"Charming and Engaging"

 A review of My Queen, My Love from royal historian Theodore Harvey at Royal World:

Most Americans are probably not aware that the US state of Maryland was originally named after Queen Henrietta Maria (1609-1669), daughter of King Henri IV of France (1553-1610) and wife of the ill-fated King Charles I of England (1600-1649). Readers seeking an introduction to this unjustly neglected historical figure would do well to immerse themselves in this charming and engaging book by Elena Maria Vidal, who appropriately enough lives in Maryland.

"My Queen, My Love," which covers the title character's life from her childhood in France through the births of her own children in the 1630s on the eve of the English Civil War, is a historical novel, so includes fictionalized dialogue, but is firmly based on historical research like any biography. Its style vividly brings the complex and colourful world of the 17th century to life, from Italy [homeland of her mother Marie de Medici (1573-1642)] to France to England. The central importance of religion is evident from the outset. Daughter of the pragmatic convert Henri IV, the devoutly Catholic Henrietta Maria finds herself in an impossible situation as wife of the staunch Anglican Charles I in what is by then a predominantly and fervently Protestant country, with even the King's own high church Anglicanism increasingly deemed too "catholic" by some. While the author clearly shares Henrietta Maria's devout Roman Catholicism, it is to Vidal's credit that the sincerity of King Charles who believes that his Church of England is truly Catholic is depicted in a well-rounded manner. I particularly appreciated the writer's evident love of liturgical beauty as reflected in lavish descriptions of Catholic ceremonies including sacred music. Henrietta Maria's enjoyment of the secular arts, so scandalous to the dour Puritans especially her own participation in Masques, is a consistent theme as well.

Anglicans like me who revere Charles as a Martyr, aware of his and his wife's fervent loyalty to each other during the terrible trials of the Civil War which (after the time period covered by this book) would end in his execution and her widowhood, are accustomed to thinking of their marriage as an ideal devoted Christian one, as indeed it later became. However it must be admitted that this was not always the case. While vaguely aware that King Charles and Queen Henrietta Maria had had difficulties in the early years of their marriage, I had not thought much about the details until I read this book. One sensitive issue is that in order to gain French approval for their 1625 marriage Charles had had to make various promises, particularly those related to the Queen's Catholicism, that once back in England he finds himself unable to keep. It particularly galls her, understandably, that money from her dowry ended up being used to fund a war with her native France! While Vidal's Henrietta Maria never falters in her ultimately heroic love for Charles, the reader can also see without dismissing his point of view how Charles might have felt frustrated at times. (Read more.)

Share

Baltimore’s Stunning Case Study in Government Waste

From Direct Line News:

Baltimore City’s failed website redesign isn’t just a digital misfire—it’s a poster child for government dysfunction, waste, and cronyism. After three years, three vendors, and nearly $4 million spent, the city still doesn’t have a functional BaltimoreCity.gov. But what it does have is a paper trail of political favoritism, poor oversight, and squandered taxpayer funds.

This project, intended to modernize the City’s website to be more user-friendly and compliant with accessibility standards, has instead spiraled into an embarrassing money pit. As detailed by The Baltimore Brew’s Mark Reutter in a July 17 exposé, the total cost is now pegged at $3.9 million—with no live website to show for it. Worse, the design currently in development is reportedly already outdated. Reutter’s reporting is based on city procurement documents, vendor contracts, and internal communications, which paint a picture of ballooning budgets and nonexistent results. Then came a Fox Baltimore investigation that added a troubling layer of political entanglements to the mess.

As Fox Baltimore reported on July 17, Baltimore’s IT department invited six companies to bid on the website redesign in 2021. Only two submitted proposals. One bid $300,000. The other—Fearless Solutions—came in at $1.2 million, four times higher. The city awarded the contract to the more expensive bidder. Fearless Solutions is owned by Delalai Dzirasa, a donor to Mayor Brandon Scott’s campaign and the husband of Baltimore’s then-Deputy Mayor, Dr. Letitia Dzirasa.

Mayor Scott defended the award: “This is a professional service contract. They went out and talked to multiple contractors and decided to go with Fearless.” What he failed to mention: this project never underwent a full competitive bid process. The city used a selective procurement approach, bypassing the broader competition that is usually required for projects of this scale.

The original contract was valued at $1.078 million. But five months in, Fearless asked for an additional $887,000. Then, seven months later, the city approved another $250,000, bringing the total payout to Fearless to over $2.2 million. Yet despite all that, there is still no functioning website. Inspector General Isabel Mercedes Cumming stated flatly: “There is no website at this time. In fact, the company we hired stopped working for the city a year ago yesterday.” (Read more.)

Share

Those Who Hate Boys

 From Becoming Noble:

Terrible solutions are proposed. No matter how much traditional masculinity is undermined, powerful voices continue to insist that the real problem is that it hasn’t been destroyed altogether. ‘Only then will boys be happy.’ My thesis for this series is that there is a need to defend true masculinity on its own terms, not on the implicit terms of progressives who either don’t understand it or actively hate it.

Take, for example, this debate at the Oxford Union on traditional masculinity. The opening argument of the opposition - who are supposed to be defending traditional masculinity - starts with asserting the need for a ‘contemporary and inclusive’ masculinity which is accessible to anyone ‘of any race, sexuality, or other identity’.

The best defence that this speaker can mount on this anaemic foundation is an argument that masculinity is useful for activism and community building like the ‘Movember Foundation’. After this slightly pathetic case she goes back to conceding “being forced to conform to a set of expectations is uncomfortable and even dangerous. We should allow people to access the gender expressions that make them feel like their truest self.” (Read more.)

 

Society will get the worst behavior it tolerates. From Culturcidal:

Although the shine is definitely off the halo these days, for a brief period of time, Rudi Giuliani had enough respect put on his name that he was considered a FRONT RUNNER for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008. At first glance, this seems ludicrous. After all, Giuliani is a moderate Republican who is best known for being the Mayor of New York City. Why were conservatives so in love with this guy?

Some of it had to do with him doing a good job during 9/11, but the thing he was most famous for was cleaning up NYC. The city was a crime-ridden hellscape before Giuliani took over, but “America’s mayor” had a plan to deal with it.

He embraced something called “Broken Windows” policing. The general idea behind it is that when small crimes are unaddressed, large crimes soon follow. You let people smash windows, put up graffiti, and jump the turnstiles at the subway, and people assume no one cares, and they can get away with more.

Under Giuliani, the NYC Police Department got very aggressive, very visible, and cracked down on these “small” crimes. As a result, not only did it improve the look and image of NYC, but the crime rate also plunged. How much? Quite a bit, actually.... (Read more.)

