jump to navigation

Flightline Friday: The Awesome A-7 April 13, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Flightline Friday, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, technology.
comments closed

For nearly 40 years, my current house would have been very nearly directly under the flight path for Naval Air Station Dallas and the co-located Vought/LTV plant.  Thus, from 1955 to the early 90s, Vought F-8s and later A-7s would have been in the air most every day, flying over my home (OK, the home didn’t exist for most of that time, but you get the point).  Of course, by the time we moved into that house Navy Dallas was closed and Vought was out of the prime contractor business, no longer building whole airplanes, but that’s how it goes.

At any rate the A-7 was the result of a quickie project to build a replacement for the excellent Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, intending to greatly increase the range/payload capability of US Navy light attack assets.  The project was a hallmark of the US aerospace industry at that time, roughly showcasing an industry at its historic peak, resulting in a program that went from conception to flying hardware in just about 4 years.  Heck, they can’t even get half the specs for a bomb written in 4 years today, let alone those for a whole airplane.  Vought responded to the Navy’s request for a new Light Attack aircraft – the VAL competition – with a modified version of its epochal F-8 Crusader fighter, basically a shortened F-8 with a wing modified to carry heavy payloads.  Vought won that competition, and between December 1964 and early 1967 crafted the A-7A.  This aircraft represented a quantum leap not in speed, because it wasn’t very fast, but in accuracy.  The A-7 was the most accurate tactical bombing platform in US service until the introduction of the F-16 in 1978.  Especially in its Air Force A-7D variant and subsequent US Navy E model copy of the D, the A-7 set radically improved standards in terms of bombing accuracy and range/payload capability, being able to carry the same payload as the A-4 twice as far, or twice the payload the same distance.

Prior to the A-7s arrival in Southeast Asia, virtually every Air Force tactical mission “up north,” whether launched from Thailand or South Vietnam, required air-to-air refueling.  Even the long-legged F-105 required refueling after taking off with a heavy bomb load.  As the first video below indicates, however, the A-7 was able to fly almost all missions over North Vietnam, with a heavy payload of about 9000 pounds of ordinance, pylons, and ammo, without air-to-air refueling.  Now refueling was still pretty frequently done, but more to give the A-7 ridiculous loiter time up North – often over 2 hours – than because of basic necessity.  Navy A-7s, operating much closer to their targets, virtually never required refueling.

The A-7 got its impressive accuracy through a combination of some of the first digital computers, embedded and computerized navigation systems (INS, Doppler, and a very accurate attack radar), and newly developed software algorithms that determined, electronically, a continuously computed impact point (CCIP) means of bombing that was a radical advance for its time.  Later perfected to a much greater degree in the F-16 and F-18, the A-7’s CCIP system improved basic bomb-dropping accuracy by more than a factor of ten, from hundreds of yards down to about 20-30 yards, average mean miss distance.  The second video, an absolute gift of an upload of a film from the old British firm of Elliot, which built some of the very first Heads Up Displays ever made, subsequently installed in the A-7D and E.  Man how some like minded enthusiasts and I would have practically wept for joy to have seen truly excellent footage like this, showing exactly how complex, innovative systems were used tactically, 20 or 30 years ago.  Great stuff.

I’m out for the weekend.  Sorry for lack of posts, it was one of those weeks.  Long live the memory of the great Vought Aircraft and its many excellent products!  Built just about 5 miles from my home, they were in every respect Great Planes:

Now that the “multirole” is cheaper experiment has been tried and quite possibly proven a bad concept – especially when the roles are far too numerous and diverse – perhaps it’s time to return to some lower cost single mission types, for the vital roles like CAS and BAI?  That is to say, Air Force and Navy jocks, just because it doesn’t have an “F” in front of its name doesn’t mean it’s second rate!  Bomber pilots may make history, fighter pilots may make movies, but attack pilots make the boots on the ground very, very happy.

Advertisements

So How Would You Like This For a Pope? April 6, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Art and Architecture, General Catholic, history, Papa, Tradition.
comments closed

The HBO one season uncompleted series “The New Pope” ran a little over a year ago.  It’s got an interesting premise – an ultra-conservative, highly traditional young American gets elected pope (choosing the name Pius XIII) by a confab of corrupt cardinals who think he will be a mere figurehead.  There is much Machiavellian drama in little bits of the series I’ve seen, including numerous attempts by the corruptocrats in the Curia to get some dirt on the new pope and thus compromise and control him.  This culminates in a young woman trying quite hard to seduce the pope, and failing.

At any rate, at some point in the series, the young pope who has held himself aloof not only from the world (refusing to perform public homilies or activities of any kind, or even to show his face) but even from the Curia, finally holds a little meeting with the cardinals, wherein he lays out his new program for the Church.  In this, you could say, he proposes to turn the post-conciliar ethos on its head and set the Church on a radical new, but in many ways a very old, course.

