Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image


Hell’s Teeth boy! Lazarus is that you???

Well I was all ready to jump ship and find a berth at Longrider’s august site, had the launch codes and everything, when the Frankenstein’s Monster, CCIZ, miraculously resurrected itself once again.

We have been down for over a month… not fuckin good enough is it? There were many things I wanted to post on, not least the death of Arnold Palmer, so I’m a mite pissed off once again.  All I ask is a steady platform, one you can guarantee to be there, we writers will take care of the rest. And what great writers they are. My fellows are not just internet friends, some are face to face friends too. We are a great team given the opportunity, so I have decided to stay with my friends here a bit longer. Loyalty has always been a weakness of mine, but there you are.

So thanks to you Longrider, I appreciate your kind offer and will keep the log on codes safe in my back pocket for the time being. Cats has promised to do the site properly and commercially this time, or turn it over to one of us who knows what he/she is doing (certainly not me!). But then Cats has informed us that he is off to China for two weeks soon, so who friggin knows…

Without a conscious (chosen) commitment to liberty government naturally grows – which means that David Hume and F.A. Hayek were wrong.

Some years ago I arrived very late for a talk on Edmund Burke that I was due to give (I had failed to come to London by train, I as should have, because a friend kindly offered to drive me to the event – and then everything went wrong).

Another person had kindly stepped into the breach and was giving the talk on Edmund Burke as I arrived. I noticed that the talk was very one sided.

Burke’s “Reflections….” (1790) was stressed, but his other works (over some 40 years of engagement in politics) were almost ignored. And even on Reflections on the Revolution in France the talk was very one sided – as it stressed the liberty-is-just-what-we-do-here side of “Reflections” and not the other side of the work.

Of course liberty was not just a habit or tradition in 18th century Britain – it was consciously chosen and supported, one only need look at the work of Sir John Holt (the classic “Old Whig” Chief Justice after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 right to 1710) to see that.

The 18th century was a time when Old Whig (such as Edmund Burke) and Tory (Dr Johnson) were united in what “liberty” was – both philosophically and politically.

On philosophy Dr Johnson famously said “we know our will is free – and there is an end to it” (meaning the philosophical dispute), in this he was not just saying much the same thing as the Scottish “Common Sense” Whig philosopher Thomas Reid (the philosopher most stressed by the American Founding Fathers – with their “we hold these truths to be self evident”) but also the Old Whig Edmund Burke – with his Aristotelian position that we can (with effort) choose to resist our desire (our passion) to do evil, and are thus morally responsible for our actions.

Not just an Aristotelian point by Burke (as if he were just following the anti determinist “On Fate” by Alexander of Aphrodisias – the great “Commentator” on Aristotle revered by later generations) – but a vital part of his Christianity, as it was with Dr Johnson also.

If we do not (with effort) know moral right from moral wrong and can not (with effort) choose to do what is morally right against our passion to do what is morally wrong – then liberty, including Christian liberty (the choice to pick up our cross and follow Jesus Christ) is nonsense, – we are just the flesh robots of Mr Thomas Hobbes and others, abominations that look and sound like people but are NOT people. This was common knowledge in 18th century Britain – after all Ralph Cudworth (the philosopher theologian who replied to Hobbes on such matters as morality and moral agency) was widely read in the 18th century (especially by people who followed the anti determinist Church of England at the time – and in Scotland the Calvinists tied themselves into knots trying to reconcile their Predestination with the obvious truth of moral self awareness – i.e. free will as James McCosh and others were going to continue to do in the 19th century). And an “argument” that runs “Cudworth believed in witchcraft – so he must have been wrong about moral agency” would have been rejected with contempt – and rightly so.

The politics of Old Whigs such as Edmund Burke came from their philosophy and their religion – without the philosophical foundation of moral self awareness (free will) their Whig Constitutional politics was absurd – and they knew it (one can not really, contra “The Constitution of Liberty” by F.A. Hayek, have Old Whig politics without the foundation of Old Whig philosophy of what a “person” is – they stand or fall together). And Dr Johnson”s Tory dreams of a moral monarchy were also meaningless (and he knew it) – if the King (a human after all) was not capable of telling moral right from moral wrong and not capable of choosing to do what is morally right against the desire (the passion) to do what is morally evil.

As for the “compatiblism” of Mr David Hume – Dr Johnson and Edmund Burke may not have agreed with the German philosopher Kant about much, or agreed with the later American philosopher William James about much – but they would both have agreed that compaibilism is a “wretched subterfuge” (an attempt to pretend that the radically opposed are “compatible” – via a mist of words) leading to a “quagmire of evasion”.

