O Mundo Perfeito de Oswald

Eu não sou gordo!

O viado veste pra dar

Pixilation Dance

Aos Telespectadores:

Bom pessoal, depois de muito vocês pedirem estaremos colocando nossos videos no youtube.com, isso mesmo podem soltar foguetes e comemorar, então de cara antes mesmo de postar ja indico alguns videos que sempre estiveram no youtube.com para que os desavisados e aqueles que caíram no barco agora saibam que agente sempre teve um material muito bom no youtube.com e que o vamos continuar fazendo.

Ps: Jogue sua TV pela janela!

Today's victim was Oswald on Noggin. We've never see this show and after this morning's episode I am banning it from future viewing. I appreciate shows that are witty, humorous and/or unique. Oswald was none of these. I got particularly enraged when Oswald's dog Weenie (big surprise, the dog is a dachshund-real clever there) was trying to draw everyone's attention to the fact that a woodpecker was very close to knocking down a support beam under a tent. Oswald spent 5 minutes saying "What's wrong Weenie?" as Weenie very clearly was barking at the base of the support beam. Did Oswald look up once? No, he kept whining because he might lose the best pet contest. Luckily for Oswald and friends (and unlucky for me as I would have preferred that they all get crushed by the tent as it fell) Oswald finally pulled his head out of his ass and looked up. How frickin' hard was that?

The few minutes that the above was taking place were incredibly painful to me, my preschooler would have figured out that he needed to look up about twenty minutes before big, stupid, teeny hat wearing Oswald. This is educational? Five hours later I am still incensed just thinking about it. Whoever created Oswald is an assclown.

Essa semana o blog do Fiz TV revelou uma surpresa, foi postado um video intitulado Fiz Brother Brasil de autoria do "Barão do pirapora" que nada mais é que uma animação feita com caricaturas dos personagens mais famosos ou carimbados do Fiz TV e para alegria geral da nação Galofritense quem deu as caras no video ? acertou quem respondeu OSWALD, isso mesmo o nosso querido amigo alemão beberrão está no video.

http://fiztv.uol.com.br/blog/?areaAtualId=2&videoId=10757

Galo Frito agora tem sua estréia marcada para o dia 14/05 às 21h!! Agora não tem frescura, toda quarta a partir do dia 14/05 às 21h você poderá ver um programa novo do Galo Frito no canal FIZTV!

Pra deixar vocês mais entretidos com o que estará no programa, vou colocar um quadro do mesmo aqui no blog, O Mundo Perfeito de Oswald! Veja como este alemão faz seu mundo um lugar melhor para viver!

Oswald Metzger hat einen Schritt vollzogen, zu dem sich sein politisches Vorbild Ludwig Erhard (aus gutem Grund) zu Lebzeiten niemals durchringen konnte: Er tritt in die CDU ein.

Ob dieser Parteiwechsel tatsächlich ideologisch motiviert ist, wird man wohl zunächst nicht erfahren (der von ihm als Begründung angegebene "wirtschafts- und sozialpolitische" Kurs der Grünen dürfte es wohl kaum sein - ansonsten würde er nicht zu der Partei wechseln, die zusammen mit der SPD einen nicht unwesentlichen Teil der rot-grünen Agenda 2010 wieder einkassiert hat). Man kann aber davon ausgehen, dass Metzger für die Zahlung seiner Mitgliedsbeiträge mit einem aussichtsreichen Listenplatz und/oder einem Wahlkreis zur nächsten Bundestagswahl 2009 belohnt wird.

Das mittlerweile selbst ein Oswald Metzger hierzulande als "Marktwirtschaftler" oder "(Neo-)Liberaler" durchgeht, ist exemplarisch für das kulturelle, ideologische und ethische Koordinatensystem der BRD.

Er gibt offen zu, höhere Steuern zu fordern und bekennt sich zu einer ökologistischen Weltanschauung (er nennt es den "ökologischen Imperativ"). Insofern ist er in der Partei von Geißler und Blühm schon ganz richtig.

The centerpiece of the conference is the appearance of Tennent “Pete” Bagley, the CIA officer whose recent book has set off a firefight in CIA over the defector Yuri Nosenko, who crossed over to the West with news about the assassination of JFK and Lee Harvey Oswald’s sojourn in the Soviet Union.

In a coup for the Raleigh Spy Conference, chief historian for CIA David Robarge will present new information about the shadowy figure of CIA counterintelligence chief James Jesus Angleton, whose paranoia that the Soviet mole SASHA had infiltrated the highest echelons of US spy agencies looms today.

Brian Kelley, the CIA officer that the FBI falsely accused of being the treacherous Robert Hanssen, will present the never before divulged saga of a double agent, the lives he touched, and a surprise ending with connections to Chapel Hill, NC.

Two respected journalists who have covered the role of intelligence will provide political dimension to the world of espionage: Jerry Schecter, former Moscow bureau chief for Time Magazine and the author of seminal books on the Cold War; and David Ignatius, Washington Post columnist and author of spy fiction respected by the intelligence community (his latest book is being made into a major motion picture, directed by Ridley Scott) will conclude the Raleigh conference with an overview of the role of intelligence in modern history.

Says conference founder Bernie Reeves, “This is the real thing. Attendees get to know the very top people who make the world work behind the scenes in the secret world of espionage. There is not other event like it in the world.”

A full conference schedule, biographies of the speakers and registration information is available at www.raleighspyconference.com or by calling Raleigh Metro Magazine at 919-831-0999.

###

El revólver con que se mató al acusado de asesinar a John F. Kennedy, el sombrero de la Bruja del Oeste, el látigo de Indiana Jones, el vestido de novia de Madonna en "Like a Virgin" y un pincel de Warhol forman parte de la curiosa subasta que tendrá lugar en marzo en Las Vegas, publica hoy la prensa local.

La casa neoyorquina de subastas Guernsey sacará a la venta los próximos 15 y 16 de marzo hasta 850 piezas de una extraña amalgama privada, que está considerada como la mejor colección de cultura popular estadounidense jamás puesta a la venta.