The new pope is very mysterious to all, even, perhaps, to himself.  He posits a return to Tradition and is loved by all the traditional priests, who form a sort of new coterie around the pope displacing parts of the existing bureaucracy.  Most of these priests are quite young and devout, and make a marked contrast to the many corrupt bureaucrats occupying positions of power.  Also dealt with are the infestation of sodomites deep into the heart of the Church.

The pope intends to use his aloofness, the mystery surrounding him, and his youth and physical attractiveness to the benefit of himself and the Church. There are intimations that he is saintly and can work miracles, and intimations that he might be insane.  Or, perhaps, his mental prowess and sanctity cause him to behave in ways that people cannot comprehend?

Note the return of the sede gestatoria, fanon, and a sort of papal tiara, though one not nearly so grand as the old photos indicate.

Not sure if anyone’s seen this series, but late on a Friday afternoon when I have almost no time to post, I thought I’d give at least a little bit of Hollywood’s version of what a hardcore trad pope might mean.  Let me know what you think from this little bit, and anything else  you’ve watched.

Should I say, this guy looks positively dreamy compared to the current occupant?  He sounds perhaps a bit severe and unyielding but after 50+ years of yielding to everyone and everything, perhaps that’s not such a bad thing? I can imagine such a pope as this might wind up like John Paul I.

I don’t think popes ever rode in the sede gestatoria standing like that.

Some Wonderful Bits of Catholic Culture April 4, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Art and Architecture, awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Christendom, Ecumenism, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, history, Latin Mass, sanctity, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

I’ve found a “new” channel on  Youtube called Holy Faith TV.  It’s not that new, it’s been around almost a  year, but it’s new to me.

They’ve got a lot of great traditional Catholic content and some really outstanding history.  How about this incredible color video of Venerable Pius XII:

And here is a video from what was then a mainstream educational film company on the jubilee year of 1950.  Can you imagine Scholastic doing a reverential and respectful video on the Church today?  How much, and how much for the worse, our society has changed since then.

“…….here lies a spiritual power that no godless philosophy may hope to vanquish.”  Take it to heart, leftists!

If an audience featuring Pius XII wasn’t good enough, how about Mass from 1948, offered in St. Peter’s. Sadly it is in black and white:

And here you go, marking the end of glory and the beginning of the auto-demolition of the Faith, a film on the death of Pius XII and coronation of John XXIII, before the fanon and sede gestatoria were scrapped by John’s successor:

 

It’s not all from the 50s.  There is content dating at least back to Saint Pius X. And some of it is more modern commentary, from a wide diversity of sources, from people known well to this blog like Fr. Michael Rodriguez and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, to more esoteric sources.  I can’t say I’ve watched much of the commentary, but as for the historical stuff, I love it.  So much more like that!

Apparently Youtube contains just part of the content, there is a website that ostensibly has more but I haven’t really had time to check it out.  Perhaps you will, and if you do, feel free to share anything of interest you may find!

As always, of course my happiness at finding this channel is not necessarily an endorsement of everything on it.  But I think there is quite a bit good to find there.

And it’s not all strictly Catholic.  There’s actually quite a bit from the Orthodox Church on the channel.  For an example, here is Patriarch Kirill, primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, taking on the cultural masters in a way the last six popes have generally failed to do, with occasional exceptions from John Paul II and Benedict.  In fact, he proclaims a truth that is readily apparent to most believing Christians of any Church, sect, or stripe: godless elites want to destroy Christianity:

Lady Lex and Planes in Remarkable Shape after 76 Years at the Cold, Dark Bottom of the Coral Sea March 6, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Flightline Friday, foolishness, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, Society.
comments closed

Billionaire Paul Allen, one of the founders of Microsoft, has spent some of his remarkable fortune on deep sea expeditions, finding old wrecks of historical value. Last year his crew found the USS Indianapolis, sunk after delivering the atomic bomb components to Tinian with most of her crew killed by sharks waiting for rescue.  He has also found the massive IJN battleship Musashi.

Just a few days ago, his research team found USS Lexington, CV-2, sunk during the Battle of Coral Sea by the US after she suffered catastrophic explosions from gasoline leaks after being hit by Japanese bombs.  The ship, and especially the aircraft, were in remarkably good shape.  Even the squadron emblems from “Fighting Three” (VF-3) were still plain as day, as were the dark grey/light grey finish, national markings (including the quickly dropped “meatball” in the star that it was feared would be confused with a similar meatball used on Japanese planes as their rising sun motif), kill markings, etc.  Structurally the planes don’t look as bad as one might think after three quarters of a century in the muck and gloom of the deep, deep ocean. In fact they look almost good enough to try to raise and refurbish for museum display.  What a historical coup that would be.