Share

Recusant Queen: The White Martyrdom of Henrietta Maria

Queen Henrietta Maria wearing the diamond cross given her by Pope Urban VIII

 

Kristen Van Uden Theriault wrote a most insightful and poignant review of My Queen, My Love at Catholic Exchange:

After the Anglican revolution of Henry VIII, the English royal house was divided. Protestant Elizabeth I died with no issue. Despite Mary Queen of Scots’ heroic witness unto death for the true Faith, her son James was effectively hijacked by her enemies and groomed into a Tudor heir. By the time James’ son Charles ascended the throne, the Stuart dynasty was strongly within the Protestant camp, though his potential conversion remained a hoped-for (or dreaded) eventuality.The long line of English Catholic martyrs marched forward even during the “tolerant” reign of the Stuarts....Anti-Catholic sentiment reigned supreme.  The “ringing island” rang no longer, instead clamoring dissonant peals of error.

Into this hostile territory entered a young Catholic princess, Henrietta Maria of France. The daughter of Henry IV, a French Huguenot, and Catholic Marie de’Medici, Henrietta was sent not only as a political envoy, as was the routine purpose of royal marriages, but also as a religious ambassador. Her parents’ marriage, by which the Church partially attempted to heal the French Huguenot schism, provided a model, albeit a rocky one.

The marriage of Henrietta and Charles required a dispensation from the pope, as Catholics were forbidden to marry non-Catholics except in extreme or unusual circumstances. The dispensation came with a weighty caveat: that Henrietta would endeavor to convert her husband, and consequently his country, back to the true Faith. Henrietta was instructed to imitate saint Berthe, who had converted her pagan husband, and sent into the spiritual war zone.

Henrietta arrived in England at the tender age of fifteen, with this outsized supernatural mission to complete. (Read more.)

 

Book available, HERE.

Share

The Art of the Deal: Japan Pays Upfront, America Builds Now

 From Amuse on X:

Let us begin with the fundamentals. Trade deficits have long haunted American politics, most often serving as cudgels wielded by opposing factions. Economists debate their significance. Politicians weaponize them. Meanwhile, the public rightly senses that an imbalance exists when goods flow in and factories shut down. Traditional trade deals attempt to remedy this by offering future concessions, increased market access, or vague commitments to "level the playing field." But these promises are paper tigers, easily ignored, impossible to enforce. Trump’s Japan deal breaks that pattern by inverting it. Instead of asking for concessions in the future, he demanded compensation upfront: a $550 billion infusion of Japanese capital to finance American infrastructure and industry.

This is a paradigmatic shift. Imagine, if you will, a wealthy guest who has long overstayed their welcome, consuming more than they contribute, finally agreeing to help renovate the house. That is what Japan has agreed to do. Rather than merely apologizing for the trade imbalance, they have provided a signing bonus that allows the US to reinvest in itself, without begging Congress for a dime.

Critics may ask: why would Japan agree to such terms? The answer is simple, and it is twofold. First, Trump’s judicious application of a 15% tariff on Japanese imports, a strategic retreat from higher threatened rates, signaled credible resolve. Second, Japan understands the geopolitical stakes. A strong, self-sufficient United States is the linchpin of Pacific stability. Financing American energy, manufacturing, and AI facilities is not charity. It is insurance against Chinese hegemony. (Read more.)

 

When NASA went woke. Also from Amuse on X:

 In 1969, Neil Armstrong took a single step that echoed across centuries. Today, NASA's Artemis program trudges forward with the bureaucratic gait of a midlevel HR department pushing a PowerPoint on pronouns. How did we get here? The answer, in brief: identity politics. Artemis, the ambitious initiative to return Americans to the Moon, has become less a scientific endeavor and more a case study in the consequences of subordinating competence to quotas.

To be clear, Artemis was not always thus. There was a moment, fleeting, but real, when hope reentered NASA's orbit. That moment bore the name Jared Isaacman. But that moment was reportedly snuffed out by Sergio Gor, the Director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, whose personal vendetta against Elon Musk doomed Isaacman's confirmation. Gor's obstruction did more than kill a nomination, it delayed America's lunar ambitions by at least a year, perhaps more. What might have been a renaissance at NASA became another casualty of palace intrigue.

Isaacman, a self-made billionaire, ace pilot, and commander of private orbital missions, represented precisely the kind of energetic, capable, and forward-thinking leadership the Artemis program required. As the founder of Shift4 Payments and architect of the all-civilian Inspiration4 and Polaris Dawn missions, Isaacman had already accomplished feats NASA once deemed impossible. He cut through the red tape. He got Americans into space, efficiently, affordably, safely. He inspired the public. And unlike the ceremonial caretakers of the federal space bureaucracy, he had actually gone to space himself.

His nomination to lead NASA promised a return to merit, innovation, and clarity of purpose. During his confirmation hearings, Isaacman argued that Artemis should be completed "as fast as possible," advocating for near-term pragmatism (using SLS and Orion) but long-term sustainability through commercial partnerships and reusable launch systems. This was no utopian dream, it was the proven SpaceX model adapted to the public sector. Had Isaacman been confirmed, Artemis might have evolved from an aimless spectacle into a galvanizing national achievement. Instead, the Biden holdovers and bureaucratic inertia won. And what we are left with now is the Artemis experiment, not in lunar science, but in DEI. (Read more.)

Share

The Reluctant Student: Cultivating Fortitude and the Love of Learning

 From Mater et Magistra:

Aside from learning, behavioral, and cognitive difficulties which must be worked out through patience, love, and appropriate therapies, there are times that the average child resists learning. Why do some students resist learning?

• Fear of failure – They assume they aren’t “good” at certain subjects.

• Disconnection – They don’t see how learning applies to their real lives.

• Lack of wonder – They haven’t been given the space to be curious.

Proverbs 1:7 – “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.” We must cultivate a love for learning as a means of knowing God’s creation. Education must engage both reason (intellectual development) and faith (spiritual purpose). When students see the purpose behind learning, they are more motivated. (Read more.)

Share

A Who’s Who of the Gilded Age

 

 From Tatler:

Old Money vs New Money, Old World vs New World: the Gilded Age was a time of seismic change in New York society. The industrial revolution of the late 19th century led to an explosion in the middle classes, with the likes of railroad men and construction tycoons suddenly becoming extremely rich. As these so-called nouveau riche emerged into society, they inevitably found themselves confronted with the rancour and jealousy of the existing upper echelons, whose wealth could be traced back generations. Now, the merchant class were mixing with New York royalty, buying up the best houses, marrying their daughters to the most eligible bachelors, and sending their children to the finest schools. This tension forms the basis of the central plot in Julian Fellowes's drama, The Gilded Age, portraying these warring factions from the point of view of Marian Brook (played by Oscar-winner Meryl Streep's daughter, Louisa Jacobson) a newcomer to the social scene whose guiding lights are her Old Money aunts, whose lives are at odds with her New Money friends. Here, Tatler brings you a guide to the women who inspired these characters, from the warring Queen Bees who kept trying to out-do each other with their 5th Avenue mansions moving further and further uptown, to the most glamorous debutantes and dollar princesses. (Read more.)

