1-Find advising:

It will help you take care of the worries, especially if the bullying is inside your mental and physical wellbeing. You will need to manage yourself.

2- Be with a bunch:

To stop Tyrants at the office, it’s advisable which you remain and stay using a specific group. Tyrants in fact reap the benefits of an individual once they see you on your own. Staying on it’s own provides them more chances in order to fake along with tease anyone whenever they like. If you are in a very team, the particular Tyrants drop their own confidence plus they don’t have braveness to accomplish what they desire to accomplish. In a group actually helps a person test takers blog fight your Tyrants since they’re scared of exactly what the class may well possibly do to these. They can actually safeguard an individual it doesn’t matter what.

3- Face and do not worry :

Discover how to have self-confidence and also have zero worry. Tyrants can be all over the place and it’s also your responsibility handle them the appropriate way. Once you dread them, believe that far more invited and they also reap the benefits of 000-570  that concern you’ve got. They think you are a coward and you’re simply scared ample to manage these people. Have confidence in oneself and be self-confident. If you think you are for the conflict, don’t think. Whenever you address all of them, the Tyrants might imagine you’re don’t fearful of these and you may ascend to your individual.

4- Other people:

If you believe it is possible to no longer go on it and no ordinary buddy will help you by it, then it is your time and energy to request true support. Tyrants can be extremely annoying as well as annoying. Try searching out the management’s help since perform Tyrants tend to be less complicated dealt out at work of those inside authority. You know these people everything. Inform them the way they take care of you together with just how unsettling they test takers blog have got described in your own life. Bear in mind, nothing modifications should you not make 1st moves.

Try not to be fearful of Tyrants. They may be merely a part of the world’s studies. Just confront these with self-assurance and also valor, and they’re going to absolutely quit violence a person.

The “Bill of Rights has come to a sudden and catastrophic end with the President’s signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a law that grants the U.S. military the “legal” right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder. This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused.” –excerpted from the article

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034537_NDAA_Bill_of_Rights_Obama.html#ixzz1iKFhRgjN

The party is now over. Big Brother has assumed control, and the rest of us will be hard pressed to wrest control over our lives back from them without a fight of some kind. The introductory statement above, alluding to collusion amongst the separate branches of our government, is made clear by the very fact that, for this document to even be considered as legal according to the Constitution, the Judiciary Branch would have to be in tacit and written agreement with the two other parts of our three part system, thereby reneging on their duty to act as a check to the legislative and executive branches, to safeguard our Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

All of the first ten given rights in the Bill of Rights have been declared null and void, without any objection from the judiciary. It seems fairly obvious that this country is now in the hands of people who have no regard for human rights, unless it pertains to their own; anyone who disagrees out loud with their new regulations don’t deserve any rights, in their eyes. And according to this new legislation, foisted on society while it was busy being distracted once again by rhetoric and illusory holiday seasons, anyone who is even suspected of being against these laws may now be kidnapped in the dark of night, with never a word of justification of any sort to anyone; none is now required, there is no oversight at all.

Considering some of what has been written here, and in other places where the author’s work may be found, they will be coming for me very soon….oh excuse me, someone is at the door…. be right back…..

Image from Wikipedia

Freedom is the utmost important right for every humans. The wave of ordinary people in Tunisia to take the streets for their rights from the country tyrant and succeed in doing so have made every tyrants all over the world shivering to their bones. They are running out of time and as usual this tyrants are turning to religion to save their seat of power.

Some of the reader in certain Asian country disliked what have been highlighted by writers that touch on human rights issue in Asian and especially Muslim majority country. However those that complains and even to the extend of threatening the safety of writers can be questioned their identities and intentions. Nobody in the right mind would like their human rights be taken away by power-hungry politician.

Bahrain, Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and many more the ordinary people are taking to the streets and their demand are simple ; BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS!