Lexington was part of the “first team” of pre-war, often career sailors and airmen who first held the line, and then very quickly turned the tables on the Japanese before massive American production of men and material made the War in the Pacific all but a foregone conclusion.

Totally non sequitur to this blog but ho boy I hope they post a lot more video and pics of this:

Wrecked Douglas TBD Devastator of Torpedo Three (VT-3)

That Felix the Cat symbol is famous and dates back to the 1920s in naval aviation.  It is still used today by VFA-31 “Tomcatters”

FSSP Given Indult to Offer Pre-“Reform” Easter Rites February 28, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, Francis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, history, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Restoration, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I am happy about this permission given to the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, to offer the Holy Week and Easter rites according to the 1945 Missal, thus not including the revolutionary changes to the Mass introduced by Pius XII. Even though many traditional Catholics have relatively little problem with the changes Pius performed, it must be made clear that it was these “relatively innocuous” changes that established a precedent for what before had always been seen as out of bounds – making inorganic changes to the structure of the Mass.  Without the Holy Week, or “Easter Rite” changes, there would have been no Novus Ordo, no mutilation of the ancient canon, probably in use since apostolic times or shortly thereafter, and its replacement by modernist fabrications, to paraphrase Pope Benedict.

So Francis of Rome has given permission to go back to the old rite before the revolution against the Liturgy began, but not, it seems, to the SSPX.  Which is actually kind of revealing – the fact that they have not been given this permission argues that they are an organic part of the Church, and being governed similar to other organizations, while not being given this permission may have much to do with internal SSPX politics, where there has long existed some division over whether Archbishop Lefebvre made the right call in settling on the 1962 Missal as the standard for the Society, rather than an earlier, unadulterated version.  I have no real opinion on these matters, save that I very much prefer the 1945 Missal and personally use one.  I also like to hear the Good Friday prayer that calls the Jews, even the perfidious ones, to conversion.

More from Angel Queen, via reader TT:

The Priestly Fraternity of St Peter has been granted an indult by the Vatican Commission Ecclesia Dei to use the liturgical books for Holy Week as they were until the [failed] reform of Pius XII (+1958). The indult is granted ad experimentum for three years. [Isn’t it interesting how the revolutionary changes are always unleashed full force and forever, while any kind of return to tradition must always be furtive, experimental, and non-committal?]

The information was published in several of the Fraternity’s US-parish bulletins. Each church of the Fraternity has to request permission from the superiors before taking advantage of the indult. According to rumours, 25 parishes have been granted permission so far.

However, on Good Friday, the prayer for the Jews published by Pope Benedict XVI must be used.

So it’s not an entire return to the ancient order – Benedict’s highly unfortunate capitulation to worldly opinion will still be used.  So, I’ll just have to read the old style prayer myself again.

I do not know if the local FSSP parish has requested permission to use the pre-1958 Mass.

 

Dr. Christopher Dawson on the Fundamental Anti-Christian Religious Nature of the Left February 22, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, Christendom, cultural marxism, different religion, error, General Catholic, history, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Dr. Christopher Dawson was one of the greatest Catholic historians and sociologists of the modern era, a man capable of amassing voluminous knowledge and collating it down to a sensible, digestible whole that relatively educated masses could imbibe.  He wrote a number of books, mostly now held by Ignatius (which makes me wonder the degree to which they have been edited for content uncomfortable to the post-conciliar zeitgeist) but there are other titles available from other sources, and you can still find pre-conciliar copies of his works every now and then.

One of the most interesting of his works was The Gods of Revolution, which argued that the French Revolution – the progenitor of the modern Left and all subsequent revolutionary movements – was primarily motivated by the desire to promulgate a new religion and moral order for society, both of which were antithetical to the hated religion and moral order of Catholicism and the Ancien Regime.  Now this realization may be old hat to many readers, and Dawson was hardly the first to make this claim, but in an age where history and science are dealt with, especially in the academic sense, from an overwhelmingly materialist and rationalist perspective, Dawson’s analysis is both refreshing and helpful.  I think there some gems in the excerpts below that may help you in your exchanges with the forces of revolution/post-modernism you may encounter.

Or, it was at least interesting to me, and interesting enough to post, so I shall make you suffer through it, if you read to the end.  The excerpts below come from pages 65-66 and 84-85 of this short book (the excerpt starts rather abruptly, discussing the Jacobin Clubs, the focal point of French revolutionary ferment, as being also the religious center of that movement):

The clubs were in fact the churches of the new religion.  “How was the Christian religion  established?” asks a Jacobin writer.  “By the preaching of the apostles of the Gospel.  How can we firmly establish the [new French] Constitution? By the mission of the apostles of liberty and equality. Each [Jacobin club] should take charge of the neighboring country districts. It is enough to send an enlightened and zealous patriot with instructions which he will adapt to the locality; he should also provide himself with a copy of the Declaration of the Rights [of Man]  , the Constitution, the Almanack du Pere Gerard [a scurrilous source of anti-Church calumnies], and a good tract against fanaticism, and a good model of a pike. [I’m sure you can imagine what that is for.  But it might be helpful to ponder who the cult of liberty was spread in our own nation, and who the apostles were of that new religion, whether its founders intended it to be one or not, it has taken on many overtones of religion nonetheless.]

