A Confession and another important thing regarding England and Ireland.

[Jacob Harrison]

Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu was a con artist and a fraud, and that's putting it very, very kindly. Her legacy is one of palling up to dictators, being hypocritical on divorce, and irreversible harm in India. Variously:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2018/07/17/this-nun-working-for-mother-teresas-charity-just-confessed-to-selling-babies/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJG-lgmPvYA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uxtcy4FpN8
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/Reports/MotherT/mothert.html
https://swarajyamag.com/insta/jharkhand-cm-orders-probe-after-child-trade-cases-emerge-at-shelter-run-by-mother-teresa-founded-charity
http://zeenews.india.com/india/two-missionaries-of-charity-nuns-arrested-for-selling-babies-in-jharkhand-2122489.html
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2018/jul/04/ranchi-sister-of-missionaries-of-charity-arrested-for-illegal-child-trade-1838304.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2003/10/mommie_dearest.html

And, to summarize:

Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu was a fraud who loved poverty, not the poor, and suffering, not the suffering. She took millions from the Duvaliers and set up convents in her name rather than making good hospitals. She thought that being poor and suffering in this life would lead to a greater reward in Heaven. She thought abortion was unequivocally evil and contraception was equivalent to it. The harm she did may never be reversed.

In a filmed interview, Mother Teresa says with a smile what she told a patient suffering unbearable pain from terminal cancer: "You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you." The patient's response: "Then please tell him to stop kissing me."

She ignored medical aid and made others suffer, because she believed in the myth of 'Christ's' suffering and poverty.

Endorsed evil dictators and tyrants
Accepted money from them as 'rewards'
Kept misappropriated funds not for the poor but to spread Catholic propaganda
Secretly baptized dying non-Christians
Recycled needles - without sterilizing them
Used them until they became blunt
Disapproved of safe sex and encouraged unwanted pregnancies
Even prevented abortions for rape victims

To the ignorant community, she is a saint.
But to the educated community, she is a sinner.

Mother Teresa was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction.

Everything everyone thinks they know about Mother Teresa is false. It must be the single most successful emotional con job of the twentieth century.

(Hitchens wrote an exposé of Bojaxhiu while she was still alive--the only negative coverage she ever received--and not one claim in it was ever rebutted by those who hailed her as a hero.)

This woman is no saint.

Because of her belief that suffering led to heaven hundreds of thousands of dying people were denied medical treatment and pain relief and were made to suffer even more in the name of God.

Jesus supposedly healed the sick, cured the afflicted, and alleviated suffering. Yet this woman promoted pain, and fostered suffering.

Don't allow the church to revise history. This person should not be promoted as a saint.

Many more people are poor and sick because of the life of Mother Teresa. Even more will be poor and sick if her example is followed. She was a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud, and a church that officially protects those who violate the innocent has given us another clear sign of where it truly stands on moral and ethical questions.

Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu was pure, unadulterated evil. That the Catholic Church canonized her is an irredeemable black mark on that institution, and cannot be wiped away even if they were to revoke her canonization and fix all their other issues (starting with, but hardly limited to, actively aiding secular authorities in bringing all pedophiles within the clergy--including, very possibly, George Pell--to justice, along with all those who worked to cover it up or dismissed it, such as Josef Ratzinger and Jorge Bergoglio).

As for Mossadegh, the main reason he was overthrown was that he was planning to nationalize Iranian oil supplies, and British and American oil companies did not like that notion, since they'd been getting rich stealing Iranian oil. If he was being too friendly to the USSR for the US and UK's tastes, sucks for them--no country has the right to dictate another's foreign or domestic policy to it.

And as for the will of the people, a regime that, once elected, turns around and destroys democracy has lost that legitimacy it had. Political legitimacy is gained solely through democracy and retained only so long as those with it respect democracy--but it can never come through undemocratic means.

1. As Lana said, the claims against her are greatly exaggerated.

2. But the USSR was a huge threat to the Western World, so under domino theory, all regimes friendly to them had to fall.

3. But it was the will of the evil Iranian people that an Islamic theocracy would become the government. They chose to live under Sharia law. This again shows that will of the people is not always legitimate and right. As Trump knows, in the Middle East, you need dictators to keep the Muslims in line which is why it was stupid of Bush to invade Iraq and stupid of Obama to support the Arab spring uprisings.

[Jacob Harrison]

If Carter was "stupid" for not keeping the Shah in and the Ayatollahs out then wasn't Reagan at least just as stupid for arming them?