Share

Trump Urges DOJ to Prosecute Obama

 From Gregg Jarrett:

“If you look at those papers, they have them stone cold, and it was President Obama… the leader of the gang was President Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. Have you heard of him?” he added.

Trump’s comments came while hosting Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. at the White House. He insisted that accountability for Obama, who served from 2009 to 2017, should be a top priority for the Justice Department.

“It’s criminal at the highest level. It would be President Obama, he started it. And [Joe] Biden was there with him, and [then-FBI Director James] Comey was there, and [then-Director of National Intelligence] James Clapper — the whole group was there, and [then-CIA Director John] Brennan,” Trump asserted. (Read more.)

 

From Tierney's Real News:

TRUMP: “Barack Hussein Obama is the ringleader. Hillary Clinton was right there with him and so was Sleepy Joe Biden, and so were the rest of them: [former FBI Director James] Comey, [former Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper, the whole group. They tried to rig an election and they got caught. And then they did rig the election in 2020. I did it a third time and I won in a landslide."

“He’s culpable. This was treason. They caught President Obama absolutely cold. This was every term you can imagine. They tried to steal the election. They tried to obfuscate the election. They did things that nobody’s ever even imagined, even in other countries." (Read more.)

 

Who is John Brennan?

Share

Should NFP Be Taught in Marriage Prep?

 All I know is that it should not be discussed when children are present. I once watched a young couple inform the congregation of the biological details of NFP as parents had to cover the ears of their small children. Just because something is natural does not mean it's for little ones to hear. From Catholic Answers:

Marriage is a natural institution that predates Christianity, but to the modern world, Christian marriage is a strange curiosity—like the Amish, or cars with stick shifts. That makes it, from our perspective, it’s an instrument of rebellion. So engaged couples should be trained as revolutionaries.

That means putting them in a mindset of being distinct from the world. Where the world pursues relationships based on sexual gratification and personal fulfilment, we offer the self-emptying model of Christ and the Church his bride. Where the world says we can redefine marriage or dissolve it at will, we say, “One man, one woman, for life.”

And when the world sterilizes sex, using pills and barriers to subordinate fecundity to pleasure, we insist on the inseparable connection between marriage and children. Underscoring this connection, education in natural family planning breeds revolutionary thinking—arguably even more than the “providentialist” approach that would have us simply tell couples not to use contraception and leave it at that. (Read more.)

Share

Byzantine and Carolingian Art

  

Brilliant. From Hilary White at The Sacred Images Project:

Icons to the eastern Christian to this day, are not “illustrations of the faith” intended to “teach illiterates Bible stories,” but points of immediate contact with the reality of the Incarnation, rendered in a symbolic style meant to invite prayer and communion, not analysis. The Carolingian north, however, increasingly favoured legibility, narrative story telling, hierarchy and natural form in service of a more didactic, rationalised approach to religion and governance. In one sense, these two ways of thinking about sacred art represent the theological divergence that was already unfolding between East and West. Rome’s was consolidating power around a Latin, imperial western Christendom on the one hand, and Constantinople maintaining the ancient mystical, liturgical cosmology on the other.

These two streams would sometimes clash and sometimes blend and finally the resulting hybrid would see unique new expressions in art, architecture and monastic life, which we’ll eventually see more fully in the Norman period, with the Italo-Byzantine and early Romanesque. But in the 9th and 10th centuries, they still stood largely apart, like two rival visions of what Christian civilisation could be. (Read more.)

Share

Some Monsters Never Die

 From AND Magazine:

Witness Christopher Steele, author of the infamous “dossier” that launched the whole mad Russiagate hoax and started us on the path to what would ultimately prove to be the first attempted coup in American history.

Steele is a former British intelligence officer. He was hired by Fusion GPS, a research firm, to produce a dossier connecting Donald Trump to Vladimir Putin. Fusion GPS was working for the law firm representing Hillary Clinton’s political campaign. The cost of all this was borne by Hillary’s campaign and by the Democratic National Committee.

Steele produced a garbage report filled with lies and innuendo. That dossier was then effectively injected into the American law enforcement and intelligence communities, where anti-Trump partisans ignored its obvious lack of credibility and used it to launch an investigation of Donald Trump, smear him with false accusations, and produce junk intelligence “assessments”. All of this is well established by this point, and Mr. Steele’s reputation has been destroyed.

One would think Steele would be living incognito somewhere, keeping his head down and hoping he is not named as a conspirator in a plot to overturn the republic. One would be wrong. (Read more.)

 

From Overton:

TSUNAMI. Trump just crossed the Rubicon—and there’s NO going back. Inside the Oval Office, with cameras rolling, he accused Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton of orchestrating the Russia Hoax. Then he said it flat-out: Obama committed TREASON. But it’s what he revealed next that could blow the lid off the Deep State:

“And we have ALL of the documents....and from what Tulsi told me, she’s got THOUSANDS of additional documents coming.” (Read more.)

Share

The Rise and Fall of the Holy Roman Empire

 From Charles Coulombe:

The French Revolution would ultimately doom the venerable old Imperial edifice.  By 1795, Revolutionary France had annexed Belgium and the Left Bank of the Rhine.  The martyred Marie Antoinette’s brother, Francis II, had been crowned Holy Roman Emperor in 1792.  In an attempt to shore up Germany against the French menace, Francis allowed the annexation of hundreds of smaller German states by the larger ones.  It was hoped that the score that remained would be better able to resist the foe, now ruled by Napoleon Bonaparte.  But the defeat of the Second Coalition in 1804 led Napoleon, who had begun to speak of himself as the new Charlemagne, to have himself crowned Emperor of the French.  At the ceremony in Paris’ Notre Dame Cathedral, Napoleon took the crown from the hands of a startled Pope Pius VII, and crowned himself with it.  This in turn led Francis to suspect that Napoleon wished to make himself Holy Roman Emperor.  In response, he created a new crown and entity over which to reign: the Hereditary Empire of Austria.