The person who was giving the talk on Edmund Burke had not just radically misunderstood 18th century Britain – he went on to talk about Ancient Athens here again liberty was supposedly “just what they did”, not something that they consciously thought about and choose.

In reality Ancient Athens was a place of open reflection about fundamental principles – both the plays of Ancient Athens and the political debates (they were both held in much the same place – with the citizens as either audience or the debaters) show this. It is hard to think of a more gross error to make about Ancient Athens that to think it was a place where liberty just happened by accident and was continued without people thinking about fundamental principles and choosing (of a while – a brief period in the grim history of humanity) freedom of speech and so on.

Indeed liberty “naturally” dies without conscious effort to maintain it. Edmund Burke did not invent the saying “the price of liberty is eternal vigilance”, because this was commonly known.

When David Hume wrote of the “euthanasia of the constitution” – what was shocking was not the idea that liberty would be destroyed without constant conscious effort to maintain it (everyone knew that) – what was shocking was the seeming indifference of Mr Hume to this “euthanasia of the constitution” into absolute monarchy (after the manor of the “Sun King” – Louis XIV of France). He did not write as a desperate appeal to inspire men for the struggle to maintain (indeed advance) liberty, he wrote as if liberty was unimportant and humans were not beings (moral beings) anyway. That we are soulless (in both the religious and the Aristotelian sense) creatures. A position far away from both the Old Whig position of Edmund Burke and the Tory position of Dr Johnson (no wonder Johnson reacted with contempt to the suggestion that he and Hume were on the same side politically) of the individual standing against the forces of evil (the savage “Social Justice” mob or whatever) to the bitter end – if bitter it must be, as the sun sets and we collapse, broken sword in hand, into a pool of our own blood.

Both Whig and Tory went to see Addison’s play “Cato” – about Cato the Younger who fought to the bitter end to preserve liberty in the dying Roman Republic, and they both held it dear to them. I can not see Mr Hume being so moved.

18th century people knew that liberty naturally declines, that government naturally expands, without desperate resistance to this – without people making a conscious choice to stand for liberty, to risk everything for it (including their own lives). They did not need 20th and 21st century experience to tell them that without principled (“ideological”) opposition to it, the state expands and liberty dies.

“But Paul, David Hume said…” and “But Paul. F.A. Hayek said…..” – yes and they were obviously wrong.

As obviously wrong as those “libertarians” who, for example, think that Mr Donald Trump opposes free trade treaties because they are not free trade enough – when he actually opposes such treaties because they are too close (not too far away) from free trade. Ditto his position on government “infrastructure” (and other) spending, and so on.

It is not subtle errors of detail that cause the most harm – it is gross errors about obvious matters that cause the most harm. And these vast (gross) errors are the ones that intellectuals are most vulnerable to.

As Cicero pointed out – nothing is so absurd that some great philosopher or other did not believe it, indeed some things are so absurd – that only a great philosopher (someone who has left common sense so far behind that they are blinded by their own speculations) could believe them.

Preserve what liberty that still exists and seek, with all your might to expand liberty – be principled to the bitter end, if bitter it must be.

When the savage mob (each member of that mob could have chosen otherwise – but have made the choice for evil, deep in their souls they KNOW) come, with their Social Justice doctrines of group “Identity Politics” of “race” or “class” – it is the role of an honourable person to stand against them. Even if one’s death is the certain result of doing so.

And, no, one does not have to be a Christian to see that – one can believe that the soul dies with the body and still see that.

Morning view

For reasons that are of no import, I am staying at my mothers place at the moment. I woke early a day or so ago, and this was the view from her balcony.


There are occasional benefits in living on Queensland’s sunny Gold Coast.

Election Rigging Not A Crime In Austria?

The Austrian Supreme Court has ruled that the Presidential election must be run again – due to “irregularities”.

It was indeed a very odd election – with most people who went to the polling stations voting for the Freedom Party candidate, but some 80% (80%) of the Postal Votes going to the Green Party candidate. Hat tip to Counting Cats for pointing that out at the the time.

Obviously the election was rigged – and must be run again.

However, why has no one been arrested – is election rigging not a crime in Austria?

By the way – for those seeking something on July 1st 1916, please see (if you can) my Facebook posting and comments today.