In many respects the clubs had inherited and absorbed the traditions of eighteenth century Freemasonry………[The clubs] possessed the same ideal of optimistic deism and claimed in the same way as the Freemasons to represent the fulfillment of the Christian ideals of fraternity, charity, and morality……….But the religion of the Jacobins was a far more definite and dogmatic theory than that of the Masons had ever been.  From the first it possessed its creed in the Declaration of Rights and its scriptures on the Social Contract and it gradually developed a regular cultus and ritual centering round the Altar of the Fatherland, the Tree of Liberty, the Book of the Constitution, and addressed to deified abstractions like Reason, Liberty, Nature, and the Fatherland [Which were precisely the objects antichrist directed the false religion of satanic-dominated humankind in Robert Hugh Benson’s Lord of the World]…….[[this new revolutionary religion] was a religion of human salvation, the salvation of the world by the power of man set free by Reason.  The Cross has been replaced by the Tree of Liberty, the Grace of God by the Reason of Man, and Redemption by Revolution. [And here I think Dawson gives as good a description of the totality of the opposition of the new religion of sexular pagan leftism to Christianity as I’ve read.  Benson does an excellent job of prognosticating how this new secular religion will move as it seeks to replace Christianity, and forecasts a sad and infinitely trying future for the Church and faithful souls.  What Benson did not predict was that virtually the entire institutional Church might join the false cult of man.]

This creed was by no means peculiar to the Jacobins; it as common to all the liberal idealists from the Illuminati to Blake, and from Shelley to Victor Hugo.  But with the Jacobin Society it acquired the external organization of a sect, with a strict discipline, a rigid standard of orthodoxy, and a fanatical intolerance to other creeds.   From the first the Jacobins had thrown themselves into the persecution of the Church with the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, and the resultant conflict with the nonjuring Catholics was largely responsible for the sectarian bitterness and persecuting spirit of the Jacobin Society. [today, that spirit has been taken up by the more leftward segments of the democrat party in this country and numerous other parties in the West in the various parliamentary democracies, with the same persecuting spirit and the same fanatical adherence to leftist orthodoxy.  In fact, Leftism has continued a steady process of metastasizing, growing ever more extreme in belief and in the amoral society they wish to achieve.]

…………[Thus] the Revolution was no longer satisfied with the liberal Catholicism of the Constitutional Church [the false, heretical, Gallican state “church” set up with the help of apostate bishops and priests who feared men more than God, just as Francis seeks to support in China today], it had come to regard Christianity itself as a counter-revolutionary force which must be destroyed in order to make way for the new religion of humanity.  As early as 26 September 1792 Fouche’ had announced at Nevers that he thought it was his mission “to substitute teh wroship of the Republic and natural morality for the superstitious cults to which the people still unfortunately adhere,” and in the following month at Lyons he staged an elaborate anti-Christian demonstration in which a donkey wearing a cope and mitre dragged a missal and the Gospels through the streets.  During the autumn all the churches in Paris were closed, Notre Dame became the Temple of Reason, and the Constitutional “bishop” of Paris, Gobel, with his leading clergy, made a public renunciation of their ministry at the bar of the Convention………..

——–End Quote——

There is much more that is great in the book, but Dawson writes compactly and densely, making it difficult to pull out excerpts that make much sense on their own.  I’ve read three books by Dawson now and  have enjoyed them a great deal, but I am looking forward to something a bit more polemical in Coulombe.  But that will be some months off, I have some other history to go through first, including a study of the man who set the entire rationalist/materialist/leftist train in motion, Luther.

 

 

 

UPDATED: Reader Has Questions about The Fatima Center and Upcoming Dallas Conference – Are There Problems with Speakers? February 20, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, Father Rodriguez, General Catholic, history, Interior Life, Latin Mass, Restoration, Society, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

UPDATE: I added the video I promised in the original post. There’s not much to it, it’s just a brief 1 minute advert for the conference.

A longtime reader of this blog asked some questions I’m really not the best person to answer.  I did have some knowledge of his concerns, so I include my response to him below, but I offered to open up the matter to the readership in the knowledge that many of you have much deeper familiarity with The Fatima Center, Fr. Gruner, and their history than I do.  First, the questions:

This looks to be a fantastic conference, however, I do have some concerns I was hoping you could address before I commit my wife and I to attending.   Although, it’s be wonderful to listen to and perhaps even chat with Chris Ferrara, who often guests on the Mike Church show, I’ve been concerned with Fr. Gruner’s Fatima Center for several years.  Wasn’t Fr. Gruner disobedient to the Church and was suspended?  I have also found that a majority of those associated with and/or sympathetic with Gruner tend to think that the NO Mass is invalid, and many of those are also perhaps sedevecantists.