El dueño de la colección, un empresario del sur de Florida, podría recaudar hasta cinco millones de dólares por la venta de unos objetos que, aunque antes eran su pasión y tras 25 años de coleccionismo, han dejado de interesarle. Una de las piezas que más expectativa crea es el revólver Colt Cobra, del calibre 38, usado por Jack Ruby para matar en 1963 a Lee Harvey Oswald, arrestado por el asesinato del presidente más carismático de Estados Unidos, y que lleva grabadas las iniciales de los detectives que entregaron el arma.

Ruby era un empresario nocturno estadounidense que el 24 de noviembre de 1963, dos días después de la muerte de Kennedy, asesinó con el revólver de su hermano a Lee Harvey Oswald, el único sospechoso en custodia por el asesinato del ex presidente.

Además, se subastará el sombrero que llevaba puesto Ruby y por el que se podrían pagar más de 25.000 dólares, un mechón de su pelo, las esposas de sus piernas, una carta que escribió desde prisión o los zapatos marca Florsheim que llevaba ese mismo día, así como la etiqueta que se puso en el pie a Oswald para identificar su cadáver.

En el ámbito de la música, los interesados podrán pujar por objetos tan variopintos como la chaqueta que John Lennon vistió en el video "Imagine" de los Beatles, hasta el vestido de novia que usó Madonna en "Like a Virgin", un disfraz de Supermán que usó Christopher Reeve y un pincel de Andy Warhol.  Sin embargo, uno de los ámbitos más atractivos de la subasta será el dedicado al cine, donde los más entusiastas podrán pujar por objetos utilizados en "El halcón maltés" , "Indiana Jones" o "Corazón valiente" , entre otras películas. Por el Casino The Palms de Las Vegas pasarán el sombrero de la malvada bruja del Oeste del Mago de Oz, el santo grial y el látigo de "Indiana Jones y la Última Cruzada" , la estatua de resina de "El Halcón Maltés" y la espada de "Braveheart" , que podría adjudicarse por más de 30 mil dólares.

Los organizadores prevén que, por ejemplo, el látigo de Indiana Jones se venda por entre 50 mil y 100 mil dólares, o que los pantalones vaqueros que llevaba James Dean en "Rebelde sin causa" se adjudiquen por entre 15 mil y 25 mil dólares. Una peluca que vistió Elizabeth Taylor en "Cleopatra" y la chaqueta que llevaba Brandon Lee cuando murió víctima de un disparo accidental durante el rodaje de "The Crow" harán también las delicias de los más cinéfilos que participen en la subasta, que podría pagar por esa última entre 15 mil y 25 mil dólares. El estadounidense Anthony Pugliese ha pasado los últimos 25 años recopilando todos esos objetos, para crear "una de las mejores colecciones que existen" , según el presidente de la casa de subastas, Arlan Ettinger.

En su opinión, en esta subasta habrá hasta un centenar de objetos que podrían ser las protagonistas únicas de otras tantas subastas, como la placa del FBI que perteneció a su fundador J. Edgar Hoover o una camisa de fuerza utilizada por Harry Houdini, el mago que asombró al mundo a inicios del siglo XX con sus asombrosas liberaciones de todo tipo de ataduras.

Fuente: El Universal

February 26, 2008 (RALEIGH, NC) — Why would the KGB take pains to deny it had nothing to do with the assassination of John F. Kennedy, or that the Soviet spy agency had no contact with Lee Harvey Oswald when he lived in the USSR prior to the events in Dallas?

CIA officer Tennent “Pete” Bagley asked those questions of KGB defector Yuri Nosenko in Geneva in 1964 — less than two months after the assassination. James Angleton, the chief of counterintelligence for CIA, agreed with Bagley’s assessment: Nosenko was part of a deception and was not telling the whole truth. Thus ensued one the most controversial sagas in CIA history that continues today with the publication of a new book by Pete Bagley.

The 2008 Raleigh Spy Conference, an internationally acclaimed event that draws top experts in the field of intelligence to Raleigh each year, will feature Bagley and five other expert speakers under the title CIA’s Unsolved Mysteries: The Nosenko Defection, Double Agents and Angleton’s Wilderness of Mirrors. The final conference schedule is available at www.raleighspyconference.com (click on “event info”).

According to Conference founder Bernie Reeves, editor and publisher of Raleigh Metro Magazine, “Many questions remain from the monumental battle between the Soviet Union and the United States when the wheel of history often turned to the will of agents of deception and moles burrowed inside intelligence and other government agencies. It was indeed a ‘wilderness of mirrors’ that continues today to cast a confused image of history.”

The Conference will open on Wednesday, March 26, at 6 p.m. with registration and a reception, followed by a surprise addition to the speaker line-up: Stanton Evans, author of the controversial new book Blacklisted By History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy And His Fight Against America’s Enemies.

David Robarge, chief historian for CIA, will start off Thursday morning at 9 a.m. discussing the environment at CIA created by the legendary James Jesus Angleton, CIA’s counterintelligence chief who turned the Agency inside out searching for a Soviet mole he thought had burrowed into the highest levels of the US intelligence community.

At 10:30 a.m., former CIA counterintelligence officer Brian Kelley will dramatize for the first time the true story of an American double agent targeted against the KGB. Drawing on newly declassified information, Kelley will trace the deceptions and mystery of the case – involving spy agencies, presidents and KGB sources -- and conclude with a stunning surprise involving an American official.

At 1:30 p.m., special guest Pete Bagley will answer questions about his new book on the Nosenko defection and the controversy it has rekindled in intelligence circles. Feelings are running so strongly that Bagley’s scheduled talk in July at CIA about his book was abruptly canceled the evening before. Brian Kelley will join Bagley on stage as moderator.

At 3 p.m., former Time magazine Moscow bureau chief Jerrold Schecter -- the author of seminal books on the Cold War -- will discuss the political environment that produced the double agents, moles and deception operations that created the wilderness of mirrors that signified the Cold War confrontation of US and Soviet spy agencies.

From 4:15 to 5 p.m. authors at the Conference will hold a book signing. The day will conclude with a Conference Gala from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at Amra’s in Raleigh’s Glenwood South district.

