Saturday, September 15, 2012


Johan Sebastian Bach wrote a number of harpsichord concertos prosaically labeled BWV 1052 to 1065 [BWV means Bach Werke Verzeichnis, or Bach Works Catalogue - MFBB]. Of these concertos, meant for harpsichord, strings and continuo, the first seven are written for a single harpsichord.

The following piece is the middle and Largo (slow) part of Concerto 1056, taking about 3 and a half minutes (the entire concerto, beginning with the Allegro Moderato part and ending with a Presto movement, lasts around ten minutes).

I meant to have this followed by another baroque piece but let's jump forward two centuries instead. Pavane by Gabriel Fauré. Heaven in your ears.

Fauré initially wrote his Pavane in F-sharp minor, Opus number 50, for piano. It is however better known in the version for orchestra. It seems that like this it is sometimes performed with an additional chorus, but I never heard it that way before.

I think that a while back I mentioned that the sarabande, a dance in triple metre, found its origin in a Spanish dance (it's rather from conquistadore-held Central America and only later moved across the Atlantic to the mother country, but whatever). Likewise, a pavane is inspired by a slow processional Spanish Court dance.



In response to the statements by the so-called President of the Unites States, Hillary Clinton, Ban Ki-Moon, General Dempsey and the entire cabal of spineless cowards groveling in the dirt and procastinating themselves for retarded paedophile worshipping sand apes, I'll post Sam Bacile's movie.

On first sight, I don't think it's a great work.

However, it's great value lies in the fact that it demonstrates clearly how the muslim world has become humanity's burden. All races and religions should move forward to better life on this planet and to broaden humanity's horizon to realms beyond the confines of our planet. I believe that is our ultimate goal.

Most earthlings make sufficient progress to make that goal happen sometime - especially where they adhere to capitalist principles. Some are faster than others, but that is in se unimportant. Botswana and South Korea have different dynamics, but it's clear that, say, over the past sixty years they have advanced their societies remarkably.

Not so muslims. Only when they could rely on significant non-muslim minorties to serve as workhorses, as in Malaysia, or were blessed with black gold, have they been able to achieve something. Even so, they had to rely on others. In the latter's case, their infrastructure would collapse were it not for the infidels, and their gleaming towers are designed and built by kafirs.

I think there's an anthropological dimension to explaining the gratuitous muslim rage we are once again seeing.

I think that deep in their hearts those howling lunatics realize all too well...

... that essentially, they are LOSERS.


Tuesday, September 11, 2012



Should relatives of John and Sylvia ever visit this page - well, I do not know if they are or were religious. I would like to ask them to believe that I do not post an Our Father out of religious chauvinism, should they happen to be not of the christian faith. I would like them to know that I consider myself flawed - that I do not consider myself an especially good christian.

But reciting this prayer is one of the ways I learned to cope with loss.

Our Father, who art in heaven hallowed be thy Name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen.

Sincere and heartfelt condolences to John's relatives, and to Sylvia's: her parents Maria Jose SanPio and Jose Luis SanPio; her sisters Laura Perez, Carolina SanPio and Patricia SanPio; and her brothers Edward SanPio Emiliano Perez and Joseph Perez.

God bless.


Monday, September 10, 2012


Marvellous piece - as per usual - by Mark Steyn on the DNC and one of its guest speakers, Sandra Flake. From the Orange County Register:

"...With respect to Sandra Fluke, I think there's a third future looming. The paperback edition of my book comes out in a week or so, and you can pretty much get the gist of it from the title: "After America." For me, the likely scenario isn't that the Republicans will be terrorizing rape victims or that the Democrats will finally pass the necessary legislation to make contraception available for the contraceptively starved millions crying out for it, but that America will be sliding off the cliff – literally, as Joe Biden would literally say. And when America slides off the cliff it lands with a much bigger thud than Greece or Iceland. I'm not certain that the Republicans will be able to prevent that happening. But I know that the Democrats can't. America owes more money than anybody has ever owed anyone in the history of the planet. But millions of Americans don't see it, and millions of those who do see it don't see it as a problem.

Sandra Fluke is one of them. She completed her education a few weeks ago – at the age of 31, or Grade 25. Before going to Georgetown, she warmed up with a little light BS in Feminist, Gender and Sexuality Studies from Cornell. She then studied law at one of the most prestigious institutions in the nation, where tuition costs 50 grand a year. The average starting salary for a Georgetown Law graduate is $160,000 per annum – first job, first paycheck.


