The Englishman Parkinson

As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.

I found this quote about an American critic named Parkinson from the 18th century interesting.




Parkinson was an Englishman, of great narrowness of mind, who came out here to be a farmer, failed, and went home to write a book in denunciation of the country. America never had a more hostile critic.

According to this profound observer, there was no good land in America, and no possibility of successful agriculture. The horses were bad, the cattle were bad, and sheep-raising was impossible. There was no game, the fish and oysters were poor and watery, and no one could ever hope in this wretchedly barren land for either wealth or comfort.

It was a country fit only for the reception of convicts, and the cast-off mistress of an Englishman made a good wife for an American.

Henry Cabot Lodge


I wonder sometime why Providence does not smile on people and they take it personal in it must be an entire nation which is the problem as they possibly could not be.

That Obama creation in changing America into his dreams of Obama is a telling point. He could not be born American, so therefore there must be something wrong with America as he peered at it from his Indonesian nativity.

It is a fascinating psychopathy that with fertile lands of the occupation, myriads of the British existed as peasants and in poverty, when all they had to do was come to Canada, Australia, Africa or Amerida and fight for possession as the Pilgrims and Jamestown colonies did and success would come.

The amusement of all of this is Parkinson actually appeared with a letter of introduction at Mount Vernon and was with George Washington apparently with enough time to come to this conclusion.


"The general lent him money. He was at least grateful, and these are his last words as to Washington:

— "To me he appeared a mild, friendly man, in company rather reserved, in private speaking with candor. His behavior to me was such that I shall ever revere his name.

"General Washington lived a great man, and died the same.

"I am of opinion that the general never knowingly did anything wrong, but did to all men as he would they should do to him."

Henry Cabot Lodge



It is interesting that Parkinson while hating America with a passion, was a man who loved George Washington.


I do not believe I have ever heard Barack Hussein Obama ever say he was grateful to America, was thankful for any American or that upon meeting Teddy Kennedy he said that Ted had knowingly done anything wrong, and treated others as Teddy would expect to be treated.


nuff said


agtG

The Exodus of 1517 AD

I wonder at the work of God through man, and how the minions of satan in religion and in state, have for 500 years blinded the world to the one man God raised up as a Spiritual Moses to demand the world let His people go.

That is what is most interesting in this, in just as Jesus had to arrive to stop the very zealous Saul of Tarsus from destroying the Church which Jesus had planted, and on the road to Damascus Saul became St. Paul, the great Christian Evangelist to the world, there was necessary emancipation of Christians from the church of Rome in the Vatican in a middle age Exodus, even greater than the first Exodus of the Israelite peoples out of Egypt by Moses.

For the record, the Germans for the most part who were freed from the Vatican and state, were exiles from Israel having moved with the other lost 10 tribes through Asia and Europe, would be visited again by God to provide them an Exodus from the unHoly Roman Empire which was keeping them from the Gospel.

This reality must not be lost as the minions of satan have deliberately covered this up. Some factions in Protestantism in jealousy from the English or other Israelite tribes of different languages have joined in censoring all information on the greatest event in Chrisitianity since the Resurrection of Christ.
Not even the rising up of Joan of Arc to save France from extermination in the Reubenites is akin to the Exodus of Martin Luther.

There are going to be three Exoduses. Two are spoken of in the Bible. The first came from Moses arisen by God in leading the children of Israel from Egyptian bondage to the Promised Land.
The second came in the rising up of Martin Luther to lead the children of Israel scattered then in European borders from the bondage of the Vatican and the Empire which controlled that Continent. This was not recorded in the Bible, but it was of necessity in the majority of those Germans, French, Lowlanders, Scandinavians, English, Scott and Irish were Josephite in his son Mannaseh, who were destined to continue their migration west to what would become America as was promised by God, for the use of that immense wealth to Evangelize the world.
The third will appear in the Exodus led by Jesus the Christ when the Lord having marked His chosen will call them to come out of the world as His people, for the establishment of His 1000 year reign.