Made up only of the hereditary Habsburg Lands, this new creation still featured the Double Eagle – the symbol of the Christian Empire that through long use had become associated with the Habsburgs.  In 1806, Francis led his country into another conflict with France, the War of the Third Coalition.  Defeated at the Battle of Austerlitz, he was forced to sign a treaty with Napoleon that greatly weakened Austria.  In August, Napoleon created the Confederation of the Rhine, into which he compelled Bavarian and fifteen of the other larger German States to enter – while withdrawing from the Holy Roman Empire.  On July 22, Napoleon issued an ultimatum ordering Francis to abdicate as Holy Roman Emperor by August 10.  He did so, but declared the bonds tying the estates to him and so each other dissolved – in effect, dissolving the Empire.

It had endured 1006 years since Bl. Charlemagne was crowned.  In 1815, there was an attempt to revive it; but Emperor Francis I (as we must call him in his role as Emperor of Austria) was against this idea.  In its place, the Germanic Confederation, a loose grouping of the German States, was erected with the Austrian Emperor as president.  In 1848, a German Empire was briefly revived, but collapsed ultimately through the then-impossibility of including both Prussia and Austria in one centralised nation.  Bismarck solved the issue in 1866 by driving Austria militarily out of Germany, as a prelude to the creation of the German Empire in 1871. Comparing it to the Holy Roman Empire, Dom Guéranger observed rather caustically in his entry on St. Boniface: “Upon its ruins, like a woeful mimicry of the Holy Empire, Protestantism has raised its false Evangelical Empire, formed of naught but encroachments, and tracing its recognized origin, to the apostasy of that felon knight, Albert of Brandenburg.” (Read more.)

Share

Garden Party at Trianon

 As has been described before on this blog, Marie-Antoinette loved gardens and nature. She wanted her domain at Petit Trianon to be like a natural landscape, albeit a fabricated one. As consort of the most powerful monarch in Europe, it was expected that the queen entertain foreign visitors in grand style. Entertaining heads of state was an expensive enterprise, however, even when they visited incognito, as did Emperor Joseph II and the Grand Duke Paul and Grand Duchess Maria of Russia. The French government was nearly bankrupt due to the help given by King Louis XVI to the American colonists in their war for independence from Britain. To save money, Marie-Antoinette would use her private gardens as the site of the entertainments by illuminating the gardens and having everyone wear white. She would have musicians playing amid the shrubbery, so that it seemed that the music was wafting through the gardens in an ethereal manner.

In May, 1782, the Russian Grand Duke and Grand Duchess visited as the "Comte and Comtesse du Nord." Madame Campan wrote of their visit in her Memoirs:

They were presented on the 20th of May, 1782. The Queen received them with grace and dignity. On the day of their arrival at Versailles they dined in private with the King and Queen.

The plain, unassuming appearance of Paul I. pleased Louis XVI. He spoke to him with more confidence and cheerfulness than he had spoken to Joseph II. The Comtesse du Nord was not at first so successful with the Queen. This lady was of a fine height, very fat for her age, with all the German stiffness, well informed, and perhaps displaying her acquirements with rather too much confidence. When the Comte and Comtesse du Nord were presented the Queen was exceedingly nervous. She withdrew into her closet before she went into the room where she was to dine with the illustrious travellers, and asked for a glass of water, confessing “she had just experienced how much more difficult it was to play the part of a queen in the presence of other sovereigns, or of princes born to become so, than before courtiers.” She soon recovered from her confusion, and reappeared with ease and confidence. The dinner was tolerably cheerful, and the conversation very animated.

Brilliant entertainments were given at Court in honour of the King of Sweden and the Comte du Nord. They were received in private by the King and Queen, but they were treated with much more ceremony than the Emperor, and their Majesties always appeared to me to be very cautious before these personages. However, the King one day asked the Russian Grand Duke if it were true that he could not rely on the fidelity of any one of those who accompanied him. The Prince answered him without hesitation, and before a considerable number of persons, that he should be very sorry to have with him even a poodle that was much attached to him, because his mother would take care to have it thrown into the Seine, with a stone round its neck, before he should leave Paris. This reply, which I myself heard, horrified me, whether it depicted the disposition of Catherine, or only expressed the Prince’s prejudice against her.

The Queen gave the Grand Duke a supper at Trianon, and had the gardens illuminated as they had been for the Emperor. The Cardinal de Rohan very indiscreetly ventured to introduce himself there without the Queen’s knowledge. Having been treated with the utmost coolness ever since his return from Vienna, he had not dared to ask her himself for permission to see the illumination; but he persuaded the porter of Trianon to admit him as soon as the Queen should have set off for Versailles, and his Eminence engaged to remain in the porter’s lodge until all the carriages should have left the chateau. He did not keep his word, and while the porter was busy in the discharge of his duty, the Cardinal, who wore his red stockings and had merely thrown on a greatcoat, went down into the garden, and, with an air of mystery, drew up in two different places to see the royal family and suite pass by.

Her Majesty was highly offended at this piece of boldness, and next day ordered the porter to be discharged. There was a general feeling of disgust at the Cardinal’s conduct, and of commiseration towards the porter for the loss of his place. Affected at the misfortune of the father of a family, I obtained his forgiveness; and since that time I have often regretted the feeling which induced me to interfere. The notoriety of the discharge of the porter of Trianon, and the odium that circumstance would have fixed upon the Cardinal, would have made the Queen’s dislike to him still more publicly known, and would probably have prevented the scandalous and notorious intrigue of the necklace.

In June of 1784, King Gustav III of Sweden arrived under the alias of the "Comte de Haga." Marie-Antoinette did not care for him, because of what she had heard concerning his private life. As Madame Campan relates:

The Queen, who was much prejudiced against the King of Sweden, received him very coldly.All that was said of the private character of that sovereign, his connection with the Comte de Vergennes, from the time of the Revolution of Sweden, in 1772, the character of his favourite Armfeldt, and the prejudices of the monarch himself against the Swedes who were well received at the Court of Versailles, formed the grounds of this dislike. He came one day uninvited and unexpected, and requested to dine with the Queen. The Queen received him in the little closet, and desired me to send for her clerk of the kitchen, that she might be informed whether there was a proper dinner to set before Comte d’Haga, and add to it if necessary. The King of Sweden assured her that there would be enough for him; and I could not help smiling when I thought of the length of the menu of the dinner of the King and Queen, not half of which would have made its appearance had they dined in private. The Queen looked significantly at me, and I withdrew. In the evening she asked me why I had seemed so astonished when she ordered me to add to her dinner, saying that I ought instantly to have seen that she was giving the King of Sweden a lesson for his presumption. I owned to her that the scene had appeared to me so much in the bourgeois style, that I involuntarily thought of the cutlets on the gridiron, and the omelette, which in families in humble circumstances serve to piece out short commons. She was highly diverted with my answer, and repeated it to the King, who also laughed heartily at it.