Not looking to be combative here at all, just cautious and seeking knowledge and perhaps a correction in what may simply be my misunderstanding.

And here is my brief response:

Like the SSPX, there are many arguments on both sides of the Father Gruner situation, but for the most part I think the accusations that he was disciplined are unfounded.  I haven’t really delved into the subject in that much depth, since the man has been dead for a year or two now.

I don’t believe I’ve personally seen or heard any of the speakers I know who are supposed to be at the conference say the Novus Ordo is invalid.  The claim they are sede vacantist is completely false.

To add a little bit more, I have listened to many talks, and read much material, by several of the conference speakers – Chris Ferrara, Michael Matt, Fr. Michael Rodriguez, and Father Paul MacDonald, and I could not recall any of them declaring the Novus Ordo to be invalid.  I feel very confident reinforcing the statement that there are no sede vacantist views in any of these gentlemen that I have ever seen, read, or heard.  Now many have severe problems with the Novus Ordo, especially as it is commonly offered in most parishes, but I don’t think any have declared it to be invalid in toto or from some fundamental basis.  Many also raise very appropriate and vociferous concerns regarding the current pontificate and the overall pontifical leadership of the Church since the late 50s, but that is quite a different thing from declaring that there have been no valid popes since whatever date.

I know some readers are very familiar with Father Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari (may they rest in peace), Michael Matt, Father Rodriguez, and others, and I ask now for additional information that clarifies their views on the topics in question.  I know the reader in question is well intentioned so I ask that replies be made in a spirit of kindness and generosity, and not take these questions as a personal attack on your own beliefs.  I also think specific evidence is the best kind of reply that directly answers the matters in question.

It should be added, however, that many of the speakers on the conference program have run afoul of the institutional Church at various times and have suffered from campaigns of misinformation and misrepresentation.  I think Fr. Gruner in particular suffered from this.  So I would personally very much appreciate any detailed replies that provide light on any particular beliefs held by these men, as well as specific instances of misrepresentation or falsification that may exist.  I bring this up, because I have a vague memory of seeing some really nasty calumnies against not only Fr. Gruner, but also Fr. Rodriguez and, I think, Matt and Ferrara, on Catholic Answers, things that were really quite disprovable.  There have been similar attacks on Church Militant websites.  But it was years ago that I read these things and I have forgotten the details.

Anyway, if one reader has such questions, it is likely that others do as well, so your response may be benefiting a number of souls, and it is always helpful to put these kinds of questions to rest.  I appreciate the time you spend in your response, and again please be charitable.

Find below a video on the upcoming conference by Fr. Paul MacDonald.  I am looking forward to it with enthusiasm.

I should also make very clear, I personally have no questions about the speakers and trust especially Father Rodriguez explicitly in every regard on matters of faith and morals.  I know his brother David, too, and am completely comfortable there, as well, as I am with Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara.  This post was for the benefit of a reader with questions I am not presently in a position to answer directly with hard data confirming the status of the speaker’s belief.  I used to have some of that info to hand, but that was 4 or 5 years ago and I’ve forgotten or misplaced it.  Thus my request to you, but I want to assure all that I cannot wait to attend this conference and am very much looking to it with no reservations of any kind.

Sorry here is the video I promised:

Get Me a Tinfoil Hat, I’m All-In on Conspiracy Theories Now February 8, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in blogfoolery, different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, history, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Not really, not entirely, but some discussion on the previous post about how the powers that be in this nation are now completely off the rails, and just when it was that this nation lost it’s way, prompted me to extrapolate a bit on the broader subject of conspiracies.  The nation, of course, was in many ways off the rails from the founding, if you are even halfway convinced by Christopher Ferrara’s most important work, Liberty: The God that Failed, but I left a comment wherein I talked about how recent study has caused me to conclude that my previous belief – that conspiracy theories are almost always false – was itself a result of a deliberate effort by the CIA to discredit those who opposed their varying agendas.  That is to say, it was the CIA itself that coined the phrase “conspiracy theory” in the 60s to squash those asking uncomfortable questions about the JFK assassination, the Vietnam War, morally questionable (or downright damnable) US activities in many countries, etc., etc……..and in fact came up with all the arguments against conspiracy theories I have tended to believe – that conspiracies are extremely hard to conduct, that they are impossible to keep secret, that to do X so many people would have to be involved that word would certainly get out, that “the real world doesn’t work that way,” among other things. [Sorry for those of you who get posts by e-mail, I wrote this in a huge hurry and really botched the grammar in this first paragraph. The first few sentences didn’t make much sense.  Mea maxima culpa]