This is all exclusive here, and has never been taught before. The greatest human event in history from the time of Jesus rising from the dead, was the rising up of Martin Luther and the establishment of the Lutheran sects from Calvinists to Hugeunots. This was the Exodus which moved England to her become by God the British Empire of Protestants, who breaking away in that King James Bible, became the Pilgrim Reformists of the New World in America.

There would not be Christianity in this world if not for God working through Martin Luther. He was a remarkable man who was threatened with excommunication and death by the Vatican and State. He was an Inspired man of God who caused the Vatican to release their own new version translation, as Luther had translated the Bible into German which then was the court of King James translating that Bible into English for the Christians of the world.

I find it amazing that one man could translate the entire Bible and that was not the end of it, for the documents assembled in the work this man did, is as equal to the work of St. Paul.


"THE AUTHOR of our catechism was Dr. Martin Luther (b. 1483, d. 1546), the great Reformer, through whom God effected the Reformation of the Church, in the sixteenth century. He began the Reformation with his Ninety-five Theses against the sale of indulgences, contended against the many errors and abuses that had crept into the Church, and preached and taught the pure truth of the Gospel, until his death. (Ninety-five Theses, 1517; Translation of the Bible into German, 1522-34; Larger and Smaller Catechisms, 1529; Augsburg Confession adopted 1530.)"

Joseph Stump. An Explanation of Luther's Small Catechism


The Martin Luther led Exodus of 1517 AD in the year of our Lord, the greatest event upon which human history was built for the modern era now squandered to spiritual enslavement again.




agtG

The Eating of Dog and Horse

As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter........


I realize a great deal what people will do when hungry, but there is a most interesting reality in a difference between Americans, French and English, and that is a starving American would starve in almost every case on the western fronteir rather than eat a horse, mule or dog.
WHile on the contrary, the French, English and Indians would kill their own animals and eat them without a qualm.


We were therefore compelled to kill one of the horses for food.

Gabriel Franchere. Narrative of a Voyage to the Northwest Coast of America in the years 1811, 1812, 1813, and 1814 or the First American Settlement on the Pacific


When the British seized the fort of Astoria founded by John Jacob Astor in Washington country in the War of 1812, the Americans were aghast to see the Union Jack flying over their property. The French though in Mssr Franchere removed themselves with the English and while having firearms, made a constant trade with the Shoshoe for dozens of dogs and horses which is what they ate in quantity.
At one point this group had 40 dogs and ate them all in a few days as there was no rationing nor apparent soup to make the dog last.

The Modoc Indians of the same Washington region in their Lava Beds uprising, also ate mules and horses which they captured.

It was a rare thing thogh for Americans ever to resort to such things. In the Creek War of the same period the entire Jackson army was starving, and one of the officers led forth his horse and killed it to be eaten, but that was a completely rare event, as in the George Custer era, the starving Troopers would rather vomit in most cases rather than eat a horse, and certainly not a mule.

As stated I realize that people get hungry. These Canadian English literally boiled and ate their beaver pelts, in what would be the leather, having barely any food value. In like manner, they disdained the Indians who ate boiled moss which became a sort of black paste and some thought not too bad tasting, but the French writer thought it tasted like soap.

It is fascinating what people will do when hungry. Two American trappers starving, divided their last flour, and the one who had a dog refused to eat it, and a great fight took place in which the trappers almost killed each other.
The one with the dog left, and soon found the other tracking them in the snow, as the intent was to kill the dog and probably the trapper.
The trapper with the dog waited in ambuscade and killed the would be dog killler.

There was Mountain Phil, a rather psychotic person who killed and ate his squaw and Liver Eatin' Johnson who apparently got the name for eating Indian livers, but that seems what is an American thing. They would not eat dogs or horses if they could help it, but would resort to eating Indians if they were unbalanced.