As Baroness Oberkirch relates in her Memoirs, the Swedish king was charmed with both Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette, in spite of various misunderstandings. Especially he was enchanted by the illuminated gardens of Trianon, which he thought resembled the Elysian fields. A Swedish scholar once told me that the because of Louis and Antoinette, Gustav was seriously considering becoming a Catholic; I have not yet substantiated that information myself, but it would not surprise me. He certainly did all he could to save their lives, especially through his delegate, Count Fersen. Gustav said of the French king: "Louis XVI is the best and most benevolent prince in existence. His soul radiates serenity. I am filled with admiration."

(Sources: Vincent Cronin's Louis and Antoinette, Madame Campan's Memoirs, Nesta Webster's Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette before the Revolution, Baroness Oberkirch's Memoirs and Antonia Fraser's Marie-Antoinette:The Journey) Share

State Deptartment Mass Layoffs: Not "the First of its Kind"

 From Sharyl's Substack:

Are the 2025 Layoffs the First of Their Kind?

The 2025 State Department layoffs are not the first mass layoffs in the department’s modern history.

In 1987, 1,270 State Department positions were eliminated. It was explicitly described at the time as the “largest round of job cuts in the department’s modern history.”

The 2025 layoffs, with 1,353 firings, are larger in absolute numbers, but smaller in terms of workforce percentage.

Since the 1987 layoffs, the State Department roster had expanded by an additional 12,000+ employees.

1,270 firings in 1987: 8% of the State Department direct-hire staff of 15,800.

1,353 firings in 2025: 5% of the State Department's total direct-hire staff of 27,230 (14,399 Foreign Service employees and 12,831 Civil Service).

Read on for details. (Read more.)

Share

New Period Drama About 1066

Some of the casting is odd. James Norton is perfect for King Harold, though. From Discover Britain:

The series will tell the story of William the Conqueror’s ascension to the English throne after the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Set in 11th-century England we will see Harold Godwinson, the last crowned King of Anglo-Saxon England, facing a threat to his throne from a forthcoming Norman invasion. Although we can’t know for sure, we can only assume the series will end dramatically with (spoilers!), Harold’s death at the Battle of Hastings. Here are 7 facts about the Battle of Hastings that you probably didn’t know before. 

The eight-part series will tell the story of a fated clash between two individuals that happened 1,000 years ago and that would change the course of history, and the destiny of Britain and Europe forever. But, as the series will show, the roots of their clash stretch back decades before their final showdown, and extend out through two, interconnected family dynasties who struggled for power across two countries and a raging sea. Two allies, neither of which had any design on the British throne, but both of whom found themselves forced by circumstance and personal obsession into a war for the British crown. Only one man would come out victorious. Here, we tell the story of events that lead to the Battle of Hastings. (Read more.)

Share

Le Temple de l'Amour

The Temple of Love is one of the most unforgettable places in the gardens of the Petit Trianon, on a little island directly behind the house. Queen Marie-Antoinette commissioned the architect Mique to design and build the neo-classical structure in 1778. The Temple of Love was not built to celebrate the queen's mythical love for Count Fersen, as some authors have hinted; Fersen was was a mere acquaintance at the time. Lady Antonia Fraser in Marie-Antoinette: The Journey maintains that it was built to celebrate the love of the king and the queen for each other and the consummation of their marriage, delayed for many years.

The consummation took so long because Marie-Antoinette was a mere child when she was married; she was fourteen but looked as if she were much younger, and Louis was not a pervert. He was a gentleman, and waited for her to mature. He also approached his bride in a restrained manner because his aunties had inculcated in him the dangers for France when a king became enthralled by a woman, as had happened to his grandfather Louis XV. Louis could probably see himself becoming quite easily enthralled with Marie-Antoinette, and so he held himself back. Also, as author Simone Bertière speculates in L'Insoumise, there may have been a physical problem with Marie-Antoinette which made marital relations difficult at first. In their early twenties, however, the young couple found their bonheur essentiel, their "essential happiness," as Marie-Antoinette wrote to her mother. It became a marriage which all the forces of hell could not sunder.

 From Art School Glasses.The statue of Cupid carving a bow from the club of Hercules is symbolic of the success of the Austrian alliance, sealed by the nuptials of Louis and Antoinette. Via Vive la Reine.

(Photo by Eugene Atget, Le Temple de l'Amour, Versailles, c.1923-24)

Share

Superman After Liberalism

 From Daniel McCarthy at Modern Age:

Superman is a product of the New Deal. His creators, Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel, were Jewish teenagers from immigrant families (Shuster was a Canadian immigrant himself) who became friends and creative partners in Cleveland, Ohio. The origin they would eventually craft for Superman echoes the story of Moses, with a newborn placed not in a basket but in a rocketship and set adrift not on the Nile but among the stars, his destiny to bring righteousness to a new land. Coupled with the immigrant and Jewish aspects that contributed to the creation of Superman is a Middle American sensibility. The Ohio of Siegel and Shuster becomes Superman’s Kansas, where his rocket crashes and the alien child is adopted into an all-American family. What unites Superman’s contrasting elements—foreign and native, rural and urban—is a New Deal–era confidence in liberalism as a form of patriotism, with America itself as a Moses-like lawgiver unto the world yet still a place of its own.

Superman, like America, is all-powerful. And being all-powerful, Superman and America can afford to be idealistic. Superman doesn’t kill because with power as great as his killing is never necessary, much as liberals would come to see the death penalty as abhorrent in a land where well-meaning government and enlightened social science could overcome any antisocial threat. Although liberals would not become truly “soft on crime” until after the New Deal, the idea of beneficent power that Franklin Roosevelt’s administration represented pointed the way to ever more beneficence accompanying ever more power. The “golden age” comic book characters of the New Deal and World War II years were also more violent than those of the 1960s, and Superman himself reached his final form by stages. But the template of what was to come, for liberalism and the superhero alike, was set in the 1930s.

The prehistory of Superman suggests the limitations of that template, however. Before Siegel and Shuster created their superhero, they wrote and illustrated a 1933 science-fiction tale called “The Reign of the Superman” about a very different kind of superior being. The story involves a mad scientist performing an experiment that gives a lowly man superhuman intelligence and telepathic powers, which this “superman” intends to use to subjugate the human race. Serious literature and genre fiction alike had been exploring the implications of “supermen” and master races more evolved than humanity since the late nineteenth century. These tales were often warnings or tragedies, such as the 1930 novel that prefigured Siegel and Shuster’s superhero Superman in many ways, Philip Wylie’s Gladiator.