I watched the wrong game…

Last night I watched England v Slovakia which was an exercise in futility. I watched on thinking all this was folly. Meanwhile there were reports of the Wales match. And they hammered the Russians 3-0 with Gareth Bale delivering the coup de grâce.

Good. The Russians are out and their fans (the “Ultras”) have caused mayhem in France and yeah these were organised platoons who had trained for six months to cause Hell to satisfy the bloodlust of Putin. No-way this wasn’t orchestrated by The Kremlin and the new Tsar.

Anyway, as I heard Wales were two up against the Russians my heart lept (It couldn’t but because I was watchingEngland dragging out a goal-less draw) and it immediately came to me…

Men of Harlech cease your dreaming!
Can’t you see the scoreboard gleaming?

And then Bale.

Good on you Wales!

I suspect the Russian team won’t be playing their next games in France but somewhere a lot colder.

This going down as unclassified because we have no category to tag it even though we have more tags than you shake a stick at.

Quote of the Day.

"The E.U. has a flag no one salutes, an anthem no one sings, a president no one can name, a parliament that no one other than its members wants to have more power (which must be subtracted from national legislatures), a capital of coagulated bureaucracies that no one admires or controls, a currency that presupposes what neither does nor should exist (a European central government administering fiscal policy), and rules of fiscal behavior (limits on debt-to-gross domestic product ratios) that few if any members obey and none have been penalized for ignoring. …the 23rd of June can become Britain’s Fourth of July — a Declaration of Independence. If Britain rejects continuing complicity in the E.U. project — constructing a bland leviathan from surrendered national sovereignties — it will have…taken an off-ramp from the road to serfdom."


George Will.

Politician announces censorship rules

Bye Bye


Supported by the usual intolerant judgemental puritan suspects.

This woman votes

Idiocracy is a documentary.

How Henry de Bracton shows that we must leave the European Union.

In his “On the Laws and Customs of England” Henry de Bracton pointed out that even the King is not above the law.

The King, just as much as the most lonely peasant, is bound by the fundamental laws – he may not, murder, rape or rob. And the King can not just pull “law” from his backside and change this fact.

Thomas Hobbes and Legal Positivism (the idea that the will, whims, of the ruler or rulers are the only law) is the opposite of all this. Those who side with Francis Bacon (judges as “lions UNDER the throne” – my stress) and his servant Thomas Hobbes, are the deadly enemies of the Common Law. The deadly enemies of Henry de Bracton – and of Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke and Chief Justice Sir John Holt. Both Coke and Holt warned against both King AND Parliament – the danger of either making “law” according to their whims, and undermining the fundamental principles of law.

One can stand with Francis “The New Atlantis” Bacon, Thomas Hobbes and Jeremy (13 Departments of State controlling just about everything) Bentham (and so on), or one can stand with the principles of the Common Law – but one can NOT stand with both. For they are fundamentally opposed.

Should a King not listen to reason, and after all peaceful ways have been used, to try and bring the King back under the laws of reason (of God) then, alas, men may have to use weapons to make the King accept the law – as with the Great Charter of 1215 (see Geoffrey Hindley’s little book on Magna Carta – rather better than David Starkey’s better known work).

Nor was this a new thing – as far back as 877 King Charles the Bald of France was forced to accept that even a King of France could not take land (by force) from one family and give it another.

Of course modern governments claim such abuses as their right – for example the South African government has just passed a regulation allowing it to steal land from white people and give it to black people (the justification being that the opposite was done in the past – as if two wrongs make a right). However one can get rid of the South African government by election – the ballot box.

In Britain also there is no need to take up arms against the government (as people did in 1215) – as one can remove the government by election.

But one can not get rid of the European Union government (the Commission and so on) by election.

One can be upset (and I am upset) that the warnings of the British Chief Justice (Hewart) in “The New Despotism” (1929) and of the American Supreme Court (in their 9 to 0 judgement in 1935 against General Johnson’s jackbooted “Blue Eagle” thugs of the National Recovery Agency – who made “law” according to their whims) against vague “Enabling Acts” went unheeded.

It is vile for Parliament (or Congress) to “delegate” its power to decide what the law is. Under the old understanding law is not “made” it is found – see Bruno Leoni “Freedom and The Law” (1961) for how the law is about real victims (victims of murder, rape, robbery and so on) not the whims of rulers to “improve the general welfare” or some such utilitarian nonsense.

However, Parliament can still act against officials – or ministers.

And so can Congress (if it is not cowardly – as it is presently) and the courts – who struck down President Truman’s effort to steal the steel industry in 1950.

