MUTNODJMET'S MUSINGS

I am Joe Bumper Sticker

2008-10-23T08:34:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I live in California, though a redder portion. I have placed two McCain/Palin bumper sticker on my car, which is probably the only form of true support that I can express outside of my vote. Yesterday, I placed a home-made "I am Joe" sticker" on my car.

My previous stickers have not received any comment, outside of "Maverick-Barracuda -- what a great combo"! However, I have gotten three requests for the "I am Joe" sticker.

Keep in mind, this is blue California. I have printed out the requests. I wanted to pass this on, as I think this is really indicative of the message with meaning in this election cycle.

Charting Psychology to Understand This Crazy Market

2008-10-14T10:12:00.001-07:00

Dear Friends:

My very wise friend who works in the wonderful world of finance did me the favor of providing this piece for me to publish:

The One Thing That NEVER Changes is Human Nature

It sure is a lot better to be up 8% than down 8% in a day. This is one of those “vicious” countertrend rallies we talked about toward the end of last week. It could continue for a short time, but in order for us to be consistently bullish again – (1) credit spreads must move back to near the historic mean (400-500 basis point spread over 10-yr U.S. Treasuries instead of current 1100bp spread) and the (2) equity market stops making lower highs and lower lows. Accomplishing these would indicate the key perception changes we have consistently outline as needing to be reversed, have done so. Until the above two things happen, we will remain “out of the way” and generate slight tactical calls (buy depression and sell excitement) and sector biases depending on market activity as it takes place.

We Followed the Same Thought Process Last Cycle. As we were turning bullish in the summer of 2003 (Upside Ahead? 07/03), we used a chart produced many years ago (by Stone & Mead) that highlighted the typical psychology during a major stock market cycle. In mid-2003, credit had moved back below mean and the equity markets had successfully retested the 10/02 low, yet no one believed there could be meaningful upside ahead. We remained steadfastly bullish into 01/08 when credit spreads moved meaningfully above mean and an intermediate-term downtrend was in place (Pulling in the Horns – 01/08). We will make mistakes during the process, as we did by getting bullish again following the Bear Stearns bailout with the historic new issuance of credit, only to reverse course and go back to a tactical approach in early July as the credit market worsened significantly. Following the Bear Stearns bailout, the Treasury Department welcomed in new credit investors by saying they would backstop a financial failure, only to squash them by bowing to political pressure despite knowing what would happen given the unregulated credit derivatives market. We won’t make that mistake again. Credit investors will wait for sustainable improvement, and as a result, so will we.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words. We thought it would be appropriate given the financial market backdrop to use this fictitious graph (provided) to highlight the following about the current environment:

We are likely in toward the end of the panic phase and beginning of the deep pessimism phase that highlights the rapidly deteriorating fundamental news.
While we do know this was made up and not based on fact, it does appropriately denote key segments of the investment cycle.
Bottoms are made over time and not on a specific price point.
Absent a real retest, calling the recent low – “the low” is a total guess. It very well may be, but we have time to figure it out as the credit and global economic crisis gets addressed and relieved.

Update: My friend adds this:

There is a lot in here to say, and much remains to be seen how much the government's incursion into preferred shareholder of banking and finance institutions is a good idea. One wonders for example how they sleep nights after grabbing FNMA and FHLMC (Fanny May and Freddie Mac -- who had plenty of assets and cash flow with which to pay their dividends and notes) and washing out both the common and preferred shareholders who had financed those companies. They set themselves up to be the case of last resort when they did that, and then compounded their error in the Lehman situation. No one wants to commit capital when they don't have an assurance of who the government will choose/not choose to either bail out or invest in vs. who they won't, and how it will impact the existing equity and debt holders. At any rate, the current chart activity for the DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average) is very like the approx. 25% improvement we saw both after the 1929 crash and again in the 1987 crash. We will see the same lows on the DJIA as a retest, and only then will we be able to judge by the quality of the rally and the corresponding volume whether or not we have seen a real bottoming action. We can only hope at this point.

BEST FRENEMIES!

2008-10-13T10:25:00.000-07:00

Just before August's Democratic convention, my journalistic instincts told me that the legacy media would be suppressing the level of dissent of Hillary Clinton supporters. Reading the news blogs avidly, I was vaguely aware of PUMA ("Party Unity My Ass"; Hillary-supporters unhappy with Obama), and suspected that there might be a blog or forum on the Internet that would help me gage the actual level of support for Obama during the nominating process.

In my quest, I found the Hillary Clinton Forum. The members there are mainly Democrats, but are generally fair-minded people who do not want a socialist, race-baiting, Chicago thug as President of the United States. I subsequently embedded myself in the group, in order to ascertain how much support Obama was actually able to count on from former Hillary voters.

During the convention, I read a blow-by-blow account of how Clinton supports were insulted by O-bots (the term the PUMAs used to describe rude, aggressive, "in-your-face" supporters of Obama. Clinton-supporters were isolated, and either forced to support Obama or have their long-held party positions endangered. If you take a look at the clips, you can see how quickly Nancy Pelosi shut-down the proceedings after the "nomination by acclimation" process was complete. You will note, if you review what happened during the convetion that the delegate count from California was passed; likely, this was due to the very vocal support of Senator Clinton by Gloria Allred, the prominent attorney and Clinton delegate. Basically, she stated her voters selected Clinton, and so would she. This was the stance taken by many Puma-delegates.

PUMAs feel that the Democrat leadership perpetrated a huge fraud in the nominating process. Many also feel uncomfortable at the extreme-left direction that party has taken.

I must say, as a flaming capitalist with a strong interest in national security, I was delighted to find this interesting group of Americans. Granted, we do not see to eye on a variety of subjects (e.g., the wisdom of Clinton's healthcare proposal, the merits of gay marriage); however, the moderators demand civility and do not tolerate any abuse posts or nasty disagreement. Therefore, this is one of the few places where political discusions occur with an elevated, repsectful tone. I have to say is this is very refreshing.

I have to say, the PUMAs are more avidly anti-Obama than my right-leaning friends on my conservative forum, if such a thing is possible. They rightly view themselves as the original victim of Obama's frauds. Many admire the national-security stance of John McCain. Quite a few are self-employed or small business owners, and mock Obama's proposal that few small businesses would be impacted by his tax raises that start at @$250,000 annually.

Many of the PUMAs are thrilled with the selection of Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice Presidential candidate. This is because these people are true feminists -- who want all women candidates treated with respect regardless of political ideology. The PUMAs found all the personal attacks on Sarah Palin and her family by the legacy media and the O-bots distasteful (e.g., "Palin is a C***" t-shirt).

These PUMAs are highly informed (the forum is constantly updated with the latest news items) and very savvy politically. In fact, one of the PUMAs outed a sex-offending Obama supporter of "astroturfing" a McCain rally to make it seem that Republicans were racist. Being highly motivated, they jump at the chance to participate in polls, and those that are willing to vote for McCain are actively supporting him with money, phone calls, displays, and emails to the campaign with ideas. These Americans have inspired me to be active, and do all that I can to ensure Obama doesn't win this November.

How many PUMAs are there? I have read from the legacy media that 95% of the people voting for Hillary are going to vote Obama. I disagree. There is a 5000-plus membership in the Hillary Clinton forum, and many of these members have family that are also like minded. The number the PUMAs give is close to 7 million. We will see; however, I would put my money on the PUMA number. These people could be key in battleground states. And here is a thought: If so many Clinton supporters were going for Obama, then why make "Hillary Supporter for Obama" stickers?

The PUMA goal is to have McCain win in 2008, and Hillary Clinton win in 2012. But for now, these people are my best frenemies.

According to Wikipedia, "in personal relationships, the use of the term 'frenemy' has become increasingly used to describe two (or more) people who are apparently friends but are actually enemies." The PUMAs, conservative Democrats, and people who despise cheaters may be the voters that prevent the compete ultra-leftist takeover of the White House and US Congress (and ultimately, the Supreme Court).

THE RECESSION LESSON

2008-09-30T08:28:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I have a dear, dear friend who is well positioned in the banking industry. I, myself, am not very knowledgeable about economics, finance, or related fields. So, when I have serious questions about these matters, I go to her for advice.

Needless to say, in the midst of all this chaos, I turned to her for some guidance. I asked her to write a synopsis of the current situation, and it is presented below. I am hoping she will grace us with a few more posts during the tumult we now face.

THE RECESSION LESSON

We are as humans destined to repeat our history, most notably those lessons we fail to learn from, or which have not impacted a present generation’s experience. We are a new society unaccustomed to saving and waiting for things we want. We are so media-driven we can’t look up from our I-Phones long enough to see there are much more serious things to look at. Like where our next paycheck is coming from.

Yesterday was a historic day for the Dow Jones Industrial Average, a historic day for commodities, and a historic day for the U.S. Bond Markets. Congress did not pass the stimulus package requested by President Bush and Treasury Secretary Paulson, crafted to purchase sub-performing loan assets and ostensibly unlock frozen credit markets. Stock indices fell 7-9% on the day in reaction, T-Bill rates collapsed to less than 1%, and repo markets were locked for the day as credit risk became germane. Perhaps most important to experts in the credit markets, overnight LIBOR jumped from 2.59% to 6.88%. These are only the reported rates, and actual rates paid by banks were no doubt higher. It could not have happened at a worse time, at quarter-end and with many of the risk “spreaders” in terms of Wall Street no longer available. Fewer participants always mean less liquidity. Allowing Lehman Bros. to fail meant no taxpayer price tag. Unless you factor in the complete disarray such action caused in terms of risk to credit markets.

While the stimulus to credit markets in form of a bill will undoubtedly be addressed again this week by Congress, and we can at least hope that it is termed differently than a “Wall Street Bail Out Bill”, with the public deluded into believing that the package will be used to pay huge Wall Street salaries and bonuses. It is time to begin the assessment of what the recent plunge in the DJIA does to individual homes and people who borrow, who have jobs, and who expect their pension check in the mail. People will quickly forget the populist rhetoric, blaming rich people and blaming Wall Street’s greed, when they realize that their pension plan is underfunded and they won’t be receiving a check now. They’ll forget about it when they lose their job in the worst recession of our lifetime. They’ll forget about hating President Bush when they can’t get a loan on a home. They’ll stop hating Wall Street and start hating their employer when their paycheck can’t happen because their company can’t make payroll. They’ll text message, e-mail, telephone, and write their Congressional representatives in droves to “fix the problem”. They’ll expect, because we’re an instant gratification culture, immediate results. They won’t be immediate, and most likely not even within the next President’s administration, no matter who he may turn out to be.

Americans share in this massive deleveraging now taking place globally. We took out the loans that are now in credit default. We need to pay off the debt we all have, inclusive of the federal government. Credit can be extended, once financial institutions know how much capital they have. We need to see Congress address the inherent illegality of Credit Derivative Swaps where there is no credit exposure, along with massive short-selling of financial institution stocks. These market manipulations are not productive toward turning the problem around, and neither is mark-to-market accounting, the FASB’s standard in recent years which means financial institutions are often forced to take massive losses on their balance sheet due to security valuations that do not reflect risk, but instead reflect broken liquidity markets. It is time to allow banks who intend to hold assets to maturity to do just that, and to assess their available capital and go back to lending without concern about an orchestrated run on their stock. These liquidity issues and bank solvency are what Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson need to emphasize. It is their job and their reason for existence, and not private security markets on Wall Street.

Whether or not Americans find it palatable, there will be necessary government foreclosure of FDIC-insured institutions, and there will be ownership collectively by the taxpayers of subprime mortgage assets. We will need an agency to pool these assets and manage them by improving the structure through time and selling both the new assets and cheap liabilities. It can be done, as it has in the past, successfully. This corporation, similar in nature to the Resolution Trust Corporation formed back in the 1980’s, can eventually make money for taxpayers. Whether or not Americans find it palatable, what happens in our financial institutions involve our own individual finances and our homes. Our property valuations are impacted by our neighbor’s foreclosure sales. It’s in the end up to us to sacrifice and to assume the responsibility of worthy credit choices. It’s up to us to use the words, “We can’t afford it” to our families along with our Congress. It’s up to us to continue to make the point to government leaders that the federal government cannot spend us out of this problem even with the largest checkbook in the world. The problem isn’t spending. It’s reducing spending and beginning real investment in our futures. Don’t believe election year rhetoric that investment starts with government. It starts with us, on Main Street, with the private businesses and people who work in them that turn the engine of the economy of the United States. It is time to reform and streamline government. And it is time to reform and streamline how we do business.

Americans said “no” overwhelmingly to the requested package proposed yesterday, but restoration of liquidity into banking markets will require both time and a rebuilding of liquidity markets and credit on the institutional and individual investment sides. The question now looms on the horizon if we have the discipline for also saying “no” to massive government handouts promised in form of expanded welfare. What is good for Wall Street is good for Main Street. But it means everybody doing more with less.

Women: A Call to Action for Sarah

2008-09-03T09:52:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

My very wise husband, Horemheb, said something yesterday that I think is very smart. In light of the very sexist and derisive attacks on Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin, women need to act and act now -- otherwise the mainstream media and the Democratic elites will feel empowered to continue on.

What form should this action take? I think four forms:

1) Contact Gov. Palin and Senator McCain and offer your support.

2) Contact newspapers, broadcast stations, and specific reporters and complain of obvious double-standard treatment, smears, and lack of serious reporting in regards to Gov. Palin and her fine family.

3) Force yourself to watch MSNBC, CNN, NBC and other entities in the tank for Obama long enough to figure out who is advertising on the errant shows -- and then send letters of complaint, with hints of taking your business elsewhere, to the advertisers. Women have a lot of purchase power.

4) Contact your State and Federal representatives, and remind them that the unfair treatment of Gov. Palin will reflect poorly on the Democrats and you will gage the down-ticket voting accordingly.

Women must take action, if we are to achieve political power in a meaningful way in the future.

I will break this post into two separate sections below. The first in a general letter, which you can feel free to cut/paste and alter. In my experience as a writer, journalist, and editor, less is more. Keep your notes short, sweet, and to the point. The second is the contact information for contact entities. One thing to keep in mind -- emails are OK, but calls and snail mail have more impact. Do the email for speed, but if you can, call or write for further impact. But do what you can.

I will come back and add to this contact list as I get further information.

Do one or two a day, but keep at it through the election season. Keep in mind, millions of Americans acting together can affect change.

*********************************************************************************

To Whom it May Concern:

I am writing to express my support of Gov. Sarah Palin's candidacy for the office of the Vice President, and to also express my displeasure at how Gov. Palin's family and her experience is being portrayed in the media.