In any case Jacob displays the very worst of the American quirk of thinking they have the exceptional right to mess with anyone else's affairs as they see fit.

Your country's infrastructure is crumbling, its once proud educational institutions are being starved, its scholars once the envy of the world are unheeded, Fascist terrorists have their way with little fear of reprisal, your prison population is booming while your pool of skilled workers is shrinking along with your middle classes while your working classes slip into the exploding underclass. You used to top the western world in innovation, now you top it in homicide, infant mortality and sickness. Your political institutions are hopelessly corrupt and presided over by an unhinged imbecile riding a wave of sectarian and racist hatred. Your international standing declines by the day.

Get your own house in order before contemplating further wrecking things for the British or anyone else for that matter. Kthnxbye!

1. Reagan did not arm the Ayatollah's. Under his presidency, the US armed Saddam Hussein to stop Iran.


2. I actually heard that the US economy is going well and the unemployment rate is low, and the tariffs and Trump's policies of keeping jobs in America are helping the working class. Besides the deportation of illegal immigrants, provides American worker's with more jobs. And the travel ban is protecting America from Muslim terrorist attacks and rape unlike Europe.

You do realize a lot of blue collar workers voted for Trump right?

[Jacob Harrison]

Since you have seem to have a fetish for the Ten Commandments (even though Jesus said you had to follow all 613... jk you only have to kiss Hank's ass)...

The stuff that's in the Ten Commandments, Dinesh, that isn't to do with human morality, is often highly immoral. For example, it's forbidden even to covet other people's goods or achievements--by the way, among their goods are included their wives, their womenfolk, who are lumped in with chattel, which goes to show these commandments are created by men and not by gods, they're created by the agricultural and masculine values of the time, that's not a small point--but there's nothing, for example, to condemn the abuse of children. There's only a vague demand that parents be respected; after all, this is coming from, apparently, a father. There's nothing against racism, there's nothing against slavery, there's nothing against genocide, partly because, in these and ensuing chapters all those things--racism, genocide, slavery--are actually going to be not just recommended but enjoined, made an actual injunction on the children of Israel, they're going to be told to do these things. So it seems to me very obvious that what is known as religious morality is partly man-made and it shows, it shows that it's made by a greedy and cruel, partly evolved, fairly highly evolved, let's not run ourselves down too much, primate species that turns out on examination to be, as we now know, one half-chromosome away from a chimpanzee.

(The ban on coveting is immoral, of course, because it creates thoughtcrime and effectively bans capitalism.)

The Catholic Ten Commandments separate coveting a neighbors goods and a neighbors wife and merge the one on graven images with not having gods before the one true God. And the Ten Commandments forbid murder.

[Jacob Harrison]

In England there will be an investigation into it and all rightful heirs to noble titles will be restored to their positions.

Investigation by whom, and when? Surely, you're not expecting to only bother with the king, then kick back and relax while someone else does the rest of the work, right?

Honestly, if you want me and I would image most others to even consider taking you seriously, the king is only the beginning. You need to find out who is the rightful lord of what land (according to the specific succession laws of that title), who is the rightful liege of what lord and, arguably most importantly, what exactly are each vassal's obligations and duties to his or her liege. Not just taxes and troop levies, but also things like war duties (such as commanding troops, what supplies, if any, he or she is obligated to provide to the army, in the event that it enters his or her holdings, administering the realm while the king is out on campaign, etc), maintaining highways and/or canals, whether or not a lesser noble is allowed to go to war independent of the king, be it against a fellow English lord or a foreign realm, as well as penalties for failing to meet their obligations. There's a lot more to building a feudal kingdom than merely finding out who should be king and calling it a day. That's only the very beginning of what you must do. For someone who so desperately wants England to return to feudalism for some reason, it's quite frankly a little disappointing that I have to point this out in the first place. You don't seem to realise just what it is you're arguing for, and again, that doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

The English courts will investigate.

Lol. The "English courts". I.e. those things that don't exist in a modern sense in a feudal kingdom, because "court" refers to the local lord himself and his or her courtiers, who, let me remind you, won't exist until they, according to you, investigate and hand out their own lands and titles. Which, let me remind you, they're expected to do despite not existing yet. You see the tiny but nonetheless critical flaw in your otherwise magnificent plan?

The royal court will investigate.

So, you expect the king himself to spend time and effort that you're clearly not willing to, just to empower his potential rivals? Again, have you really thought this through?

The true heirs to the baronies will be grateful that they are restored to them and therefore be loyal to the King.