The French, Indians and English though dined upon man's best friend and best transportation at the first hint of no venison in camp.

These things are fascinating to me, as these were all Israelitish peoples, and it was the Americans who with apparent Christian morals refused to take the steps as a whole when starving in eating their property. They adhered to the Old Testament Laws of what was clean and unclean.

Human psychology is a diverse thing. Some in the Donner Party ate their corpses and horses to survive, so exceptions to the rules do apply, but in toto, the Americans did so as last resort and the others seemed to jump feet first when the last salt pork was in the bag.

nuff said



agtG

The Elephant Gun

As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.......

I enjoy history and the interesting things of life. It is why I dislike all modern writers in they have not one whit of comprehension in the necessities of life. Jerome Corsi could not more bile a kettle of tea in the Canada bush no more than Michael Savage could relate how best to kill an elephant while straining river sand through his teeth drinking coffee.

I have a great appreciation for those who have experienced actual life. The passing of V. M. Starr was a great loss in his knowledge of the muzzleloading shotgun. His treatise still found online concerning 11 gauge shotguns in their loading and use are some of the best paragraphs around.

So when I come across things of interest they are interesting in Sir Samuel Baker, while blasting away at Asian elephants and Asian stags, he noted that a 10 bore was all the rifle anyone would require. His loading was the interesting part in he loaded 6 drachms of English powder for his elephant gun charge and four for the stags.
A drachm is an English unit of measurement of 1/8 ounce. So he had 3/4's of an ounce of black powder for elephants or 360 grains of powder as a drachm is 60 grain dry measure. This will not mean a fiddle without a bow to you, but it does to me as this is my weave, and as this progresses it will make more sense for the stag load would be 4 drachms or 240 grains of powder.

English powder was of a different blend than American powders. The Americans powder burned hot and dry, while the English powders burned hot and wet, meaning the fowling was less hard. This process also produced a better transfer of energy and more generated energy for hunting or war.

The modern deer loading would in blackpowder be in a 50 caliber gun, which is much smaller than the 10 bore in size, about 100 grains of powder.

In loadings though for black powder, a square load was attempted in meaning that the size of the powder charge matched the size of the shot or bullet charge, not by weight, but by volume.
It is why shotguns in the modern 28, 16, 12 and 10 shoot well in their shot charges match well with the powder charges, so the patterns do not blow or in meaning, the patterns are not disrupted by too much speed causing individual pellets to fly off on their own out of the pattern.

There are those life saving experiences too in simply keeping the gun loaded correctly in making certain the percussion caps are in a carrier and not the pocket as the tropical heat would neutralize the explosive effect of the caps.
Powder was to be dried in the sun before loading, and all lumps shaken out or they would lodge in the loading flask and this would be a deadly problem in having a wounded elephant rising to kill you, and your rising with a gun with no powder in it.

This I found interesting in the patches were not bed ticking as the Americans utilized, but were of silk which had soaked in a 1 part hogs lard to 2 parts beeswax, and free from salt. Using only lard would melt out in the heat and of course the salt would rust the firearm, and blackpowder has enough problems with corrosion once fired.
Silk was not cut like linen, and it also had the advantage of being thinner to ram the bullet home easier to seat it on the powder. The entire purpose of the patches is to form a gas seal, so the full force of the burning powder is transfered to the bullet being projected down the rifle barrel. It also forms the buffer against the rifling so the lead ball is not engaged directly upon the lands of the rifle which spin the ball for stability in flight.

The Americans always utilized a hardening mixture of tin in one part to 7 to 10 in lead, but Sir Samuel has a most interesting discourse on this for elephant hunting. I post the quote:


"All balls should be made of pure lead, without any hardening mixture. It was formerly the fashion to use zinc balls, and lead with a mixture of tin, etc., in elephant-shooting. This was not only unnecessary, but the balls, from a loss of weight by admixture with lighter metals, lost force in a proportionate degree. Lead may be a soft metal, but it is much harder than any animal's skull, and if a tallow candle can be shot through a deal board, surely a leaden bullet is hard enough for an elephant's head."

