text:
tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post738839707458136392..comments2018-07-03T21:44:39.698-07:00Comments on Two Old Books: Links to My Recent Writings ElsewhereNicholas Senzhttps://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-69107334271648484402016-07-10T09:43:10.860-07:002016-07-10T09:43:10.860-07:00Good post.Good email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-42326393998368421722016-07-09T20:02:31.040-07:002016-07-09T20:02:31.040-07:00Lastly, I wish to address your accusation that I h...Lastly, I wish to address your accusation that I have "taken out of context" the words of Francis in the now infamous, "who am I to judge?". Allow me to quote you, as you quoted Francis:

"If someone is gay and is searching for the Lord and has good will, then who am I to judge him?"

 You indeed sum up the intent of Francis within this statement of his as follows: "This clearly and obviously means that we ought not to judge someone simply for having a sinful inclination, for all of us are inclined to one or another sin."

 Lets now look into Francis' comment critically. Firstly, he intones that a human person "is gay". That is patently erroneous as we human persons are created in the Divine likeness and image of God. I'll spare you the metaphysical discussion of the human person but suffice it to say that we are "not gay" as the homosexual act is contrary to human nature, properly understood and the human person is not "the act" as Francis intones there. He then speaks of a person "searching for the Lord". An interesting linguistic use in the same context of his stating firstly that a person, "is gay". Find the National Catholic Register article here: https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/pope-homosexuals-who-am-i-judge. What indeed does supposed "searching for the Lord" have to do with making a free will assent into the intrinsically evil and as thus mortally sinful act of sodomy? This is a willful conflation of language that suggests because someone is "searching for the Lord", all else is well in whatever they are doing, including sodomy in this specific context. Our Blessed Lord commanded the adulterous woman at the well to "go and sin no more", not to continue in her mortal sin as she was in her "search" for him. Further, He commanded that not everyone that says, "Lord, Lord" will enter the Kingdom of God. The teachings of our Blessed Lord are quite pristinely clear and simple, Nicholas, not requiring a fundamental grasp of Thomistic metaphysics to know. Indeed, Francis is also exquisitely misleading when he suggests that he will not "judge him", when he is commanded, as are we all, by our Blessed Lord to judge the willful acts, not the heart of the person, as Francis intones in his language use. Finally, Francis injects the "good will" of the person, whatever that means in this context as he says precious nothing else about it. The person can have all the "good will" in the world, as the road to hell is paved in "good intentions(will)". Many souls there are in eternal hell who had supposed "good will". In caritas.
email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-87242121770398839822016-07-09T20:00:45.245-07:002016-07-09T20:00:45.245-07:00Take a step back for a moment, Nicholas, and consi...
 Take a step back for a moment, Nicholas, and consider the unmitigated, purported "gaffs" that Francis has made, very interestingly oft times on return trips from visiting nation state sovereigns on the papal aircraft, which the Vatican has total control over and as thus could simply not allow for the press to query him there, as the now infamous, "who am I to judge?", comment was made. Don't you believe a pontiff, who you intone to be so incredibly ignorant of the teachings of the One True Faith and of the Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophical method of inquiry, that he would in caritas keep his mouth shut but for pre-authored language for the sake of not causing further scandal to countless souls with his rhetoric? Your view of this pontiff as being a somehow lesser theologian than his predecessors speaks to the blindness that you indeed have in regard to just what Francis is accomplishing. You write him off as being somehow of a lesser intellect, while at once as I opined before, he is playing you as a maestro plays the violin. It is truly sophomoric to believe that the cadre of prelates that surround the Pontiff (Lombardi?) would continue to allow him to "misstep" time and time again, extemporaneously, as though his innumerable repetitions of error somehow beget the truth. Yet this is what he is doing and this is what Lombardi (Gerhard Mueller), et al, continue to "allow" him to do. This is the signature of the Hegelian dialectic of synthesis existentially manifest right before our very eyes, re: being somehow begets "non-being", which then somehow begets becoming, and this carries a Luciferian signature, not the signature of a Holy Roman Pontiff and his handlers, submitting themselves into the Will of Almighty God. See too "missteps" as you might categorize them Nicholas, here-- "beg forgiveness" and here--"pretends to be angry". This is an exquisitely calculated maleficence of the teaching authority of the One True Faith.
firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-32178846620636976422016-07-09T19:58:51.911-07:002016-07-09T19:58:51.911-07:00Good evening, Nicholas, (posted in parts) I to... Good evening, Nicholas, (posted in parts)

 I too then, will close with this final commentary. My use of the term "parlay" is of a less common colloquial understanding than what you suggest, as follows: "to exploit successfully or to increase or otherwise transform into something of much greater value" (Merriam Webster). Thus, your opinion about my linguistic use of the word, "parlay", as being my "error" in this case, was simply your error in the mischaracterization of my language use of the transitive verb, parlay. Secondly, your apology was unnecessary as I took "nothing personally" nor was I "insulted" by what you objectively accomplished, as I have no interest in human respect for the sake of the formality of human respect. My only interest is in "The Truth" and the truth. Continuing on, my use of the term, "preternatural", is indeed referring to the angelic realm, as Satan indeed revealed in the temptation of Jesus the Christ in the desert that he is in possession of all of the "kingdoms" of this world and he is free to give them to whomever he chooses, as I alluded to in my previous discussion. You are simply blind to what Francis is accomplishing from within the very interiority of the rhetorical construction that he continues to parlay flawlessly, Nicholas, as that is now patently clear from your argument.
firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-49084375477617002182016-07-09T17:07:20.463-07:002016-07-09T17:07:20.463-07:00I am sorry that you took it personally when I poin...I am sorry that you took it personally when I pointed out your errors. To cite a few specific examples from one entry: Parlay means "a series of bets made in gambling," or less often, "a meeting of negotiation." You used it in the sense of "pass of as."
Preternatural means "apart from or outside of nature," as in the preternatural gifts God granted to Adam and Eve apart from their essential human nature, such as infused knowledge and bodily immortality. You refer to Pope Francis' "preternatural cunning," which would mean "cunning apart from that which is granted by human nature." Either you're saying he has been given extraordinary cunning as a gift from God that he then uses for evil (allegedly), or that Satan has granted him this ability, which would be quite the claim.
"Answering questions with questions" is not a tool of deception, but of teaching, much as Jesus used (and Socrates before Him). Think, for example, of Matthew 21:24. It's a didactic tool used to help the student to consider their own presuppositions.
You take the Pope's "Who am I to judge?" comment out of context. He said:
"I see that many times in the Church people search for 'sins from youth,' for example, and then publish them. They are not crimes, right? No, sins. But if a person, whether it be a lay person, a priest or a religious sister, commits a sin and then converts, the Lord forgives, and when the Lord forgives, the Lord forgets and this is very important for our lives," said Pope Francis.
"When we confess our sins and we truly say, 'I have sinned in this,' the Lord forgets, and so we have no right not to forget, because otherwise we would run the risk of the Lord not forgetting our sins. That is a danger. This is important: a theology of sin. … If someone is gay and is searching for the Lord and has good will, then who am I to judge him?"
This clearly and obviously means that we ought not to judge someone simply for having a sinful inclination, for all of us are inclined to one or another sin. This phrase was often taken out of context, but when it was spoken, it was perfectly clear.

