Counter

Pageviews last month

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Kenneth Miller's motion to dismiss for failure to state an offense or for improper venue is denied.

Counter Well, no surprise, Kenneth Miller's motion to dismiss for failure to state an offense or for improper venue is denied. The Court did leave open the possibility that Vermont may not be the appropriate venue for the charges, and requests supporting evidence from the Prosecution. What strikes me the most is the assumption, for the purposes of trying Kenneth Miller, that Lisa Miller is already guilty of the charges in which Kenneth Miller is being tried as an accomplice. This flies in the face of the concept that guilt cannot be assumed but must be first proven. Lisa Miller is not available to try, however, and we don't do trials in absentia in America, so they are going after Ken. And he will have his day in court.

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

Israel lines up landing sites for upcoming Iran raid

Counter The irresistible force draws ever nearer to the immovable object. Woe to him who stands between.

UPDATE APRIL 27 from DEBKAFile
Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrived in Washington Thursday, April 19 with tough questions for US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta about the administration’s dialogue with Iran, on the lines of, “What’s going on? Is there a deal? Don’t tell me what you have settled with the Iranians, just your minimal demands, your bottom line.” The questions reflected Israel’s concern at being kept in the dark about US-Iranian back-track negotiations and American concessions, including President Barak Obama’s willingness to yield on full transparency and international nuclear watchdog inspections at Iran’s nuclear sites. According to our sources, they focused on the fresh intelligence reaching the US and the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran has begun moving military nuclear facilities to secret locations not covered in the confidential deal evolving between the Obama administration and Tehran.

UPDATE AUGUST 6 2012
Now reports indicate that the existence of backup landing sites in Azerbaijan was leaked by the Obama administration in an attempt to head off any Israeli use of these sites.

Monday, 16 April 2012

Not a good week for the "natural-born citizen" conspiracy

Counter Why is it that just about every single time I stick my neck out to give Barack Obama the benefit of the doubt as to the legitimacy of his presidency, I end up having to retract it? This just in--There are no State Department records showing that Barack Obama Sr. traveled to Kenya for his son's birth. There are, in fact, no immigration records at all, for that entire week. They are ALL missing. Do you realize the magnitude of this scam? There is absolutely no evidence, whether documentary, court testimony, or forensic, to disprove Barack Obama's legend. It's all either sealed or missing. In its place we have only anecdotal evidence, and it is contradictory. This man has something MASSIVE to hide.

Monday, 9 April 2012

Tuesday, 3 April 2012

David vs. Goliath, The Battle of Champions--round two

Counter
Since writing my first post about Goliath, I've found a passage in Livy's History of Ancient Rome that closely parallels the story of David and Goliath. I've printed the passage in full, highlighting the correlations to the biblical account. This battle took place around 360 B.C.
 --------------------------------------
The dictator, having in consequence of the alarm of a Gallic tumult proclaimed a cessation of civil business, obliged all the younger citizens to take the military oath; and marching out of the city with a very powerful army, encamped on the hither bank of the Anio. The bridge lay between the armies, neither party choosing to break it down lest it should be construed as an indication of fear. Frequent skirmishes were fought for the possession of the bridge, but so indecisive that it could not be clearly discovered to which party it belonged. While affairs were in this posture, a Gaul of a stature remarkably large advanced on the bridge then unoccupied, and with a loud voice called out, "Let the bravest man that Rome can produce come forth here to battle, that the event of a combat between us two may determine which of the nations is to be held superior in war."

The young Roman nobility were for a long time silent, ashamed to refuse the challenge yet unwilling to claim the first post of danger. Then Titus Manlius son of Lucius, the same who had freed his father from the persecution of the tribune, advancing from his station to the dictator, said: "General, I would on no account leave my post to fight without your orders, not though I should see a certain prospect of victory; but if you permit me, I wish to show that brute who makes such an insolent parade in the front of the enemy's army that I am sprung from that family which beat down an army of Gauls from the Tarpcian rock."