Those countries leaders proudly declared they are the beholden and protector of Islam but their reaction to the demands of the little people are outrages! Those ordinary people are beaten, shot with lived bullet and even bomb by the used of fighter jets and tanks just for the sake of a few greedy men.

Politician in those trouble nations been going around Muslim country asking for help by using Islam as a reason. There’s none truth what so ever for this type of leader when they talk about Islam. If they really a true Muslim none of this would happen. People wouldn’t be hungry or crime wouldn’t be rampant or even no child be working to help their parents to put food on the table.

In Bahrain the leaders through their kin in Saudi been going around to other Muslim leader and ask to send arm forces to quash the uprising. They are pleading if Bahrain government of the day fall then it will be the end of Sunni Muslim. How stupid the reason sound. Sunni is Muslim and Shia is Muslim so what the problems. If Shia is deviate from the true teaching of Islam why does Iran and Syria been accepted into OIC. Even majority of religious scholar doesn’t have the balls to declare Shia as a deviate teaching. So stop using Shia as the reason for you to hold to power!

Woman been jailed, some were raped, even kidnapped and nobody knows of this women fates. They are treated worst then an enemy combatant during war. Children became orphan because their mom and dad got killed by the police and army. All this incidents will create a long-term problem for those country even if democracy win over dictatorship.

Libya, just because of a single crazy man thousand had died and still many more to come. Even the NATO air force can’t find this man and not because he been protected by Allah but he is hiding like a scary little mouse in a hole. If Muammar Khadafi a true leader he will be leading his men to the battle field. Please tyrants of the world don’t ever quote from the great Prophet (pbuh) just for the sake of power. Leaders like Muammar Khadafi been slandering Islam since day one he got on to power. No true leader of Islam will shot a civil airline out of the sky. No leaders of Islam will jailed or killed religious scholar for advising the leader to be compassion.

Saudi Arabia should be the one that lead the Ummah to reform countries that are ruled by tyrants. Two of the holiest place on earth are with them but the Saudi political leaders been showing bad example to the Ummah and to other non Muslim society. Saudi shouldn’t be the spoke person for those tyrants. Better yet Saudi should be the one that encourage those tyrants to let the people choose their fate.

The non Muslim countries been fooled by those tyrants which have tarnished the image of Islam. Those tyrants are worst than the terrorist leaders. They been lying and preaching Islam of their owned version. The ignorance of true Islam teaching among the non Muslim have made them assumed Islam as a religion that breed corrupt and power-hungry leaders. If true Islam been used those tyrants would already lose their head for cruelty done to the ordinary people. Leadership in Islam is not an easy task,a leader that stray away from the fundamental rights of the people would automatically be thrown out of his seat.

To the ordinary people in Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya and all other countries that are taking the street the world are praying for you and may the people power would bring down tyrants from their pedestals.

Additional reading: Ignorance of Islam True Teaching Caused Confusion.

Years of Khadafi’s despotism must sooner or later end with his disappearance into the caverns of history, but not without retribution. The unconscionable massacre of those that are yearning for a new era of democracy, cannot go unanswered. This mad man is not only a tyrant, but he is also a fool, believing that he is immuned to any kind of retribution in the not-too-distant future.  His delusion, together with those of the rest of the members of his family, seeking to champion his cause, will, without any doubt, bring about a finality  in this terrible drama of oppression, even after his so-called victory over his citizens.  His irrational behavior is psychotic in nature, the virulence of which has unfortunately rubbed off on his family and supporters, all of whom are presently intoxicated by power and corruption, which, can only be transitory. Given the heroism and determination of the rebels, there can be only one way for Khadafi to rule and that is through violence, an option that will definitely drag him and his cohorts deeper and deeper into the quagmire of self-inflicted misery.

It seems as if the charateristics of Arab dictators are such that their years of domination, seem to border on some kind of an  ideology of invincibility, as if their corrupt power and influence over their subjects are religiously ordained. Time and history are replete with tragic consequences that dictators suffer, even after their initial triumphs.   