Whether you agree or disagree with the political positions of the Governor, her family should be off-limits for intense reporting and derisive commentary in a professional media venue. I admire Gov. Palin for her reform-oriented governance of Alaska, her pro-business approach, and her knowledge of energy issues. She deserves a fair hearing in the court of public opinion.

It seems that Sen. Obama's past has not received nearly the same level of scrutiny -- and he is running for the Office or President. I just wanted to inform you that despite the elite media's best efforts, I am aware of Obama's "bitter clinger" remarks, Rev. Wright's and Father Fleger's hateful and bigoted preachings, Tony Rezko's business dealings with the Senator, and Obama's long-term friendship with domestic terrorist William Ayers.

I will be continuing to follow this election season closely. I will note which reporters and publications are fair, and those which are not. I will also note which advertisers support those news entities that are biased, and I will not look kindly on Democrats down-ticket of Obama if this continues.

Thank you for your consideration.

************************************************

Contact Information:

Gov. Palin
email: governor@state.ak.us
mail:
Juneau Office
Alaska State Capitol Building
Third Floor
P.O. Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811-0001
Phone (907) 465-3500
Fax (907) 465-3532

Sen. McCain:
webmail: http://www.johnmccain.com/Contact/
Mailing Address
John McCain
2008P.O. Box 16118
Arlington, VA 22215
Phone(703) 418-2008

Congress: http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
(Find your representatives and write from there).

MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3303518/
(webmail and address information)

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv/

THE ADVERTISERS:

Verizon Ivan Seidenberg, Chmn & CEO, Verizon Corp. Branding 212-395-2121 ivan.g.seidenberg@verizon.com Robert Engalls Jr, Pres. Retail Mtkg. bob.ingalls@verizon.com Robert Varetonni, ED External Comm. robert.a.varettoni@verizon.com Eric Rabe, VP External Comm. eric.rabe@verizon.com Judy Verses, Sr. VP Natl. Mktg. 703-390-7017 judy.verses@verizon.com Jerri DeVard, Sr. VP Mktg. jerri.devard@verizon.com John Bonomo, PR 212-395-7756 john.j.bonomo@verizon.com Sharon Cohen-Hagar, PR 972-718-6205 sharon.cohen-hagar@verizon.com Pearle Vision Claudio Del Vecchio, Exec VP 516-484-3800 x2202 cdelvecchio@us.luxottica.com Seth McGlaughlin, VP Mktg. smcglaug@luxotticaretail.com Office Depot Steve Odland, Pres & CEO sodland@officedepot.com Rex Ciavola, SVP Global Mktg. 561-438-4452 rciavola@officedepot.com Mindy Kramer, PR 561-438-4276, or mkramer@officedepot.com Ray Tharpe, Investor Relations 561-438-4540, rtharpe@officedepot.com Brian Levine, Public Relations, 561-438-2895, or blevine@officedepot.com Bayer Aspirin Heiner Springer, Head of Communications heiner.springer.hs@bayer-ag.de Michael Schade, Head of Media Relations michael.schade.ms@bayer-ag.de Gerard Smith, VP Mktg 973-254-4843 gerard.smith.b@bayer.com Jay Kolpon, VP Mktg. 973-254-4797 jay.kolpon.b@bayer.com Toyota Don Esmond, Senior VP tel. 310-468-5212 fax 310-468-7846 don_esmond@toyota.com Dennis Cuneo, SSenior VP tel. 212-223-0303 fax 212-750-3564 dennis_cuneo@tma.toyota.com Ms Pat Pineda, VP Ext. Affairs pat_pineda@tma.toyota.com Main #: 800-331-4331

********************************************************

Here is a good place to begin: Apparently, the Washington Post has published a blatant lie -- it seems that Gov. Palin expanded prenatal services for teens instead of cut them.

The full link is here: http://minx.cc/?post=272312

Washington Post ombudsman's email address: ombudsman@washpost.com
***********************************************************************

CHECK OUT THE NEW SARAH PALIN FORUM: http://www.freepowerboards.com/sarahpalin/

ALSO THIS:

http://fightthepalinsmears.com/

AND FOR FUN, THIS:

http://www.palinfacts.com/

Black and White of Ancient Egyptian Race

2006-11-11T09:58:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends:

I heard a stunning report from my local radio station, as well as a broadcast on FNC (Special Report with Brit Hume). Apparently, a group of NAACP members protested the King Tutankhamen exhibit it the LA County Museum of Art because the recent bust generated using CAT scan data depicted the young pharaoh as “white” instead of “black”. I am livid with anger, because this blatant racism is being allowed to play out and no critical comment is given. I am also saddened by this display of ignorance about the actual “race” of the ancient Egyptians. Therefore, I have rapidly developed this essay.

Here are the source materials:

http://www.catchpenny.org/race.html (my main reference source, and the one to which I most specifically refer).
“Black Spark, White Fire” by Richard Poe
http://www.egyptologyonline.com/using_dna.htm
The Great Courses on Tape – The History of Ancient Egypt by Bob Brier

I will begin this piece by clearly stating that I firmly believe that current, scientific evidence indicates that the ancient Egyptians were a blended group of people. In fact, the ancient Egyptians had one of the healthiest attitudes toward race – they basically thought of people as “Egyptian” or “foreign”, the actual ethnic group of an individual not being of particular concern to them. In fact, I think that the ancient Egyptians are best classifiable as members of the human race, and beyond that, the race or color of a specific individual is going to be exceedingly difficult to ascertain.

This essay will explore the definition and meaning of race. It will also provide information on the information that the ancient Egyptians transmitted themselves about their race. Then, it will address probably one of the most significant tools that are available to us to understand which groups of people actually contributed genetically to the ancient Egyptians – mitochondrial DNA. Then, I will conclude with my theory of the “race history” of the ancient Egyptians. (NOTE: The original essay contained links to images that helped highlight the point. Limitations of this format permit only one image, above. Please click to the links, as I think you will find them interesting).

RACE – WHAT DOES IT GOOD FOR? A PERSONAL COMPARISON.

I want to start this section with personal description. I am half Romanian gypsy in heritage (with distant ancestral roots, therefore, in Northern India). I have a good friend who is half “African American”, half “German American” – she looks rather like Lena Horne. Here are some graphics showing what we basically look like.

http://www.serpukhov.su/museum/yarosh_gypsy.jpg

(Gypsy like me)

http://www.nationaltheatre.org/cinema/art/1998/HorneLena240h.jpg

(Blended, like my friend)

When I am out of the sun, I am a light golden color – just like my friend. When I am in the sun, I tan darker than my friend. In fact, she burns a toasty pink. Who, then, is really “black”? Here in the USA, she is. But in Europe, I also would be referred to as “black”. Germans and many other Europeans refer to gypsies as “schwartzers”, “black ones”, or other similar terms, because gypsies tend to be darker than the typical Caucasian European.

Eventually, she and I will both pass away. In about 1000 years, our remains are discovered and a reconstructive bust of each of us is made. How would that artist/scientist know how to color each of is? My friend’s face bears some classically “black” features – but my ancestors have given me a skin tone far darker than hers.

LOOKING AT ANCIENT EGYPT AND RACE WITH PERSPECTIVE

Review the map of ancient Egypt. Some very important considerations must be given when “determining” the race of the ancient Egyptians, as noted by looking at the area itself.

http://www.mfa.org/egypt/explore_ancient_egypt/map.jpg

(Ancient Egypt)

Egypt is fully connected to the Sudan and exceedingly close the Horn of Africa (i.e., Ethiopia, Somalia).
Egypt is fully connected to Libya.
Egypt is partially connected, via a land bridge, to the Sinai and the Levant.
People tend to migrate from areas of less prosperity to areas of greater prosperity.
Egypt was a highly successful and prosperous area for 5000 plus years.

And, as a final note to this section, let’s consider what race really means. Per my main reference cited above:

Biologists define "race" as a group or population differing in gene frequency from that of others in the same species. Such differences usually occur as a result of some type of geographic barrier limiting interbreeding, so that the two otherwise similar genetic populations begin to drift apart. Thus there are distinct "races" of fruit flies – separated perhaps by mountainous or desert conditions. However, with very limited exceptions there are no such separated groups within the human population, and those that do occur do not map on to what are in conventional speech regarded as separate "races." The consensus view among population geneticists and biological anthropologists is that the concept of "race" to indicate analytically distinct subgroups of the human race is biologically meaningless. [From a public lecture given at Gresham College, London, reported in The Independent, 28 January 2002]

"Race is a social construct, not a scientific classification," Robert S. Schwartz, M.D. wrote (in "Race Is a Poor Measure," New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 344, No. 18, May 3, 2001). "Any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations is both arbitrary and subjective." The Human Genome Project determined that 99.9% of the human genetic complement is the same in everyone, regardless of race. This means that the DNA of any two people will differ in one out of every thousand nucleotides, the building blocks of individual genes. With more than 3 billion nucleotides in the human genome, about 3 million nucleotides will differ among individuals. While statistically small, this does allow for some variation. "Admittedly," wrote Dr. Sally Satel, "race is a rough marker. A black American may have dark skin - but his or her genes may well be a complex mix of ancestors from west Africa, Europe and Asia. No serious scientist, in fact, believes that genetically pure populations exist. Yet an imprecise clue is better than no clue at all." ("A question of colour" in The Guardian, 9 May 2002) But these differences between people are relatively insignificant: skin pigment, eye shape, and hair texture. The physical "stereotypes" of race, Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza wrote in The History and Geography of Human Genes, "reflect superficial differences."

ANCIENT EGYPTIANS TELL US ABOUT THEIR OWN RACE

The ancient Egyptians provided some very important clues to their race on tomb walls. Here are two examples:

http://www.wcg.org/wn/98may/seti.jpg

(Four peoples of the world: Syrian, Nubian, Libyan, and Egyptian, from the Tomb of Seti I.)

http://www.catchpenny.org/images/r3tiles.gif

(Foreign prisoners of Ramesses III: Libyan, Nubian, Syrian, Shasu Bedouin, and Hittite.)

The ancient Egyptians were very consistent as to how they painted themselves – dark reddish brown for men, yellow for women. They also recognized and were willing to paint other races with classic racial characteristics of that particular group. Looking at the tomb painting above, the ancient Egyptians recognized that Nubians (i.e., Sudanese) were black, and that Libyans and Syrians were “white” (actually, in this case, a light yellow). Culture characteristics were also carefully recorded. Basically what the ancients were telling the viewer: We aren’t as black as our southern neighbors, nor are we as light as our western/eastern neighbors. We Egyptians are a separate group of people entirely.

In fact, the ancient Egyptians did what we Americans did to Betty Crocker a few years ago: blended all the colors of all the people together and came up with one standard color for everyone:

http://www.jsonline.com/entree/image02/crocker011602_big.jpg

(American Blended Race Image of Betty Crocker).

The main reference I cited above expresses this concept very nicely:

Tomb paintings depicting captive Nubians may show them as being very dark, but this is an artistic convention stereotyping a nationality, and to conclude there were therefore no very dark Egyptians would be a non sequitur. Similarly, the skin tones in art depicting the Egyptians themselves adhere to convention rather than an absolutely accurate description of reality…We can safely conclude that the ancient Egyptians were of various skin colors, few of which were light judging by the climate.

OLD SCIENCE: A CLASSIC STUDY OF THE ANCIENT EGYPTIAN RACE

The “race” of the ancient Egyptians were studied in the 1940’s. My main essay reference provides this analysis:

In the 1940's, A. Batrawi made a detailed examination of ancient skeletal material from Egypt and Lower Nubia, comparing such physical features as craniological data and the length of limb bones, while recording changes through time. His resulting theory of racial continuity in the early Egyptian population has been supported by more recent research. In his seminal two-part article "The Racial History of Egypt and Nubia" (The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 75:1945, pp. 81-101; 76:1946, pp. 131-56), Batrawi does categorize physical types into racial groups, but his description of migration and interaction remains valid.

Batawi concluded:

Since early neolithic times there existed two distinct but closely related types, a northern in Middle Egypt and a southern in Upper Egypt. The southern Egyptians were distinguished from the northerners by a smaller cranial index, a larger nasal index and greater prognathism. The geographical distinction between the two groups continued during the Pre-Dynastic Period. The Upper Egyptians, however, spread into lower Nubia during that period. By the beginning of the Dynastic era the northern Egyptian type is encountered for the first time in the Thebaïd, i.e., in the southern territory. The incursion, however, seems to have been transitory and the effects of the co-existence of the two types in one locality remained very transient until the 18th Dynasty. From this time onwards the northern type prevailed all over Egypt, as far south as Denderah, till the end of the Roman period.

In Lower Nubia a slight infiltration of negroid influence is observed during the Middle Kingdom times. In the New Empire period, however, the southern Egyptian type prevails again. After the New Empire a fresh and much stronger negro influence becomes discernable till the end of the Roman period.

NEW SCIENCE: DNA TESTING OF MUMMIES AND POPULATIONS

The Basics of DNA Testing

With the advances in science technology, there is now a new "weapon" that can help Egyptologists in their quest to construct the definitive chronology of Egyptian kings, namely DNA testing. The process involves taking minute amounts of tissue samples from a donor that can be broken down into their constituent parts, allowing the identification of individuals, by comparisons to other known samples.

First developed and used as an identification technique in 1985. DNA testing underwent further refining until in 1991, a process known as Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) was developed; whereby DNA can be cloned to produce multiple copies of specific regions of human DNA. These regions can then be examined to see if they are linked genetically to other individuals.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~frist/imager/procedures/mass_standards/yw32.11.gif

(DNA Analysis Example)

DNA testing may be able to provide answers to the chronology and genealogy of Egypt's mummies. DNA has been termed as the "genetic fingerprint" of each individual, passing genetic information from one generation to the next by making exact replicas of its self. Therefore, the closer a genetic sequence match is, the higher the probability that the donors share a common ancestry.

Furthermore, an individual's genetic fingerprint is influenced by ones parents' genes; each contributing half of their genes to their offspring. There are two specific types if DNA that can be studied : Mitochondrial DNA and Nuclear DNA.