Sir Samuel White Baker

Granted modern blackpowder firearms use not patches and balls, but maxi balls with lube in the base of the bullet for the seal as the lead skirt expands, but his experiences are not to be lost as they are something not to be lost to antiquity.

He conducted experiments in pure lead, zinc mixtures, pure zinc and pure tin, but nothing with a tin zinc mixture, and found in shoothing through iron, the lead was superior and zinc had no effect at all.
His greatest penetration was with what would become the future in a steel tipped conical bullet.

In that case, he was shooting a rifle with 240 grains of powder and it the bullet went through 14 inches of elm planks. Such is the full metal jacket or steel bullet of the military. It penetrates well, but has no transfer of power for killing effect.

As a historical note, the above gun was meant to be fired with a full ounce of powder with a quarter pound ball. It was deemed a small artillery piece in weighing 21 pounds, and it still kicked the shoulder too hard.
He did deem that rifle capable of shooting 6 to 8 soldiers if marching in file with one shot.

There were in those days 2 groove to 8 or 12 grooves for the rifling. The larger number of groves meant easier loading, but the 2 groove though harder to load in what Sir Samuel shot, was a harder hitter and handled longer distances better. That historical fact is of importance as it is never discussed in modern firearms, in once upon a time, the best guns had only two lands in them.

The two grove rifles had to be "shot in" as when new were almost impossible to be loaded quickly. This is why the multi groove rifles came to be.

Heavy charges are what Sir Samuel advocated in 1/5 the powder by weight to the weight of the ball. There is always a problem with novices in mixing up volumes at times and weights. Square loads are volume and not the same as weight loads.

That should be enough information in this file in my private journal of information. Sometimes things appear here for the few in condensed recipes and knowledge. It is always good to be familiar with the intricacies of the past, as on this one can only form a knowledge of the present or the future.

agtG

The Continentalist Declaration

The following quote was not written by me, but it is a quote from the Autobiography Forward written by President Theodore Roosevelt.

In it, is the balance of the John Kennedy maxim and the sage wisdom of Abraham Lincoln in not asking what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country, and, with malice toward none and charity toward all.

The world is a reality where one can not have peace without war, and one can not have war without peace.


The quote below is something which should be taught to all children in meaning, and something they would be required to know before being allowed to vote, graduate or hold any public office.


It seems to me that, for the nation as for the individual, what is most
important is to insist on the vital need of combining certain sets
of qualities, which separately are common enough, and, alas, useless
enough.

Practical efficiency is common, and lofty idealism not uncommon;
it is the combination which is necessary, and the combination is rare.


Love of peace is common among weak, short-sighted, timid, and lazy
persons; and on the other hand courage is found among many men of evil
temper and bad character. Neither quality shall by itself avail.

Justice mong the nations of mankind, and the uplifting of humanity, can be
brought about only by those strong and daring men who with wisdom love
peace, but who love righteousness more than peace. Facing the immense
complexity of modern social and industrial conditions, there is need to
use freely and unhesitatingly the collective power of all of us; and
yet no exercise of collective power will ever avail if the average
individual does not keep his or her sense of personal duty, initiative,
and responsibility.

There is need to develop all the virtues that have
the state for their sphere of action; but these virtues are as dust in a
windy street unless back of them lie the strong and tender virtues of
a family life based on the love of the one man for the one woman and on
their joyous and fearless acceptance of their common obligation to the
children that are theirs.

There must be the keenest sense of duty, and
with it must go the joy of living; there must be shame at the thought of
shirking the hard work of the world, and at the same time delight in
the many-sided beauty of life. With soul of flame and temper of steel we
must act as our coolest judgment bids us.

We must exercise the largest charity towards the wrong-doer that is compatible with relentless war
against the wrong-doing.