Friday, March 28, kicks off at 9 a.m. with a panel discussion featuring all speakers to field additional questions from the audience, introduce special guests, and discuss the findings and conclusions from the 5th Raleigh Spy Conference.

At 11 a.m., David Ignatius, Washington Post columnist and former Moscow bureau chief, will present the keynote address. Ignatius, an award-winning journalist and the author of espionage fiction applauded by the intelligence community, will present an overview of the era that created the wilderness of mirrors and the political and historical impact of Cold War espionage.

The Raleigh Spy Conference was founded “to bridge the gap between intelligence and current history,” according to Reeves. “The calculus of modern events is intelligence. We don’t really know what happened until someone declassifies something.”

Association of Intelligence Officers President Gene Poteat says of the Raleigh Conference: “In Washington, it's difficult for the public to comprehend important intelligence and terrorism issues since everything is partisan and politically charged. Outside Washington, there are few voices for the public to hear, and those heard are often wrong or media-driven. Few are able to explain to the public what really has happened, and is happening, in intelligence, counterterrorism and national security — important issues, which, throughout history, have spelled the survival or loss of this or other nations.

“The annual Raleigh Spy Conference is a rare opportunity to hear it straight, with an unusual ‘insider's’ perspective and knowledge. Each year this conference opens that door to share remarkable insights and stellar speakers with the public. If one claims a scintilla of world-affairs knowledge, it cannot be true unless the annual Raleigh Spy Conference is on your calendar.”

Tickets to the three-day event are $250 for the general public, $175 for seniors, and $145 for teachers, students and members of the military and intelligence community. Early registration is available by calling Jennifer Hadra at 919-831-0999. For complete information, including accommodations, go to www.raleighspyconference.com.

- 30 -

The files could however not be furnished to the HSCA as they had be destroyed in 1973 as part of a routine procedure.

I can understand that the file of an average Marine would only be kept for a certain time, but this was the file on the man who killed the President! as well as a man who defected to the Soviet Union.

One would think that the file would be market and kept under special circumstances.

This is to me unbelievable and at least circumstantial evidence of a conspiracy.

Source: HSCA p 223-225

But what can we do that's more wholesome, productive or inspiring?

What do you do in the morning with your young children?

LINK

Recording of Role-playing + powerful figure = Bad Idea #1

Need I say more?

In high school, I had a history teacher who was obsessed with JFK.  We spent six weeks studying the president's life and of course his assassination, and the infamous Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby.  The teacher was so obsessed that he even had a poster of JFK on the wall behind his desk. Oliver Stone's successful film was watched in class, along with specials recorded from the History and Biography channels.

Every November when these shows are repeated on television in conjunction with the anniversary of Kennedy's death, I'm still captivated and sit and watch them although I have seen some of them thousands of times and know the events and conspiracies by heart.  As Americans we probably all do, which is why it's always interesting to come across a new point of view.  And that is exactly what Jim Jarman has presented to us in his book, Deadly Delusion.

Jim is the first to offer to send a free copy of the actual book to me, so I would like to take a moment to discuss the quality of the book cover thanks to my own book cover charades which I have discussed in great detail in the POD Diary.  The image which is pictured above was copied from Lulu, but appears to be the same as the one pictured on Amazon.  Unfortunately, either the color or the font has caused the DEAD part of DEADLY to appear quite blurred online.  It does not look like that at all on the physical book.  The hands and the rest of the title appear quite bright and even washed out in the picture above.  Again, they are not like that at all on the actual book.  These parts even have some nice shading which make the overall effect Jim was probably going for work very well.  The blood splatter and gun shot reminded me of the opening sequence of a Bond film, and were probably prevalent on murder mystery book covers published in the 60s which is when Jim's book takes place.

There are a few issues on the back of the book with the overlapping of lettering in the blurb.  It almost gives the words the same glass crackled effect as the front, but makes them hard to read.  The blurb also gives no mention to this book being about the JFK assassination and Oswald.  You can read the blurb here.  Had I read this blurb on my own without any prior knowledge about Jim's book, I probably would not pick up this book and buy it. Lastly, on the front I'd like to see Jim's name be a bit larger.  Sorry to pick on Jim, but I'm only offering my constructive criticism because the piece of work he has written between the front and back cover is truly amazing.

As I've said before, the outside of the book gives no mention to this story being about JFK and Oswald.  The entire book is about the CIA choosing Oswald and training him to carry out the murder of the president, ultimately changing history forever, unbeknownst to Oswald ever knowing he was just a pawn. Right from the start, Jarman dives head on into Oswald's life as a loyal marine.  You almost feel sorry for him as the opposite side of the story treats you to some harsh CIA operatives manipulating Oswald like a puppet on a string just as the book cover hints.

I'd like to point out that Jim Jarman has not just regurgitated the conspiracy theories and historical evidence that history buffs are already privy to.  I enjoyed having some prior knowledge to the themes that Jarman plays upon, but the twists and turns that his fast paced, hard edged writing takes you on offered many pleasant surprises that I was not expecting.  He's written a thriller, with new point of view and bite, that I could easily see transposed to the big screen.

I would have liked to have seen the climax play out a bit differently, even a fictional account perhaps, as we all know how Oswald's story ends.  Jarman leaves us with a "textbook" account of the tragic story which I have to admit disappointed me just a bit:

The world had been denied comprehension of the extreme dedication of Lee Harvey Oswald to his dream of worthwhile fame. A young life whose voice was hushed forever, never to heard, never to implicate an evil force that infected a free nation.

But I have a feeling Jarman wanted to remain true to history with the basic plot of his book.  Outside of this, Deadly Delusion is an amazing piece of work filled with suspense and mystery.  If you are a JFK buff, history major, mystery reader, or political guru, I highly recommend that you add Jim Jarman to your bookshelf!  You will not be disappointed.  I look forward to more from this author in the near future!