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited from the mother, whilst Nuclear DNA is derived from both parents and is much harder to obtain for study. In fact, when someone mentions human DNA, they often are referring to “Nuclear DNA”. “Nuclear DNA” are the 46 chromosomes that inhabit the nucleus of almost every cell that comprises a human body. These chromosomes hold the vast bulk of genetic information inherited from both parents. Outside the nucleus, but still within the cell, lie mitochondria. Mitochondria are tiny structures that help cells in a number of ways, including producing the energy that cells need. Each mitochondrion -- there are about 1,700 in every human cell -- includes an identical loop of DNA about 16,000 base pairs long containing 37 genes. In contrast, nuclear DNA consists of three billion base pairs and an estimated 70,000 genes. (This estimate has been revised upward several times since the announcement that the human genome had been decoded, and likely will be again.)

One of the problems of trying to harvest ancient DNA is that it is one of the first things to undergo decomposition, breaking the strands of DNA into fragments, resulting in the danger of false sequencing. MtDNA is a hardier than nuclear DNA, and easier to replicate, therefore, it is easier to do genetic studies with it.

However, far and away the biggest threat in using DNA is the fear of cross contamination. If a single modern cell contaminates the sample under analysis, it becomes worthless. Therefore, it is imperative that any samples harvested are carried out under the most practically stringent conditions possible. Through the advent of experimentation, it has been found that teeth are the best source of harvesting "clean" DNA. The outer layer is vigorously cleaned, then the tooth is drilled to gain access to the inner un-contaminated pulp, which is then pulverized and used for DNA testing.

Since mtDNA is maternally inherited, one obvious limitation is in an instance when a mother bears no daughters. Her mtDNA effectively comes to a screeching halt. Later generations will not have a trace of the former generation's mtDNA in this case.

Here is the important point to mtDNA: Even though everyone on Earth living today has inherited his or her mtDNA from one person who lived long ago, our mtDNA is not exactly alike. Random mutations have altered the genetic code over the millennia. But these mutations are organized, in a way. For example, let's say that 10,000 years after the most recent common ancestor, one of the mtDNA branches experienced a mutation. From that point on, that line of mtDNA would include that alteration. Another branch might experience a mutation in a different location. This alteration would also be passed on. What we would eventually end up with are some descendants who have mtDNA that is exactly or very much like that of some people's, somewhat like that of others, and less like that of yet others. By looking at the similarities and differences of the mtDNA of all of these individuals, researchers could try to reconstruct where the branching took place.

What mtDNA Testing Can Mean to Egyptology

When a group of people migrates to an area, they tend to combine their DNA with the local population. The mtDNA can be used to determine when certain populations “commingled” within Egypt. Since the mT DNA mutates at a fairly steady rate, there are a questions that may be answered with further study:

· What populations today are most similar to the ancient Egyptians?

· How much of a “genetic contribution” did each population make?

· How long has it been since the “genetic contribute” was initially made?

For example, using mtDNA and samples from ancient and modern sources, it can be determined that Population X of ancient Peoples has many characteristics of Population Y, and that group X became separated from its “home” Population Y 5000 years ago. About the same time, Population X met new population Z and began the enjoyable process of “blending DNA”. Then about 2600 years ago, another group, Population S, arrived to contribute other distinct genetic characteristics. And, looking at the DNA structure of a specific individual, it could be estimated that the individual had 50 % X, 25 % Y and 25 % Z characteristics. Therefore, mtDNA studies could be really valuable at looking for the populations that contributed most strongly to the ancient Egyptian nation, and the approximate percentage and chronology of this contribution can be reasonably determined in a scientific manner.

Mitochondrial DNA studies have been recently use to show Neanderthal man did not contribute significantly to the current human population – even in Europe, where it was thought such interactions may have been occurring. Also, mtDNA shows we all have a shared maternal ancestor about 32 generations back. Forensically, mT DNA is used in many criminal prosecutions (e.g., Westerfield trial in San Diego).

Currently, I am not aware of any mtDNA study that focuses on looking at the populations that contributed to ancient Egypt. I have made some inquiries, and will provide an update if I get information that such studies are being conducted. At the present time, the only mtDNA studies conducted of mummies have been to show the familial relationships between individuals.

In the example of mtDNA conclusions utilizing populations X, Y, Z and S that I have detailed above, there are three specific populations I am considering in actuality. My candidate populations for these theoretical population interactions are as follows:

POPULATION X/Y – HORN OF AFRICA GROUPS

http://www.style.com/slideshows/fashionshows/S2005RTW/FENDI/DETAILS/00480f.jpg

http://www.iocc.org/nwsltr/winter2003/page2_photo1.jpg

(Populations from the Horn of Africa; note that the bone structure here would be hard to distinguish from many Caucasian/European populations)

POPULATION Z: LIBYAN/NORTHERN AFRICAN GROUPS

http://www.modernlibya.com/index/Libyan-Woman-4B.gif

http://www.peterlanger.com/Countries/Africa/Libya/images/LYGDM022BW.jpg

POPULATION S: LEVANT GROUPS

(Libyan populations, generally with classic Mediterranean features)

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/images/mideast/jan-june03/syria5.jpg

http://cremesti.com/krasiva/photos/Lebanon/nagham/nagham_hips.jpg

(Levant populations, with classic Semitic features).

It is my theory, and one I would enjoy seeing studies using DNA analysis (instead of heated rhetoric) to prove or disprove, is that these three groups combined to make the “ancient Egyptian” race. Later in this essay I will demonstrate how I think this blending took place. Only if the NAACP group can prove the African Group provides a preponderance of the mtDNA contribution in a specific individual will I concede that an specific ancient Egyptian was “black”. Otherwise, I will assume the individual was a blended version, containing contributions from 2-3 of these groups, and the actual color of an individual is an estimate (unless it is reasonably concluded by looking at hair samples, the race of directly related mummies, and portraiture that is painted in a fashion that tends to reflect the individual’s look instead of ancient Egyptian artistic funerary convention).

THE RACE OF SPECIFIC ANCIENT EGYPTIANS

The “Black” Ancient Egyptians

As I indicated toward the beginning of this essay, an individual’s race can be difficult to conclude. However, I think we can look at the artwork, mummies, and recorded history to come up with reasonable racial estimates for specific individuals. Let me start this process by conceding a point to the NAACP – I strongly suspect that the earliest Egyptians in the southern portion of the country were probably “Horn of Africa” types, and therefore, what we consider “black” in today’s lingo. For example, King Khufu’s son, Rahotep and his wife Nefer have been depicted in painted statuary thusly:

http://www.humboldt.edu/~lao2/images/rahotep.jpg

(Rahotep and Nefer, 4^th dynasty).

When I look at this, objectively, I believe Rahotep could have looked similar to a Somali. And, like my girlfriend, a golden skin is not unheard of in Horn of Africa types – especially when they stay out of the sun (like women tended to do in ancient Egypt). However, it could indicate some genetic blending with Libyans was occurring, too!

Interestingly, a police sketch artist (Frank Domingo) completed an investigation of the facial features of the Sphinx, which also has an estimated 4^th dynasty construction date. Comparing specific, undamaged portions of the Sphinx to a statue of Khafre (the king thought to be the face used as a model), Domingo questioned the conventional Egyptological thinking that the Sphinx depicted Khafre. Looking and angles between specific facial features, Domingo showed that the Sphinx had dramatically greater prognathism (the degree to which the lower face points forward) than Khafre. Pronounced prognasthism is a characteristic of “black” populations. Personally, I believe this is a reasoned interpretation of the data. I find it credible that the early version of the Sphinx represented a “Horn of Africa” type, or one that was blended with a large genetic contribution from African ancestors. Also, since the Egyptians were big on “recycling “ monuments, and the head of the Sphinx is very small in proportion to the body, I find it possible that Khafre did a little reworking of the Sphinx to make it look more like himself. Additionally, the Sphinx was pained a red-brown color (which, I think, points to the blended nature of it’s original race).

-http://www.biped.info/images/longhead9.jpg

(Sneferu, 4^th dynasty).

On a more personal note, when I look at this image of Snefru, I think it looks very similar to that of an African-American man I know (and even then, he is “blended”, having a German grandfather). So, in my opinion, Sneferu could have been “black”. This is a very rare depiction of this great king, and it demonstrates an unconventional approach to depicting the Pharaoh. Snefru is shown as imperfect, with a receding jaw.

Also, it is important to note that individual Egyptians have been clearly portrayed as “black”. For example, there was a valued chancellor (Maihepri) within a Late period Egyptian royal court. His Book of the Dead depicts him as “black” – therefore, Egyptians were willing to show a specific individual as “black”.

There are a whole dynasty of kings (the 25^th) from the Sudan – all, most likely, “black” in the NAACP meaning of the term. These kings include Piye, Shabaka, Shibitku, Taharqa, and Tanuatamun. Additionally, their daughter’s that became the “Gods Wife of Amen” (e.g., Shepenwepet II) were also “black”.

http://www.livius.org/pha-phd/pharaoh/taharqa-sphinx.jpg

(King Taharqa of the 25^th Dynasty).

NOTE: The only image to appear in this essay is deemed a "Mystery Queen". A contributor at the Egyptological Electronic Forum notes: "During the Egyptian Government excavations around the pyramid of The Pharaoh Teta at Sakkara, a mould was found in the Royal Funerary temple, which is unquestionably a death mask; and the above photographs show the plaster cast which was made at the Cairo Museum from this mould." The face molded from this mask appears to be the "Horn of Africa" type Egyptian. That she was potentially Old Kingdom royalty is consistent with my theory (presented below) that the earliest rulers of ancient Egypt could well be "black", as the southerners conquered and dominated the northerners in the earliest epoch of ancient Egyptian history.

The “White” Ancient Egyptians

However, there are other indications that specific individuals were either “blended” or were strongly “Mediterranean” (i.e., olive skin, straight hair) in their look. For example, the mummy of Tutankhamen’s Great-Grandfather (Yuya, whose daughter Queen Tiye gave birth to Tutankhamen’s reputed father, Akhenaton) had a full head of “gingery”, reddish-blond hair and a beard to match. The mummy of the “Elder Lady”, which was found in a cache of other important 18^th dynasty royalty, is strongly suspected to be Queen Tiye herself. This mummy has classically Mediterranean hair, long and straight. The mummy of Ramses the Great has red hair. So, just considering the actual mummies, I think it is reasonable to assume that these individuals were “Mediterranean” types – blended, but with a large contribution from Libyan and Levant group sources.

Some portraiture also points to Mediterranean racial influences. For example, the pictures derived from the Armana Period (18^th dynasty period featuring the heretic King Akhenaton and inclusive of his son, Tutankhamen) clearly show the young Armana princesses (i.e., Tutankhamen’s half sisters) as olive skinned. Armana portraiture was specifically designed to be as close to natural as possible. In fact,. The Armana portrait shows body flaws (e.g., Amenhotep III’s fatness, Nefertiti’s sagging breasts and stretch marks). Therefore, if these individuals were black, they probably would have been painted that way. The famous bust of Nefertiti was found in an artist’s shop. This bust was a “model” upon other works were based. This model clearly shows a Nefertiti with highly “Libyan” features, and I think it is an accurate likeness of the queen at the height of her beauty.

Tutankhamen was a Mediterranean type. His great-grandfather and grandmother clearly were, based on the actual mummies. His reputed mother was Kiya, who is conjectured to be a Mitanni princess. Mitannis were clearly a far lighter population then typical Egyptians, of the "Levant" type from Northern Syria. His portraiture that obviously depicts him in a personal way also shows olive skin. Therefore, the bust developed on the CAT scan data is a reasonable approximation of his skin tone. If any fault could be made, it is that he should have been more “tan”, as he enjoyed hunting (and probably spent a good deal of tie outdoors, as many young men do).

Not only is Ramses the Great “Mediterranean”, evidence points to his chief wife, Nefertari also being “Mediterranean”. The art of this period, the 19^th dynasty, was still highly influence by the Armana standard , as the Armana artists began working for the next line of kings. Her tomb paintings show naturalistic pink cheeks on fair skin.

Cleopatra is another individual that Afrocentrists claim is a “black” Egyptian Queen. Cleopatra VII was directly descended from the Macedonian line of kings that ruled after Alexander’s conquest. Therefore, she is at least half Greek. Her father was Ptolemy XII. Her mother was either a Greek sister or cousin, or a Syrian noble woman/princess (the Ptolmeys were marrying into other Alexandrian kingdoms at this point). Though there may be Roman references to Cleopatra being “black”, the term in this context means darker than a western European. True, Cleopatra would have been darker than a Roman, but she is not a Nubian Queen either.

Finally, also consider the cartonage masks of the Graeco Roman period mummies (i.e.,32 dynasty to 400 AD). These masks were designed to exactly look like the mummified individual The faces that a presented on those cartonage masks reflect a population that looks remarkably like the Egyptian population today. This confirms a finding in the “classic” study cited earlier in the essay: the Egyptians have been a relatively homogenous population for a prolonged period of time. Individuals may be far darker (especially in the south), but generally they look similar to many peoples found in the Mediterranean basin.

Afrocentrists counter that there are examples of King Tutankhamen funerary statues depicting him as “black”. Certain other queens and pharaohs (e.g., Ahmose-Nefertari and Amenhotep I) are also shown painted “black”. However, artwork with these features is ALWAYS found in a funerary context, at least for the examples Afrocentrists like to cite. It was one of the Egyptian art conventions that rulers posing as funereal divinities were often painted black or green, to mimic decaying corpses or to represent rich, fertile soil. Therefore, one black funerary portrait does not a black Egyptian ruler make. There needs to be hard, forensic evidence (e.g., mummies, mtDNA) or evidence presented in “living” artpieces or the written record.

MUTNODJMET’S UNIFIED THEORY

I have presented a lot of different types of data into this discussion. Now, I would like to put it together, to demonstrate the population migrations and interactions that occurred along the Nile to generate the “ancient Egyptian race.”.

During the period between 10,000-7000 BC, toward the end of the last Ice Age and a relatively wet period for north Africa, two distinct groups began entering the Nile Valley: The “Horn of Africa” Group (HOA) and the “Libyan” contingent (LB). Ready access to the Nile was available to the Libyans, as the desert was a fully formed barrier to the river valley or delta region during this period. The HOG group dominated southern Egypt, the LB group the northern Delta region. About 5000 BC, these groups began interacting and genetic material started blending. Approximately 3000 BC, Narmer of the South conquered the north and married a delta princess (LB group). The famous Narmer palette shows that Narmer was vanquishing foes with long, straight hair indicative of Mediterranean types. Narmer’s “race” may have been HOA or blended (HOA and LB).

The early dynasty pharaohs continued the process of blending HOA and LB groups. Therefore, certain individuals may have been very dark (i.e., “black”). But, it is also reasonable to assume others would have been fair (i.e., “white”).