Again, my point was not to insult you or to dismiss your argument due to these errors, but merely to say that it was difficult for me to follow what you were saying. With that behind us, I would like to close this discussion (as I don't have further time to engage it, and don't wish it to seem that I'm simply walking away from it) by stating what I believe to be the key difference between us: while we agree that the pope makes public statements that are confusing or imprudent, you believe this is done intentionally as a means to drive people away from the truth and from God, while I do not--I think he simply is not the theologian that his predecessors were. I do not claim to have a view into his heart or his motives, but you do claim that. You say it is clear by his actions, but I do not see it. You say I am being deceived, but I do not think so. I'm not sure how this discussion can proceed then. I thank you for taking the time to engage this discussion with me, though. Deus benedicat te.Nicholas Senzhttps://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-18826260531191703162016-07-09T13:39:10.061-07:002016-07-09T13:39:10.061-07:00Allow me another example of how you are deceived b... Allow me another example of how you are deceived by Francis and his ilk. You ask the question, "...where has he positively and definitively contradicted Church teaching, saying '"this is Catholic belief"' when it is not?" Francis' ilk has come out many times since the so called, "Synod on the Family", to say that no one has done anything to "change" the affirmed teachings of the Church. Again, Nicholas, do you believe for one iota of one moment in time, that those powered by the diabolical are going to show their countenances openly? If they did, they would be proffering the truth and even the poorly catechized would run the other way. Their dialectic is one based in the masterful use of the rhetorical double entendre', which at its foundation, answers questions with more questions. Francis use of his surrogates is itself masterfully placed with the "he said, she said" artful play, for instance. The sign of the quintessential Modernist is his ability to "say without saying" and that is done oft times by answering questions with more exquisitely well placed questions. The artful, yet alone quintessential, Modernist can never be found guilty of manifest heresy, as he places his error insidiously and when accused, denies what he affirms and affirms what he denies, with the cunning of the Serpent. Always know, Nicholas, that we are faced here with the preternatural gifts of the cunning of Lucifer, who as you know lost none of his gifts in the Fall and has an intellective power beyond our capacity to imagine, yet alone know, with the direct Intelligence of the One Who Is Love, as Deus Caritas Est, given him. Further, we know from the inerrant Gospels that Lucifer was given "all of the kingdoms" and he is free to "give them to whom ever I choose". These prelates in the highest positions of Ecclesial power are now his minions, including the one who rests in the Chair of Saint Peter, as this now rests, res ipsa loquitur, time and again for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

 Lastly, Nicholas, it is in the praxis of the One True Faith, where these vitriolic and malignant usurpers of Truth play their best game. As lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi rests true, it is the failure in belief that led to the change in prayer initially and finally the life lived of the Catholic faithful. Francis and his human minions are artful masters of changing the praxis of the One True Faith without changing the written dogma. It is a changing of lex orandi without manifestly changing the dogmatic aspects of lex credendi, however as it is to be existentially understood, their rancor for the Truth and artful deception, in its final analysis, yields a fundamental disruption in lex vivendi both temporally and eternally, thus. Anabale Bugnini's Mass has led to sacrileges and blasphemies and an ultimate loss in the Supernatural Faith by both clerics and laity, the likes of which could even possibly make him blush. In caritas.
email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-54964402529230150252016-07-09T13:37:45.554-07:002016-07-09T13:37:45.554-07:00Nicholas, (posting in two parts again) You are... Nicholas, (posting in two parts again)

 You are projecting your "confusion" upon my "use of terms". Again, if you point out objective examples of my purported, "confused use", I will be glad to clarify in any capacity that I can. You are indeed invoking the ad hominem when you suggest, without objective example and within the context of your argument of my use of terms, that I am the one who is "confused". You see, the ad hominem is the ad hominem, objectively understood. When you posit a label for my use of terms without objective evidence of why that is in your mind, you are from a de-facto understanding labeling me as somehow "confused" without the objective evidence, which is the ad hominem approach to argument. While I am properly labeling your use of parlance as ad hominem, I am not suggesting any contempt on your part (re:the so called "attack"). I am a Catholic, devoutly, by the Grace of Almighty God, in the pursuit of the One, True Faith and a physician in the practice of internal medicine for 25 years.

 firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-51555681680723035492016-07-09T12:37:30.030-07:002016-07-09T12:37:30.030-07:00My friend, you misunderstand me. I made no ad homi...My friend, you misunderstand me. I made no ad hominem attack. I simply pointed out that it was difficult for me to understand what you were saying because of your confused use of terms. Here's the point: we agree that Pope Francis can speak confusingly, and that that is not helpful. But where or how has he attempted to officially change the teachings of the Church? In what am I deceived? He has made public statements that I consider imprudent and confusing, but where has he positively and definitively contradicted Church teaching, saying "this is Catholic belief" when it is not?
If you could tell me something of your background, I would appreciate it. Nicholas Senzhttps://email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-49040540246594145102016-07-09T12:06:37.486-07:002016-07-09T12:06:37.486-07:00Good afternoon, Nicholas, Thus far what you ha... Good afternoon, Nicholas,

 Thus far what you have demonstrated, is your capacity to bring forth the emotive, ad hominem approach to your defense, which it does as it only can, implode under its own weight. If you would like to specifically site my error, I would be happy to address your concerns. As of now, all you have accomplished is an ad hominem use of parlance.