But no elected body can stand against the magic words “we were ordered to do it by the European Union”.

Parliament is helpless against the magic words “we were ordered to do it by the European Union”.

And the people’s right to remove Parliament and get a new Parliament is made vain.

That is why we must leave the European Union.

Its officials can give their whims the force of law – and there is no practical way to get rid of them.

The New Hampshire Primary – have most Americans stopped being serious people?

It may seem odd to write about something that happened months ago (the New Hampshire Primary of 2016), but it has been running in my mind – or in my sorry 18th century excuse for a mind, full of concepts such as Free Will and universal moral right and wrong, so absurd to the followers of Hobbes and co.

We know New Hampshire, the “Live Free or Die” State – or we think we do.

From Colonel John Stark and his Rangers (“Liver Free or Die”) of the Revolutionary War period (see the New Hampshire Constitution of 1784), to the New Hampshire fifth regiment fighting against slavery in the Civil War (and for those who deny that war was about slavery – how many non Slave States tried to secede?), to plays and films set in New England, such as “Our Town”, “Its A Wonderful Life” and (openly New Hampshire) “White Christmas”.

People who do not talk much about religion or show emotion about it – yet believe. And live their belief (the Calvin Coolidge type – the opposite of the Billy Sunday type). And people who never boast – but are somehow always there when they are most needed, when things are at their darkest.

A broader American type – not just confined to New England.

Think of the actors of a certain sort – the “bad actors” because they were playing themselves. Men such as James Stewart, William Holden, Gary Cooper, Audie Murphy and on and on. People who doubt the existence of Paladins could do worse than study the life of Audie Murphy. And note there is never a boast in a film – the message is NOT “I am wonderful” it is “this is what a person, an ordinary person, should do when facing the forces of evil”.

The struggle against the forces of evil, to protect the weak even if it means one’s own death – not the power seeking struggles of a “Hegemon” and all the morality-free-zone language of the vile.

Men who seem utterly ordinary (even boring) and yet when the Horrors of Hell are driving you into blind terror – they are suddenly there. willing to take your place. To stand between the Horrors of Hell and you.

They pay for that of course – they scream in the night, but they will never scream if someone is in earshot (for they will not upset you). They will wear the face of normality (in front of the innocent and helpless) – in spite of all they have experienced.

The Texans Marcus Luttrell (“Sole Survivor”) and Chris Kyle (“American Sniper”) are modern examples.

As a D Day Veteran once explained of such people – objecting to being called a “hero” he said……

“I am not a hero – but there were heros. When we came to a house the man who was with me could see I was afraid – and he said quietly “it is O.K. – I will go” he is still there, he died so I could live and I have tried to live my life doing what little I could to make his sacrifice worthwhile”.

Even that wild hard drinking Irish American Marion Morrison (“John Wayne”) understood – under his swagger (after all even the distinctive walk was really from American Football injuries in the 1920s). Under the swagger his characters always understood moral right and moral wrong – and the characters knew that a price had to be paid to defend freedom against the powers of evil. Hence the fate of the characters in such films as “The Sands of Iwo Jima” and “The Alamo”.

“But Wayne did not go” – I have already mentioned people who did go, and he was showing a real type (as he once said to such a man “you are the person I was pretending to be in all those films”) .

The Republic – to defend the rightful property of the weak as well as the strong. And the freedom to be “drunk or sober” as drunk as John Wayne or as sober as James Stewart “just as you choose”.

The lazy left who scream “racism” know nothing of such men, for example who John Wayne’s wife was.

Private property – not being filled with envy for those who are better off. but not tugging one’s forelock to them either (not measuring a person by how much stuff they have – but by whether they will do what it is right when the time comes). Hard work and (even among people who had an outward show of bluster) a deep core of moral seriousness.

Moral seriousness – the quiet decision to do what is right, even if it means one’s own death. The point where even the “drunken Irishman” is suddenly stone-cold-sober. And ready to stand in defence of others – against all the Legions of Hell.

“But what has all this to do with the New Hampshire Primary”.

Look at the results…..

On the Democrat side a socialist won.

Remember when I was mocked for pointing out (quite truthfully) that Mr Obama has a socialist (indeed a Marxist) background.

Mr Obama did not go round saying this (and the mainstream media did not report it) so Paul Marks must be having a silly fantasy about Mr Obama having a Red background.

Hard to say that about “Bernie” Sanders – a man who goes around quite openly saying he is a socialist. And whose “Democratic Socialism” is best defined by where he choose to go on Honeymoon – the Soviet Union.