Whitby Abbey. Picture taken by yours truly in 2002. This would be the location of the important Synod Of Whitby in 664 which would result in the majority of Britain following the Roman version of Christianity at the expense of the Celtic system. The Abbey ruins above date from about 1220, but were built as an improvement on an older building dated to the early eleventh century. It is quite likely that Hild established a monastery at this site which would date back to about 655.

Britain in the middle of the seventh century was divided into two religious camps: The Ionan and the Roman (for the sake of argument I am ignoring the non-Christian elements within the British Isles: apologies to all you pagans out there…). The former camp also known as Celtic Christianity, was centred around the teachings of Columba (or Columcille: the Holy Dove) who had been granted some land on the small island of Iona by a local King (probably Conall mac Congaill) in or about 563. From this base Columba sent missions and established trade routes with both Anglo-Saxon and Scottish kingdoms and in doing so increased the reach of the Celtic belief system. The Roman version of Christianity had arrived in England in 597 when Pope Gregory dispatched Augustine to convert the kingdom of Kent. After a brief reluctance the Kentish king, Aethelbert converted, this probably down to a pincer movement between his wife, Bertha who was a Frankish Christian and Augustine himself. It should be noted that Augustine’s followers left his life unwritten and that the majority of source material on this fascinating man were put down by the equally impressive Venerable Bede in the eight century. Bede was a student and avowed follower of the Roman church and therefore any commentary by him on the Synod of Whitby must be treated with an element of caution. Nonetheless, the arrival of Augustine did lead for some interesting, but probably false stories. In particular, when King Aethelbert was due to meet Augustine at Thanet, he is alleged to have insisted on the encounter taking place beneath the open sky through fears of what this new and complex religion could do. Allegorical maybe, but this is a perfect tale of how Christianity was viewed at that time. Little understood, such a belief system could be seen to be as a new sinister form of magic which could have limitless repercussions for those introduced to it. This reluctance to embrace Christianity is manifest when it is realised that twenty years after the death of Augustine, the Kingdom of Kent had still not been wholly converted, let alone the rest of the British Isles.

In comparing the two versions of Christianity, the most obvious difference between them is also arguably the most fundamental. The Ionan church was much more lax than its Roman rival in matters of hierarchy. In selling the Columban version to the fiercely independent Celtic kings it would have been a non-starter to insist that they be answerable to the Pope. In granting permission for Columba to base himself on Iona, it is certain that King Conall mac Congaill was after something more than just saving his soul. Trade and an establishment of a literate elite would have figured largely, and if this strange new religion could help preserve him in the afterlife, then so much the better. The Roman Church had no such misgivings about who was at the top of the chain and insisted on a structure of worship which ran through layers territorially based bishops and was drawn together by the centre of authority in Rome.

For much of the next one hundred years the two churches co-existed, albeit uneasily, with each other. It is likely that the population, as a whole, paid lip-service to the competing ideologies and would hedge their bets by taking the eminently sensible precaution of following the direction of their king. As an aside, it has always struck me as curious that historians appear to assume that the unknown majority of a nation will inevitably have the same affiliations as their leader. In times such as the Anglo-Saxon period, even the major figureheads have limited source material with which to verify their actions. As far as the common people are concerned there is, too all intents and purposes, no information at all. From my perspective, I believe that most would have been more concerned about ensuring that the next harvest was not ruined by ill weather, or that their next born would make it through labour. If a new fangled religious belief assisted with these everyday preoccupations then all well and good, but there is no need to immediately forsake the old, established and tried and trusted pagan rituals.

Be that as it maybe. The two groups seemed destined to meet and resolve their differences. The location of this clash would be Whitby and the arbiter: King Oswiu. Historians are (unsurprisingly) not agreed as to the reasons for the opposing sides being forced together for the Council Of Whitby. What is known is that it was King Oswiu who ruled over Northumbria who decreed that the meeting should take place.

Northumbria had up until recently been separated into the two kingdoms of Deira and Bernicia. Oswiu’s father had been killed in fighting King Eadwine of Deira whon would briefly unite the two kingdoms. Following the death of his father Oswiu, aged about five, had found himself exiled in Scotland and later Ireland. Eadwine was later to die at the hands of the British king Cadwallon of Gwynedd, who would also kill Oswiu’s brother, Eanfrith and lead Northumbria to sunder itself again. It would be another brother of Oswiu, this time Oswald who would meet Cadwallon near Hexham (the exact location being unknown but possibly Rowley Burn or Heavenfield) in 634. Oswald defeated and killed the British king and was greeted as a saviour of both Deira and Bernicia which were united as the Kingdom of Northumbria.

Whilst all this going on, Oswiu was becoming ever more familiar with Celtic culture, including the ability to speak Irish and also being christened into the Ionan faith. Although not established for certain it is quite possible that the christening took place on Iona and he would remain a patron of Celtic Christianity right up until the Synod of Whitby. However, more immediate concerns would prevail upon Oswiu’s time. In 641, Oswald met the pagan king Penda of Mercia in battle at Oswestry. It is alleged that as Penda’s forces closed in on Oswald’s army, he knelt and prayed for the souls of his men. This battle is important as it demonstrates that Christianity, of either persuasion had a long way to go before Britain could be considered converted. Pagan beliefs still existed and as if to further underscore this point, Penda, following heathen-tribal ritual, dismembered Oswald’s body and placed the head and arms on stakes. The manner of his death at the hands of a pagan meant that Oswald would soon be given martyr status. Oswiu ascended to the throne of Bernicia , he would soon invade Deira and force the newly installed king to flee. However, the population of Deira chose one of Oswald’s sons to be their leader. This was a man named Aethelwald who promptly placed himself under the protection of Penda. Thus the first decade of Oswiu’s reign would be characterised by conflict with Penda who led continual incursions into Bernicia. In 655, Oswiu, following the refusal of a peace offering to Penda, would finally settle matters with the pagan king at the River Winwaed in the area of Loidis (possibly Leeds which is located in what was once Deira). It seems likely that despite having an overwhelming force at the start of the battle, many of Penda’s allies deserted him, including Aethalwald. Penda, almost certainly as revenge for the death of Oswald was beheaded by Oswiu. For the time being Oswiu could be considered as overlord (Bretwalda) of England, for he was certainly the most powerful king at that time.