So this is America's best and brightest – or, at any rate, most expensively credentialed. Sandra Fluke has been blessed with a quarter-million dollars of elite education, and, on the evidence of Wednesday night, is entirely incapable of making a coherent argument. She has enjoyed the leisurely decade-long varsity once reserved for the minor sons of Mitteleuropean grand dukes, and she has concluded that the most urgent need facing the Brokest Nation in History is for someone else to pay for the contraception of 30-year-old children. She says the choice facing America is whether to be "a country where we mean it when we talk about personal freedom, or one where that freedom doesn't apply to our bodies and our voices" – and, even as the words fall leaden from her lips, she doesn't seem to comprehend that Catholic institutions think their "voices" ought to have freedom, too, or that Obamacare seizes jurisdiction over "our bodies" and has 16,000 new IRS agents ready to fine us for not making arrangements for "our" pancreases and "our" bladders that meet the approval of the commissars. Sexual liberty, even as every other liberty withers, is all that matters: A middle-school girl is free to get an abortion without parental consent, but if she puts a lemonade stand on her lawn she'll be fined. What a bleak and reductive concept of "personal freedom."

America is so broketastically brokey-broke that one day, in the grim future that could be, society may even be forced to consider whether there is any meaningful return on investment for paying a quarter-million bucks to send the scions of wealth and privilege to school till early middle-age to study Reproductive Justice. But, as it stands right now, a Cornell and Georgetown graduate doesn't understand the central reality of the future her elders have bequeathed her. There's no "choice" in the matter. It's showing up whatever happens in November. All the election will decide is whether America wants to address that reality, or continue to live in delusion – like a nation staggering around with a giant condom rolled over its collective head. Any space aliens prowling through the rubble of our civilization and stumbling upon a recording of the convention compatible with Planet Zongo DVD players will surely marvel at the valuable peak airtime allotted to Sandra Fluke. It was weird to see her up there among the governors and senators – as weird as Bavarians thought it was when King Ludwig decided to make his principal adviser Lola Montez, the Irish-born "Spanish dancer" and legendary grande horizontale. I hasten to add I'm not saying Miss Fluke is King Barack's courtesan. For one thing, it's a striking feature of the Age of Perfected Liberalism that modern liberals talk about sex 24/7 while simultaneously giving off the persistent whiff that the whole thing's a bit of a chore. Hence, the need for government subsidy. And, in fairness to Miss Montez, she used sex to argue for liberalized government, whereas Miss Fluke uses liberalism to argue for sexualized government.

But those distinctions aside, like Miss Fluke, Miss Montez briefly wielded an influence entirely disproportionate to her talents. Like Miss Fluke, she was a passionate liberal activist who sought to diminish what she regarded as the malign influence of the Catholic Church. Taking up with Lola cost King Ludwig his throne in the revolutions of 1848. We'll see in a couple of months whether taking up with Sandra works out for King Barack. But what's strange is that so many people don't find it strange at all – that at a critical moment in the affairs of the republic the ruling party should assemble to listen to a complacent 31-year-old child of privilege peddling the lazy cobwebbed assumptions of myopic narcissism. Lola Montez was what botanists would call a "sport" – morphologically distinct from the rest of the societal shrub. The tragedy for America is that Sandra Fluke is all too typical...."

Oh... yeah. If you followed the link, you will have noticed the following key sentences in that slut Fluke's DNC address:

"During this campaign, we've heard about two profoundly different futures that could await women in this country – and how one of those futures looks like an offensive, obsolete relic of our past," she cautioned. "That future could become real." In one of those futures, women will be "shut out and silenced," rape victims will be "victimized all over again," pregnant women will "die preventable deaths in our emergency rooms," and "access to birth control is controlled by people who will never use it."

Which once again presses home the sheer, baffling and incalculable ability of democrats, or leftists in general, for that matter, to utterly delude themselves. Because, as Janet Levy over at The American Thinker puts it so eloquently:

"...The ardent protests against Republicans and the concomitant apocryphal charges that they are anti-woman and anti-gay are par for the course. In actuality, Republicans are merely advocating for the sanctity of life and traditional marriage and do not demonstrate hatred against any group. However, to hold an opinion contrary to the leftist dogma of the day is obviously enough to spur public vilification and rampant allegations of malfeasance.


The anti-woman, anti-gay allegations Democrats use to characterize Republicans are all the more astonishing in light of the tolerance and accommodations that are conferred on Islam. While Islam is given a pass on these issues, Democrats freely malign Republicans who speak out about repressive Islamic doctrine or sharia, an ideology that is truly anti-woman and anti-gay.

It's worth noting that the Democratic Party's friendliness toward Muslims has prompted an extraordinary gathering in Charlotte, North Carolina, where the Democratic National Convention begins on Sept. 4. As part of the pre-convention festivities, a "Jumah at the DNC" was held through Sept. 1 by the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs (BIMA), an Islamic nonprofit headquartered in Newark, New Jersey. The Washington Times estimates that "between 500 and 1,000 participants" attended the Jumah, while 20,000 had been predicted to attend the entire three-day event.

The opening prayer was led by Siraj Wahhaj, an advocate for an Islamic state in America, a "potential unindicted co-conspirator" in the first World Trade Center bombing, and a member of CAIR. Event co-organizer Jibril Hough has ties to Islamic terrorists as the imam at a Muslim Brotherhood-owned mosque in Charlotte. That mosque is listed by the U.S. Justice Department as an "unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror finance case in U.S. history..."


I have come to believe that to vote democrat in 2012 is a sign of being criminally insane.