Saturday, November 20, 2004

Arafat, another anti-Semite is gone.

For Lincoln,

"Arafat's undisclosed illness is well-known, but has been kept under wraps by the mainstream media." Speaking of media bias, here's a question you won't hear in our bigpapers or on network TV: Does Yasser Arafat have AIDS?" asks Frum, who also writes for the National Post." We know he has a blood disease that is depressing his immune system.We know that he has suddenly dropped considerable weight -- possibly as much as one-third of all his body weight. We know that he is suffering intermittent mental dysfunction. What does this sound like?"

Earlier, John Loftus told John Batchelor on ABC radio on October 26that Arafat is dying from AIDS. Loftus said the CIA has known thisabout Arafat for quite awhile and that as a result the US has encouraged Sharon not to take Arafat out because the US has known Arafat was about done. It was deemed better to have Arafat discredited as a homosexual. Although homosexuality is rife in the Arab world, it is at least officially considered a sin and a crime, and regarded--especially in fundamentalist circles--as a mark of great shame and depravity.
In his memoirs "Red Horizons," Pacepa relates a conversation in 1978 with Constantin Munteaunu, a general assigned to teach Arafat and thePLO techniques to deceive the West into granting the organization recognition."I just called the microphone monitoring center to ask about the'Fedayee,'" Arafat's code name, explained Munteaunu. "After the meeting with the Comrade, he went directly to the guest house and had dinner. At this very moment, the 'Fedayee' is in his bedroom making love to his bodyguard. The one I knew was his latest lover. He's playing tiger again. The officer monitoring his microphones connected me live with the bedroom[......]

Munteaunu continued: "I've never before seen so much cleverness, blood and filth all together in one man." Munteaunu, wrote Pacepa, spent months pulling together secret reports from Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian intelligence agencies as well as Romanian files." I used to think I knew just about everything there was to know about Rahman al-Qudwa," Arafat's real name, "about the construction engineer who made a fortune in Kuwait, about the passionate collector of racing cars, about Abu Amman," Arafat's nom de guerre, "and about my friend Yasser, with all his hysterics," explained Munteaunu, handing Pacepahis final report on the PLO leader. "But I've got to admit that I didn't really know anything about him." Pacepa wrote: 'The report was indeed an incredible account of fanaticism, of devotion to his cause, of tangled oriental political maneuvers, of lies, of embezzled PLO funds deposited in Swiss banks, and of homosexual relationships, beginning with his teacher when he was a teenager and ending with his current bodyguards. After reading the report, I felt a compulsion to take a shower whenever I had been kissed by Arafat, or even just shaken his hand.'"
(Hospital concealment strengthens suspicion:
Arafat died of AIDS
November 11, 2004)

Compare with,
'Most loathsome of all is the reeking miasma of furtive, unnatural sexuality that fills and fouls the whole atmosphere around him, like an evil emanation. Nother [sic] in this environment is straightforward. Surreptitious relationships, substitutes and symbols, false sentiments and secret lusts - nothing in this man's surroundings is natural and genuine, nothing has the openness of a natural instinct.'0ne of Hitler's reactions which is carefully hidden from the public is his love for pornography."
(A Psychological Analysis of Adolph Hitler, His Life and Legend
Walter C. Langer
Office of Strategic Services Washington, D.C.)

Perhaps one of these days a man who has a stygian stench about him will succeed in his anti-Semitism. Who can say? What is it that they try to keep hidden? What is the pattern of being that lurks there? Demonology, it seems to be a lost art. Maybe it was lost by happenstance.

Sometimes to have a chance in a dance you have to take a chance and then make Chance dance. Then Happenstance has to take a stance in the dance.

So take a chance....


Anonymous said...


I am curious. What are your thoughts--if any--about the timeframe for the end of time? (Sorry this is off topic.)


mynym said...

(Well, I went off topic. May be disjointed....)

A time of ending is worth thinking about as a thought experiment but not to worry about, I suppose.

So then, the main timeframe in the Bible and other ancient stories that bear the same pattern (the most ancient I know of being a Summerian text about a dying god) is three days, three days, three days.

What is with the three days? That is the repeating pattern.

So is the pattern of time in dog years, human years or God years? I kid, I kid! Or do I?

"With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."

And, "On that day, you will surely die." On that "day"? Then, Adam lives for another 900 years? I am not a young earth creationist, by the way. There are symbols and so on to how a writer writes. Literalism vs. the symbolic or what is best, a layer of meaning in which the two combine. That is best.

Before someone thinks that the fact that the symbolic is there dissolves the meaning of a text, it does not.