Oswiu remained a fervent Christian and was only to eager to spread the word of the (Ionan) church. In overcoming great odds and defeating the powerful Penda, God’s hand could be seen to be at work. The move to the Synod of Whitby proceeded apace when Oswiu’s son, Alchfrith adopted the Roman Church and expelled the Celtic brethren from the monastery at Ripon. Furthermore, Oswiu’s wife Eanflaed had retained the Roman teachings of her youth. It is here that we see what Bede called the ‘great and active controversy of Easter’ when it is recognised that within the confines of one kingdom, the important date of when Christ ascended to Heaven was being celebrated differently. Due to the adoption of differing calendars (the Ionan being an older version which had been regarded as an error by the Roman Church), practitioners of each faith found themselves in the rather absurd situation of one group celebrating Easter (Oswiu and the Ionans) whilst the other group (Alchfrith and the Romans) were fasting in Lent. Of course Bede with his love of the Roman Church always being uppermost in his thoughts, would regard this as being the reason for the Synod being called. To Bede’s way of thinking, his nation would once more belong to the true Church of Christ, rather than being guided in matters theological by what he regarded as a “handful of people in the remotest islands”. It is far more realistic, however, to assume that the conference was held by Oswiu as he noticed his grip on power slipping. Yes, this was in part due to religious differences between himself and his son, but the immediacy of political realities would have been at the forefront of his actions. It should be recalled that Easter had been celebrated twice within a year for nearly two decades already – reconciling the date would have not been regarded as an urgent matter.

In moving across to the Roman faith, Alchfrith had aligned himself with a movement whose star was very much in the ascendant. Oswiu had appointed Alchfrith as a sub-king of the kingdom of Deira and it would be Alchfrith who would expel the Ionan’s and install Wilfrid, one of the most fanatical supporters of the Roman Church into the monastery at Ripon. For Oswiu it was unfortunate that the better organised Roman Church was making inroads into Britain whilst the Ionan Church was being sidelined. Alchfrith would make a greater impression on his subjects having the weight the of the church behind him, Oswiu recognised that this would ultimately be at his expense. The influence that Alchfrith had on the decision to call the Synod must also be factor. Anglo-Saxon successions could quite often be erratic affairs, at the time there was no rule of automatic succession. Although strong kings were able to choose who would take their place, very often a successor was appointed via an election. Differing from what we recognise as the electoral procedure, the Anglo Saxon variant involved an individual garnering support from magnates which meant that he would be able to back up his claim with force. It is very important to realise that force was a major consideration in the seventh century. As noted, Alchfrith had joined with the dominant Roman Church, it is not stretching the point to far, to suggest that within that church were more prominent and powerful figures than could be found in the Celtic version. These are people that Alchfrith could call upon to assist in his aspirations for power. Furthermore, in choosing Rome, Alchfrith would be re-affirming his autonomy from his father. In expelling the Celtic monks from Ripon, Alchfrith could be seen to be delivering a slap in the face to his father as those monks were under Oswiu’s patronage. It also cranked up the tensions between the two factions and was a possible reason (and more immediate) reason for the Synod to be called.

Oswiu, perhaps through experience gained with age, is unlikely to have missed the machinations of his son. Indeed, he would have been hard pressed to have overlooked the challenge laid down by Alchfrith when the latter expelled the monks from Ripon. Ripon was part of Deira which was governed by Alchfrith as a under-king. But, Deira was part of Northumbria and viewed in that light was very much the realm of Oswiu. Following Oswiu’s defeat of Penda, he would have been recognised as Bretwalda, but by 644, his standing was being eroded not least by a surge in Mercian influence. At the helm of this rise to power was Penda’s son, Wulfhere, who over time had managed to subject most of the southern kingdoms to his lordship. A new power block was forming to challenge the Northumbrians. The water was further muddied when it is realised that Alchfrith was the brother-in-law of the Mercian king

Oswiu was demonstrating his understanding or real politics when he called the Synod of Whitby. Despite the arguments flying backwards and forwards, it is even quite probable that Oswiu had made his decision prior to the meeting taking place. In the end what choice did have but to align himself with Rome? No matter what arguments were put forward in favour of adopting the Celtic church, in the end the decision would be a foregone conclusion. When the Roman firebrand Wilfrid pointed out that the Roman way was traceable directly back to St Peter, who held the keys to the gates of Heaven, the writing was on the wall. Oswiu asked the Celtic contingent if it was indeed true that St Peter held the keys which they could only respond to by answering in the affirmative. St Peter (and by extension, his successors, the Popes of Rome) was of a much greater authority than Columba (the lynchpin of the Celtic argument) and in recognising this Oswiu made his decision in favour of Rome.

Oswiu out manoeuvred his son, allied himself with a rising centralising force and reasserted his authority. He can be viewed as being not just a fine leader of men militarily but also a learned politician. The Anglo-Saxon period is often contemplated in simplistic terms, but when one digs beneath the service of what is seemingly a minor dispute about a date of celebration, the convoluted nature of the peoples and practices of this period, bubble to the surface.

Further Reading:

(1) Any study of the Anglo Saxon period must make recourse to: Stenton, F (1971). Anglo-Saxon England, Oxford University Press, Oxford (ISBN 0-19-282236-3). A lot of what Stenton has proposed has been overturned (historians are more than most, smug with the benefits of hindsight)but this seminal study still remains at the vanguard of Anglo-Saxon study.

(2) Nobody can lay claim to be the Historian of the moment more than: Schama, S (2001) A History Of Britain – Volume 1: At The Edge Of The World: 3000BC – AD1603, BBC Worldwide, London(ISBN 0-563-38497-2). Schama is opinionated and authoritative and his writing style is unsurpassed.

(3) Falkus, M and Gillingham, J (1981). Historical Atlas Of Britain. Book Club Associates, London (Sorry, I don’t have the ISBN) – Excellent resources for study of the Sceptred Isle.