 Pius IX declared ("Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma", Dr. Ludwig Ott, pg. 312): '"By Faith it is to be firmly held that outside the Apostolic Roman Church none can achieve salvation. This is the only ark of salvation. He who does not enter into it, will perish in the flood. Nevertheless equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion, are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord"'. Anyone who is existentially outside the Church, One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, Nicholas, holds ONLY the subjective possibility of attaining eternal salvation. Only those, who through NO fault of their own (and to the contrary those who, vis a vis committing gravely sinful acts, as objectively understood and by virtue of their free will assent, experience a withdrawal of God's Grace, that which is both freely given and completely underserved by any and all but for the Blessed Virgin and Saint John the Baptist, which then yields them a certain spiritual darkness and by consequence a darkening of the intellect remain culpable)possess an inculpable ignorance (which by nature of the seeds of grace and supernatural virtue infused into the baptized who don't freely reject said grace and supernatural virtue, have no objective platform for being inculpably ignorant)have some subjective possibility of achieving salvation and of course not "because of" their ignorance. We lay faithful and most assuredly the Holy Father, are called to glorify Almighty God in every word we say and in every act we offer. This Pontiff is deliberately confusing his sheep and the children of this world, the unbaptized, time and again for three and one half years now. The examples remain innumerable.

 You have now demonstrated in your last response to me, your utter blindness to the cunning that Bergoglio, as Francis, uses in his willful deception, using what I choose to refer to as "the rhetorical double entendre". He plays on the likes of your utter miscalculation when he invokes his most cherished and chosen modes of communication, those which to any properly catechized Catholic, contain a complete absence of infallibility. Do you for one iota of one instant Nicholas, suggest that most Catholics today, yet alone the unwashed, have any concept or care of whether the Pontiff is in an infallible position when he speaks and writes? His power to deceive rests precisely from within the immanence of this reality that because they (the overwhelming majority of the people in this world) don't (know nor care)and he isn't (speaking nor writing infallibly). That is his cunning. He is playing you like a maestro will play the violin. That said, he is also undermining traditional methods of papal teaching; see Amoris Laetitia as the preeminent example. You are completely missing the mark when you somehow accuse me of falling into "hyper-ultramontanism". That is a rhetorical trap that Francis counts on, as part of his masterful use of deception. Our Blessed Lord and Savior, when he proclaimed: Let your yes be yes and your no, no. Anything else is from the Evil One, is in no understanding speaking of "Peter" in either an ex-Cathedra position nor exclusively in the General Magisterium, as Jesus the Christ commands us to glorify the Father in all we utter and in all we do and Francis is breeding a confusion the likes of which has heretofore not been witnessed in two thousand years of Church history. I pray you wake up Nicholas as you, as all husbands and fathers, are called to lead first, your spouse and family in the Faith. In firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-9584207060712200972016-07-09T10:01:56.399-07:002016-07-09T10:01:56.399-07:00Dear Sir, I'm afraid you demonstrate a deep mi...Dear Sir, I'm afraid you demonstrate a deep misunderstanding of the Catholic faith in several key areas. You use terms in an incorrect or confused manner, both specific theological terms and your vocabulary in general (there is a difference between using big words and using them correctly); you seem to have a heretical understanding of "extra ecclesia nulla salus," along a Feeney-ite line; you deride the pope for allegedly destroying the faith for statements he has made which, while certainly confusing at times, were by no means exercises of the magisterium, and thus were not harmful to the integrity of the faith itself; and in that, you demonstrate an extreme hyper-ultramontanism which places too much credence on every breath and gesture of the Holy Father. In several examples you cite, you take a quotation out of context and willfully give it the worst possible interpretation. This is hardly charitable. I would invite you to read my original article again and consider what I have written there, as well as reading the portions of the Catechism (or Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, if you prefer) pertaining to the indefectibility of the Church and the infallibility of the pope.Nicholas Senzhttps://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-46611427560847552932016-07-09T07:06:51.344-07:002016-07-09T07:06:51.344-07:00I pray that you are not blind to the confusion tha...
 I pray that you are not blind to the confusion that he is willfully instilling both within the Ecclesial Body of Christ and the world writ large. As you are well aware, in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 5, our Blessed Dominus Deus Sabbaoth proclaims: "Let your yes be yes and your no be no. Anything else is from the Evil One.", as He was teaching His disciples. "Anything else" Nicholas, is from the Evil One, particularly from the lips of Peter. No pope proclaims that they're intent is to "dream" of a "missionary option" to "TRANSFORM EVERYTHING", so that the Ecclesial teaching can be "suited for today's world". Not until this pontiff, that is. The Holy Church does not descend into the abyss of this world, rather She is commanded to bring division as Christ Himself proclaimed: "You think that I have come to bring peace. I have come to bring division". The world, as you well know, is under the princely powers of Lucifer and we are tempted also by the world and what it offers the flesh, as well as our concupiscence. He is frankly minimally and exquisitely misleading about what the Church's role in this wretched world is, based on what Her Singular authority is. The Church NEVER, EVER, "transforms everything" and particularly such that She can adapt to "today's world", "RATHER than for Her SELF-PRESERVATION". That, dear Nicholas, is utterly diabolical rhetoric and when you see this from its immanence and you firmly place in your mind the damage that he is inflicting on the human structures, both hierarchical and writ large of the One True Church, the damage is quickly assessed as being incalculable, particularly in this time of utter neo-pagan ideological transformation. Today's Pontiff needs the razor sharp incisiveness and true pastoral care of, God rest his beautiful soul, Pope Leo XIII, and instead our Blessed Dominus Deus, in His Divine Providence, has allowed for a minion of Lucifer to occupy the Chair of Saint Peter, such that more souls will be saved than had been plummeting into eternal hell, as dogmatically understood, in this post-Conciliar epoch of utter confusion as understood in the lived, double entendre' of that maleficence called VCII.