Look at the narrative and how many different ways it can go. The Maker created the heavens and the Earth.... vs. "The maker in the heavens named Orion formed the Earth with his hand. Look, look up in the sky, there he is!"

If I were an ancient person going to make something up, that's what I would have done. Then, just look in the sky! Or, say that you are God and all the ladies are supposed to have sex with you. That was done too.

"The big turtle in the sky, it pooped out the earth. And just look, there it is!"

Or my favorite,
"The mommy Moon, she birthed the Earth."

You think I'm kidding? Well, you should read some ancient narratives. There are many ways to screw up an accurate cosmology, even doing so symbolically too. There is the simple elegance of the Bible that has too much explanatory power dealing with the way people think about relationships between animal and human, male and female, etc.

How did such accuracy get there if some ignorant less evolved goat herders made it all up?

Did Moses go around studying all the animals after he studied cosmology and psychology too? And so on and on...for he must have learned a lot somehow to write such a vast story. Different peoples, different nations coming and going, different religions, etc., even if you do not accept the miracles all else seems to be reliable. Most of the "big" religions trace back to this text and oral tradition, some by imitating, others by accepting it as true.

You still will tell a story like so, "At sunrise today...." But someone could say that the Sun did not "rise," instead the Earth revolved around the Sun and also the galaxy is....

Wrong, it is wrong to write off a story like that, ancient or no. You can still see the communication is actually clear and true, symbolically. The Sun DID rise, in the sky, relative to human observation of it. You can be right symbolically and wrong symbolically, just as you can be empirically.

Now people want to be all empirical, is all.

Can you see the point? Then, the reader looks around them for a sharp pointy object next to their desk... No, the communication is clear about a symbolic/metaphoric "invisible" point that is seen by insight. So is this sort of faith really so difficult to understand and to believe? Atheists already make great use of it, you see. You can still be right and wrong about it as a matter of truth and debate within the context of insight, the invisible.

Best guess on the topic given the pattern of the symbolic, three thousand of human years until something or other happens and people get their answers. This could be right, could be wrong. And is the calendar right anyway? A lot of people thought something or other would happen in the year 2000. I would not worry about the year 3000 so much. For what are you going to do? How will you live differently? If there is a difference then what does that say about how you are living now?

If the year 3000 is true then I will most likely not quite live to see it! But who can say, anyway?

All I can say with certainty is that everything is ending, planet's orbits go off a little more and so on. So these times are ending times by any measure, as it is written in Nature, as it is written in the Bible.

Anonymous said...

"...three days, three days, three days."

I find this 'pattern' interesting too. I am beginning to formulate a theory.

"I am not a young earth creationist, by the way."

What is the position that you take?

As to the rest of your post, it will take me some time to digest. I'll get back to you.


Anonymous said...

Interesting to think about time, literal earth time,(dog year time :-)), God's time, eternity...awesome.

When God said to Adam, "...for when you eat of it you will surely die", he did die in the sense of spiritual death. He separated himself from perfect fellowship and communion with God and knew, really knew experientially, what sin was. And so the promise of a Savior is given to rescue mankind. Perhaps I misunderstood the reasoning or the way you used it. If so, enlighten me :-)


mynym said...

"What is the position that you take?"

The fact that space-time and matter seem to trace back to a point of Creation or "Big Bang" throws things off. Once you say that time itself is created and it is proven relative to the speed of light, while God says "Let there be light..." (Plus the talk of the Maker's time-frame being totally different too.) and then perhaps time comes to be, which is relational between things. This is why it is referred to as space-time. It is relational, relative. Rather than continue here, maybe I'll cite a book on this sometime.

Once you look at these sorts of things then the issue of time gets strange. If the evidence and theories for now seem sound and they do, then I see no reason to reject them.

It is not like biology in which the evidence and theories may as well be excrement. I.e., it is difficult to fathom how anyone could actually be mentally retarded enough to believe them.

"As to the rest of your post, it will take me some time to digest."

It's a bit of a hodge podge because I have not thought about "end times" that much.

These are the times of ending that seem to be leading to an ending of this time. Besides that, a lot of people are dying and their time is up. For that is their own ending of this time. Everyone born into a dying Cosmos is in their own end times.

If you get a theory going, post it here. Maybe we can even disagree about it.

mynym said...

"...for when you eat of it you will surely die", he did die in the sense of spiritual death."

Yeah, I forgot about that. Well, not to mention the fact that it can be as, "Do not eat of it or you will surely begin dying...since the spiritual death will manifest out."

Actually, the NIV just says, "...but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

I must have been thinking of another version that mentions "day." Hopefully....I wonder if any version says that. Anyway, it does not matter that much.

I blame Carl for springing a big question like that on me. It is fun to shift the blame.