We must be just to others, generous to others,
and yet we must realize that it is a shameful and a wicked thing not to
withstand oppression with high heart and ready hand. With gentleness and
tenderness there must go dauntless bravery and grim acceptance of labor
and hardship and peril.

All for each, and each for all, is a good motto;
but only on condition that each works with might and main to so maintain
himself as not to be a burden to others.


It is a reality of what this blog has preached in RESPONSIBLE LIBERTY is the only measure which continues a Republican form of Government, which is the majority rule, but that rule is governed by the rights of the majority.
Each Citizen's rights end where the other Citizen's rights begin, and that above all and through all is Societal Law, in which all laws are based in the protection of the family unit of husband and wife, for the procreation of the children who will inherit a righteous, just, adult and free land built with the knowledge of  respecting the sacrifices of those generations before it.

Without this, America is doomed. She is a cadaver in grave only to rot in this Age of Obama and never to be raised from her sinful dead to a new life consciously based in Scriptural reality that one governs the nation by the individual first governing their individual hearts.

This is the Continentalist Declaration for America.


We of the great modern democracies must strive unceasingly to make our
several countries lands in which a poor man who works hard can
live comfortably and honestly, and in which a rich man cannot live
dishonestly nor in slothful avoidance of duty; and yet we must judge
rich man and poor man alike by a standard which rests on conduct and not
on caste, and we must frown with the same stern severity on the mean and
vicious envy which hates and would plunder a man because he is well off
and on the brutal and selfish arrogance which looks down on and exploits
the man with whom life has gone hard.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT.

SAGAMORE HILL, October 1, 1913.




agtG

The Dickens You Say

Like most children, I was forced to gouge my eyes upon the words of the English novelist, Charles Dickens. While the name and the names of his characters which he procured while searching through cementaries as in Uriah Heap to David Copperfield, are timeless in the English epics of literature, no one very much pays attention the the author of these works.

As a note concerning the English caste of pomposity, which has now shackled the American person in a version of rich man poor man in the Age of Obama, I offer here a most interesting personal assessment of President Theodore Roosevelt of Charles Dickens.

For those who do not comprehend the nature of Theodore Roosevelt, he was American to the last fiber of his form, and he completely adhered to the judgment that no people and no nation were more exceptional than the American.
He came forth with fang and claw at the merest attempt or the extroverted slander by anyone against Americans.

Such was Charles Dickens who maligned Americans in his ignorant writings, which one finds now and again in the pestilent writings of the English of that era, as that little war in 1776, really cut off their testicles and impregnated those ovaries with a reality that Rule Britania was bettered every time by those Yanks.
King George never recovered, and his Queen was far worse like Roselyn Carter in being beaten by Ronald and Nancy Reagan, over that 1776 episode, and the contributing high seas battles along with New Orleans in the War of 1812.
Britain had devoured the world, but off her shores sat that people who reminded the world, she had been bettered by her battered offspring.

In that President Theodore Roosevelt writes his children about Dickens as they are currently reading many of Dickens works which are timeless. It is punch to the face and a kick to the groin prose which Roosevelt delivers to his children exposing Charles Dickens who was the worst sort of English snob of the European order, in being neither gentleman nor royal, his baseness thereby judges the Americans as base in being damned for that great crime of being American.

Exactly as the Obama regime in it's jihad against Americans on the Berliner boys order in the 21st century.

The Roosevelt letters concerning Charles Dickens.

TOM PINCH

White House, February 23, 1908.

DEAREST KERMIT:

I quite agree with you about Tom Pinch. He is a despicable kind of
character; just the kind of character Dickens liked, because he had
himself a thick streak of maudlin sentimentality of the kind that, as
somebody phrased it, "made him wallow naked in the pathetic." It always
interests me about Dickens to think how much first-class work he did and
how almost all of it was mixed up with every kind of cheap, second-rate
matter. I am very fond of him. There are innumerable characters that he
has created which symbolize vices, virtues, follies, and the like almost
as well as the characters in Bunyan; and therefore I think the wise
thing to do is simply to skip the bosh and twaddle and vulgarity and
untruth, and get the benefit out of the rest. Of course one fundamental
difference between Thackeray and Dickens is that Thackeray was a
gentleman and Dickens was not. But a man might do some mighty good work
and not be a gentleman in any sense.