Approximately at the end of the Third Dynasty, and certainly by the beginning of the Fourth, there were expeditions to Sinai (for turquoise, other minerals) and the Levant (for cedars of Lebanon, used in barges and pyramid construction). Snefru, for example, developed important turquoise mines and his Bent Pyramid still has beams of large Lebanese cedars visible today (for those brave enough to enter the unstable tomb). Therefore, starting approximately 2600 BC, Egyptians were starting to genetically blend with Levant Group types (LV), which brought the population more in line with the overall complexion of the Mediterranean Basin.

There were definite genetic interactions occurring on the southern border as well. HOA and Nubians were also contributing DNA to the Egyptian population, in what I view as a “steady-state” rate. But, due to the nature of trade and exploration, more and more influence from the LV groups were occurring, overall “lightening” the Egyptians relatively to their original population. For example, the Middle Kingdom rulers (2000 BC) were continually sending expeditions to the Sinai, Levant and were thought to be establishing contacts with Greeks and other groups more distant to Egypt within the Mediterranean basin.

By the time of the New Kingdom (1500 BC), the Egyptians were a blended mix of HOA, LB and LV groups. They looked much the same as they do now, with a bell curve of fewer “white” individuals, most “olive” individuals, and fewer “black” individuals. Overall, they were darker than the average Greek, Roman, Syrian, Hittite, Libyan, but they were also lighter than any Nubian or Southern African type. In the late Period (^60 BC forward), more and more contributions were being made by the Greeks to the genetics of that region.

SUMMARY

I think that Afrocentrist theory has been poisonous to a levelheaded discussion of ancient Egypt. My main reference source eloquently explains the ancient Egyptian race “controversy” in this fashion:

There has been a spate of controversy of late between "Afrocentric" authors and their critics, but the truth is that Egyptologists are not involved in some massive conspiracy of lies designed to subjugate black populations, as has often been charged. Indeed, most modern Egyptologists are rather taciturn when it comes to the subject of race. Nor have the black Africans been "robbed" of their legacy. Civilization as it exists today is the culmination of the historical development of mankind, layer upon layer from ancient times to modern, each group contributing its share to the whole. Through human interaction, whether by trade or warfare, ideas, reform, and invention are assimilated, adapted, and again dispersed. It's the nature of history regardless of ethnicity. To make petty and arbitrary distinctions based on human physical appearance is divisive and can only lead to wanton racist misuse.

Summarizing some important facts:

· The ancient Egyptians did not belong to one race, but were a blend of several ethnic groups.

· Though there certainly were “black” pharaohs, King Tutankhamen was not one of them.

· Though there certainly were “black” queens, Cleopatra and Nefertiti were not among them.

· Specific scientific study, in the form of DNA/mt DNA testing, might be valuable to elucidate the actual origins/composition of the ancient Egyptian population.

One final thought: The ancient Egyptians can be claimed by no, one group of people. The entire world can enjoy the wisdom, beauty and mystery of the Kingdom of the Nile. The ancient Egyptians were distinct, in and of themselves. I think that is way they would prefer for us to think of them.

Egyptian Mummies

2006-10-28T10:06:00.001-07:00

Dear Friends:

It has been my privilege to prepare essays on various subjects pertaining to ancient Egypt . This essay will focus on my area of most focused egyptological study – the art and science of mummification. There are links to images and references that can enhance understanding.

As always, I would like to list the sources for the material cited through this article
1) Egyptian Mummies (Unraveling the Secrets of an Ancient Art), Dr. Bob Brier, 1994 (ISBN 0-688-10272-7).

2) The Mummy in Ancient Egypt (Equipping the Dead for Eternity), Salima Ikram and Aidan Dodson, 1998 (ISBN 0-500-05088-0).

3) http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/mummification.htm

4) http://members.aol.com/egyptart/mummy.html

This piece will strictly focus on the actual process of mummification as practiced by the ancient Egyptians, as well as how we know this information. As always, I will be delighted to address questions from ACOC members on this material.

EGYPTIAN MUMMIFICATION – THE DELUXE TREATMENT

The Egyptians believed that a fully preserved body was essential, as the spirit (“Ka”) required an intact home. Through centuries of experience and practice, the ancient Egyptians developed very worthy techniques. We are able to look upon the faces of some of the most prominent men in history (e.g., Ramses the Great, Amenhotep the Magnificent) as a result of the art and science they practiced.

The first step in producing a worthy mummy is to remove all traces of water. Water permits the bacteria, which are responsible for the process of decay, to thrive and multiply. Consider a raisin – it is essentially the mummy of a grape. Therefore, the primary goal of the ancient mummifier was extracting as much water as possible from the corpse.

This total process of ancient Egyptian mummification included numerous religious and ritual aspects. However, two specific elements in the ceremony addressed the need for water removal -- evisceration and dehydration.

The first step in mummification, once a corpse arrived and was ritually cleansed, was eviseration. The first embalmer, a priest, would an incision line on the left side of the abdomen. Here is where the obsidian knife comes in. In most instances, a 4 inch slice was made in the lower-right portion of the abdomen, from which the internal organs could be removed. During is experiments, Dr. Bob Brier attempted to use a variety of knifes that were constructed in similar fashion to those available in the ancient world. Ultimately, he discovered that an obsidian blade (refered to in Greek literature as the “Ethiopian Knife”) was surgically sharp and the single most effective tool to begin the eviscerating procedure.

It is interesting to note that the “Slitter”, as this individual is termed in ancient Egyptian texts, was reviled for this act of desecration. The other members of the mummification crew would have tossed stones at him after the cut. Likely they missed, as the “Slitter” was most likely a brother or another member of the family engaging in the clan’s business. Also officiating at the ceremony was an embalmer wearing an Anubis mask, performing specific rituals during the mummification process.

The internal organs, called viscera, were normally removed from the thoracic and abdominal cavities through an abdominal incision in the left flank. In some instances, the viscera were not extracted at all, while in others they were removed through the anus. Typically, however, there will be a 4-inch incision though which even the largest abdominal organ (the liver) could be removed. Dr. Brier commented that the liver came out in two sections, but was able to be extracted though the small slit.

This organ tissue was then dehydrated with natron, and either placed in canopic jars or made into four packages and reinserted into the body cavities (especially during the 21^st dynasty and after). Some were wrapped in one large packet that was placed on the legs of the mummy. Interestingly, the heart was considered to be the organ associated with the individual's intelligence and life force and was therefore retained in place, while the brain was removed and discarded.

http://www2.sptimes.com/Egypt/Artifacts/Graphics/CanopicJarsSet.JPG

Imset (depicted as a human) was responsible for the liver;
Hapi (a baboon) for the lungs;
Duamutef (a jackal) for the stomach;
Kebechsenef (a falcon) for the viscera of the lower body.

The brain itself is a water-rich organ, and had to be removed for effective mummification. Reviewing the ancient literature, it was theorized that a hook was inserted into the nostril, and the brain removed in piecemeal fashion. However, during his 1994 mummification of a modern man, Dr. Brier ascertained the hook was used to scramble the brain matter, which would then ooze out once the head was tipped. Then, linen would be inserted and removed, extracting more residue. Only when the linen came out clean would this process be concluded. As mentioned before, the brain was discarded as useless.

After removal of the internal organs, the body cavities were washed out with spiced palm wine and then filled with a mixture of dry natron (a type of salt) gum resin and vegetable matter. An average sized human being requires 600 pounds of natron for dehydration. Once placed on special boards (which would permit the corpse to be completely surrounded by natron, so that the glutteal and back areas would be dried), the corpse was left to dehydrate for a period of approximately 35 days. At that point, the limbs were still mobile enough for movement (so that the mummy could be posed in classic funereal styles).

It is interesting to note that natron, believed to be the main ingredient used to pack the body, is found in a dry desert valley called the Wadi Natrun, now famous for its monasteries. It is composed of sodium carbonate and sodium bicarbonate and includes some natural impurities. Originally, there was some discussion in Egyptology circles concerning the use of natron, actual salt (sodium chloride), or lime (calcium carbonate) as the main dehydration agent in Egyptian mummification. There was also a question of whether the natron was used in a solution such as water, or in a solid state. However, assessment of the Greek texts that describes the process, together with modern experiments on mummification has led us to believe that dry natron provides the most satisfactory results and was probably used exclusively.

After the body was completely dehydrated, the temporary stuffing that was used to fill the body was removed from its cavities and replaced with the permanent stuffing and sometimes also with the viscera packages. Next the abdominal incision was closed, the nostrils were plugged with resin or wax, and the body was anointed with a variety of oils and gum resins, which may have also played some part in preventing or delaying insect attack and in masking the odors of decomposition that would have accompanied the mummification process. However, all of these later stages were essentially cosmetic and had little effect in preserving the tissues.

After the basic mummification process was completed, the embalmers then wrapped the mummy in layers of linen bandages, between which they inserted protected amulets to guard the deceased from evil and danger. A decomposing body will soon begin to swell and loose its recognizable human form. This swelling will effect all of the body, but is particularly apparent in the abdomen, where gasses being produced by bacteria inflate the intestines. Removal of the internal organs of course aids in preventing this process. However, bandaging of the body also prevents or at least restricts such swelling, as well as excluding air from direct contact with the corpse, thus slowing deterioration. Bandaging would also prevent the formation of blisters on the skin, caused by fluid within the body, which appear in the first stages of decomposition. It is thought that the bandages were derived from the bed-linens and clothing items the ancient Egyptians utilized during their lives.

Next, a liquid or semi-liquid resinous substance was then poured over the mummy and coffin. The mummy and coffin were then returned to the family of the deceased for the funeral and burial.

At the end of the embalming process the priest would conclude by repeating an embalming spell:

“You will live again, you will live forever. Behold, you are young again forever”.

EGYPTIAN MUMMIFICATION – VALUE TREATMENTS AND ENHANCEMENTS

The approach I described above was essentially the premier treatment. There were two less expensive value packages that Herodotus mentions did not involve the complete evisceration of the body. In a second method, which was also used for animal mummification, oil of cedar was injected into the anus, which was then plugged to prevent the liquid from escaping. The body was afterwards treated with natron. Next, the oil was drained off and the intestines and the stomach, which became liquefied by the natron, came away with the oil. All that remained was actually the skin and the skeleton. The body was returned to the family in this state for burial. However, this was even superior to the cheapest method, where the body was purged so that the intestines came away. Afterwards, the body was treated with natron.

Over the long history of ancient Egyptian mummification, there were only two major additions to the basic procedure. From as early as the Middle Kingdom, the brain was removed in some mummies and by the New Kingdom, this procedure of excerebration had become widespread. This process involved the insertion of a metal hook by the embalmer into the cranial cavity through the nostril and ethmoid bone, and the brain was pulverized to fragments so that it could be removed with a spatula type instrument. However, at times, access was gained to the cranial cavity either through the base of the skull or an eye socket. Obviously, it would have been impossible to remove every small fragment of the brain through any of these methods. Before the mummification was complete, the emptied cranial cavity was packed with strips of linen that had been impregnated with resin, though at other times molten resin was poured into the skull. In fact, King Tutankhamen’s skull contains such resin residue.

The second innovation in mummification was probably not introduced until as late as the 21st Dynasty. Then the embalmers sought to develop a technique that originally had been used during the 18th Dynasty mummification of King Amenhotep III. His embalmers had attempted to recreate the plumpness of the king's appearance by introducing packing under the skin of his mummy though incisions made in his legs, neck and arms. The priests of the 21st Dynasty began to use this subcutaneous packing for anyone who could afford such an expensive technique. Now, the body cavities were packed through a flank incision with sawdust, butter, linen and mud, and the four individually wrapped packages of viscera were also inserted into these cavities, rather than being placed in canopic jars.

Subcutaneous material was also inserted through mall incisions into the skin, the neck and the face was packed through the mouth. Hence, the embalmers attempted to retain the original body contours at least to some extent in order to give the mummy a more lifelike appearance. In fact, artificial eyes were often placed in the eye sockets and the skin was sometimes painted with red ocher (for men) or yellow ocher (for women). False plaits and curls were even woven into the natural hair. However, these very expensive and time consuming processes were not retained beyond the 23rd Dynasty.

The following is an example of the high-point in Mummification: the mummy of 21^st Dynasty Queen Nodjmet. Prepared with subcutaneous stuffing, flase hair, and inlaid eyes, she is extremely well preserved and almost looks asleep. Nodjmet was the wife of the Priest-King, Herihor.

OTHER INTERESTING FACTS

One can readily assume the entire mummification process was an odoriferous one. Bob Brier noted that one of the titles Anubis (the ancient Egyptian god devoted to mummification) was “He Who Is Upon His Hill” or “He Who Is In His Tent”. Therefore, it is theorized that most mummification was conducted within tents, outside the borders of the city/village on nearby hills.

During the Graeco-Roman period, records indicate it would cost about 450 drachmae (about $5000) to prepare a mummy. The most costly item was linen, as so much was used. Addional charges included an Anubis mask (probably worn during specific ceremonies by one of the embalmers), mourners, and carriage by donkey.

THE OVERALL HISTORY OF EGYPTIAN MUMMIFICATION

The history of Egyptian mummifcation can be summarized based on the kingdom divisions of the Egypt’s history.

· Old-Kingdom (initial experimentation; mummies made mainly of royal persons; mummies essentially consist of wrapped corpses poorly preserved).

· Middle-Kingdom (moderate progress; mummies made of nobles and royals; better dehydration and preservation techniques.)

· New Kingdom (High-Mark; mummies made of nobles, royals, and the wealthy; brain removal and subcutaneous padding).

· Late Kingdom (Generally good, and mummification services offered to more and more citizens; explosion in the number of animal mummies produced).

· Graeco-Roman Period (Generally poor preservation, but the bandaging is precise and is an artform in itself; mummification is available to all who can afford it; cartonage and gold-covered masks cover the mummies).

The history in full starts with an understanding that in Egypt, a combination of climate and environment, as well as the people's religious beliefs and practices, led first to unintentional natural mummification and then to true mummification. In Egypt, and particularly ancient Egypt, there was a lack of cultivatable land and so the early Egyptians chose to bury their dead in shallow pit-graves on the edges of the desert, where the heat of the sun and the dryness of the sand created the natural mummification process. Even this natural process produced remarkably well preserved bodies. Often, these early natural mummified bodies retained skin tissue and hair, along with a likeness of the person's appearance when alive.