(4) Craig, D.J (2004). Oswiu. Oxford Dictionary Of National Biography, Oxford University Press,Oxford

(5) Abels, R (1983). The Council Of Whitby: A Study In Early Anglo-Saxon Politics. The BritishJournal Of Studies, Volume 23, Number 1 (Autumn 1983) – An excellent but argumentative review of the Synod Of Whitby. Abels writes lucidly and convincingly, but leaves me with the urge to knee him in the knackers!

(6) Savage, A (Trans) (1982) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles. Book Club Associates, London (Sorry I do not have the ISBN). If you are interested in Anglo-Saxons then I don’t really need to introduce this do I?

Os lo cuento a ver como se os queda el cuerpo a vosotros:

Lincoln fue elegido al congreso en 1846, Kennedy en 1946

Lincoln fue elegido presidente en 1860, Kennedy en 1960

Ambos presidentes fueron asesinados un viernes por un disparo en la cabeza

Hasta aqui puede ser casualidad ¿no?, pero la cosa sigue:

La secretaria de Lincoln tenía de apellido Kennedy, la secretaria de Kennedy tenía de apellido Lincoln

Ambos fueron asesinados por sureños y fueron reemplazados en la presidencia por sureños de apellido Johnson

Andrew Johnson quién remplazó a Lincoln nació en 1808, Lyndon Johson que remplazó a Kennedy nació en 1908

John Wilkes Booth, que asesinó a Lincoln nació en 1839,  Lee Harvey Oswald que asesinó a Kennedy nació en 1939

A ambos asesinos se les conocía por los 3 nombres, algo no muy común en la cultura norteamericana, la suma de las letras de ambos nombres es 15

Pero todavia hay más cosas:

A Lincoln le dispararon dentro de un teatro llamado Ford, a Kennedy le asesinaron dentro de un coche de la marca Ford, modelo Kennedy

Booth y Oswald fueron asesinados antes de ir a juicio

Una semana antes de que lo asesinaran, Lincoln estuvo en Monroe (Maryland) y una semana antes de que mataran a Kennedy estuvo con Marilyn Monroe

Y después de todo esto, ¿crees en las casualidades?

However, I'm watching Game 7 of the Celtics/Hawks series the other night, caught up in the excitement of a down-to-the-wire game.  Instead of being held in the grip of exciting play, I was treated to a total blowout.

And then I remembered...

Several years back, a friend of mine (a trusting native New Yorker...) mused this statement: "Have you ever noticed how so many f*****' (New York expletive) NBA playoff and championship series come down to the final game?"

What my buddy was inferring is that The Corporate Machine (TV) was staging these incredible series in order to sell more advertising. Total B.S., I told him! Or is it?

This is my same bro that tried to convince me that every boxing match was rigged.

I was intrigued...so I did some research.

In 1963, both of the NBA division finals went the full seven games, and the championship went 6 games, with Boston winning the whole shebang. Around the same time, JFK was assasinated by Oswald. JFK was from Massachusetts, where Boston is located. Coincidence? I think not.

Then, later in that decade, inspired by a challenge from JFK, the moon landing occurred. Or did it?

NBA, JFK, Moon Landing...the connection is obvious.

Can't you see it?

 The following is an excerpt from a book I highly recommend called "The JFK Assassination Debate:Lone Gunman versus Conspiracy."by Prof.Michael L. Kurtz,published in 2006 by University Press of Kansas along with my own commentary.If this topic interests you but you don't wont a long winded book and you wont the anylasis to be fare then please pick this up.

"One of the most critical pieces of evidence in the entire Kennedy assassination case,the bullet the warren commission called bullet 399,also found its evidentiary value destroyed by haphazard,careless,and neglectful handling. This was the bullet (supposedly) fired from Oswalds rifle that the commission claimed entred the back of JFKs neck,exited from the front of his throat,then entered Goevernor Conallys(The man directly in front of the president in the motorcade.)back,passed through his chest,exiting just below his right nipple,then entered the underside of his right wrist and exited from the top of it,and finally lodged in his left thigh..."

The strange discovery of Bullet 399 however made it unlikely that is had anything to do with the actual assassination  though the warren commission choose to believe it was the bullet that killed Kennedy.

(At the Hospital) "Darrell Tomlinson,a senior hospital engineer,got on the elevator and wheeled the now empty gurney Gov.Conally had been lay on into a corridor on the ground floor and placed it next to another gurney that had nothing to do with the assassination.The first gurney blocked the mens restroom.About 45 minutes later,Tomlinson, accompanied by his friend ,Nathan Pool, returned to the ground-floor corridor and noticed that the original gurney,not Conallys,was blocking the corridor because someone had used the mens room and had failed to return the gurney to its original position. When Tomlinson pushed that gurney back against the wall ,he and Pool noticed that a bullet,which had apparently been lodged under the mat,rolled out."

That is literally how the bullet was found.And immediately after he informed the Secret Service Agent guarding JFKs body he was told to pick it up. He got O.P. Wright,the hospital security director to do it and that man took it to Agent Richard Johnsen who mearly put it in his pocket. No photograph of the exact spot it was found was taken,No one signed there initials on it,no one even though to pick it up with a handkerchief all standard practises in murder investigations of the time.

After several layers of people handling and miss-handling the missile it was used in the warren commission as evidence.That is if bullet 399 was even the original bullet found by Tomlinson.Agent Richard Johnsen and Secret service Director James Rowley,both of whom handled and observed the stretcher bullet,refused to identify bullet 399 as the one they turned over to the FBI.Even if they had it wouldint have mattered though since Tomlinson believed he had found the bullet on the other gurney not Conallys.

"Nevertheless, Warren Commission junior counsel Arlen Spector concluded that the bullet came from Governor Conallys stretcher. In his questioning of Darell Tomlinson ,Spector convinced the hospital engineer to admit the possibility that he found the bullet on Conallys strecher,even though Tomlinson originally believed that he had discovered it on the other gurney, one that had no connection to the assassination. In sharp prosecutorial tones, Specter interrogated Tomlinson almost as if he were a hostile witness,because Tomlinson's original scenario had the bullet discovered on a gurney that had nothing to do with either President Kennedy or Governor Conally.This,of course, would have inevitably raised the possibility of the bullets having been planted,thereby demonstrating the existence of a conspiracy."