What made the comic-book Superman a defender of humanity rather than an outcast (like Wylie’s protagonist) or would-be conqueror (like Siegel and Shuster’s first sci-fi superman) was his assimilation into Kansas and America as the land of the free. But today’s left-liberals don’t think of Kansas or Middle America as metonyms for decency and simple goodness. Nor do they believe that assimilation is an ideal worth pursuing—identity politics instead prescribes maximum alienation from any traditional model of Americanism. An immigrant from the planet Krypton would today be told by activists in what was once the party of the New Deal that America is a place to be ashamed of and “truth, justice, and the American way” a contradiction in terms. Instead of confidence that American liberalism will overcome any foe at home or abroad, the modern left-liberal fears that fascism has already taken over this country.  (Read more.)

From Direct Line News:

Last night I did what every red-blooded American comic nerd and cinephile did: I went to see the latest Superman movie—James Gunn’s grand reboot of the Man of Steel. You know, the one he’s been hyping for months like it’s the Second Coming of Kal-El himself. And while I was prepared for lasers, capes, and Jonathan Kent’s folksy wisdom, I wasn’t prepared for this much immigration propaganda dressed in spandex.

Because, folks, we need to talk. We need to talk about Superman. We need to talk about Martian Manhunter. About Wonder Woman. About Hawkman. Hawkgirl. Starfire. The Green Lantern Corps. And how, under James Gunn’s visionary eye, they’ve all become something a little more… political. A little more symbolic. A little more like a glowing endorsement of open borders wrapped in the American flag.

Let’s get this straight: Superman is an illegal alien. So are most of his Justice League friends. And if you thought this new movie was going to treat that fact with a bit of humility, maybe even acknowledge the complicated nuances of being an outsider in a nation of laws, then you’re in for a rude awakening. Because Gunn doesn’t just double down—he celebrates it.

Superman: The Undocumented Messiah

It’s no secret that Kal-El is an alien. That’s been canon since 1938. The last son of Krypton crash-lands in Kansas, gets adopted by the Kents, grows up into America’s Boy Scout, and becomes a symbol of truth, justice, and—nowadays—whatever the politically fashionable version of “the American way” happens to be.

But here’s the thing: Superman didn’t go through immigration screening. No asylum process. No refugee vetting. Not even a space-themed green card. If he landed in 2025 instead of the 1930s, he’d be met with border patrol drones, a media circus, and probably a congressional investigation.

Yet James Gunn wants us to treat him as a role model—a cosmic DACA poster child in tights.

And don’t tell me “He’s just a metaphor.” Because that’s exactly the problem. In Gunn’s version, Kal-El doesn’t just fight for humanity—he represents all immigrants. Illegal or not. The movie all but shouts: “If you’re against Superman, you’re against immigrants.”

Which leads us to the uncomfortable question that James Gunn doesn’t want you to ask…(Read more.)

Share

History of Greek Loukoumia, or Turkish Delights

From The Greek Reporter:

Greek loukoumia, or Turkish delights, hold an important place in the world of Greek sweets. The delectable, soft little squares of sweet flavor coated in powdered sugar are an iconic symbol of Greece. In Greece and Cyprus, loukoumia, the plural of loukoumi, are a traditional sweet offered with coffee. In many villages across the country, visitors are welcomed into the homes of locals with an offering of the delicious gelatinous confection. Made from the simple ingredients of water, starch, and sugar, and flavored with iconic tastes of Greece like rose, bergamot, and mastiha, loukoumia are easy to make but difficult to perfect. (Read more.)

Share

Madame Louise of France: the Princess Who Became a Nun

 

From Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira:

Wishing to enter the convent, while attending the Countess of Rupelmonde’s reception of the habit at the Carmel, she decided to join that Order. She began to prepare herself for it by studying the rule of St. Teresa and slowly abstaining from the comfort that surrounded her. She would stay away from the heated area of the castle during periods of appalling cold.

She could not stand the smell of candles and only overcame this repugnance after years of effort. Finally, she obtained the consent of the king and on February 20, 1770, entered the Carmelites of Saint Denis. France admired her example, and Pope Clement XIV wrote the princess to express his happiness at seeing his pontificate marked by such a comforting event for religion.

Therefore, this event took place nineteen years before the French Revolution broke out.

In the convent, she fought hard for her companions to stop distinguishing her from the others. She also worked to overcome her difficulty in staying a long time on her knees, a grace she obtained after a novena to St. Louis Gonzaga. She received the habit on September 10, 1770, clad in the mantle of Saint Teresa, owned by the Carmelites of Paris, and took the name of Sister Therese of Saint Augustine.

What an honor to receive the habit clad in the mantle of Saint Teresa!

Later named mistress of novices, she excelled in that difficult work, manifesting constant joy in the midst of the difficulties she encountered. Later she was unanimously elected mother superior. When the Visitor General of the Carmelites brought the news to the king, he said that Sister Therese had only had one vote against her. ‘So,’ Louis XV replied, ‘was there a vote against her?’ ‘Yes, Sire,’ answered the prelate, ‘but it was her own vote.’

(Read more.)

Share

Tulsi Gabbard Releases Background Information of Obama Involvement in Trump-Russia Targeting Op

 From The Last Refuge:

Staying focused on the trail of evidence held deep within the ODNI office, is why Tulsi Gabbard has been targeted for removal over the past several weeks.  Kudos to Tulsi Gabbard for staying on mission – Great job.

What the evidence shows is a focused targeting operation intended to fabricate a false premise by the United States Intelligence Community, through the Office of former DNI James Clapper.  The op was green-lighted by Barack Obama as a way to impede the agenda of incoming President Donald Trump.  All three branches of government collaborated on the scheme.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Friday, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard revealed overwhelming evidence that demonstrates how, after President Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, President Obama and his national security cabinet members manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.

• • In the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the Intelligence Community (IC) consistently assessed that Russia is “probably not trying … to influence the election by using cyber means.”
  • On December 7, 2016, after the election, talking points were prepared for DNI James Clapper stating, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.”
  • On December 9, 2016, President Obama’s White House gathered top National Security Council Principals for a meeting that included James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and others, to discuss Russia.
  • After the meeting, DNI Clapper’s Executive Assistant sent an email to IC leaders tasking them with creating a new IC assessment “per the President’s request” that details the “tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.” It went on to say, “ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS.”
  • Obama officials leaked false statements to media outlets, including The Washington Post, claiming, “Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election.”
  • On January 6, 2017, a new Intelligence Community Assessment was released that directly contradicted the IC assessments that were made throughout the previous six months.
  • 
    

After months of investigation into this matter, the facts reveal this new assessment was based on information that was known by those involved to be manufactured i.e. the Steele Dossier or deemed as not credible. This was politicized intelligence that was used as the basis for countless smears seeking to delegitimize President Trump’s victory, the years-long Mueller investigation, two Congressional impeachments, high level officials being investigated, arrested, and thrown in jail, heightened US-Russia tensions, and more.