 The dictator answered Titus Manlius, "I honour your bravery and your dutiful regard to your father and to your country; go, and with the help of the gods, show the Roman name invincible." The youth was then armed by his companions, took a footman's shield, and girded on a Spanish sword adapted to close fight.

As soon as they had fitted on his armour and ornaments they conducted him out towards the Gaul, who showed a savage joyand--the ancients have thought that circumstance also worth mention--even thrust out his tongue in derision. They then retired to their posts, and the two champions were left in the middle space in the manner of a spectacle, rather than according to the rules of combat, very unequally matched in the eyes of such as judged by sight and appearance. The one had a body of enormous size glittering in a vest of various colours, having armour painted and inlaid with gold; the other was of the middle stature among soldiers, and his mien devoid of ostentation in arms, calculated for ready use more than for show. On his side there was no song of defiance, no capering, nor vain flourishing of arms; but his breast replete with resolution and silent rage, reserved all its fierceness for the decision of the contest.  

They took their ground between the two armies while the minds of such great numbers of men on both sides were suspended between hope and fear. The Gaul, like some huge mass ready to crush the other under it stretching forward his shield with his left hand, discharged an ineffectual blow on the edge of his sword with great noise on the armour of Manlius as he approached; while the Roman, pushing aside the lower part of his antagonist's shield with his own and insinuating himself between that and his body, closed in with him in such a manner as to be in no danger of a wound. He then raised the point of his sword and with one and then a second thrust, piercing the belly and groin of his foe, laid him prostrate on the ground, of which he covered a vast extent The body, without offering it any other indignity, he despoiled of a torc only, which, bloody as it was, he threw round his own neck.

Astonishment and dismay held the Gauls motionless.The Romans in rapture advanced from their posts to meet their champion, and with congratulations and praises, conducted him to the dictator. Among the unpolished jests which they threw out, according to the soldier's custom, composed in a manner somewhat resembling verses, the appellation Torquatus was heard joined with his name, which being generally adopted, has since done honour to the descendants of that whole line. The dictator also presented him with a golden crown, and in a public speech extolled the action in the highest terms. In fact, that combat was of so great consequence with respect to the general issue of the campaign, that on the night following, the army of the Gauls, abandoning their camp in hurry and confusion, removed into the territory of Tibur.
------------------------------
In what follows, we also see a remarkable correlation with the story of Saul's attempted execution of his son Jonathan for breaking military discipline:
------------------------------
At the same time strict commands were given that no Roman should come out of his rank to fight in single combat with the enemy; a necessary regulation, as the Latins were so like, in every respect, to the Romans, that there would have been fatal confusion had there been any mingling together before the battle. Just as this command had been given out, young Titus Manlius, the son of the consul, met a Latin leader, who called him by name and challenged him to fight hand to hand. The youth was emulous of the honour his father had gained by his own combat at the same age with the Gaul, but forgot both the present edict and that his father had scrupulously asked permission before accepting the challenge. He at once came forward, and after a brave conflict, slew his adversary, and taking his armour, presented himself at his father's tent and laid the spoils at his feet.  But Manlius Torquatus was a man of principles. He collected his troops and surprised them by not honouring his son for the glorious defeat of an enemy. Instead, he said he would not allow disobedience and lack of discipline, and ordered to strike off his own son's head. The Roman army won the battle, but when Manlius Torquatus returned to Rome, the Senate refused to give him the usual marks of honour. The severity he had shown went way too far for the Roman people.

ADDED APRIL 30, 2012

I could also mention the Greek account of Nestor and Ereuthalion, champion of the Achaewoi-- another parallel to, and roughly contemporaneous with,  Goliath. The differences between the two heroes who took on these giants, and David, however, is profound. They trusted in long battle training, skillfully wrought weapons, and military strategy. David, on the other hand, had no military training, rejected the use of military armour, and went into battle armed with a simple shepherd's sling. What did he trust in? Only the LORD his God, and with that, he triumphed despite the incredible odds.