After that Tomlinson spoke publicly about bullet 399 twice more and both times said he found it on the Gurney that had nothing to do with the assassination.

Now there is loads of things I could add for example how did bullet 399 change direction in mid-air and hit Governor Conally but I think the strange discovery and mishandling of the bullet alone is enough to convince most that there was indeed a Conspiracy.  Id like to add that Arlan Specter ,who is now a senator, almost single hadedly created the Magic bullet theory and had a great deal to do with the cover up.If you would like to "thank" him feel free to contact him using the information below:

Website: specter.senate.gov

Washington, D.C. Office:

711 Hart Senate Office Building SH-711
Washington, D.C., District of Columbia 20510-3802
Phone: (202) 224-4254
Fax: (202) 228-1229

600 Arch St., #9400
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
Phone: (215) 597-7200
Fax: (215) 597-0406

WeAreChange confronts Arlen Specter and asks about the Kennedy Assassination and the Magic Bullet among other things:

The Dame;

Julie Christie.

Making her debut in John Schlesinger's Billy Liar at the age of 22, Julie Christie ushered in the swinging sixties, landing a BAFTA nomination she announced herself on the national stage, before two years later reteaming with Schlesinger once more in the central role, she won an Oscar for Darling. At 24, the grandest prize in the profession in her grasp, Julie Christie played a second role that same year, and though it was the other that built her reputation, it was David Lean's Doctor Zhivago that made her an icon. Proving diversity was in her grasp she displayed her range over the next decade, refusing to settle into comfortable roles, she starred in Francois Truffaut's adaptation of Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, alongside her much celebrated other half in Robert Altman's lyrical western in McCabe & Mrs. Miller and with Donald Sutherland, in Nicholas Roeg's grim, horror masterpiece Don't Look Now. As time went by and her relationship with Warren Beatty grew, her interest in acting seem to dim, though working relatively consistently for the next few decades she turned down numerous major roles that had been major steps for other actresses from They Shoot Horses Don't They? to Reds, moving back to the UK in the early 80s after her split from Beatty, she began campaigning for animal rights, nuclear disarmament, and numerous other causes. Eventaully in the mid 90s she began a career renaissance, first landing the role of Gertude in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet before going onto further supporting work and Oscar nominations for her beautifully subtle work in Afterglow and Away from Her. Though she may have priorities in other arenas, Julie Christie certainly makes it count whenever she steps on screen.

The Dude;

Gary Oldman.

Not a performer given to nuanced and subtle work, Gary Oldman is an actor that came from the stage and has never forgotten it. An artist that paints in loud, broad brushstrokes he still strives for the farthest row in the theatre whenever he appears on screen and he nails it out of the park basically every single time. Though loud and brash might be his game, there really isn't anybody better at it, when Gary Oldman is on the screen, you can rarely tear your eyes away. Those screams, those pulsating veins, those glorious tics and twitches, and the absolute brutally perfect way he delivers every single line has been in evidence from his screen debut as Sid Vicious in the romanticized biopic Sid & Nancy, to his vicious, obsessive sports thug in The Firm to his 'graduation' across the atlantic, where ever since the turn of the 90s he has been blazing his way through Hollywood. There was Lee Harvey Oswald, Count Dracula, he hammed it up but was never dull in Leon, The Fifth Element, Air Force One and Lost in Space. He brought his blazing intensity to a role it fit like a glove playing Beethoven in the otherwise ordinary Immortal Beloved, and as the century turned he found himself reaching a whole new generation in as kindly a role as he had every tried his hand at, playing Sirius Black in the Harry Potter films, a role that shall ensure if, for whatever bizarre reason all else fails, Gary Oldman, will never be forgotten.

The Director;

Robert Bresson.

In a 50 year career, Robert Bresson only turned out 13 feature films. A testament to his intrinsic and minutely detailed approach to his work, and to his refusal to bow to commercial restrictions, spending a great deal of his time struggling to find funding for his projects. Following early desires to take up a career in painting, Bresson found his way to photography before directing his first short film in 1934 before spending over a year in a POW camp during the second world war. This time in captivity along with his aspirations as a painter and Catholic upbringing, had a very great impact on his work. Catholicism in particular was reflected in the redemption, salvation, and exploration of human soul that permeated throughout his work. Termed the patron saint of cinema, a term that was not without merit, Bresson strove to define a new cinematic language entirely different from all other artistic mediums. Requiring numerous takes from his actors till all mannerisms and tics of the performer were stripped away and the raw naturalism that only cinema could find was all that remained. He argued for cinematography, how he sought to find it elevated above merely what was essentially the filming of a play to create a new language out of imagery and sound. Though his films were often seen as critques of French society and the wide world beyond, Robert Bresson was never less than an optimist when it came to the artistic possibilities of the cinematic medium.

The Picture;

The Aviator (Martin Scorsese, 2004)

Too often simplistically dismissed as Martin Scorsese turning to old Hollywood glitz and glamour to land an Oscar, The Aviator is a flawed but fascinating epic of one trailblazer of a man overcoming the numerous seemingly insurmountable obstacles in his path only to be constantly plagued and felled by the demons within. In the central role, Leonardo DiCaprio plays Howard Hughes and graduates into adult roles with tremendous aplomb. Aging 20 years over the course of the film, DiCaprio begins the earnest, bright eyed boy that everybody knows, and slowly transforms into a gruff, stilted middle aged man, physically crushed by his exploits but still emerging triumphant. Howard Hughes was a groundbreaker, a 20th century pioneer, and Scorsese charts that innovation in the way that only cinema can, visually. Robert Richardson's Oscar winning cinematography telling a visual story, entirely through images, charting the cinematic technology of the age, evolving as the years pass from the old two strip colour process to three strip saturated technicolour. Dante Ferretti's production design compliments Richardsons work perfectly to add to the visual narrative, beginning with the giant, seemingly neverending expanse of youthful idealism and slowly closing in, trapping the titular Aviator in his own personal prison. Though the film is brighter and brimming with more glitz seen in any Scorsese picture this side of 1977's New York, New York it is still unmistakeably his, a dark, troubled heart laying at its centre. Innovative and pioneering work, reigned in by humanity.