He was born on 13 October, 1887, in Nagybiccse a subject of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire to a deeply religious family, as such, he was always destined for a life in the priesthood. As a boy he seems not to have impressed either academically or as an individual. In 1910, he graduated from his Catholic Seminary and made rapid progress through the ranks of the local Catholic hierarchy through hard work and diligence if not inspiration. After serving briefly as a curate during World War One he returned to his home town to work as a secretary to his local Bishop. Following the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire upon the conclusion of the war and the formation of the nation state of Czechoslovakia he very quickly identified himself as a Slovak. For a time he worked as a journalist where he caused some controversy with his pro-Hungarian views. Having reached the rank of Monsignor he volunteered to work as a parish priest and was to continue to tend to the spiritual needs of his flock throughout the war years and the duration of his Presidency.

In the early 1920’s he joined the Slovak People’s Party, a right-wing, nationalist organisation that drew most of its support from the more rural areas of Slovakia. In 1938, he became its leader.

In October, 1938, Germany annexed the Sudetenland. Seizing his opportunity, Tiso declared Slovakia to be an autonomous region within the Czechoslovak State, making himself its Premier. Even so, he had to be bullied by Hitler personally before he finally dared to pronounce Slovakia an independent State on 15 March, 1939. Appointed by the Nazi’s President of the fledgling country he declared himself Vodca (Fuhrer) in 1942.

Though he was an enthusiastic anti-Semite and willingly carried out the policies of his German masters in what was never more than a puppet-State he never really had the stomach to be a true Nazi. He was always a Catholic priest first and a politician second, in his heart at least, if not always in his actions. 

Tiso, introduced the Jewish Code which barred Jews from owning their own homes, and barred them from participating in sport or attending university. He also forced them to wear the Star of David in public. In March, 1942, Slovakia began deporting its first Jews to Auschwitz. Tiso was more than happy to expel the Jews in line with his policy of Slovakia for the Slovaks. But excluding the so-called undesirables from his country and deporting them to their deaths were two very different things. He was a vicious anti-Semite no doubt, but he was also a Catholic priest with a conscience and a sense of right and wrong.

Even so, by June, 1942, just three months after the deportations had started, more than 52,000 Jews had been sent to the Concentration Camps. Indeed, so efficiently had the deportations been carried out that the Vatican felt compelled to intervene. Slovakia had become a clerico-fascist regime and an often supine in the face of Nazi aggression Catholic Church, felt on this occasion at least they could act. They arranged bribes be paid to those Slovakian officials who were responsible for the deportations to cease them, and Pope Pius XII brought personal pressure to bear on Tiso himself to halt the expulsions. Which he did.

This outraged the Germans who demanded that the deportations resume. For two years Tiso resisted German pressure but by 1944, he had been forced to buckle. By the wars end 75% of Slovakian Jews had been deported and murdered, more than 75,000.

Tiso was captured in April, 1945. Unusually, for a collaborator Tiso remained popular amongst the Slovakian people. Even so, he was sentenced to death for treason by the recently reformed Czechoslovak Government. Monsignor Josef Tiso, was hanged in Bratislava on 18 April, 1947, still wearing his clerical robes.       

By Roger Penney

        Most of us may have heard something about King Herod. All it usually amounts to is that he killed some babies and therefore was a thoroughly bad character and a tyrant like Stalin or Hitler. It may surprise many people to find that the reality is a lot more complicated and that as kings of that time go he was remarkably benign and even generous when it suited him.

        Medieval Christendom blew up this incident into something like the worst excesses of Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane or Stalin. They had Herod sending his soldiers to murder hundreds if not thousands of babies in his attempt to kill the Messiah.

The reality is that there were probably only a handful of infants under two in what was, in fact, an obscure little town or village.