“The issue I am raising is not a partisan issue. It is one that concerns every American. The information we are releasing today clearly shows there was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government. Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,” said DNI Tulsi Gabbard. 

“Their egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic. No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. The American people’s faith and trust in our democratic republic and therefore the future of our nation depends on it. As such, I am providing all documents to the Department of Justice to deliver the accountability that President Trump, his family, and the American people deserve.”  

Is there new information within the release?  Yes and No.

All of the outlined activity, the release of the emails and communication within the scheme team, is not new.  However, the new part is the evidence.  The facts now public to support all previous claims made here and by others, this time with greater detail that cannot be refuted.

If you have been reading here for a while THE DOCUMENTS tell a story that is well known.

We were able to piece this together even without knowing how the corrupt actors were talking to each other about their specific roles, responsibilities and motives.

The documents provided by Tulsi Gabbard are the evidence of a serious coup against incoming President Trump by actors within government.   The end of their IC effort culminated in the Robert Mueller investigation.  Tulsi is providing the path to the avatar Mueller represented and all of the actors who participated with him. (Read more.)

Share

The Cave of Elijah

 "Elias the prophet stood up, as a fire, and his word burnt like a torch....Blessed are they that saw thee, and were honored with thy friendship." (Ecclesiasticus 48: 1, 11)

"Elias indeed shall come, and restore all things." (Matthew 17:11)

From A Pilgrim's Journey:

The caves on Mount Carmel were well known to the prophet Elijah. They provided him shelter and also protection from the wrath of Jezebel, whose prophets of Baal Elijah had defeated. It is also thought that Elijah established a “school of prophets” here on his return from exile at Mount Sinai. If so, this would be where his successor Elisha, among others, studied. (Read more.)

The greatest of the Old Testament prophets is Elias (Elijah.) The life of St. Elias can best be described by two phases which he often used: "As the Lord liveth, in Whose sight I stand" (3 Kings 17:1), and "With zeal have I been zealous for the Lord God of Hosts." (3 Kings 19:10) Whatever his exterior activities, the prophet remained aware of the constant presence of God. He possessed an unflagging desire to serve his Lord, even in moments of darkness and discouragement. (3 Kings 19: 4, 14)

Elias, called "the Thesbite," first manifested himself during the three year drought and famine by which the God of Israel punished His erring people, who had been led into idolatry by King Ahab and Queen Jezebel. (3 Kings 17:1) Described as "a hairy man" (4 Kings 1:8), he usually could be found praying in remote desert and mountain retreats. It was in the solitude of Mt. Horeb that he experienced the majesty of God, not in fire or earthquake, but in the serenity of a "whistling of gentle air." (3 Kings 19:12) His usual haunt seems to have been Mt. Carmel, where he had the famous contest with the 450 prophets of Baal. (3 Kings 18:19) He defeated them by calling down fire from Heaven (3 Kings 18:38), setting the precedent for those who wish to follow in his footsteps as "Carmelites," whose role is to pray for the fire of graces, especially in times of crisis for the Church.

It was also on Mt. Carmel that Elias, deep in prayer, sent his servant to scan the horizon for rain. Finally, after looking seven times, the servant reported "a little cloud...like a man's foot arising out of the sea." (3 Kings 18: 43-44) Tradition holds that Elias knew the cloud to be a sign of the coming of the Immaculate Virgin Mary, Mother of the Redeemer. "Henceforward, Carmel was sacred in the eyes of all who looked beyond this world." (Dom Gueranger's The Liturgical Year, Vol. XIII)

St Elias came to have many disciples called the "sons of the prophets." (4 Kings 2:5) This group was seen as being the origin of the Carmelite order, since for generations to come, holy men and hermits would seek to live a life of solitude and prayer in imitation of Elias and the "sons of the prophets." Elias chose Eliseus (Elisha) to be his successor. (3 Kings 19:19) In a remarkable and moving scene, Elias is mysteriously assumed into heaven, riding in a fiery chariot. Before the dramatic departure, Eliseus begged Elias for a double portion of his spirit (4 Kings 2:9)

As Elias is carried away in the whirlwind, he bequeathes to Eliseus his mantle, along with his "double spirit." (4 Kings 2:13) Eliseus continued the work of fighting idolatry, working many miracles which surpassed those of his master. Can the mantle of Elias be seen as prefiguring the brown scapular, which symbolizes the spirit of prayer and penance, the spirit not only of Elias, but of Mary?

The history of Elias the prophet does not end with his assumption, for he makes an appearance in the New Testament as well. He and Moses converse with Jesus at His Transfiguration on Mt. Tabor (Matthew 17:3), as witnesses of the divinity of the Son of God. Afterwards, the Apostles question Our Lord about Elias. "Why then do the scribes say that Elias must come first?" (Matthew 17:10) They refer to the prophecy of Malachias: "Behold, I will send you Elias the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." (Malachias 4:5) Jesus assures them that Elias has preceded him in person of the John the Baptist (Matthew 17:12), who had the "spirit and power of Elias." (Luke 1:17)

However, Our Lord makes it clear that "Elias indeed shall come and restore all things." (Matthew 17:11) According to the scripture scholar Fr. Herman Kramer: "'John the Baptist did not usher in the great and dreadful day of the Lord,' as was foretold of Elias. That day will be the destruction of Antichrist...." (Fr Herman Kramer, The Book of Destiny, 1975)

Most of the early fathers of the Church identify Elias as one of the "two witnesses" in Chapter 11 of the Apocalypse, who do battle with the Antichrist. The two witnesses are martyred by the son of perdition, but their resurrection and ascension into Heaven ushers in the final defeat of "the beast." (see Apocalypse 11) The exact manner in which such cryptic prophecies will be fulfilled remains to be seen. It is interesting, however, that Carmelites have always used red vestments on July 20 in honor of the martyrdom of Elias that is to come.

Share

Highlights of St James's Palace

 

 From the Royal Trust Collection:

Originally known as the ‘Consort’s Presence Chamber’, the Tapestry Room features a spectacular original fireplace that survives from the reign of Henry VIII. In one of the carved quatrefoils (a design made of four intersecting lobes) you can see the initials ‘H’ and ‘A’ for Henry and his second wife, Anne Boleyn, which are intertwined with a true lover’s knot.  