 In your initial critique of what I first wrote to you, you choose to read the words of Francis that I quoted from "Evangelii Guadium" in a light that is blinded from the 3.5 years now of a pontificate of confusion. I pray you revisit your intellective reasoning and divorce yourself of any emotive response that suggests still, after three and one half years of breeding confusion, this pontiff simply and truly in caritas, does NOT deserve, as he is a destroyer of the Ecclesia, not a builder and therefore not a true Shepherd of shepherds, rather a wolf who simply can no longer be understood from an intellective perspective, as wearing sheep's clothing. In caritas.
email@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-78360338977844564612016-07-09T07:04:57.931-07:002016-07-09T07:04:57.931-07:00Good Saturday morning, Nicholas, Firstly, what... Good Saturday morning, Nicholas,

 Firstly, what I have written is too long to fit in one field and thus I will post it in two parts. My hope is that you open your eyes to the rhetorical double entendre' that this Pontiff continues to parlay as his extemporaneous "catechesis". He freely chooses to speak on such matters of Church teaching, time and time again, in such a way that he breeds confusion. A signature of his preternatural cunning, is his answering questions with questions, an exquisitely deceptive tool, par excellence, in a fashion beyond that of a maestro. The classic example that all the world now knows of course, "Who am I to judge?". Another is when he spoke to the Lutheran wife of a Catholic man, who proclaimed her faux "yearning" to receive the Blessed and Holy Sacrament with her husband. If she was indeed yearning in truth, she would convert to the One True Faith, outside of which there is no salvation, as extra ecclesia nulla salus teaches dogmatically. So what did the Pontiff do, the chief shepherd of Holy Mother Church as the Church's teaching authority himself, instead of proclaiming the perennial teaching of the General Magisterium to assist in the salvation of the poor woman's eternal soul as we are all commanded to do, yet alone the "Holy" Father (Love your neighbor as I have loved you)? He instilled uncertainty into her mind and all those poorly catechized (the overwhelming majority of today's Ecclesia and of course the world)by suggesting that such an answer was somehow unclear to him and that "the theologians" must answer such "difficult questions". Clearly diabolical from its very essence, Nicholas.

 firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-4010973544374176002016-07-08T07:55:35.442-07:002016-07-08T07:55:35.442-07:00Dear Mark, Thank you for your comments. I don'...Dear Mark,

Thank you for your comments. I don't think your conclusion follows from the evidence you offer. In the quotation you provided, the pope speaks of altering structures within the Church to aid the Church's mission of evangelization. Things like collapsing Vatican dicasteries into new ones or amending canon law would fall into this category. The Church throughout her history has changed its structures, rules of life, and practices to further the divine work of saving souls. He says nothing of attempting to change the teachings of the Church or denying truths of the faith. What in that quotation leads you to conclude that the the pope is an "emissary of Lucifer"?Nicholas Senzhttps://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-7995623816141617980.post-48204798872345150702016-07-08T07:13:33.882-07:002016-07-08T07:13:33.882-07:00Good morning, Nicholas, I'm writing this c... Good morning, Nicholas,

 I'm writing this comment here, in response to your article posted today at "Crisis Magazine", entitled, "The Problem with the Unofficial Francis". You posit this question:

"Is this really what the pope thinks? Is this really what the pope is trying to do?"

 Allow me to quote Pope Bergoglio, known as Francis, from his very first encyclical, "Evangelii Guadium", to allow for your knowing precisely what Bergoglio thinks, from his very immanence, as to be found in the encyclical:

"I dream of a "missionary option", that is, a missionary impulse capable of transforming everything, so that the Church's customs, ways of doing things, times and schedules, language and structures can be suitably channeled for the evangelization of today's world rather than for her self-preservation...
 More than by fear of going astray, my hope is that we will be moved by the fear of remaining shut up within structures which give us a false sense of security, within rules which make us harsh judges, within habits which make us feel safe..."

 In your article, you quote the miscreant, Walter Cardinal Kasper, as saying this:

"Cardinal Walter Kasper told a German newspaper recently that Pope Francis doesn't intend to "preserve everything as it has been" in the Church,..."

 You now CLEARLY see that the malevolent Kasper, filled with rancor and malignity for Holy Mother Church, simply speaks the language of the "Holy" Father, essentially quoting him from "Evangelii Guadium". The Chair of Saint Peter, where rests the Vicar of Christ in this miserable world, is indeed young man, compromised, by an emissary of Lucifer. May Almighty God in His Three Divine Persons, have mercy on me for saying such things and on this Pope and his ilk, for the purpose of their eternal salvation and mine. In caritas.