Wie beispielsweise Bruno. Bruno ist ein ehemaliger Arbeitskollege von mir und gelernter Schlachter. Vermutlich war Bruno deprimiert, dass ihm die Frau weggelaufen war, oder dass er nicht mehr täglich töten konnte, sondern Feuerschutzschränke herstellen musste. Whatever, Bruno mochte mich nicht und liess mich das täglich spüren. Mir wars egal, war ja nur Bruno, trotzdem gab er sich redlich Mühe, mich immer wieder aufs Neue zu ärgern, sogar Kloppe hat er mir einmal angedroht. Aber war ja nur Bruno.

Der nächste Metzger war Oswald. Welch peinliche Figur. Bei Oswald ist so Einiges schief gelaufen, er wäre sooo gerne Bürgermeister in Bad Schussenried geworden, hat es sogar zweimal versucht und verkackt. Und das hat weh getan. Aber so dachte sich Oswald in bester never-fuck-a-fucker-Manier: "ich kann auch anders!" und verkaufte den Rest seiner kümmerlichen Seele an den Teufel versuchte sich als Marionette der Industrie Botschafter der "Initiative Neue Soziale Marktwirtschaft", INSM. Eigentlich eher untypisch für ein Mitglied der Grünen, mag man denken - und weil Ossi nur konsequent ist, machte er dann auch mal was richtig und verliess die Grünen... nur um vorgestern seinen Mitgliedsantrag für die CDU bei deren Geschäftsstelle abzugeben. Spricht für sich selbst, denke ich.

Und dann gab es ja noch Dagmar, die Frau, die über so ein ausgeprägtes Gewissen verfügt, dass sie die greifbar nahe Möglichkeit für einen Politikwechsel in Hessen einfach mal so zerschlägt. Ja klar, Abgeordnete sind ersteinmal nur ihrem Gewissen gegenüber verpflichtet, aber irgendwie auch gewählte Volksvertreter. Das Volk wollte Roland nicht mehr, es gab die Möglichkeit, ihn abzusägen... Nunja.

Hallo Frau M, ihr "Gewissen" hat mich sportliche 500 Schleifen für Studiengebühren gekostet. Könnten sie bitte nach Afrika gehen und Kinder retten, oder die Olympischen Spiele boykottieren? Ich mein' ja nur, wegen Gewissen und so. Danke!

Mit etwas Anstrengung liesse sich bestimmt noch der eine oder andere KZ-Aufseher Metzger oder so finden, aber von denen hab ich fürs Erste genug.

Nachtragend um 11:21 Uhr:

Eben fiel mir noch Jens, der Sohn des ortsansässigen Metzgers ein, mit dem ich noch vor Kindergartenzeiten immer gern gespielt habe und der dann, als junger Erwachsener, überzeugter Neonazi wurde. Wobei, es ist ja nicht so, dass die Gute Seite einen verloren hätte... aber es passt irgendwie ins Konzept.

Midlife-Crisis: Unterschiedliche Ausprägung, aber global beobachtbar.

Natürlich leiden nicht alle im gleichen Außmaß unter einer "Midlife-Crisis", aber das Phänomen sei überall beobachtbar. Konkret stießen die Forscher auf folgendes Ergebnis: „In Großbritannien verfallen die Menschen mit durchschnittlich etwa 44 Jahren ins Grübeln, in den USA sind Frauen im Alter um 40 und Männer mit etwa 50 Jahren am stärksten depressionsgefährdet. Die 55.000 befragten Deutschen erreichten das Minimum an Zufriedenheit im Alter von knapp 43 Jahren.“ Oswald vermutet folgenden Hintergrund für dieses Phänomen: „Möglicherweise müssen Menschen in diesem Alter manche unerfüllbaren Träume aufgeben oder erkennen, dass ihnen nur noch eine begrenzte Zeit zum Leben bleibt.“

Das glückliche U: Ab 50 gehts wieder bergauf.

Trotzdem gibt es auch eine gute Nachricht: Im Alter ab 50 Jahren tauchen die meisten Menschen wieder aus diesem Tief auf. „Wer mit 70 noch körperlich gesund ist, ist durchschnittlich ähnlich glücklich wie ein 20-Jähriger“, so Oswald und fügt tröstende Worte für aktuell Betroffene an: „Vielleicht kann die Erkenntnis, dass solche Gefühle im mittleren Lebensalter völlig normal sind, Menschen dabei helfen, diese Phase besser zu überstehen.“

Quelle:

Artikel "Midlife-Crisis ist weltweites Phänomen" auf www.psychologie.at, vom 18.2.2008.

But what happens to the credibility of the Warren Report if parts of the puzzle are false? That off course depends on what pieces are false. I have earlier written about the Mexico trips that Oswald allegdly made, to visit the Cuban and Soviet consulates. This is a matter thoroughly investigated by the WC, but did they get it right?

A major flaw in their report (that figures in several places) is the question of Oswald's knowledge of the Russian language. The Warren Commission (WC) have establsihed that Oswald spoke Russian like a native (WC Report on Oswald’s foreign activities p 12; WR_A13 p 703), yet they do NOT question why the CIA reported (repeatedly) that the man who called the Soviet Consulate in Mexico, spoke broken and bad Russian! They even included it in the same report that presents Oswald as fluent in Russian (WCD-347 & WR_A13).

This is to me a significant issue and I wonder why it is not discussed more often in conspiracy circles, rather than some of the "crazy theories" like Oswald was on another floor, magic bullet etc

Because if it was not the real Oswald, then it was some one creating a Legend of an Oswald, and if so for what purpose?

Amendum: The claim that the Oswald who called the Soviet embassy in Mexico spoke no/poor Russian was reclaimed in 1978 when Boris Tarasoff testified to the HSCA. I again ask why? The WC and others have established that Oswald spoke perfect Russian, so why have this obvious error in the report