[Art Vandelay]

The true heirs to the baronies will be grateful that they are restored to them and therefore be loyal to the King.

You honestly believe that? All self-respecting vassals plot in secret against their liege in the hopes that they themselves may one day rule in their place. You'd know that if you knew the first thing about how feudalism actually works.

And again, why would the king do that when, once in power, there'd be nothing to stop him from just keeping it all to himself? More importantly, why are you so desperately grasping at straws just to avoid doing the necessary work to further your own pet cause? I assure you, the only one who gives a shit is you. I guarantee you, nobody is going to do it for you.

[Jacob Harrison]

The true heirs to the baronies will be grateful that they are restored to them and therefore be loyal to the King.

You honestly believe that? All self-respecting vassals plot in secret against their liege in the hopes that they themselves may one day rule in their place. You'd know that if you knew the first thing about how feudalism actually works.

And again, why would the king do that when, once in power, there'd be nothing to stop him from just keeping it all to himself? More importantly, why are you so desperately grasping at straws just to avoid doing the necessary work to further your own pet cause? I assure you, the only one who gives a shit is you. I guarantee you, nobody is going to do it for you.

But the vasals will not rule in the King’s place because of the laws of Primogeniture. They will earn enough money that they will be loyal and they will be put back in the House of Lords which they were until Tony Blair’s House of Lords Act of 1999.

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

Laws-stopping the power hungry from plotting...

Kid, you haven't worked out this whole "human beings" thing, have you?

[Askold]

He came up with a plan that includes rape, betrayal and wars but then thinks that the same people for whom a qualifying factor for getting into the band of betrayers was the willingness to betray their rightful rulers and to break several laws would not be willing to betray the ruler they just set up as a puppet because that would mean breaking laws...

[Jacob Harrison]

Laws-stopping the power hungry from plotting...

Kid, you haven't worked out this whole "human beings" thing, have you?

They will have enough money as Lords to keep them happy.

[niam2023]

And again you have zero understanding of the kinds of people who would join such a project. None would be good, noble souls. They'd mutilate and carve you to pieces if it would mean they got just a bit more.

[Jacob Harrison]

And again you have zero understanding of the kinds of people who would join such a project. None would be good, noble souls. They'd mutilate and carve you to pieces if it would mean they got just a bit more.

The current Barrons in England(most of whom are rightful heirs) are not like that.

[dpareja]

And again you have zero understanding of the kinds of people who would join such a project. None would be good, noble souls. They'd mutilate and carve you to pieces if it would mean they got just a bit more.

The current Barrons in England(most of whom are rightful heirs) are not like that.

Because (just like religion) they have no power and have to be nice.

Give them power and look the fuck out.

[Jacob Harrison]

And again you have zero understanding of the kinds of people who would join such a project. None would be good, noble souls. They'd mutilate and carve you to pieces if it would mean they got just a bit more.

The current Barrons in England(most of whom are rightful heirs) are not like that.

Because (just like religion) they have no power and have to be nice.

Give them power and look the fuck out.

The King will do a good job at keeping them in line like they did in the Middle Ages.

[dpareja]

And again you have zero understanding of the kinds of people who would join such a project. None would be good, noble souls. They'd mutilate and carve you to pieces if it would mean they got just a bit more.

The current Barrons in England(most of whom are rightful heirs) are not like that.

Because (just like religion) they have no power and have to be nice.

Give them power and look the fuck out.

The King will do a good job at keeping them in line like they did in the Middle Ages.

Here's a radical idea: let's stick with the system that's in place now. It works and provides far fewer opportunities for real fuckery than yours does.

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

And again you have zero understanding of the kinds of people who would join such a project. None would be good, noble souls. They'd mutilate and carve you to pieces if it would mean they got just a bit more.

The current Barrons in England(most of whom are rightful heirs) are not like that.

Because (just like religion) they have no power and have to be nice.

Give them power and look the fuck out.

The King will do a good job at keeping them in line like they did in the Middle Ages.

The current Royal line that you're whining about supplanted their prededessors you dill, just like the Tudors supplanted the ones before them. Like any other tyrant or dictator they're often replaced violently and without regard to legal process. Where do you think George Martin got his plotlines from?

Regarding Reagan, arms for fucking hostages. That is all!

Sure, guy who gets suckered into humiliating himself on social media-belly flop into a real life Game of Thrones nest of vipers. The forumites here are kinder and gentler to you than real life aristocrats would ever be!