 Mark
email@example.com


text:
It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
What is abnormal about a fear of Ouija boards? Those "devices" are insane, and definitely not a game. A friend of mine had his father play around with one once, and the table the board was on lifted off of the floor and went crashing into the wall. Honestly, just take a look at the evidence, and you will realize how playing around with such antics can lead towards some unforeseen consequences.
Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
Originally posted by Albertarocks
Originally posted by Donnie Darko
I don't have proof, it just seems like something's wrong with him mentally. Like how obsessed with certain things he is.
Like how much he likes Canadians.
[edit on 5-4-2009 by Donnie Darko]
Is there something about "liking Canadians" that makes a person mentally ill? I'd say "liking Canadians" is about as normal as you can get. Everybody likes Canadians, not just George Noory. I think George is fine!
LOL, yes, our Canuck friends are VERY likeable. In fact, they are quite peaceful as well. I have enjoyed every Aussie I have ever run into, including the friends I have made, and the same goes for Canadians.
I mean seriously, I think the only violence in Canada is the result of Chopping trees in half, and drilling for Maple Syrup
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Now you have convinced me. he likes Canadians? What more proof do you need that the man has been given a lobotomy or brain transplant by the CIA and reptiles? It's part of the grand scheme. They are trying to make everyone like Canadians by the year 2012, so Nibiru will come and end the planet.
I have plated my tinfoil hat with titanium. They won't get to me
Originally posted by Donnie Darko
I read a post somewhere that George Noory might have dementia.
Originally posted by Resonant Being
I've never been subjected to the constant conversation derailment and lack of basic understanding of the subject matter. Otherwise he seems like a really nice guy. Frankly, I'd rather have Ian Punnet every night. At least George Knapp is smart enough to hold a conversation.
[edit on 4/10/2009 by Resonant Being]
Originally posted by paxnatus
I love George's voice and have been an avid listener for over 11 years. He does one thing that absolutely drives me nuts. He believes in EVERYTHING!!!!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Rihanna Tells 'Extra' She's 'Living Her Truth'
"Extra's" Renee Bargh headed to Hawaii to talk with singer Rihanna about her acting debut in the action-packed summer movie "Battleship" -- and how the pop singer is playing by her own rules.
Rihanna also laughed about her mother's sense of humor regarding her daughter's rumored love life. "I took a picture with someone at the TIME 100 gala and I showed her, and she said, 'Oh I thought it was Ashton! I thought it was Mr. Kutcher!' She's funny. She's crazy. I love my mom."
As for her big debut in "Battleship," Rihanna still thinks it's "weird" being called an actress. "That doesn't even sound right. That's so, so weird to hear actress next to my name."
Rihanna plays a Navy cadet who must battle an armada of unknown origin in order to discover and thwart their destructive goals. The songstress said, "I never thought that I would have had these experiences, you know, shooting the weapons and all that cool stuff, especially not in my first movie."
On training for the role, the "We Found Love" singer said she paid "close attention" to her diet, but now, "I'm not careful with what I eat, because I'm trying to gain weight... just a little bit."
Rihanna is releasing a sexy new video, "Where Have You Been." She explained, "Nothing about this video is raunchy. It's all thematic, very artistic. There's more dancing than there been for a long time, so that should be exciting and new for my fans."
Check out Rihanna's kick-ass moves when "Battleship" docks in theatres May 18.


text:
The Broadway
241 Castle La WestBournemouthDorsetBH8 9TG
Bournemouth Station more details »
Categories: Public Houses, Bars & Inns
No ratings yet
Add a rating or review »
Add a rating or review »
Write a Review
Show Larger Map
Directions From Go
We do not currently have any additional information about this business. If you have been here, why not tell us a bit more about it by giving it a rating or adding a comment or review?
Read More »« Less
Similar Businesses
|Five Ways Hotel
 0.76 miles
|The Hollies
 0.81 miles
|Horse & Jockey
 0.87 miles
|The Talbot
 1.06 miles
Nearby Hotels
|Village Urban Resort Bournemouth
 1.73 miles
|Dean Park Inn
 1.79 miles
|Ingledene Guest House
 1.90 miles
|Parkside Guest House
 1.93 miles
Nearby Restaurants
|Breeze Lounge Bar and Restaurant
 1.41 miles
 0.51 miles
|Frankie & Benny's
 0.52 miles
|Pizza Hut
 0.55 miles