I had swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.  To my comment:

One thing I learned recently, which was fascinating and has caused me to re-examine my own previously held notions, is that it was the CIA itself that coined the phrase “conspiracy theory” in response to continued doubts over the JFK assassination and other scandals of the 60s. I wouldn’t say I believe in black helicopters, the Illuminati, chemtrails, or anything quite like that just yet, but it is patently obvious at this point to anyone with an ounce of sense that there is a massive, ongoing conspiracy against conservatism, Trump, liberty, Christianity, and the conception of this nation as founded, or what was long presented as the conception of this nation, that has become so clumsy and obvious of late that it can no longer be ignored, but which in fact goes back decades if not much longer. And yes the US was wrongly founded from the beginning, in being not based on Catholicism (and in many respects hostile to the Faith as it was certainly practiced then, and had been since the early Church), and in being the product of a small dedicated group that sought the overthrow of the existing economic/political/cultural power structure and its replacement with another structure – with themselves in the positions of power. In other words, a conspiracy, and a successful one.

If you read the sad, US-influenced political and cultural history of Mexico since 1800, you will find almost exactly the same thing. A small cabal subverting the will of the vast majority of souls and imposing a hostile and alien construct upon the masses, for their own personal benefit.

And then there is the example of the Church, where again a relatively small cabal, infinitely aided by sympathetic, timid, and/or feckless leadership, has seized control and imposed a radically different construct on the (initially?) largely unwilling masses, and even convinced them of how good and wonderful all these changes have been. Just recently I had an exchange with some septuagenarians, very early boomers who were at just that “right” age at Vatican II, who are just utterly convinced of how wrong and awful the pre-conciliar Church was, and how wonderful all the changes have been. When I presented contradictory evidence, the implosion of vocations, tens of millions of souls lost to the Church in this country alone, etc., etc., they said those were POSITIVE developments, that it made absolutely no difference what “church” one belonged to and those people were probably better off outside the Church, given all the evils like the boy-rape epidemic and collapse of catechesis that have resulted (and that religious life was a crock, that it was a medieval concept for stuffing unmarried daughters and Jesus freaks into veritable asylums). There is absolutely no arguing with these people, no quoting of Scripture, no relation of the wisdom of the Fathers, no statistical data that can possibly move them from their position that Vatican II was an unalloyed good and what existed before an unalloyed evil. These people are wholesale devotees of the new religion foisted on the Church in the 60s. They only remain Catholic themselves for sentimental reasons, or, more demoniacally, to continue the work of destruction (and some of them have been long involved in just that).

These are just a handful of examples.  I still do not believe that history in toto is more or less a collection of conspiracies successful and failed, but that doesn’t mean that extremely influential events have not been developed and decided by a (relatively) small group working to a particular purpose.

So get me a tinfoil hat and call me a conspiracy theorist, but honest reading of history reveals that a great many extremely influential events have been the result of a small cadre of dedicated activists, generally working in secret (see France, 1789). IOW, a conspiracy.

And I would say that all the cultural/moral travesties we have witnessed over the past 50-odd years are the result of a deliberate conspiracy aimed at destroying Western civilization and, in particular, the Church, in order to bring about a sexularist socialist “utopia.”  I mean, transgender bathrooms, really? or arguing that guys (it’s always guys) who say no to men dressed up as women are hateful bigots?  For real?  Like that just happened organically, naturally?  Riiiiiiight.

Don’t Have a Freak Out – Russian, Chinese Anti-Satellite Technology Nothing New January 31, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Flightline Friday, history, It's all about the $$$, non squitur, silliness, Society, technology.
comments closed

This article from Hot Air is remarkably ignorant of history.  It does not mention, for instance, Program 437, which ran from 1962 until 1975, which involved launching a Thor missile from Johnson Atoll in the Pacific to down low earth orbit satellites and/or fractional orbit bombardment systems (FOBS) – a kind of nuclear warhead designed to behave like a satellite and thus attack by stealth, possibly from a surprising direction – like from the south.  This was an active US anti-satellite (ASAT) capability for over a decade.

And even Program 437 was preceded by another American ASAT system, Program 505, which used a Nike Zeus anti-ballistic missile missile to also target low earth orbit satellites and FOBS.  505 was phased out because Thor could reach much higher altitudes than Zeus, up to 800 miles above earth – really out of LEO territory and into medium orbits.  Both were armed with nuclear warheads to make sure they killed what they targeted, though they were accurate enough (at least Zeus was) to get skin-to-skin hits even way back in the very early 60s.  Satellites and ICBM reentry vehicles behave in extremely similar ways, if you have a capability against one, you have a capability against the other.  And right now, the US missile defense system is neither the world’s most advanced nor it’s most comprehensive.  Apparently, many other nations have concluded that shooting down targets on entirely predictable ballistic paths is not impossible.  Because it’s not, and we’ve been doing it for nearly 60 years, though the current Ground Based Mid-Course Defense system is kind of a kludge and has been starved of vital infrastructure for years (like enough radars to discriminate targets).

