffering enormous insults and barbs without recourse to violence? Ok, now which one not only engaged throughout his adult life in unchaste, promiscuous acts, to the point of taking very young girls as “wives,” treated women like cattle, and counseled same? Which one founded a religion unique among all the non-primitive religions in directing the use of the most extreme violence against all non-believers? Which religion has been spread virtually entirely by that violence? Which one is opposed to reason and not only encourages, but seems to demand ignorance and backwardness?
I also have to ask why if these fighters are so brave and their cause so holy, why do they hide their face?
A little more. In 2003, there were 35,000 Catholics in Mosul. Now there are none. An unintended consequence, to be sure, but one that was foreseeable all the same. That dang war in Iraq unleashed chaos and extremism – just as Pope Saint John Paul II warned – that may never end. And ancient Christian communities are being destroyed as a result.
The muslim goal is that there be no Christians at all in their “sacred” ummah. This nation has done much to help bring that about:
The American Catholic Charities guy isn’t very impressive, but I was edified to see all those Chaldean Catholic women in veils. Such a shame to know that all of that, in northern Iraq, at least, is gone.
I know there are relatively benign and even some good aspects to islam. I know there are millions of relatively good muslims. I guess. But I’m having an increasingly hard time not seeing it as a profoundly erroneous religion that seems predisposed to great evil.
And yet so many leaders in the Church slather completely unjustified attention and accolades on islam. They are almost sycophants at time – good little dhimmis.
Two good sermons on the martial arts July 25, 2014Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, error, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Interior Life, Latin Mass, priests, sadness, scandals, Society, Tradition, Virtue.
I am just about out of time for the day, but hope you will enjoy the sermons below, both related to the martial arts, or Christianity’s more militant side. The first is a good history of the Battle of Vienna of 1683, that awesome battle in which King Jan Sobieski and his winged hussars stopped islam’s final attempt (until now) to advance into the heart of Europe. This priest is nothing if not a great story teller (but also very much more)!
The second is not historical, but examines aspects of serving in the military today. Father starts off with a description of the life the martyr Blessed Franz Jagerstatter, who refused to fight for the immoral Nazi regime. Sadly, our own country has veered so far into immorality, and the military in particular has been used as a vehicle to advance that immorality, that the proud tradition of military service in the United States is now more morally questionable than ever. “Wars are punishments for the sins of the worlds.” Father considers just and unjust wars, and the distinction between fighting in them. Many of the wars the US has fought over the past few decades, with our very troubling defense policy, are highly suspect (if not outright damnable) from a just war standpoint. Thus, volunteering to serve in the US military is increasingly problematic.
This video may be controversial, I don’t know, but I think the points raised deserve the most serious examination:
You might bear in mind this priest is most well-suited by personal experience to speak on this topic. I shall leave it at that.