"MARTIN CHUZZLEWIT"

White House, February 29, 1908.

DEAREST KERMIT:

Of course I entirely agree with you about "Martin Chuzzlewit." But the
point seems to me that the preposterous perversion of truth and
the ill-nature and malice of the book are of consequence chiefly
as indicating Dickens' own character, about which I care not a rap;
whereas, the characters in American shortcomings and vices and follies
as typified are immortal, and, moreover, can be studied with great
profit by all of us to-day. Dickens was an ill-natured, selfish cad and
boor, who had no understanding of what the word gentleman meant, and no
appreciation of hospitality or good treatment. He was utterly incapable
of seeing the high purpose and the real greatness which (in spite of the
presence also of much that was bad or vile) could have been visible all
around him here in America to any man whose vision was both keen and
lofty. He could not see the qualities of the young men growing up here,
though it was these qualities that enabled these men to conquer the West
and to fight to a finish the great Civil War, and though they were to
produce leadership like that of Lincoln, Lee, and Grant. Naturally
he would think there was no gentleman in New York, because by no
possibility could he have recognized a gentleman if he had met one.
Naturally he would condemn all America because he had not the soul
to see what America was really doing.



agtG

The Good Muslim

As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.

Lt. General Philip Sheridan on visiting the Ottoman capital during Ramadan, had the following quote concerning the head Ottoman and the actions of his harem.

You will notice in the following that Islam was quite liberated compared to what it is now. The veil was more like an head band and the women were quite coquettish in beckoning General Sheridan to them.

Just a view of Islam in the 19th century, which in the 21st century would get these women beheaded.



"Shortly after we reached the Esplanade, carriages occupied by the women of the Sultan's harem began to appear, coming out from the palace grounds and driving up and down the roadway. Only a few of the women were closely veiled, a majority of them wearing an apology for veiling, merely a strip of white lace covering the forehead down to the eyebrows. Some were yellow, and some white-types of the Mongolian and Caucasian races. Now and then a pretty face was seen, rarely a beautiful one. Many were plump, even to corpulence, and these were the closest veiled, being considered the greatest beauties I presume, since with the Turk obesity is the chief element of comeliness.

As the  carriages passed along in review, every now and then an occupant, unable or unwilling to repress her natural promptings, would indulge in a mild flirtation, making overtures by casting demure side -glances, throwing us coquettish kisses, or waving strings of amber beads with significant gestures, seeming to say: "Why don't you follow?" But this we could not do if we would, for the Esplanade throughout its entire length was lined with soldiers, put there especially to guard the harem first, and later, the Sultan on his pilgrimage to the mosque."

Personal Memoirs of P. H. Sheridan, General, United States Army


"Down between the two ranks, which were formed facing each other, came the Sultan on a white steed—a beautiful Arabian— and having at his side his son, a boy about ten or twelve years old, who was riding a pony, a diminutive copy of his father's mount, the two attended by a numerous body-guard, dressed in gorgeous Oriental uniforms. As the procession passed our carriage, I, as pre-arranged, stood up and took off my hat, His Serene Highness promptly acknowledging the salute by raising his hand to the forehead. This was all I saw of him, yet I received every kindness at his hands, being permitted to see many of his troops, to inspect all the ordnance, equipment, and other military establishments about Constantinople, and to meet numbers of the high functionaries of the Empire."

Personal Memoirs of P. H. Sheridan, General, United States Army


From 21st century history it is a reality that Tehran would have stoned the women for being lewd and Obama would have shot the Sultan and replaced him with a committee of Islacommunst al Qaeda terrorists.


nuff said


agtG