Prior to about 3400 BC, all Egyptians were buried in pit graves, whether rich or poor, royal or common. Later however, as prosperity and the advance in building techniques improved, more elaborate tombs for those of high social status were constructed. Yet at the same time, these brick lined underground burial chambers no longer provided the conditions which led to natural mummification in the older pit graves. Now however, mummification had been established in the religious belief system so that the deceased's ka, or spirit, could return to and recognize the body, reenter it, and thus gain spiritual sustenance from the food offerings. Hence, a method was sought to artificially preserve the bodies of the highest classes. However, preservation of the body was probably also required due to the longer period that it took to actually inter the body, as grave goods and even the tomb itself received final preparations.

What we sometimes called true mummification involves a sophisticated process that was developed from experimentation. The best example of this process is Egyptian mummification, which involved the use of chemical and other agents. The experimentation that led to true mummification probably lasted several hundred years. Such efforts may have begun as early as the 2nd Dynasty. J. E. Quibell, an Egyptologist who worked in some primitive Egyptian necropolises, found a large mass of corroded linen between the bandages and bones of a body interred in a cemetery at Saqqara that perhaps evidences an attempt to use natron or another agent as a preservative by applying it to the surface of the skin.

Another early technique involved the covering of the body in fine linen and then coating this with plaster to carefully preserve the deceased's body shape and features, in particular the head. In 1891, W. M. Flinders Petrie discovered a body at Meidum dating to the 5th Dynasty in which there had been some attempt to preserve the body tissue as well as to recreate the body form. Bandages were carefully molded to reproduce the shape of the torso. Arms and legs were separately wrapped and the breasts and genitals were modeled in resin-soaked linen. Nevertheless, decomposition had taken the body beneath the bandages, and only the skeleton remained.

Only as early as the 4th Dynasty do we actually find convincing evidence of successful, true mummification. The mother of Khufu (i.e., Hetepheres), the king who built the Great Pyramid at Giza, also had a tomb at Giza. Though her body has not been found, in her tomb was discovered preserved viscera which could probably be attributed to this queen. An analysis of these viscera packets proved that they had been treated with natron, the agent that was successfully used in later times to dehydrate the body tissue. Hence, this find demonstrates that the two most important components of mummification, evisceration of the body and dehydration of the tissues, was already in use by royalty. Afterwards, mummification continued to be practiced in Egypt for some three thousand years, lasting until the end of the Christian era.

As Egyptian history progressed, mummification became available to people of the upper and even the middle classes. During the Middle Kingdom, the political and economic growth of the middle classes and the increased importance of religious beliefs and practices among all Egyptian social classes resulted in the spread of mummification to new sections of the population. More mummies have survived from that period than from the Old Kingdom, but it is also evident that less care was taken in their preparations. Mummification was actually most widespread during the Greco-Roman period. It was then that foreign immigrants who settled in Egypt began to adopt Egyptian funerary beliefs and customs. Mummification at that time became an increasingly prosperous commercial venture, and it tended to indicate the decease's social status rather than any religious conviction. This resulted in a further decline in the quality of the mummification process. At that time, bodies were elaborately bandaged and encased in covers made of cartonnage (a mixture of plaster and papyrus or linen). However, modern radiographic analysis confirms that these bodies were frequently poorly preserved inside their wrappings. Mummification was never generally available to the common classes of people. Yet, since they could not afford the sophisticated funerary structures, they continued to be interred in simple desert graves where their bodies were naturally preserved.

KEYS TO MUMMY IDENTIFICATION

The following section summarizes important things to look for, so that you can readily identify the general period of time during which an Egyptian mummy was prepared. This list is not all inclusive, but should give ACOC members an idea of the basic trends and identification clues that can be used in determining the age of a specific mummy.

Old Kingdom (Mummies of Royals. Very rare; never usually seen outside of Egypt or the oldest European Collections).

· Plastered-Shaped Mummy

· Plain Wooden Coffins, Box-Shaped.

· When used, stone or pottery Canopic jars were plain.

http://www.geocities.com/atworldtour/egypt/mummy.jpg

Middle Kingdom (Mummies of Royals and Nobles).

· Plaster Masks (called Cartonnage), generally of simple design, but usually of high quality and beauty.

· Wooden Coffins, Box-Shaped.

· Coffins have elaborate hieroglyphics, and eyes on the side of the box.

· Mummy buried on its side.

· Stone or pottery Canopic jars were plain or had human heads.

New Kingdom – Late Kingdom (Mummies of Royals, Nobles, and Wealthy).

· Plaster Masks (called Cartonnage), of more complex design (e.g., feathered headdresses). These tend to be more colorful and garish then Middle Kingdom.

· The Royal Mummies would have gold or silver masks (e.g., the famous one of King Tutankhamen).

· Arthropoid Coffins, Human-Shaped.

· Coffins have elaborate hieroglyphics.

· Richer burials utilize box-shaped wood or stone sarcophagus, which can be highly decorated (either with paintings or reliefs)

· Canopic jars were generally had human heads or those of the Four Sons of Horus.

· Papyrus “Book of the Dead” are buried with the mummy.

Ptolemaic-Graeco-Roman (Mummies of all who can afford the price).

· Plaster Masks (called Cartonnage), were used/ However, there was a wide variety of types, and many were highly influenced by Greek art (which focused on producing more realistic results). Plaster or gold-foil masks with very Greek characteristics are noted.

· Some of the wealthier mummies (especially in later history) have encaustic mummy portraits instead of masks. These portraits are as close to a snap-shot of what the actual individual looked like as could be achieved during this period of history.

· The quality of preservation techniques deteriorated. However, the bandaging became quite elaborate to make up for it. Therefore, a mummy with diamond-shaped patterns of bandages will always be from this period.

· Canopic jars may or may not be associated with a burial.

Three Threats to Security

2006-10-24T12:28:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

A good electronic friend posed this question (hat-tip, Royd!!!!). Many of the responses obtained were one-word wonders. However, I gave this matter some thought. (Note - Picture is of Egyptian God of War Montu)

The question was: What are the three biggest threats to peace and security.

I told him that I think this is more a phsycology question rather than one related to current events. The answers will tell you something about the person responding.

I think that the following are the most serious threats to international peace and security, as far was we Americans (and perhaps the Brits/Australians) are concerned.

1) Suppression of quality capitalism. People who are not hungry, have a decent job, and a safe family are not inclined to rattle cages or trigger nuclear detonation. Healthy economies and effective trade promote peace and good relations. I believe much of the aggression in the world is related to one neighboring country being jealous of the quality life of successful societies in which capitalism is promoted (or the leaders of the dysfunctional societies distracting their unhappy people by redirecting their anger).

2) The unprofessional, unrestrained and unapologetic liberal media. Here is fabulous example of what I mean by that:

http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/10/24/calame-press-polls-chemical-peels/

Quote:
Now of course Byron Calame of the NY Times made his famous excuse this week, “I hated Bush so much I couldn’t do my job…” and I’m quite sure Calame, having pounded his chest, is figuring the story of his paper’s harmful leaking of a worthwhile and legal program used to combat terrorism is “over.” Not so fast, Mr. Calame. Giving away security secrets.

Crying "racism" whenever valid border security issues are brought up by congressional leaders. Minimizing true threats (e.g., North Korea's armaments) when they are the result of poor policies of liberal leaders. Suppressing information as to the real state of the economy and the war in Iraq when it can help Conservative/Republican leaders:

http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/10/06/no-one-to-credit-for-the-good-economy/

Quote:

It’s always driven me crazy that in the 1990’s we were told that 5.6% unemployment was “virtually full employment,” (of course it was, a Democrat was in the WH!) but the current 4.6% unemployment rate never gets reported, and even if it does, there is always a “but.” The headline reads: Job Growth Slows, Unemployment Rate Dips. Hmmmm…maybe “full employment” is actually near, this time? It’s at a 5 year low…: The economy created 51,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department said in Washington. While that was fewer than economists predicted, it was offset by a 188,000 rise in August that was almost 50 percent bigger than the government previously reported. The jobless rate unexpectedly declined to 4.6 percent. Bonds fell and the dollar jumped as the reports suggested the economy will withstand the worst housing-industry downturn in more than a decade. The numbers also diminished speculation that the Federal Reserve will reduce interest rates in coming months.

Also this:

http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/10/17/saddam-wanted-to-strike-the-us/

Quote:

Many of us who live in New York have not forgotten that on 9/12/01 the only consulate not flying their flag at half-staff was Iraq’s. The “mediating intelligences” decided long ago that 45,000 boxes of documents from Iraq were uninteresting and they simply don’t cover what is being discovered within those boxes.

But Ed Morrissey has been keeping track of things and ohhh…lookey here…March 2001: Iraq wants to attack American assets…: …a close look at document CMPC-2003-006758, translating it from the Arabic and revealing the intent of Iraq to attack American interests. The memo from the IIS complains about the election of “Bush the Son” and talks about the need to exhort terrorists to attack America… Read it, folks.

You’re not going to see it covered in the Mainstream Media.

3) The United Nations. Egghead intellectuals have become dependent on the UN to magically address the enormous security threats created when certain populations are unwilling or unable to get rid of nut-job leaders. Meanwhile, as very angry letters are written and wrist-slaps distributed, some seriously dangerous men are allowed to destabilize my country and arm theirs to the teeth (of course, North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela come to mine). I long for the days when treaties could be made with specific countries, and every time there was an international issue that threatened American security, that we could take action (alone or with true allies). Waiting for "Coalitions" means we lose time, flexibility, and other valuable security perks while waiting for wine-sipping, egotistical diplomats (which I view as a species less worthy than politicians) decide where they will place their child-raping thieves.

Egypt News: We have to thank the thieves.

2006-10-24T11:30:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I am hoping to include regular news updates from the wonderful world of Egyptology. I have loved ancient Egypt since I was 5 years old and my dad showed me the National Geographic magazine article about ancient Egypt that he treasured (by William Hayes, “Daily Life in Ancient Egypt,” National Geographic Magazine 80 (1941): 419-515. H. M. Herget’s 32 imaginary color paintings). I am amazed at how many people are also intrigued by this ancient land.

Here is an exciting news development from Saqqara:

Thieves unearth ancient tombs

Quote:

SAQQARA, Egypt: Thieves led an Egyptian archaeological team to discover three tombs of dentists to the ancient kings, unveiled yesterday at the Saqqara pyramid complex south of Cairo.

"It seems for the first time that the ancient Egyptians made a cemetery to the dentist and they are buried in the shadow of the Step Pyramid," Zahi Hawass, chief of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, said as he toured the site. About 4,200 years old, the tombs honour a chief dentist and two other dentists, who served the royal families. They show the ancient Egyptians "cared about the treatment of their teeth", Hawass said. He pointed out two hieroglyphs - an eye over a tusk, appearing frequently among the neat rows of symbols decorating the tombs' doors - that he said identify the men as dentists.

Thieves beat the archaeologists to the site of the new tombs, launching their own dig one summer night two months ago, before they were captured and jailed.

"We have to thank the thieves," Hawass said. They likely didn't notice a curse inscription just inside the prominent doorway to the chief dentist's tomb, which showed a crocodile and a snake, designed to ward off invaders.

There is additional backrodund information from a related article:

Quote:

The tombs date back more than 4,000 years ago to the 5th Dynasty and were meant to honor a chief dentist and two others who treated the pharaohs and their families, Hawass said............

They depict the chief dentist and his family immersed in daily rituals — playing games, slaughtering animals and presenting offerings to the dead, including the standard 1,000 loaves of bread and 1,000 vases of beer.............

Although archaeologists have been exploring Egypt's ruins intensively for more than 150 years, Hawass believes only 30 percent of what lies hidden beneath the sands has been uncovered. Excavation continues .

My thoughts and notes on this:

a) The Tombs are Old Kingdom. Old Kingdom is the most ancient, and therefore the most obscure, of ancient Egyptian history. A find of noblemen, or even upper class health professionals, is truly exciting. The dentist tombs were built just after the Great Pyramid (which was 4th Dynasty), and before the decline of the Old Kingdom to the First Intermediate period.

b) The tomb of the dentists can tell s much about basic life in ancient Egypt. The more famous tombs of kings and queens focus on divine mythos. These newly discovered tombs offer more insight into daily living.

c) This site promises to offer much more news and exciting material!!!!

The New Media, Wall Street &New York Times

2006-10-21T12:31:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I just had an epiphany, and I wanted to share it with you today. I will apologize beforehand. I am experiencing technical difficulties on my main computer at home, so I won't be able to provide links and specific citations as I normally would. However, I think this observation will be one that many enjoy.

This past week, there have been two news articles I have noted: The Dow Jones closing up above 12,000 points and the NYT profits down a whopping 39 % (I would loved to have been a fly on the wall when the NYT accountants went into NYT Publisher Pinch Schultzberger's office and given this buffoon the news).

I think these two stories are deeply related.

The Old Media (spearheaded by the NYT) has been essentially masking how terrific the economy under the Bush Administration has been. For example, the very low unemployment rates (that is, unless your are a Mainstream Media type) have been unheralded. Stories about "outsourcing" are fairly regular elite media fare.

Yet, investors and businessmen seem jazzed. Euphoric. Optimistic about the economy. Why is this?

Because those of us in the business world utilize New Media sources for making business decisions. I know that many of you, like myself, are entrepreneurs and small business owners. Where do YOU go for your news on matters of national and international importance???

I know for damn sure I don't, won't and shan't use the NYT or any other traditional media outlet. I go to the Drudge Report, RealClearPolitics, and Fox News for hard news. I utilize the Competitive Enterprise Institute and other more conservative sites for materials related to certain aspects of my business. It seems to me most business people are doing much the same thing.

I wonder how this economy would be doing if the toxic, traditional media types were still the only source of news? We would probably be stuck with President John Kerry chirping about "malaise".

OPEN LETTER TO REPORTERS

2006-10-12T14:56:00.000-07:00

Dear Traditional Journalists:

I am writing an open letter to formally record my utter disgust and disdain for what you have done to a once nobel profession.

Some background: My father was a professor of journalism at Wayne State University in Detroit Michigan and was part of the team winning the Pulitzer Prize for covering the Detroit Riots (1968, Local News)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Pulitzer_Prize). My mother was the second female journalist on staff, ever, for the Schenectady gazette. I began my career as a journalist for the Ferndale Gazetter in 1979, and wrote for various publications through the years (e.g., Ferndale Gazette, The South End, and the San Diego Union Tribune). I now do freelance work, in my capacity as a specialst in biology/science matters, for a local FOX affiliate. Therefore, my comments are grounded in an appreciation of some journalism basics. For you reporters who have forgotten, these basics are:

WHO. WHAT. WHERE. WHEN. WHY. HOW.