This room is best-known for its display of tapestries that tell the story of Vulcan and Venus from Homer’s Odyssey. Charles I, when Prince of Wales, commissioned a suite of nine tapestries from the Mortlake tapestry workshop, the designs for which may have been adapted from an earlier series owned by Henry VIII on the same subject. Following Charles's execution in 1649, most of his collection of art (including the tapestries) was sold, and the suite was dispersed across Europe along with countless other works. (Read more.)

Share

Conspiracy Theory Comes True

 From The Vigilant Fox:

California just proved the “conspiracy theorists” right. Lawmakers passed a bill to seize fire-ravaged Palisades land and turn it into taxpayer-funded low-income housing.

This isn’t theory anymore—it’s reality, and it follows a disturbing national trend. For years, people claimed that disasters like the Maui fires were being used to clear land for Smart Cities. Now it’s happening in plain sight.

Across America, neighborhoods destroyed by fires and floods are being “reimagined” as dense, government-controlled housing zones. California’s SB 549 lets cities buy burned lots for mere pennies, rebuild using your tax dollars, and cram in numerous low-income units. Officials call it “resilient,” but it’s really about controlling where and how you live.

And it’s not just Democrats. The Global Covenant of Mayors unites cities from both parties under a Smart City agenda built on surveillance, permanent renting, and the end of single-family homes. Is this really about safety and sustainability—or is it about control? Watch Maria Zeee’s shocking report to see just how deep this agenda goes. (Read more.)

Share

The Downton Abbey Auction

 From Elle Decor:

The Julian Fellowes-created show first aired in the UK in 2010. Following the lives of the Crawley family, headed by the Earl of Grantham, the drama unfolds the day after the RMS Titanic went down in 1912. The show ran for six seasons, with 52 episodes, ending in the year 1925. But it has since had the kind of long-tail interest that few other TV dramas get with two feature-length films, the first of which was released in 2019. Now, 15 years after the first episode aired, the final installment—and third film—is on the horizon, and titled, fittingly, The Grand Finale, premiering in September.

As if to confirm that it will, actually, be the end, 120 prop pieces are to be auctioned off at Bonhams, in London, starting on August 18th and running through September 16th. The pieces on the block comprise a spectrum of fan-enticing fodder. For example, the Grantham family car, a 1925 Sunbeam: "The 20/60 was considered by many to be far superior to the Rolls Royce,” reads the auction footnotes. “First seen in Season 2, the Sunbeam was used throughout Seasons 3, 4 and 5, and in all three films.” The estimated price is between £25,000 (roughly $33,000) and £35,000 (or $47,000).

The auction will also include wardrobe pieces like Jim Carter as Carson’s “three-piece morning suit” (£600 - £800) and Dame Maggie Smith as Violet Crawley’s blue dress (£1,000 - £1,500). (Read more.)

Share

The Queen's Roses

The rose is a symbol for many things, including the Blessed Virgin Mary and marital happiness. From Anna Gibson:

Roses can be found in many of Marie Antoinette's portraits. Roses may have been a symbolic nod to her Austrian heritage; they may also have been used as a symbol of her Christian faith. In Christian paintings and engravings, various types of roses were often used to represent the rebirth of Christ, the Holy Trinity, and other important Christian iconography. The dog rose, just one of the roses chosen to populate the Petit Trianon, was used to symbolize both the five wounds of Christ and his rebirth. In mythology, the Rose was associated with love, fertility, and beauty. (Read more.)

Share

Washington Post's Fake News Gaza Coverage

 From Direct Line:

I read the latest Washington Post WorldView excerpt with the same mix of disbelief and frustration that hits every time our major newspapers abandon moral clarity for moral fog. Prime Minister Netanyahu was in Washington this week — and right on cue, the Post rolled out its familiar template: selective outrage, historical amnesia, and just enough “both-sides” language to obscure who started this war and why it hasn’t ended.

Let’s start with their opening lament: “There is no ceasefire yet in the war-ravaged Gaza Strip.” True — but let’s not pretend the blame lies with Jerusalem. Hamas has rejected every serious ceasefire offer that required them to do the one thing a civilized world should demand: release all the hostages and lay down arms. Instead, they’ve insisted on fantasy terms — permanent immunity, an Israeli withdrawal, and their own continued rule — as if they’re a legitimate government and not the terror cartel that raped, burned, and butchered its way through Israeli towns on October 7.

The Post says there’s “no clarity on how to address the humanitarian catastrophe.” Really? There’s clarity, alright — it’s just inconvenient. Hamas is the architect of Gaza’s suffering. They steal aid. They hoard fuel. They turn UN clinics into weapons depots. They dig tunnels under hospitals while their own people starve above ground. That’s not Israeli policy — that’s Hamas doctrine.

Then comes the loaded claim: “No road map for reconciling Israel with the millions of Palestinians who live under the de facto control of its security forces.” This is pure sleight of hand. Israel left Gaza in 2005 — unilaterally. Evacuated every settlement. Pulled out every soldier. In return, they got rockets on kindergartens and suicide bombers on buses. Gaza is not occupied by Israel. It’s occupied by Hamas — and it’s been ruled by fear, child indoctrination, and repression for almost two decades. (Read more.)

Share

Battle of Langport

 From BBC:

It has been 380 years since the Parliamentarians defeated the Royalists at the Battle of Langport, paving the way for one of the biggest changes in England's history. The Somerset battle effectively ended Royalist control in the West Country, a key strategic region. This boosted Parliamentarian morale and crippled their opponents forces in one morning of fighting. Experts believe that the battle of July 1645, fought during the English Civil War, marked a turning point that ultimately led to the execution of King Charles I and the abolition of the monarchy. Historian Julian Humphrys, of the Battlefields Trust, said: "This battle really was the beginning of the end for the Royalists." (Read more.)

Share

Death of a Family

 

July 17 is a sad anniversary. To quote author and historian Gareth Russell:

It had been a horrible, violent, lawless death - carried out in secret, without a trial or without justice. It was a fate that was to befall millions of ordinary Russians in the years under Communist rule - a system of government which has still, inexplicably, managed to escape the historical condemnation it so richly deserves. The Soviet Union was a depraved and genocidal regime, which even on its best days bore all the qualities of a sociopath. It was devoid of morality or respect for human life. It was infinitely worse than any regime in Russian history. And although it had technically come to power in October 1917, it was the events in Yekaterinburg on 17th July 1918 that should arguably be seen as the Soviet Union's true birth-date. Everything that defined it and everything that it was prepared to resort to was contained in how it executed the Romanovs. As Trotsky so rightly pointed out, with his chilling disinterest in human suffering - it proved that there was no going back. It defined what was to come. (Read entire post.)

 

Share