The thing is, all of our major world adversaries have had a similar capability for decades.  Pretty much, if you have the ability to orbit a satellite, you have the ability to shoot them down, at least the ones in LEO. Simply calculate the orbit of the target satellite, and launch your own to coincide with at some determined time, and blammo, no more satellite. The Soviets had a massive ASAT program from the 60s on, and deployed a number of ASAT systems, up to an including a 1 megawatt laser battle station prototype, which, thank God, failed to achieve orbit when it’s booster turned the wrong direction and fired it back into the atmosphere (that was in 1987, when the same Soviets were screaming to all the world, and had eager acolytes in the Western press doing same, that orbital laser battle stations were an impossibility.  They were actually way ahead of us at the time, and in some ways, still are).

Anyhoo, some statist media were trying to work up a panic today, eagerly parroting what their patrons in the Deep State wanted them to say, proclaiming that Oh My God, the bad guys are threatening us again!  It’s all much ado about nothing (or very little, and very old, news), but it does point up that, indeed, at present, the US has no viable, operational ASAT system, not because we don’t have the ability, or can’t afford it, but by deliberate act of policy. Any number of systems have been proposed, and a good number have reached the hardware stage, but demonrats in Congress (or the executive branch) have always managed to scuttle them, since we signed a stupid treaty in 1967 that pretends to ban warfare in outer space.*  Good luck with that:

China and Russia are developing anti-satellite missiles and other weapons and will soon be capable of damaging or destroying all U.S. satellites in low-earth orbit, according to the Pentagon’s Joint Staff.

The Joint Staff intelligence directorate, known as J-2, issued the warning in a recent report on the growing threat of anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons from those states, according to officials familiar with the assessment.

The report concludes that “China and Russia will be capable of severely disrupting or destroying U.S. satellites in low-earth orbit” in the next several years, said the officials.

The capability to attack low-earth orbit satellites could be in place by 2020, the officials said.

Notice the subtle manipulation – there is a big threat, but it’s not quite real, yet.  We’re safe for now.  But you better pour billions into our pet project, or we’ll be doomed, doomed!

There actually is a real threat out there, but I think it has much more to do with how the US defense establishment has allowed its operations to evolve into this desire for an ultimate control, God’s eye view of the battlespace, requiring massive recon and even more massive data transfer capabilities.  Because the “gods” don’t want to be anywhere near an actual battlefield, which tend to be in hot, nasty, dusty, and sticky places.  They want to sit in their air conditioned cocoon in DC and call all the shots.  The only, or easiest, way to get worldwide recon and transmission of data is via satellite.  Thus, the US military is now incredibly, incredibly dependent on constant and massive satellite presence, a very very delicate system and one with a thousand and one dire vulnerabilities and single points of failure. Thus the screaming about the threat.  25 years ago, satellites were very nice to have an in some limited ways even vital, but the Gulf War could have been fought with a serious reduction in our satellite capabilities without a great deal of impact at the operational level.  Nowadays, literally everything runs via satellite, from the Predator footage that allows Obama to sit in the Oval Office and watch a terrorist get Hellfired in Yemen, to all the JDAMs/JSOWs/JASSMs and other “joint” bombs and missiles that now make up the overwhelming majority of the ordinance dropped by tactical aircraft, which, similarly, navigate via satellite.  There is still some sanity, many of these bombs and certainly the aircraft have embedded INS and other systems to back up and replace the GPS if need be, but a) those are just that, back ups, and not used much anymore, and b) the entire concept of operations, training, budgets, etc., are focused around constant availability of very expensive, very few, and very vulnerable satellites.  This actually is a very major concern for the US, because satellites are extremely difficult to harden, and they are very easy to find (there are ways around this, satellites do contain maneuvering fuel, but not very much, and a few orbit changes to avoid a threat will use that up very quickly.  Plus, moving them around causes them to not be where you need them to be when you need them – at least some of the less numerous kinds. Probably most of you would be shocked to know how FEW recon “spy” satellites the US has in orbit – even adding in the radar and other non-visual types, it isn’t even 10, and may be as few as 4 or 5).

Thus, ZUMA, which some of you may have heard of, was probably not actually a failed mission, but is almost certainly a prototype (or not so prototype) stealth satellite design.  That’s one way to avoid being targeted – many amateur astronomers, radio hobbyists, etc, are able to track all publicly acknowledged satellites by their transmissions (even if they cannot decode them), literally see them in orbit, etc.  It is known there have been some stealth satellites that were not visible to the ground and used transmission technologies that most ordinary enthusiasts could not ID and track.  Several of these have been orbited over the years.  ZUMA appears to be another one, but unusually large and with an unusual cover story.