text:
Jane Levring Stam
"Jane's Joy" - Eulogy for Jane Stam Miner. (pdf file)
Given at Jane's Memorial Service, Feb. 15, 2014. Written and read alternately by her daughter-in-law Doris Perry Stam, widow of her son Chip, and Clara Stam Flores, Jane's granddaughter and daughter of Chip and Doris.
"More Precious
than Rubies"
Clara Stam has written a tribute to Jane Stam Miner on the occasion of her grandmother's 80th birthday, March 11, 2005
A Testimony
of Resurrection Life: by Jane L. Stam (MP3 audio)
Recorded on Easter Sunday, March 30, 1997, at the Chapel Hill Bible Church, Chapel Hill, NC
A Tribute to Jane Levring Stam
By Paul "Skip" Stam on his mother's 74th Birthday, March 11, 1999
This tribute is a free-form exposition of the character of one woman described in the 31st chapter of Proverbs. You may decide whether I have faithfully applied the text. This is a birthday present even though the only present she has ever asked has been "sweet children."
First, my grandmothers. My father's mother was Deana Bowman Stam, originally of Rochester, New York. She was Dutch and married my grandfather, Jacob, who was of Dutch and French Huguenot descent. They had seven children, the oldest of which was my father, Paul.
For a few months in 1962 I lived with these grandparents in Patterson, New Jersey, before the rest of my family moved there. My grandmother Deana was a wonderful cook and was amazingly tolerant of a 12-year-old grandchild. The sport of choice at my junior high school was "wallball" a cheap form of handball. I had never heard of it before but I was determined to learn. My grandmother allowed me to turn a basement room of the house into a practice room. The noise must have driven her crazy.
My mother's mother was Christine Whitten Levring. She was a housemother at Wheaton College for 17 years. When I was four years old I lived with her for a semester while attending Wheaton Kindergarten. She would send me in to play in the parlor if she thought her girls were getting too interested in their boyfriends.Her uncle was Col. James Duncan who served in the Civil War. Another distant cousin was Jamie Whitten, recently retired after 50 years in the U.S. House of Representatives. Later in life, "Gram" lived with our family. She was another wonderful cook but, more than that, took a real interest in our reading and activities.
My mom's father was Carl Levring, of Copenhagen, Denmark. When she was seven months old he died of the aftermath of malaria contracted during World War I while serving with the Army Medical Air Corps in Louisiana. She grew up in Jackson, Mississippi, where she had cousins who were like brothers and sisters to her -Jane Lauber and Billy Moore.
On Pearl Harbor Day she learned the cost of loyalty.
Mom was a member of a high school sorority whose membership was only by invitation. Any member could blackball a proposed member. My mother proposed her best friend several times for membership, but each time her friend was rejected. My mother discovered that the rejection was due to a polio-caused deformity to her friend's hand. Because of this "deformity" her friend was not good enough for the sorority girls.
On December 7, 1941 my mother resigned from her sorority and told them why, as a Christian, she could not participate any longer. She was not sure if she would have any social standing at her high school in the next semester but, thankfully, circumstances intervened. A few weeks later her mother was invited to become a housemother at Wheaton College in Illinois. Mom was able to finish her high school studies at the Wheaton Academy without the encumbrance of sororities or more Latin.
At Wheaton College she met my father, Paul. For eleven years she had attended Camp Ton-a-wondah in the North Carolina mountains near Hendersonville, the last seven years as a camp counselor. Their wedding on August 25, 1946, was held at the end of summer camp at Camp Ton-a-wondah with her campers as attendants. The camp director "gave her away." Her trainbearer was "Pookey" Haynes - a later director of the camp. The service might be described as early nature lovers' style, being scheduled outside, next to the water. A summer thunder storm moved things inside to the dining hall which was built over a waterfall. Between the waterfall and the rain on the tin roof it was hard to hear the "glee club" of 100 voices. One bridesmaid fainted. She was revived by a medical student, another cousin.
While at Wheaton College, Mom was in the Christian Service organization. She would travel to Cook County Hospital in Chicago to visit with patients without families.
My mother majored in zoology. She received the Bachelor of Arts in Science degree from Wheaton College in 1946. This had consequences. For many years she participated in the annual Audubon Society's bird count on New Years Day. This meant that her children suffered through more bird lectures and travelogues than should be allowed under ordinances governing child protection.
She was a collector of zoological curiosities. She would find cat and bird skulls and even snake skeletons on the road and would preserve them in our freezer. The glove compartment always had a few plastic bags in it, in case we came across the remains of an interesting animal along the roadside. She would boil the skulls down in a big pot and instruct us in basic anatomy. A guest who nosed about in the freezer could find the skull of an owl. This very day there is a plastic bag in her freezer with a copperhead in it.
Her lessons in zoology were not purely academic, but useful. She was a Red Cross swim instructor and taught "life saving." In those days mouth-to-mouth resuscitation was the preferred method. One day Karen's two pet ducks were swimming in a plastic pool in the back yard. Somehow they drowned while Mom was on the phone. What to do with the drowned ducks? My mother successfully performed mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.
After college days my parents moved to Princeton, New Jersey, where my father was in graduate school. My mother worked in a lab for a professor trying to replicate the origins of life in a test tube. One day my mother and father attended a lecture by the nuclear physicist, Robert Oppenheimer. The lecture was also attended by Albert Einstein. After the lecture Dr. Einstein spoke to my parents and the subject of that comment has been a matter of family controversy ever since. One version is that, in a crowded stairway after the lecture, he stepped on my mother's foot and said "Excuse me."
After the days at Princeton in 1950 my parents moved to Danville, Virginia, to a house on Marshall Terrace. At the end of the street there was an artillery piece, a war relic. My mother organized patriotic parades for July 4th dressing up the children of the neighborhood in costumes. My parents also dug a swimming pool in the backyard. This was not the modern version with pumps, filters and recirculated water. Instead they filled the pool up with hoses, kept covers over it to keep out the leaves and used a siphon to drain it every Saturday night onto the neighbor's garden. My mother taught dozens of neighborhood children how to swim.
In 1956 we moved to Greensboro, North Carolina, where we lived for six years. It seemed to me that my mother was the chief ring-leader of everything important happening in town. She was a Girl Scout leader and the leader of the girl's high school mission group of our church. These groups met weekly at our home. The Girl Scout Group practiced on my brothers for the childcare scout merit badge. Mom's three young sons (Skip, Chip and Billy as well as our sister, Karen) got a full dose of "girl talk."
Because my father was often away from home on business for several days at a time my mother had to be a disciplinarian at home. I have a theory that discipline mostly easily remembered is that which is unjust or undeserved. While I remembered being well restricted I do not actually remember any injustice from her ever. I do remember the taste of soap in my mouth as her cure for my improper talk.
When my father was away Mom would pile all the children, including the neighbors, into the station wagon and would take us camping in the state parks. That was pure joy.
Jane was a great athlete. At Camp Ton-a-wondah she had learned all sports. There she taught swimming and fencing. She was on the basketball team in high school and on the tennis team at Wheaton College. She taught all of her kids to play sports but, more importantly, she played with us whether swimming, tennis, kickball, camping, or archery. She was a competitor. She was such a good tennis teacher that in the 1970s she began teaching professionally. She taught over three thousand (mostly in Greensboro) how to play tennis. She still has students and can soundly beat all of her grandchildren (except perhaps Michael or Martin).
One of her dreams was to build a home around a tennis court. She lived in squalor in a townhome from 1968 to 1982 on a month to month basis always planning to build her dream house at Carlson Farms. It never happened. So after Dad died in 1990 she finally built her tennis court, and then her basketball court. As a founder of Raspberry Ridge String Camp she has blessed the lives of hundreds of children from Chapel Hill and Durham. She is known for two unique athletic techniques. Before taking a basketball set shot she always licks her fingers. In tennis doubles her killer drop shot is the specialty of the court.
She is a constant reader. She liked to read aloud to my father and to her children and liked to be read to. She taught us hundreds of Bible verses and poems which we competed to say as fast as we could. One by Isaac Watts was especially helpful to us.
Whatever brawls disturb the street,
There should be peace at home;
Where sisters dwell and brothers meet,
Quarrels should never come.
Birds in their little nests agree;
And 'tis a shameful sight
When children of one family
Fall out, and chide and fight.
My mother never wanted recognition as a cook. She often talked about the burned beans, or the scorched toast but the truth is what she served was always delicious. She has had a garden, which she tends herself. Her feasts from the garden are elegant. Sewing, mending and washing were her specialty. Go to her house with soiled or ragged clothes and she will fix them on the spot. She always knows the best place to buy clothes to save a fortune. The only reservation I would make would be her penchant for dressing her boys up in identical suits. The "itchy brothers" (Brooks Brothers wool suits) combination was an exemplar. She would use experimental textiles as well. Since my father was the head of research for large textile companies he would bring home samples of prototype textiles for the family to try out.
From 1962 - 1969 my parents lived in New Jersey again- this time not in Princeton but in northern (Kinnelon) New Jersey. This was in the days when the South was not held in the highest esteem by Yankees. My mother's accent was distinct. She found a home in New Jersey of true southern architecture - Smoke Rise - built like a plantation house. It was reputedly a stop on the "Underground Railroad." She turned it into a gem in the muddy north as well as a center of hospitality.
My mother is protective of her daughters-in-law (Dottie, Doris and Lynn) but without ceremony. One night she was treating them to a candlelight dessert of raspberries/blackberries with ice cream. Doris felt something a little crunchy but did not say anything. Getting a little more light on the subject Dottie saw that one of the crunchy things was still moving - a Japanese beetle.
Mom is an internationalist. Her foreign travels have only included Europe a few times and a recent trip to New Testament sites in Greece and Turkey, but her friends from around the world are counted in the hundreds - students, missionaries and cousins.
Her Chinese friends are her special interest. She and my father befriended dozens (maybe hundreds) of Chinese students in Chapel Hill. For years she has taught southern conversational English to students and their families but shared friendship and the gospel of Jesus Christ as well. On one Wednesday each month, she hosts the World Serious, an informal but informative time for friends to learn about Christian mission activities around the world.
Mom is evangelistic. She has been a counselor with the Billy Graham Crusade in New York City and at the Wheaton Center at Wheaton College. With the Good News Clubs in Greensboro and on hundreds of other occasions she has always been ready to share her faith. For many years she studied and enjoyed Christian Womens Club and Bible Study Fellowship.
One of her aunts, Margaret Quattlebaum of Columbia, South Carolina, was very smart but truly crazy. Although she owned her own home she was paranoid against electricity and funeral homes and would get her food from others' discards. For decades she would not let anyone in the family help her. In her very old age she finally let my mother into her life because they had been friends when my mom was a young girl in Marg's wedding. She always called my mother "Baby Jane." First she let my mother provide food for her. Later she allowed Billy, Mom and Hank Fordham to make some basic repairs (including a roof) to her house. Finally when she fell and thought she had broken her leg she allowed my mother to carry her to our home in Greensboro to care for her. Hundreds of others have been recipients of my mother's mercy.
Her children rise up and call her blessed.