            The incident is not recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus so some scholars argue that it did not happen. These fail to accept the Gospels as legitimate historical documents, especially as eighteenth and nineteenth century criticism argued that these were of a late date. It is now recognised that this was not true, indeed there are fragments of John’s Gospel of a very early date which strongly suggests that the Gospels were, as manuscripts go, contemporary.

        Josephus got all his information from a biography written by Herod’s friend Nicholas of Damascus. Sadly his work is lost and we only have Josephus. Some people do not think he is reliable. However he is all we have got and there are other things which tell us about Herod. In particular there are his buildings or what remains of them. He built temples, he built fortresses and he built cities. Like his friends, the Emperor Augustus and Augustus’s most loyal friend and supporter, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, Herod set his mind to great building projects.

        Not all his projects were in Palestine like the cities Sebaste and Caesarea, like the fortresses Herodion, Machaerus and Masada, and like the wonderful temple he built at his own expense for his Jewish subjects, he also restored much of the city and port of Rhodes which had been destroyed by Cassius.

            Looking for a moment at the darker side of Herod’s character we know that he executed three of his sons. Two had been executed on less than concrete evidence and partly as a result of the internecine quarrels of his womenfolk. At the time of the incident of the wise men and the babies in Bethlehem, he was debating the execution of his eldest son who was guilty of treason and plotting to murder his father The son was found guilty on the strongest possible evidence. Historians often tend to record spectacular incidents like this rather than take note of the deaths of a few babies in an obscure village. Children were all too often seen as commodities in that less compassionate age.

        Even when close to death at this time, he was able to deal rationally with these matters which suggest that he had an iron will and self-control. My G.P. has explained, after I wrote to him listing Herods symptoms, that Herod was suffering from cancer of the colon which had, by that time affected much of the lower part of his body so that some parts were clearly in a corrupt state and infected with maggots. He was in very great pain.

      As a young man he had accompanied his father on campaign and on diplomatic missions in the service of the rulers of Judea. Even later on in life he still took the field and seems to have had a gifted military mind. He was a loyal supporter of the Romans, and came to the help of leading Romans in their campaigns. Herod would have mixed with the Roman upper classes from Julius Caesar himself to his successor Augustus and his chief minister Agrippa, as well as many others not so well known outside academic circles.

        He was politically adept far beyond the skill of other rulers and understood, as his hot headed Jewish subjects did not, that being part of the Roman Empire was the safest policy for Palestine. Under Herod they had a great deal of freedom which was not properly appreciated by such people as the zealots who would have been seen by their bigoted fellow countrymen as ‘freedom fighters’. Herod saw them only as trouble makers who were likely to attract the legions to put down any rebellion. this would have been disastrous for the common people who would have been sold into slavery or killed in the ensuing war.

        He put down dissent ruthlessly and in doing so followed the example of his Roman friends and masters. He was chosen as king by Octavian (later titled Augustus) and Marc Anthony before their falling out, but was loyal to Anthony until, being besotted with Cleopatra, he refused Herod’s advice to abandon her. After the suicide of Anthony, Herod managed to make his peace with Octavian and to become his friend.

        On returning to Palestine, after his approval by the Senate he had a three year war with a rival to the throne and with the Parthians who supported his rival. His conduct in the war shows him more skilled both militarily and diplomatically than his Roman allies and all his enemies. He then gave the Jewish people decades of peace and prosperity.

        When famine struck the land he found himself short of ready cash because of his building programmes but melted down all the gold and silver furnishings and plate in his palaces and turned that into coinage to buy corn from Egypt to feed his people until the next harvest and wool to clothe them.

        That end of the Mediterranean called The Levant was the riches part of the Roman Empire. Though Herod was extremely rich he never made money his object but spent freely as with the famine relief and the building of the Temple. This undertaking employed thousands of skilled builders and architects including priests who alone were allowed to build the most sacred part of the buildings. The most sacred part took nearly two years and the rest seven years and still work carried on. If money kept his throne secure then he spent it and keeping the throne secure was achieved by seeing to the well-being of his people.