Even the most stupid or lazy voter should know what they are voting for when they vote for “Bernie” – they are voting for the sort of policies that have reduced Brazil and Venezuela to their current condition. We know that because Mr Sanders openly supported these polices, he was full of praise for these democratically elected governments with their unlimited promises of Free Stuff for the voters.

“Yes, but Paul, the Democrats are the Bad Guys – they have rejected the traditional American principles of Limited Government and Individual (Personal) Moral Responsibility since at least the time of Woodrow Wilson if not from the time of 1896 Convention when President Grover Cleveland was rejected by them”.

“The Republicans may often be weak and horribly misguided, such as with Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon and the Bush family – but deep down in their hearts they are still Republicans, they still have some vestige of belief in voluntary (rather than government) aid, in the Rule of Law, the quiet man doing what is right – as with Cato the Younger and Cicero”.

Hard to apply any of that to DONALD TRUMP.

And he also won in New Hampshire – although he got vastly less votes than Senator Sanders got on the Democrat side.

Donald Trump – a man of endless boasts. Mostly about how rich he is – without mentioning that his wealth is inherited from his family of pimps and conmen. And that he has added to his inherited wealth by trickery and deceit.

Mr Trump has never asked God for forgiveness for any sin – not because he does not believe in God. but because he does not believe he has ever done anything wrong. We now that because Mr Trump has openly stated that he has never asked for forgiveness.

A shameless boaster, and a liar who calls other men liars. Whose policies amount to stirring up racial hatred (whist carefully leaving the violence to his followers – never getting his own hands dirty, conduct in accord with his draft dodging in the 1960s) and promising Free Stuff (health care for all – and so on) with 1930s Trade War on top.

I recently listened to Mr Trump deliver a speech to the National Rifle Association.

After a long period of boasting and self praise, Mr Trump got on to policy.

He made various pro 2nd Amendment statement that contradict his past pro “Gun Control” positions (but then he contradicts himself constantly – sometimes within seconds), but he also added something else.

Protectionism again – American companies who try and escape the endless taxes and regulations that make production in America so expensive now, are to have a special tax imposed upon their imports from Mexico (or where ever).

1930s style Trade War (rather than trying to roll back the American government – its spending, taxes and regulations) – and taxes imposed by Presidential Edict (with the consent of Congress). Fascism.

The voters in New Hampshire (and elsewhere) knew exactly what Mr Trump was like – he has been a Reality Television person for many years (just as he has financed Big Government politicians and OPPOSED people working for smaller government, for many years).

So there it is.

A population (not just Democrats – but Republicans also) backing all that is vile.

Endless boasting hiding vile personal conduct. The “National Enquirer” made flesh – and supported by much of the American “right” (the “Drudge Report”, much of “Fox News” and so on).

Wild promises of Free Stuff for all.

Gaudy display – rather than moral substance.

And, in the case of Mr Trump, blaming all problems on people of other races for committing the terrible crime of selling goods to customers.

This is the Republic? The heir to Cato the Younger and Cicero? And remember a Constitutional Monarchy (the aim of Edmund Burke and so on) is also a “Republic” in this sense. The sense of the Rule of Law and respect for private property rights (of both great and small) – limited government.

This is the Shining City on a Hill?

This is the vision that people all over the world (such as Raphael Cruz in his torture cell in Cuba – or even little me in some rather unpleasant places in past years) prized so passionately?

This is it?

Drunken fools voting for “Bernie” Sanders and Donald Trump in New Hampshire – and so many other places?

With Hillary Clinton (Big Government, corrupt, Hillary Clinton) standing as the only real alternative?

This may not just be the end of the Republic – it may be the end of the West as a whole.

For if America falls the West can not stand – make no mistake about that.

It ends not in a tragic last stand – such as the Alamo.

It ends in squalid farce.


Evil can win – and then lose.

A film is coming out soon – “The Free State of Jones”.

About Newton Knight (in modern language a religious “Fundamentalist”) who fought against slavery in Mississippi during the Civil War and against the KKK after it.

On the face of it Colonel Newton Knight and Republican Governor Ames (General Ames from Maine, Congressional Medal of Honour holder – who lived on in New England till 1933) LOST.

A reign of terror won in Mississippi – the White Hoods and the Burning Crosses under men pretending to be Christians but who really served “The Dragon”. And who committed crimes too vile to discuss fully on a public site.