I am not interested in "gottcha" reporting. I am not interested in interpretations of words/events/speeches -- I have brains enough to do that myself. I want the facts -- just the facts. If I want news analysis, I have specific sources for that.

I was appalled by the disdain and disrespect shown to President Bush during the recent Rose Garden press briefing by news reporters. While you and I may not agree with Presdient Bush on all matters, the fact is he is due some basic courtesy and thougtfulness while being questioned. Here is an example of the idiocy that passes for great journalism today:

(Terry Hunt, AP): Thank you, Mr. President. Democrats say that North Korea's reported test shows that your policy has been a failure, that you got bogged down in Iraq where there were no weapons of mass destruction while North Korea was moving ahead with a bomb. Is your administration to blame for letting North Korea get this far?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061011-5.html

How shameful. As far as I am concerned, we are now reaping the effects of President Clinton's policies of the 1990's. President Bush is left to address the mess left behind during Clinton's reign of zipper diplomacy. However, even if I belived otherwise, I think this question is appalling and does not hit anywhere near the heart of what Americans such as myslef would like to know -- WHAT DOES THE ADMINISTRATION PLAN TO DO NOW?

President Bush is stuggling with weighty global matters, and is attempting to do the best with the available resources and personality. He is not evil, and wants what is best for the country. Instead of treating him with such contempt, would it be too much to ask for addressing the President with tactful, thoughtful questions that would actually be the basis for stories I would want to read.

I used to love reading the newspaper and news magazines. However, during the last 10 years, I have found myself turning to alternative news venues. Presently, I confine my news reading to the local section of our city newspaper, and the comics section. My husband will read the business and sports sections. Our national and international news is obtained through the Drudge Report, FNC and other internet and radio sources. We can't be the only Americans for whom this is now true.

Here are other items that reinforce the above points:

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2006/10/the_media_scandal.html

Not to make too big a deal of this, but falsifying that report - as Reid apparently did - is a federal crime. Under Title 18 US Code Section 1001, it's a false official statement. For which Reid could be sent to jail. If you're looking for this on tonight's network news or on the front page of tomorrow's New York Times (next to the newest revival of the Foley minutiae) you won't find it. There's ample time for Mark Foley, the discredited generals' revolt, and even the comprehensively discredited Lancet report on civilian casualties in Iraq. But cover a real scandal, with real misconduct that's punishable under federal criminal law? Just imagine if this were Bill Frist, not Harry Reid.

http://newsbusters.org/node/8285

Oops. Back in 2004, then-ABC White House correspondent Terry Moran argued President Bush’s tax cuts were building debt, not prosperity: “Most experts say that making those tax cuts permanent would cause gigantic deficits virtually as far as the eye can see.” Early last year, CBS’s Bob Schieffer suggested it would be impossible for the federal budget deficit to be cut in half before 2009 without raising taxes: “The government has just got to find some money to finance these programs.”
Well, the tax cuts haven’t been repealed, and there have been no big new tax increases. But yesterday the White House announced that final tallies for the federal government’s fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, the budget deficit had shrunk from $413 billion two years ago to $248 billion. The federal government collected $2.407 trillion in taxes in FY2006, $122 billion more than originally forecast back in February.

While I wish that my journalist friends would be successful, the traditional media will continue its freefall as it continues to alientate about 50% of its potential audience -- and, most significant, alientates that portion of the population that is most readily interested in current events. Now is the time to get back to the basics, include information from all points of view (not just liberal, Democrat, coastal-area sensibilities), and treat fellow, law-abiding Americans with basic human dignity (even if they hold different political views).

LIFE CHANGING BOOKS

2006-10-10T19:02:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I am a scientist by day. At night, however, I dabble in art, history and the arcane arts (tarot reading and astrology). That way, I keep myself in balance.

I am a successful scientist (mostly). Art, however, is a humbling experience. I play flute and recorders well enough to do Christmas carols and play olde English music. However, I am amazed at the musical abilities of many in my local American Recorder Society chapter.

I used to draw. I will never be a master artist, but drawing relaxes me. To draw (or paint) well is a skill that amazes me. Therefore, when I realized my son was of an age to begin drawing and painting, I wanted to relearn some basics so I could teach him more than what I was taught when young. I went on a quest for a good source of information for a beginner.

Based on a recommendation of some electronic friends, I ordered this book. It is one of the few, truly wonderful, life-changing books I have ever read. I have only finished the first few chapters, but I have learned some astonishing things on how the brain functions to process data and very practical ways to apply this information when teaching my son.

I am very excited. The book notes that handwriting is a form of drawing, at which many analytical left-brainers (ME) are not skilled. My writing is worst than ancient Egyptian hieratic (which looks rather like stenography done by a drunk secretary). Since completing some basic exercises that trigger the right side of your brain to overcome left-brain domination, my handwriting has really improved to near legibility. And I do see marked improvement in my ability to render objects. And the best thing is that I have been able to direct my son to tap into his right-brain, too. He is beginning to enjoy and be good at handwriting and drawing.

This just shows you are never too old to learn something terrific. Here is a link for other interested people:

http://www.drawright.com/

Rightosphere Muslim Defense

2006-10-04T17:25:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

Let me not leave you with the impression that all members of Ann Coulter Official Chat are ranting, thoughtless attackers of all that is Islam. Many, member fellow chatters in my group have been striving to elevate the discussion of Islam and to actually learn something about the Muslim faith, practices, and diversity of opinion. In light of my previous post, a very thoughtful ACOC friend sent me this contibution. With his permission, I repost it here.

From Rusty57:

Hi! I went a little long with this message so I decided to start off addressing your request for any good links. As far as moderate interpretations of Islam, I'm not aware of any that are better than the freemuslimcoalition that you're already aware of.

I have a few links that might be of interest.

http://www.muslimcanadiancongress.org/index.html

http://www.ccmw.com/

These two organizations led the campaign to stop sharia tribunals here in Canada http://www.wluml.org/english/index.shtml (women living under muslim laws) Yes, religion is a more contentious issue than politics! I've been trying to understand religion and belief in God for almost 40 years. When it comes to belief, I've been all over the map since I was 12 years old. Way back then,growing up in a fundamentalist home, I was disturbed by an article I found in a book on zoology I received as a present.

It was about Ichneumonidae wasps that lay their eggs inside a live caterpillar. The larvae can only feed on live flesh, and as they hatch, they slowly devour their host. Even though they were just lowly insects, it made me wonder how and why an omniscient, caring God would create such a system. It seemed to only make sense in a dispassionate survival of the fittest sense. I did not receive any useful answers to the question and even though I never considered an advanced education in science or philosophy; since then I've spent a good portion of my spare time investigating science, religion and philosophy to try to find some satisfactory answers. From the beginning, I discovered that most people were not all that curious about these kind of anomalies or why there are so many different religions in the world.

When I was young, we kept changing churches as my father would keep finding inconsistencies in the beliefs of the new church and would move us on to a new one in a fruitless search for God's true church. Over the years, I've shifted from belief to nonbelief countless times, but I've always steered clear of religions that claim exclusive truth or salvation. This doesn't work for many people who seem to need a strict infallible dogma and a set of rules to follow. This has been a problem for many liberal churches that have tried to update their doctrines in the wake of social pressures or new scientific discoveries, and lose members in the process who start becoming suspicious of the church leadership. The fundamentalist churches ignore or oppose these pressures, but there are two problems with that approach.

ONE The opposition to new science(especially evolution, but also neuroscientists looking for the source of consciousness in the brain and new cosmological theories) encourage a hostility and lack of interest in science that some educators believe may already be endangering the U.S.'s dominance in many research areas. TWO When more than one religion claims exclusive revelation from God, someone has to be wrong. And that I believe, is the primary source of the hostility being expressed towards Islam.

If one church or a group of churches such as the evangelicals who insist on dispensationalist salvation, believe that their dogma holds the only salvation for all of mankind; having a foreign religion that views Jesus as just another prophet flourishing, might be seen as invalidating their claim to divine truth. And I believe this is why the true believers do not want to hear about moderate Muslims or compromises. Many of the posts on the Islam threads are fatalistic about an inevitable war with Islam based on their interpretations of the prophecies in Revelation. (I can't help notice how many members are using crusader avatars lately)

This reasoning is obviously being fueled by the pastors like John Hagee and Jack Van Impe, who are preaching that the Muslims will be the Antichrist's armies in the final battle of Armageddon.(A generation ago, the Soviet Union and China had that distinction) On the Muslim side, the fundamentalists like Ahmadinejad and Bin Laden are preaching that Mahdi will come to lead them to victory against the Jews and Christians in the final war. An innocent bystander can only conclude that fundamentalists on both sides either subconsciously or deliberately, are willing to risk destroying the planet in the goal of deciding religious supremacy.

So with all that going on, I hope that voices of moderation on both sides can encourage people to step back and consider the risks involved if they are wrong.

I AM NOT EVIL

2006-09-28T13:21:00.000-07:00

(And Neither are most Muslims)

Dear Friends:

There is a blogostorm brewing, and I wanted to contribute some thoughts on this subject.

In a nutshell, there is a demand for introspection being made on Conservative bloggers and pundits on how Muslims are considered and discussed in print and on the Internet. In fact, my humble blog began by as a chronicle of the experience I shared with a respected, humanist Muslim (Ali Eteraz) when he briefly posted on Ann Coulter Official Chat (where I am the site Librarian).

I strongly feel that too many on the right side of the world have little knowledge of the complexities of Islam, and make rude, demeaning, and ignorant claims about Muslims and Islamic faith in posts and dialogs. As a student of Ancient Egypt, and having some knowledge of this history of the Levant (gleaned from more than reading the Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam), I have more experience than many. I had hoped Ali could expand upon my teachings on that site, but circumstances were such that he could not. I continue my attempt to inform and educate there nonetheless.

Here is the sweet irony of the situation: Republicans/Conservatives have much in common with Humanist Musims. We are two groups of people classified as "EVIL" by much of the world.

In fact, Republicans and Conservatives (I recognize that the two are not necessarily the same) should be the most circumspect when discussing Muslims. We are both classified as evil.

Let's consider we Republicans. The elite media and elitist liberal types have labeled us as racist, bigoted, homophobes who wish to enslave minorities. Personally, I have had two interesting experiences related to becoming a Republican in 1993 (just after I realized I had been duped by Clinton by believing his lie regarding the Middle Class Income Tax Cut -- my taxes went up). I would like to share these stories:

* I was part of a play group about two years ago. I mentioned that I was Republican. One mother said..."but you seem so nice". I coughed and asked if she were a Democrat. She replied "yes". Then I responded "but you seem too smart". Once she realized I did freelance work for a Fox News affiliate, she basically ignored me.

* I was having dinner with a girlfriend who is also a colleague in the environmental business, where I make most of my greedy capitalist earnings. We began discussing the Bush-Gore election issues (this was Dec. 2000, fresh from the election being decided). She was hesitant to review the current events, as she assumed a female environmentalist such as myself had to be a liberal (she thought she was the only Conservative in our field). She had many uncomfortable experiences trying to rationally discuss politics with any woman. Happily, we found we had a similar political viewpoint and have been great friends since.

I tire of trying to defend myself against charges of prejudice and greed by people who read toxic materials, such as Evil GOP Bastards and Democratic Underground , and think they know what I stand for based on their limited knowledge. In fact, classification of Republicans as mean-spirited bigots is so prevelant and widespread, a full page ad was placed by a member of our party on the Washington Post, which read:

You're a Republican???

(Wednesday, October 20th 2004): In today's America, ask a growing number of high school and college students; their teachers and professors; the self-anointed media elite and/or hard working men and women of all ethnicities, the question, "What is a Republican?", and you'll be told "a rich, greedy, egotistical individual, motivated only by money and the desire to accumulate more and more of it, at the expense of the environment , the working poor, and all whom they exploit..

I am a Republican. I am none of those things and I don't know any Republicans who are. WHAT I AM first and foremost, is a loving husband of some 52 plus years, the father of four and an American who's proud of his country and his country's heritage.

I find humanist Muslims, who wish to celebrate the peaceful and wholesome aspects of Islam, support the separation of Chuch and State (just like we Republicans/Conservatives), and denounce the militancy of the Islamic extremists have similar experiences. For example, my 4-year-old son was at the condo pool this summer and started playing with a 5-year-old beauty of Persian heritage. The parents are obviously from Iran. When the mother introduced herself to me, I could tell she was not comfortable. She has had issues with people making assumptions as to how she practices Islam (e.g. cold stares). She was delighted to discover that I knew something about the history and culture of Persia/Iran, as well as its geography (i.e., Tehran is the Capital, Farsi is the main language). She was really impressed when I mentioned Isfahan!! She then relaxed with and was forthcoming about the family's coming to the United States. My son and I were even invited to a tasty Persian dinner. I made a new friend that day because I showed friendship.

I wish to be fair. My focus on the Internet is on Conservative news and opinion (as well as Egyptology). I do not know how Democrats/Liberals actually discuss Muslims. I do know, however, that many bloggers and posters on the "Rightosphere" are very comfortable espousing hatred toward an entire group of people. Today, one member of ACOC actually entitled a post "I've crossed that line... Islam must be destroyed". Replace the word "Islam" with the acronym "GOP" and it has the same tenor we Conservatives revile on extreme liberal websites.

I have spent many hours explaining Ann Coulter's infamous statement in her column, This is War. In full context, it reads:

We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now.
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.

I sincerely think Ann was distinguishing between terror-loving extremists from peaceful Muslims who are Americans and American allies. Damn, many of them are Americans in the US Armed Forces! However, her words (and the words of other Conservative pundits) are used to bash all Muslims -- anywhere at anytime. It is hard for me to demonstrate that Ann Coulter, one of my writing icons, is NOT prejudiced when there are regular posts calling for the destruction of Mecca on her chat room. It is time for these Conservative icons to take a stand and specifically distinguish between the terror-mongers and Muslims who are worthy of respect.

I think this is a sound time for some serious introspection for us Righties. Often, Conservatives state that we value and reason over irrationality (especially after liberal rants such as this). We have much in common with humanist Muslims. It is time to support these Muslims.