text:
What kind of a job do you think Steve is doing at Apple?
I think that he is doing a good job of belt tightening first, getting the company healthy, and then moving forward from there. Apple is doing more than any other company to advance what computers are.
A couple of my friends and I have been wondering where exactly did the Apple logo come from, and why is the Apple somewhat bitten? A friend said that the logo is in memory of a famous man who committed suicide by poisoning his Apple and thus only taking one bite. He was found with the apple at his nightstand. Is this true and why the name Apple?
Steve and I wanted a color logo with the Apple theme and the Regis McKinna agency, which we were just hiring, came up with it. Steve Jobs rearranged the colors with the darker blue at the bottom and lighter green at the top, rather than keeping them in rainbow order.
The guy who committed suicide as you say was an Apple manager. Just kidding.
I never heard any reason for the name other than it sounded good and interesting. Steve Jobs came up with it. He was into natural foods and things at the time, and Apple is a healthy name.
I also knew when Gates gave Steve that money a few years back that it had a bigger meaning then Gates just saying that this was to keep compitetion in the OS market. Maybe...and I say this with sarcasim, maybe somewhere in the back of Gates mind he knows he did wrong I was trying to make it right. But at the same time he was still looking out for his best interest. Now that Microsoft and Apple have this new relationship, what does this really mean? To see them as friends after seeing the movie, seem to be just a front to the consumer.
Gates didn't give Steve (or Apple) any money. He traded a certain amount of money for stock that was worth that amount as part of a huge legal settlement for claims that Microsoft infringed on Apple's intellectual property (patents and the like). The reason for Apple wanting the investment was for the PR and how folks like yourself would perceive it. The whole truth was kept from the public for this reason.
Could you give me some good advice?
Do what you really love to do. Do it hard and try to be the best you possibly can. Forego a lot of other things in life, particularly things that can make your interest less serious. Know that you don't have to argue with people and prove every point, you can just know that your own thinking is right and good by your own standards. You can just walk away from someone that doesn't hear you or see things your way, and you can be polite and don't have to stoop to saying bad things about others. Your victory is in knowing that your own brain is good and that you know it even if others don't. Be forgiving. When others are bad to you, be good to them. The internal peace and happiness that being a good person brings will get you further in all other aspects of your life.
I also am a hacker but with the old meaning of the word...i like to explore all systems...especially unix-liked...I run Linux on my pc 'cause windows :]
You're in with the right sort of people today.
I read that Steve Jobs became an egoist but you stayed as you were...
I think that Steve is level headed. His reputation for being an egotist is probably not because he sees his own greatness. That probably helps him do the things that make him great with enough confidence that he succeeds a lot. It's probably more due to the way he has treated others as though they are worth very little and not as great as he. I had a very strong head, with good philosophies that I believed in deeply. I knew who I was and what I wanted from life and what I wanted to be. It sounds unbelievable but it's true and I'm very lucky for it. I don't do what others think I should, I stick to being who I want to be. That's the reason I seem that way...Woz
I want to thank you for all the things you brought us ...
I know that you want to thank all the people of the world that helped these computer things come along, but thank you for considering me as a symbol of that...Woz
After accumulating lots of knowledge on you and Steve in the beginning of Apple, I've come to the conclusion that you should be more credited than you are. I mean, you're the one who created the Apple 1. You're the one who made it all work, and work inexpensively, something that no other individual or person could do. So why aren't you credited with being a genius or something?
The world tends to remember those who are business leaders over engineers and scientists. Newspapers and magazines don't as much have current material to write in which they can use my name, but they have lots of current things to say about many others.
I am a student representative on my high school's technology committee. Based on your experience, what advice can you give to the committee and to teachers in general about computers in schools?
First, I'd advise you to have some clear ideas of what your purpose is and what you want to achieve. This should be in terms of what characteristics of the schools and students you want to promote. Let's call it a mission statement. Educators and Administrators have to be included in forming this statement. It should have about a dozen or so key points ('acedemic excellence' might be one) and should be written. Perhaps your school already has a mission statement to work from. From that you can derive technical goals for your committee. When questions arise (platforms, access, services) you can answer those questions (sometimes) by looking at your overall mission statement.
You may want to consider the aspect of plurality and of minority platforms. It may be important that mixtures of platform be elevated so as not to give students experience with only on. This may override other efficiencies, depending on your mission statement.
My school district is very worried about students going to porn sites. As a result, the security is so tight that students feel like they can't even use the school's computers. What do you think about this?
Personally, I believe that students learn more and faster when educated rather than restricted. But I believe that these things should be the choice of each individual parent. That generally leaves schools no choice, especially after parents complain. If all students have to log in then you could possibly 'record' access to such sites, using the protective server software, and report it to parents. A better approach might be to make a contract with the students that they are given more privileges than at most schools as long as they don't do certain things. In my own classes, for example, I've always put out the goal of accessing other student's computers over the network to have fun, even to mess up the computer a bit. But I make the deal that they can never touch another's computer directly, only over the network, and that any changes can be undone easily. In 8 years my students have never violated this, but they do have a close relationship with me.
- How would you like people to think of you 50 years from now?
- If possible, please send some pictures of yourself that I can put in the interview. I'll post everything that you send me.
- Woz, you really have no idea what this means to me. If I'm ever interviewed and someone asks me "Who made the biggest impact on your life?", I'm going to say Steve Wozniak without hesitation. Your interview is the best present anyone has ever given me.
- That I was a great engineer and a free thinking person about my designs and that I cared about people too much to go for the politics of business.
- I'm a bit short here, but you can grab pictures from my web site, woz.org
- Thank you very much and Happy New Year (in a few hours for myself).