As late as the 1940s the descendants of Colonel Newton Knight were still being persecuted in Mississippi – for the “crime” of inter racial marriage. Especially ironic as Jones County Mississippi was founded by someone who was descended from the Indian Princess Pocahontas – the county seat Ellis is named after the descendant of a mixed marriage.

And yet……

Slavery did NOT return – people were free to leave Mississippi.

And, eventually even the dream of Colonel Knight and Governor Ames won out – although they died believing they had lost.

Good is not for nothing – even if you seem to lose, even if you DO lose.

A good deed is never “for nothing” – even if it is a brief shining moment in the darkness.

And that is not a religious statement – as even if there is nothing after death the brief moment of honour (even if no will ever know of it) still matters.

It matters more than anything else.

We may be in a sewer and will die in it – but we can still see the stars. And we will die looking at them (and at the Shining City on a Hill in our own minds) even as we choke on our blood, covered in our own urine and excrement.

As for the future – there is still hope (at least for the young).

Keep your eye on the Lone Star in the years to come.


Sorry for revisiting this topic so soon, but the interview here really does provide quite an insight into Ken Livingstones thoughts.

Naz made these comments when there was another brutal Israeli attack on the Palestinians, and there is this one stark fact, that virtually no one in the British media ever reports, in all these conflicts the death toll is usually between 60 to 100 Palestinians killed for every Israeli. Now, any other country doing that would be accused of war crimes.

Hamas, daily, sends badly aimed missiles into civilian areas of Israel. What do we learn from this small summary of Ken Livingstone’s position:

  • Israel occasionally getting right pissed off and responding to the constant provocations, and attacks on the Israeli civilian population, by Hamas, from Gaza, is an Israeli attach – seemingly from the context, unprovoked.
  • The Israeli government and forces are demonstrably more capable of protecting their fighters and population from Hamas attacks than Hamas are of protecting their fighters and population, and this is ipso facto evidence of Israeli war crimes.
  • Israel is accused of war crimes, constantly and without let.
  • This disparity, far from not being reported, was repeated constantly by the media, Islamist propagandists and the anti-Israeli left. That Ken can make claims to the contrary shows either, or both, cognitive dissonance or dishonesty.

I’m sorry, but anyone who accepts Kens statement at face value is ignorant, living in a fantasy world, or a bigot.

The Three Stooges.


If iDave, Lord Pantsdown and Kinnockio want us to stay in the EU, it’s time to exit stage right… right?


I was clearing out my shed recently. I ought to have had Baldrick with me for I found “things”.

One was my old spiral-bound pre-publication version of Carl Murray’s “Solar System Dynamics“. I was tempted to include scans to show how fucking nails it is but suffice to say a very condensed version of the disturbing function to fourth order takes up over 30 pages of A4. And that is just for the three body problem*. I got a B.

But this is the front quote…

I was going to do the full Irish Gaelic version but the Hell with that…

But indeed everything red is beautiful,
everything new is bright,
everything unattainable is lovely, everything familiar is bitter
everything absent is perfect, everything known is neglected,
until all knowledge is known.

– Anonymous, C9th, The Sick-bed of Cu Chulainn.

*Comments about English libel law are welcome.

Cartoon of the Week.

The caption translates as… Why don’t you open your door? Don’t be heartless…

By a really gutsy Saudi Cartoonist named Abdullah Jabar. Hope he makes out ok. No missing limbs or head etc.

Quote of the day

It could not have been many seconds that he stood there, hand held out, but to me it seemed hours as I wrestled with the most difficult thing I had ever had to do.

For I had to do it — I knew that. The message that God forgives has a prior condition: that we forgive those who have injured us. "If you do not forgive men their trespasses," Jesus says, "neither will your Father in heaven forgive your trespasses." …

And still I stood there with the coldness clutching my heart. But forgiveness is not an emotion — I knew that too. Forgiveness is an act of the will, and the will can function regardless of the temperature of the heart. "Jesus, help me!" I prayed silently. "I can lift my hand, I can do that much. You supply the feeling."

And so woodenly, mechanically, I thrust my hand into the one stretched out to me. And as I did, an incredible thing took place. The current started in my shoulder, raced down my arm, sprang into our joined hands. And then this healing warmth seemed to flood my whole being, bringing tears to my eyes.

"I forgive you, brother!" I cried. "With all my heart!"

For a long moment we grasped each other’s hands, the former guard and the former prisoner. I had never known God’s love so intensely as I did then.

Corrie ten Boom