Update: A review of Michelle Malkin's response to Dean Esmay's assertions is intriguing. The depth and focus of her blogging about Esmay indicates to me that Dean's comments may have hit something. Her belittling of Dean (who is no uberliberal), her repititous cutting/pasting of Dean's invectives to a troll on his blog (meant to lessen Dean's credibility), and her pointing to an insulting reference on littlegreenfootballs is rather rabid if Dean's comment didn't have a grain of truth somewhere.

I liken it to my experience on Ann Coulter Official Chat. Another (albeit liberal) member accused me of being anti-Muslim. I was truly upset and defensive in my response. But upon serious reflection, that member was correct. I had failed to clearly distquish between Islamic terrorists and "moderate" Muslims in my posts. I changed my approach and did some homework, and now I am sometimes referred to as a "deluded Muslim apologist" on the chat room.

If Ms. Malkin didn't sense that her posts have promoted irrational anti-Muslim sentiment, then she wouldn't have bother being so vindictive in her own blog. If there were NO truth to Dean's assertions whatsoever, then if Michelle had mentioned Dean's blog at all, it would have been to simply state she disagreed, with a few examples to demonstrate her point. However, the level of vitriol and agressive posture leads me to believe that Dean's comment hit a mark and perhaps Michelle should take the opportunity to some soul searching. It could only enhance usually remarkable work. That way, perhaps some of her readers would reconsider before posting toxic anti-Islamic screed, such as this: Perhaps the idiots on the left will wake up when the islamo-goons begin killing their family members. I can only hope this Malkin reader doesn't equate 4000 Muslim soldiers with Osama Bin Laden.

I wonder if Michelle Malkin's site could pass the "moderate Muslim" test. That is, could a peace-promoting, Constitution-respecting, Islam-reforming Muslim American feel comfortable posting on her blog and get rational comments and respectful questions? If so, then perhaps Dean was wrong. But I sense a moderate Muslim there would be as welcome as one on ACOC.

(Link to someone whose view corresponds to my own on this matter: http://nospeedbumps.com/?p=1045).

Bush is the Lord of the Rings!!!!

2006-09-26T13:54:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I started this blog in hopes of writing much more frequently than I do. There is so much of interest happening in the world today, and also tons of new history and archeology being uncovered, that I wanted my own little soapbox to be a true "Citizen Journalist".

I am still striving toward the blog quality achieved by two of my internet heroes: The Anchoress and Ali Eteraz. The Anchoress views the world with a Catholic insight, Ali with an Islamic one. I was hoping to create a web page melding ancient Egypt with current events. But battle plans rarely survive the first engagement.

I was doing my morning blog-hopping, with an excellent cup of coffee, and came across this rather creative webpage: George W. Bush is the Anti-Christ. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a conservative Republican (in a nutshell, I hate taxes, love small business, think good environmental policy is not based on poor science). Curiosity compelled me to click on the link.

My initial responses were two: laughter and envy. Laughter because I don't live and die by which way the political winds blow, and there was a lot on the site that was chuckle worthy. For example, as an historian, the comparisons of President Bush and Roman Emperor Nero. If this webpage is satire, it is one of the most clever examples I have seen. Sadly, I think it is the work of a delusional, obsessive personality.

Hence, my second emotion - envy. I would love to have the time to generate such an stunning page on my pet obsessions. Yet I wish not to wallow in jealousy. Therefore, I will create this blog post as a tribute to all the work for my Bush-obsessed comrade on the Internet.

Top Five Reasons I know Bush is the Ring Bearer:

1) Has anyone really gotten a good look at the "wedding ring"?
2) Bush is constantly being attacked by Orcs and Trolls.
3) Rove and Gollum, separated at birth?
4) The Twin Towers vs the Two Towers - conspiracy anyone?
5) Condi Rice is an elf -- just look at the ears.

Three Rings for the elfin-kings under the sky, Seven for the Dwarf-Lords in their halls of stone,Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die, One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne,In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in darkness bind them,In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

I LOVE AUTUMN

2006-09-21T14:04:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I had intended to post a woderful essay on the start of fall, which is my favorite season. This would be a great way to start a regular blogging schedule. However, I have a "hot project" in my real world business -- and as the true capitalist that I am, I need to earn money. Happily, I have a couple of extra days, as this year fall begins Sept. 23, 2006, 12:03 A.M. EDT. I hope to be back with weighty words of wisdom to share with my Internet friends soon.

Maine Lobster is Endangered

2006-08-31T17:10:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I am on vaction until Sept. 12!!!! My family is headed to Maine, where so much lobster will be consumed that it will be placed on the Endangered Speices List. While I am gone, please enjoy these links to some of my favorite spots on the vast Internet:

http://theanchoressonline.com/

http://eteraz.wordpress.com/

http://drstat.blogspot.com/

http://newsbusters.org/

http://egyptologist.org/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi

Embrace Athena and Ares

2006-08-29T11:44:00.001-07:00

I love ancient Egypt and its myths, customs and history. I also appreciate the ancient Greeks and Romans. This is one of the reasons that my husband and I went on an Aegean cruise for our honeymoon in 1999, so that I could immerse myself in the lands of the Iliad and the Odyssey.

I recall my tour of one of the most revered of ancient sites, the Parthenon of the Acropolis in Athens. The name Parthenon refers to the worship of Athena Parthenos, the 'Virgin Athena' who issued fully grown from the head of her father Zeus. Although she was widely known in one of her roles as war goddess, it was in her roles of mediator and battle planner that she excelled. She always worked to prevent war, but once war had been joined the goddess Athena, fought valiantly for her side.

Our tour guide made it a point of pride to note that the ancient Greeks venerated Athena, whose focus was on tactics and the intelligence aspects of warfare. In his view, this made the goddess superior to Ares, the god of warlike frenzy and bloodshed. The Greeks had such disdain for Ares that he was deemed a coward and when a Greek hero wounded him during the Trojan War, Ares received scant sympathy from his father Zeus.

http://www.crystalinks.com/greekgods.html

Interesting as this was, I think that the Greeks made a critical mistake. To effectively engage the enemy, one has to be willing to tap into their inner Ares. Being able to talk and negotiate is fine, but there must be a time a people are willing to battle for their society and way of life and to do so smartly. Therefore, both Areas and Athena should be given their due.

The Greek world eventually was dominated by the Roman Empire. I feel this is because the Greeks became too enchanted with peace, prosperity and negotiations. Rome, on the other hand, was devoted to its war god, Mars. Mars was the legendary father of its founder, Romulus, and it was believed that all Romans were descended of Mars. Mars, unlike neglected and abused Greek version, was more widely worshipped than any of the other Roman gods. Because they promoted a distinctly martial attitude, Rome was able to conquer the Mediterranean basin (including my beloved Egypt), much of Europe, and a good portion of Asia Minor.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/Courses/maps/basicmap.html

The ability to combine fearlessness, stength and other aspects of the "masculine" with more "femnine" qualities such as intuition, circumspection, and willingness of negotiate and comprise is vital to being successful. This is true both on an individual level and on a societal scale. And never forget that Rome, too, eventually fell to tribes that were able to tap into their warrior nature. Rome became a victim of prolonged peace, prosperity, and dealing with neighbors who were willing to treat with them. They could not contend with The Scourge of God…hideous barbarians who ate raw meat and did everything on horseback, even sleep.

http://www.royalty.nu/history/empires/Hun.html

I think it is good to reflect on both Ares and Athena now. The time we live in seem turbulent. Though I was not around in the 1930s, I sense that the pace and nature of significant news events would have been similar. And in his article today, The West Invites Attack, David Warren writes:

We have a problem in us, not in them. It is the recovery of our own sense of what we are, what we believe, and what we are about, that would defeat Afghan cave-dwellers and shrieking ayatollahs fairly quickly.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/08/the_west_invites_attack.html

The West has an enemy in Islamic extremists, who desire nothing more than our complete and total destruction. Yet, one of the grand actions that France takes as part of Athena-based negotiating tactics is to send 49 engineers to enforce the UN-sponsored cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel. Yes, and I am sure a set of Roman aqueduct workers would have astounded the Huns, too! [In the interest of complete disclosure, France has vowed to send a total of 2000 troops for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). How many will actually arrive is anyones guess].

That being noted, it is also critical to balance power with wisdom. One of the key components in effective battle tactics is identifying allies. It is good to recall not all Muslims love death as much as Maulana Inyadullah of al-Qaeda (The Americans love Pepsi-Cola, we love death.). In some of the more extreme anti-Muslim sites, there are calls to Nuke Mecca!!!!. This is not a sound approach either, as analyzed by Robert Spencer in his FrontPage Magazine article, Nuke Mecca? Nope.

Others have argued, however, that the deterrent value of destroying Islamic holy sites would lie not in giving jihad terrorists pause, but in showing Islam itself to be false and thus removing the primary motivation of today's jihad terrorists. If Allah is all-powerful and rewards those who believe in him while hating and punishing the disbelievers (the vilest of creatures, according to Quran 98:6), wouldn't he protect his holy sites from these disbelievers?

However, Muslims have weathered such shocks to their system in the past. In 1924, the secular government of Turkey abolished the caliphate; the caliph was considered the successor of the Prophet Muhammad as the religious and political leader of the Islamic community. By abolishing the office, Turkish leader Kemal Ataturk hoped to strike at the heart of political Islam and create a context in which Islam could develop something akin to the Western idea of the separation of religion and state. Instead, his act provided the impetus for the establishment of the Muslim Brotherhood, the first modern Islamic terrorist organization, in Egypt in 1928.

Muslims were involved in busting the recent trans-Atlantic terror plot (which impact my impending trip to Maine, as I can't take my 4-year-old son's boxes of Parmalait vanilla milk).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_plot

And as President Bush pointed out:

Many Muslim scholars have already publicly condemned terrorism, often citing Chapter 5, Verse 32 of the Koran, which states that killing an innocent human being is like killing all humanity, and saving the life of one person is like saving all of humanity. After the attacks in London on July the 7th, an imam in the United Arab Emirates declared, "Whoever does such a thing is not a Muslim, nor a religious person."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-3.html

Despite my affinity for the Great Mother Goddess of ancient Egypt, I lack answers on how to best address the nature of our terror-loving enemies. But I do appreciate the importance of balancing Athena with Ares.

Romanian Connection to Islamic Terror

2006-08-25T17:01:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I am a scholar of ancient Egypt and the Levant. I am also an American of Romanian heritage. The other portion is mostly Scottish. As a fan of classic Star Trek (yes, I am dating myself horribly), I always likened the combination to being part Klingon/part Vulcan.

But I digress (yet again). While it is rare I see news stories combining Romania with Middle Eastern issues, there seems to a spate of material recently. Needless to say, I find such information fascinating and want to share it with others, playing my role as citizen journalist.

In a National Review Online article (Russian Footprints - What does Moscow have to do with the recent war in Lebanon? By Ion Mihai Pacepa) there is interesting information from General Pacepa, who was a Romanian Intelligence Officer assisting the Soviets to spread anti-Jewish/Israel sentiment through the Middle East during the 1970s.

Some extracts that are insightful:

"General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, who created Communist Romania's intelligence structure and then rose to head up all of Soviet Russia's foreign intelligence, often lectured me: In today's world, when nuclear arms have made military force obsolete, terrorism should become our main weapon.

Also, this:

In 1972, the Kremlin decided to turn the whole Islamic world against Israel and the U.S. As KGB chairman Yury Andropov told me, a billion adversaries could inflict far greater damage on America than could a few millions. We needed to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world, and to turn this weapon of the emotions into a terrorist bloodbath against Israel and its main supporter, the United States. No one within the American/Zionist sphere of influence should any longer feel safe

.......... The codename of this operation was SIG (Sionistskiye Gosudarstva, or Zionist Governments), and was within my Romanian service's sphere of influence, for it embraced Libya, Lebanon, and Syria. SIG was a large party/state operation. We created joint ventures to build hospitals, houses, and roads in these countries, and there we sent thousands of doctors, engineers, technicians, professors, and even dance instructors. All had the task of portraying the United States as an arrogant and haughty Jewish fiefdom financed by Jewish money and run by Jewish politicians, whose aim was to subordinate the entire Islamic world.

The remaining article is extremely worthwhile for all who wish to understand the potential origins of Islamic terror, and the impact of Cold War tactics still being felt today.

Romania VS Iran: Place your bets here.

2006-08-22T19:08:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends:

I guess the new Mahdi must retain a grudge against one of the most infamous Muslim killers known to history: Vlad Tepes, Count Dracula. Recall that August 22, 2006 held promise of a significant event of great importance to the self-heralded new prophet of Islam, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Apparently that event was attacking Romanians

From World News Story comes information related to Iranian troops seizing a Romanian oil rig. http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3773813a12,00.html

Romanian oil firm Grup Servicii Petroliere has said one of its offshore rigs in the Gulf, involved in a legal dispute, had reported coming under fire from an Iranian navy ship and being boarded by troops.

An Iranian oil official denied the reports, saying military force was not used against the Orizont platform, which had been chartered by United Arab Emirates-based Oriental Oil Company. GSP spokesman Radu Petrescu said: "We were called by one of our employees at 9.15am (0615 GMT – 1815 NZT), who told us a military ship opened fire against the Orizont rig, and by 9.45am Iranian troops got on board."

"By 4pm the troops left the rig and judicial officers came on board. In between, we had no contact with the crew."

The 13,000-tonne Orizont rig has 26 people on board and has been in Iranian waters since October last year.

Perhaps Ahmadinejad had a great-great grandfather who got on the wrong side of Vlad's impaling tool.

http://www.royalty.nu/Europe/Balkan/Dracula.html

By 1462, when he was deposed, he had killed between 40,000 and 100,000 people, possibly more. He always thought up some excuse for these executions. He killed merchants who cheated their customers. He killed women who had affairs. Supposedly he had one woman impaled because her husband's shirt was too short. He didn't mind impaling children, either. Afterwards he would display the corpses in public so everyone would learn a lesson. It's said that there were over 20,000 bodies hanging outside his capital city. Of course, the stories about Dracula's cruelty might have been exaggerated by his enemies. Despite all this, Dracula's subjects respected him for fighting the Turks and being a strong ruler. He's remembered today as a patriotic hero who stood up to Turkey and Hungary. He was the last Walachian prince to remain independent from the Ottoman Empire. He was so scornful of other nations that when two foreign ambassadors refused to doff their hats to him, he had the hats nailed to their heads. He was opposed to the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches because he thought foreigners, operating through the churches, had too much power in Walachia. He tried to prevent foreign merchants from taking business away from his citizens. If merchants disobeyed his trade laws, they were, of course, impaled.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am an American of Romanian heritage. I await with interest on how the Romanians will respond. I hope they offer more military response than the French offered as part of their portion of the recent UN cease fire deal in Lebanon. I hope Romanians still have a bit of Vlad's DNA in their genetics. I know I still do.