text:
Amtrak & Metrolink Passenger Trains
Through Fullerton, California
Schedules of Amtrak and Metrolink passenger trains serving the Fullerton Santa Fe Depot.
Schedules based upon Amtrak's Spring/Summer 2002 (April 29 & May 25, 2002)
and Metrolink's Spring/Summer 2002 (May 6, 2002) schedule changes.
Click Here For A More Detailed Version Of This Schedule.
Click Here for more Fullerton Station info!


text:
The Well Community
The Well Community serves alongside those who struggle with mental illness – offering hope & healing through the power of faith, friendship & best-practice interventions. Founded in 2002, the Well Community ("the Well") is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. What started as a simple, church outreach to a handful of people has grown into a flourishing, holistic ministry among adults recovering from serious mental illness. The Well's philosophy of care, relational interventions, and holistic rehabilitation combine to make a significant impact upon those we are called to serve.


text:
This new trailer for the series gives us a little more than the last one, expanding on a key piece of premise information hinted at in the previous shorter teaser.
Halle Berry's stars in CBS' new Steven Spielberg-produced futuristic thriller series Extant, which debuts on Wednesday, July 2, at 9/8c.
The series, as we've known so far, will center on a female astronaut trying to reconnect with her family, after she returns home after a year in space. Her experiences lead to events that ultimately change the course of human history. And the key piece of information the below new teaser expands on is that it she's carrying what is likely an alien baby (or something), which she brings back with her to earth.
Louis Gossett Jr. will play her good-natured but unreliable father – a retired doctor living out his last years in an isolated community, which keeps him out of touch with the rest of the world, including his daughter and her family.
Goran Visnjic, Grace Gummer, Camryn Manheim and Michael O'Neill will also star in Extant.
The script was penned by Mickey Fisher, who will executive produce alongside Spielberg, Greg Walker, Brooklyn Weaver, Justin Falvey and Darryl Frank.
Watch the new trailer for Extant below:
Sign Up: Stay on top of the latest breaking film and TV news! Sign up for our Email Newsletters here.


text:
Thursday, 10 January 2013
22 comments:
Hehe that's so cool! I have a black cat hat too but the ears a lot pointier :PReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks! High five on having a cat hat too :DDelete
omg that's so cute!! :) I can knit too but at very beginner levels hahaReplyDeleteReplies
Thank you Sheri~ I'd say this hat's difficulty level is easy so you could try it one day :3Delete
That's such a cute hat! You are awesome for making your own too!ReplyDeleteReplies
Glad you like it! I do feel quite proud of make it. It's one of the few DIY projects that I actually complete and is wearable :LDelete
sooo adorable!! i can't believe you made that, it's amazing! (:ReplyDelete
fashionlei styledReplies
Thank you haha :)Delete
cute kitty hatReplyDeleteReplies
Glad you like it!Delete
OMG so cute!!! You're so creative! I couldn't even sew a button right.ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks! And haha awww bless x'DDelete
you.... KNIT THAT???? *_* HOW THE-- Why do I lack such feminine qualities as knitting!?!?!? WHY AM I SO CRAFT-RELATEDLY INEPT!?!? o_o I'm sure if you made a business out of this it would sell like hotcakes. Or rather cat-cakes. I have no idea what I'm saying anymore x_x All I know is that I want one haha. Ada = Jelly.ReplyDelete
BTW, I've nominated you for a Liebester Award. It's actually just a tag, and I'm pretty sure you may have received it before, but what the heck. TAG, I guess lol.
Check it out here: http://ada-nikki.blogspot.com/2013/01/liebster-award-and-giveaway-alert.htmlReplies
Hahaa I do have plans to open a webstore one day :D After all, I am studying Textiles!Delete
Thank you so much for the nomination girl!! I've actually done it before but I guess it doesn't hurt to do the tag again c:
woah super good effort! Look so cute :DReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks! Tbh I'm quite proud of myself! A lot of the times I start making something and never finish them ^^"Delete
ah so cute! :3ReplyDelete
I really want to be able to knit too >_< hahaReplies
Glad you like it! It's quite easy once you get the hang of it so definitely give it a go when you can :DDelete
Hi there,ReplyDelete
How are you? I'm continually inspired through beauty, fashion, music and design. this is the link please follow my blog www.wengie.com
thank you.Replies
Will have to give your blog a visit to see :pDelete
so cute! would you like to follow each other? let me know!ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks! Will have to check out your blog!!Delete
Feel free to drop me a comment; it makes me happy :D
I try to reply to all comments so don't forget to check back!