*- While the Us has no acknowledged, purpose-built ASAT system at present, as recently as 10 years ago, the US very publicly shot down a satellite in LEO using an ABM missile (a Navy Standard 3 missile, our best ICBM defense weapon at this point).  If a nation has an operational ABM system, it most certainly has at least some measure of an ASAT capability. I’m sure Obama scratched any further development of that capability, even at the classified level, but perhaps Trump will turn it back on.

In the past, I’d have said that was a good thing.  Not so sure anymore.

Sorry I do have a lot of good Catholic stuff to get to but had little time today.  I’m really running late now, have a blessed evening.

Sorry for the atrocious pic – who would take it from between some fuzzy covers, and why? But it’s the only one that shows what we could have had, and almost had – a layered missile defense system covering almost the entire US with nearly 1000 interceptors (more could have been added later) with numerous, very capable and very hardened, targeting radars. Not sure why New Orleans and El Paso were left uncovered – Miami, too, apparently. This system wasn’t really good against SLBMs but with additional radars and interceptor sites, easily could have been. Yes it was expensive but at present we have almost no defense, and for some of the country, none at all, against a ballistic missile attack, nuclear or otherwise.
These are coverage areas of the proposed – and somewhat built – Sentinel ABM system, which later was called Safeguard under Nixon, and then cancelled by the commie Congress of the mid-70s that came in the national temper tantrum in the wake of Watergate, which was an absolute nothing burger compared to what the corrupt federal government is up to today, and has been since at least Jan 20 2009, when Obama turned it into the paramilitary enforcement branch of the demonrat party.

Coulombe on Fr. Feeney January 11, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, history, priests, sanctity, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I posted some videos yesterday from the Tumblar House video interviews of Charles Coulombe.  Some folks liked the take Coulombe had on the difficult issue of the SSPX – in the video below, he tackles another very difficult issue, that of Fr. Feeney and his “excommunication.”  Once again, Coulombe covers a complex matter with subtlety and panache.  He rightly notes that if Feeney taught error, it would be very difficult to claim that many past popes, Saints, and Fathers did not similarly err.  That’s not to say Feeney did no wrong.  He may have gone a bit to excess in greatly diminishing the scope of baptism of desire, BUT at the same time the major thrust of his argument is one that cannot be rejected as false. That is to say, the process of condemning Feeney was abusive, in that there can’t be a dogmatic refutation of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus without throwing out vast portions of the Doctrine of the Faith, and condemning numerous great Catholic theologians in the process.

Another important point brought up below is the extent to which Feeney’s belief has been misrepresented.

Perhaps this take might be a bit controversial but it aligns well with my own study of the matter.  Like Coulombe, it’s not completely clear the extent to which Feeney formally taught error or was formally corrected for doing so, but I am certain that there has been a massive attempt, predating Vatican II by 20 years or more, to reduce Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus to meaninglessness, and that this move has played a primary role in practically neutering the Church’s grand 2000 year history of selfless evangelization:

Coulombe looks like he enjoys a good meal and a drink every now and then.  My kind of guy.

Note the key role Benedict XVI plays in the fleshing out of this argument.  That’s my main problem with the rejection of EENS in general and Father Feeney in particular – whatever the theological fine points, the major thrust has been the total gutting of the Church’s evangelization efforts AND a collapse in the lived Faith of tens of millions of Catholics, because the modern ecumaniacal approach that more or less everyone is saved, and in fact that one is essentially penalized by being a Catholic, has an impetuous internal logic that has eviscerated the great well of evangelical power the Church possessed until recent decades.

It is interesting to me how much venom is directed at Fr. Feeney and any perceived followers of the belief attributed to him, not by liberals, but by traditional Catholics.  It’s the reverse of the obverse side of the coin that says “SSPX = schismatic” as a knee jerk reaction, where the trads turn around and say “Feeneyites = heretics,” though the juridical standing of Feeney’s actual teachings was never fully settled, unless you want to go with the opinion of the same ordinary, Cardinal Cushing, who a few years later deliberately conspired with Planned Murderhood to overcome Catholic legislative resistance to get contraception legalized in his archdiocese and state.

Here is the book Coulombe references in the Q&A.  Seems like he rather strongly believes that the practical abjuration of EENS has played a vital role in the crisis in the Church.   If you want a little peak behind the veil at the kind of tactics used by the neo-Cath crowd (a term of convenience I don’t really like), make sure to read the really abominable review by Karl Keating.  Pure ad hominem – shocking, I know.  But I’ve already been called – in effect –  a no account scumbag almost certainly hiding some dire dark secret by Keating and his attack dog Shea for not broadcasting my “real name” on every post I make, though my name appears scores of times on this blog in various forms, so I have my own ax to grind, I suppose.

I’d appreciate reading your thoughts on Coulombe’s take on this subject.