So, in the interest of inspiring discussion, I am taking bets as to the victor in the Romania vs Iran match-up. Looking at the available data, I am placing my money on Romania.

SHAME, AND ETERNAL SHAME, NOTHING BUT SHAME!

2006-08-10T13:54:00.001-07:00

I am writing to describe a situation that highlights an important point that my blogging icon, the Anchoress, made – that people focus on websites and information that cater to their own points of view (http://theanchoressonline.com/). Therefore, they can confirm their narrow view of the world and tune-out thoughts that do not correspond to their own. Needless to say, without reasoned discourse, rational assessment of different data and information, and needed reality checks, people can get locked-into fairly toxic ideas.

I have spent several years on a chat site, Ann Coulter Official Chat. I appreciate Ann’s satirical style, and I discounted entirely what the Achoress said about her ability to inspire extremists. However, I always check into the Anchoress (right after I looked at Drudge), because when I found myself disagreeing with Ann Coulter on a subject, I discovered that the Anchoress and I tended to be more in agreement. Furthermore, I am too much of a scientist and analytical thinker to be a good satirist – and the Anchoress' weighty, well-considered writing style was more akin to my own. Also, as that blog states, good people can disagree on a subject and still be good people.

With that in mind, in recent months, I began reviewing the discourse that was occurring on our own Chat Room, Ann Coulter Official Chat. I began to realize that some members (but not all, mind) were creating an atmosphere in which it was OK to hate one group of people – Muslims. One would routinely refer to them as muslimes, and another as ragheads. Another expressed great pride in her giving a purdah-clad woman in a mall the "evil eye", assuming this visitor to our shores as an obvious terrorist. There were chronic instances of the latest outrage committed by Muslims in third-world countries being used to condemn all Muslims. Routine calls for genocide of men, women and children who follow Islam were made, as well as suggestions for carpet bombing Mecca and Medina.

Initially, I thought the focus of these awful remarks was centered on Islamic extremists. I despise terrorists who target innocent civilians, as do most rational people. I hold them in the deepest contempt, and no words are nasty enough for these evil men. However, I know many fine Americans who happen to be Muslims. They despise Islamic extremists as much as I – if not more, because tolerant Muslims are often a target of hatred by these extremists.

During the discourse on ACOC, the members who disagreed with my opinion would often cite Coulter’s famous ….”convert them to Christianity” statement in her post 9/11 column, “This is War”. However, I felt they were taken out of context. The more full quote is as follows:

We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

Therefore, the above statement could not possibly apply to my Egyptian friend, who called be in deepest grief and anguish after 9/11, condemning the “insane idiots” who plowed the jets into the World Trade Center and Pentagon. This statement could not apply to the 4000 American soldiers who are also Muslim, acting to defend our constitutional freedoms (including some who have died in service to our country). This statement could not apply to the Muslim in my brother’s unit in Fallujah, who tackled my brother down when an IED went off, saving my brother’s life.

I was called a Muslim apologist. I was deemed a terror-supporter. I was classified as “deluded” for having Muslims as friends. In fact, as I looked around and considered posts, I was astonished that the voices of many reasonable posters had been silenced on this subject because of the screed of anti-Muslim posters.

I attempted to reason with some of the ACOC members who expressed anti-Muslim sentiment, to no avail. However, many members also became more thoughtful of how they discussed Americans who were Muslim – in the true spirit of out First Amendment rights to worship as we please and the constitutional protections we enjoy of innocent until proven guilty.

Several ACOC members, myself included, tired of chat room threads in which the more violent passages of the Koran were extracted to demonstrate that all Muslims wanted to kill Christians and Jews. No one on that Forum was qualified to discuss the Koran in any fair manner, as none of us were true scholars of Islam. Several of us were also very angered at an internet message gleefully posted on the board:

Can a good Muslim be a good American?
Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is toAllah, the moon god of Arabia.
Religiously - no. Because no other religion isaccepted by his Allah except Islam (Koran, 2:256)
Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to thefive pillars of Islam and the Quran (Koran)…
etc. etc. etc..

Once it was OK to attack fellow Americans for their religion, I went on a quest to find someone to humanize the face of Islam, discuss the Koran with full understanding, and provide an alternative, and necessary, viewpoint to our discussions involving Islam. Subsequently, I enlisted the help of the Achoress to locate such a man. My hopes were met admirably in Ali Eteraz (http://eteraz.wordpress.com/).

Ali is one of the most articulate, educated people that it has been my privilege to meet, albeit electronically. After telling him about the corrosion of the discourse pertaining to Americans that are Muslim, he agreed to join our group and address questions and concerns expressed by Forum members. He had everything that ACOC could have desired in a learned, respectful participant:

Ali clearly despises terrorism:

For the first time in my life I feel truly American. Vestiges of rebellious third world sentimentality are not erased but they have become much more rational. I feel an unbridgeable distance from those militants across the globe that I felt some sort of pity for. Once I thought even though their methods were disreputable they were simply misguided people trying to rectify the injustices of the world. No more. Now, having seen their vision of justice, I am appalled that I ever felt some sort of emotional, sentimental connection with them. So what if it was pity and not alliance? So what? It was connection, and I rue that. If I hate them now then I must hate the part of me that did not hate them before. I don’t understand. Do the quintessentially juridical expositions of our sacred (as is life) Shariah not leave a mark in their heart? Does not the generous and manganimous character of our Prophet not ring in these people’s minds? They have lashed out like Nietzsche’s master moralists, but I see no nobility in their actions; no honor in their enunciation. I don’t know who did it; but I know. (http://eteraz.wordpress.com/page/3/)

Ali wants no part of enforcing sharia law:

Politically I believe in democracy, separation of church and state and freedom of expression and association. It is OK for bigots, racists, and fundamentalists to get elected in any and every democracy as long as they do not limit the freedoms of others. The limitation of freedom is unacceptable. Of course, the best thing would be if they ceased being bigots, racists and fundos
( http://eteraz.wordpress.com/about/)

Ali also read Coulter’s recent book, “Godless”!!! And I would imagine the writings of Coulter aren’t normally on the nightstand of an Islamic extremist.

Therefore, I extended the invitation for Ali to join us on the chat room, while being quite honest about how uncivil and irrational the discussions related to Muslims, as a whole group, had become. However, I had hoped Ali could provide new links and information to Muslim groups who promoted peace, tolerance and democracy. I hoped, too, that inviting a real human on the board would force members to reassess their dialogs. It is easy to be hateful in anonymity. It is harder to spew bigotry in a real person’s face, even in an electronic venue.

Though we had several technical difficulties getting started, Ali and I prevailed. Prior to his arrival, I also entreated members recall the ACOC official guidelines on civility and prohibitions against racism. After all, there is no rule in the ACOC guidelines that a Muslim can’t join our group. And, one points of pride heralded by ACOC is that we accept all applicants, as long as they meet some technical, internet requirements and are willing to engage in civil dialog. In fact, we note that several of our members are liberals (from whom I have, myself, learned new perspectives)

In some ways, Ali worked out better that I imagined. ACOC was shown that clearly, not all Muslims wanted to kill us and our family. We were treated to texts that no other ACOC members could have posted, ever. For example, the following writings that promote equality of the sexes, denounce anti-Semitism, and call for a secular approach to government (Muslim ideas never before seen in the Forum before):

Here is a Manifesto by a French secular Muslim organization: Institute Manifeste Des Libertes The Manifesto

Quote:
"We are women and men of Muslim culture. Some of us are believers, others are agnostics or atheists. We all condemn firmly the declarations and acts of misogyny, homophobia, and Antisemitism that we have heard and witnessed for a while now here in France and that are carried out in the name of Islam. These three characteristics typify the political Islamism that has been forceful for so long in several of our countries of origin. We fought against them there, and we are committed to fighting against them again - here. "Gender Equality: A Prerequisite for Democracy. We are firmly committed to equal rights for both sexes. We fight the oppression of women who are subjected to Personal Status Laws, like those in Algeria (recent progress in Morocco highlights how far Algeria lags behind), and sometimes even in France via bilateral agreements. [see document footnote] We believe that democracy cannot exist without these equal rights. Accordingly, we unambiguously offer our support for the '20 ans, barakat!' (20 years is enough!) campaign of the Algerian women's associations, demanding the definitive abolition of the two-decades-old family code. "It is also for this reason that we oppose wearing the Islamic head scarf, even if among us there are differing opinions about the law banning it from schools in France. In various countries, we have seen violence or even death inflicted on female friends or family members because they refused to wear the scarf. Even if the current enthusiasm for the head scarf [among some Muslims] in France was stimulated by discrimination suffered by immigrant children, this cannot be considered the real cause of the desire to wear it; nor can memories of a North African lifestyle explain it. Behind this so-called 'choice' demanded by a certain number of girls is the promotion of a political Islamic society based on a militant ideology which aims to promote actively values to which we do not subscribe. "Stopping Homophobia: For Islamic fundamentalists (as for all machos and fundamentalists), 'being a man' means having power over women, including sexual power. In their eyes, any man who favors equality of the sexes is potentially subhuman, or 'queer.' This way of thinking has proliferated since the rise of political Islamism. Its ferocity is equaled only by its hypocrisy. One of the organizers of the demonstration on Saturday, January 17, 2004, in favor of the head scarf declared that 'it is scandalous that those who claim to be shocked by the head scarf are not shocked by homosexuality.' Undoubtedly he thinks that a virtuous society hides women behind head scarves or puts homosexuals behind bars, something we have already seen happen in Egypt. We shudder at what the triumph of these attitudes implies for 'shameless' persons in society-like women who fail to wear the head scarf or homosexuals or non-believers. "In contrast, we believe that recognition of the existence of homosexuality, and the freedom for homosexuals to live their own lives as they wish, represent undeniable progress. As long as an individual-heterosexual or homosexual-does not break the laws protecting minors, each person's sexual choices are his or her own business and do not concern the state in any way. "Fighting Antisemitism: Finally, we condemn firmly the Antisemitic statements made recently in speeches in the name of Islam. Just like 'shameless' women and homosexuals, Jews have become the target: 'They have everything and we have nothing,' was something that we heard in the demonstration on January 17. We see the use of the Israel-Palestine conflict by fundamentalist movements as a means of promoting the most disturbing forms of Antisemitism. Despite our opposition to the current policies of the Israeli government, we refuse to feed primitive images of the 'Jew.' A real, historical conflict between two peoples should not be exploited. We recognize Israel's right to exist, a right recognized by the PLO congress in Algiers in 1988 and the Arab League summit meeting in Beirut in 2002. At the same time, we are committed to the Palestinian people and in support of their right to found a state and to be liberated from occupation. "Living Secularism: Islam has not received sufficient recognition in France. There is a lack of places to pray. There are not enough chaplaincies or enough cemeteries. We are aware that young French people, the sons and daughters of Muslim immigrants, are still held back socially and suffer discrimination. All monitoring bodies recognize this. Consequently, 'French-style' secularism has lost a great deal of value in the eyes of these young people. Two possibilities lie before them. They can rediscover the strength of a real, living secularism; that is, political action on behalf of their rights and to demand the social gains fought for by their fathers and mothers-who belonged to social classes, cultures, peoples, and nations before they belonged to Islam. Or they can see themselves in an imaginary, virtual 'umma' [Islamic community - Eds.] that no longer corresponds to reality, and then masquerade in republican or 'tiers-mondistes' (third-worldist) rags. This only ends up securing unequal, repressive, and intolerant societies. This latter path cannot be ours.

Ali also provided some insights as to why the view of “moderate” Muslims (or, as I prefer to them, “Humanist Muslims”, may seem silent:

Please don't get me started. I think everyone on the liberal side, Huffington on up, has had NO interest in hearing anti-terror Islam speak. I have sent her numerous emails =) I'm not sure whether this is because much of the MSM wants nothing more than a Muslim it can 'plug' into the 'conflict' it seeks to portray.

Interestingly, it was Fox News which was the only one to give a run to a series of anti-terror Muslims after 9/11. The Editor in Chief of Muslim WakeUp! showed up a few times on Fox.

And Ali was able to provide links to alternative sites, such as Muslim webpages specifically denouncing violence:

http://www.freemuslims.org/

To be fair to the membership of ACOC, many members had thoughtful comments and questions, such as follows:

Imaginethat: I look forward to your responses to the questions presented. I admire your willingness to enter "hostile" territory, basically unarmed. You will find many, many thoughtful, intelligent and warm people here. You also may bring light to certain dark corners, inshallah. Blessings to you and to this endeavor.

However, despite please for civility, some posters opted to be outright rude and hostile:

AvgDude: ALI ETERAZ = EAT IZRAEL

Catellus22: Evil makes muslims tick.

Ali even tried to be humorous and informative when a member called Fritz accused Muslims of nothing more than “sadomasochistic mayhem”. Ali responded, thusly:

I think the 14 centuries of sadomasochistic mayhem part is where you're wrong. I encourage you to look at some islamic art and architecture http://www.uga.edu/islam/IslArt.html also consider the poetry of hafiz: http://www.poetseers.org/the_poetseers/hafiz/gift or even today's 'islamic' pop music (which even as it is hated by the radicals is loved by the muslim on the street) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouCDB99h780

One Muslim-hating poster simply placed pictures of the WTC at 9/11 – as if Ali were Osama Bin Laden himself. And two members were so extreme in their unwillingness to acknowledge a friendly Muslim voice, who despises terror and embraces American freedoms as much as they do, they quite the site outright.

Though the Moderators of the Forum endeavored to keep the dialog civil, seeing long-time posters on this board behave so irrationally and discreditably was disturbing. The head Moderator moved the thread to a Forum that is rarely viewed and locked for further comment. This Moderator, much to his credit, told several members that they need to “grow up”. Ali closed his account with us.

I now am struggling with a decision. I admire many posters on ACOC, and resent to bullying tactics used to silence members who to not go along with the “Evil makes muslims tick” sentiment. However, I dislike toxicity and being around members that celebrated Ali’s departure. Part of me wishes to leave. Ann’s words have been used out of context to embrace hate, just like the Koran has been abused. I want no part of promoting prejudice.

I am torn. And sad. And shamed. As expressed by a French nobleman in, Henry V, "Shame, and eternal shame, nothing but shame!"