        Alright so he killed a couple of High Priests! That again can be seen as political expediency. That, of course does not excuse murder but we can understand it given the volatile political, religious and social situation of Palestine at that time. It was a lot like today really. 

        His generosity is seen in the way he cut taxes by as much as twenty-five percent on more than one occasion. He strove in every way he could to placate and earn the respect of his subjects but was hated by a few and resented by many. Even then he managed to keep the peace between the Jews and their neighbours, between them and Rome, also resented as an occupying power, and between the various Jewish factions.

        As well as open strife there were Parthian and Arab spies and subversives to deal with and the need to keep the Roman rulers happy. He had constantly to be looking over his shoulder to Rome. That is both to the Roman governor of Syria of which Palestine was officially a part, and to the capital of Empire, Rome itself.

        The fact that The Emperor and his friend Marcus Agrippa trusted him and made him their friend and that he was also the friend of Senators and other sophisticated Romans tells us a lot more about Herod’s character. Even Josephus has to admit that he was a charming companion and friend. Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem must have been the high point of Herod’s success and his popularity. Everywhere Agrippa was welcomed and indeed applauded by the people. When he offered sacrifices in the temple the Jewish people showed their gratitude in cheering him and desiring him to continue his visit.

        This side of Herod’s character which could inspire loyalty in all manner and ranks of men is also seen in the love he inspired in relatives and servants. When, in his final days he contemplated suicide servants and a cousin, with tears, begged him not to do away with himself. Indeed at the low point when he was in flight for his life from the Parthian invaders he was persuaded by his soldiers not to kill himself.

      Less well known is also his skill as a business man. When Cleopatra persuaded Anthony, her paramour, to take the fabulously rich balsam groves near Jericho from Herod and give them to her, Herod accepted the situation. Whereas a lesser man would have made a fuss and complained, Herod instead rented them back from her and still made a profit from the balsam. Later of course he got them back anyway. Herod was also a patient man.

      So he killed one wife, two High Priests, three of his sons and a few babies. By modern liberal standards that makes him a cruel despot. But compare the good he did and take into account the political expediency of the time. Think also of what real cruelty is, of the labour camps of the Russian gulag and the dreaded Lubyanka; think of Aschwitz, Belsen, Sobibor, and others from the Nazi era. Then what about the Japanese prisoner of war camps and then further back in history of Attila, Genghis, Tamerlane and the many more utterly evil men whose cruelty far surpassed the relatively few political killings of Herod. Ruthless he may have been, cruel if need be, but a monster he was not.

1,639 words R.Penney              

HEROD: A GREAT KING OR A TYRANT?

By Roger Penney

        Most of us may have heard something about King Herod. All it usually amounts to is that he killed some babies and therefore was a thoroughly bad character and a tyrant like Stalin or Hitler. It may surprise many people to find that the reality is a lot more complicated and that as kings of that time go he was remarkably benign and even generous when it suited him.

        Medieval Christendom blew up this incident into something like the worst excesses of Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane or Stalin. They had Herod sending his soldiers to murder hundreds if not thousands of babies in his attempt to kill the Messiah.

The reality is that there were probably only a handful of infants under two in what was, in fact, an obscure little town or village.

            The incident is not recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus so some scholars argue that it did not happen. These fail to accept the Gospels as legitimate historical documents, especially as eighteenth and nineteenth century criticism argued that these were of a late date. It is now recognised that this was not true, indeed there are fragments of John’s Gospel of a very early date which strongly suggests that the Gospels were, as manuscripts go, contemporary.

        Josephus got all his information from a biography written by Herod’s friend Nicholas of Damascus. Sadly his work is lost and we only have Josephus. Some people do not think he is reliable. However he is all we have got and there are other things which tell us about Herod. In particular there are his buildings or what remains of them. He built temples, he built fortresses and he built cities. Like his friends, the Emperor Augustus and Augustus’s most loyal friend and supporter, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, Herod set his mind to great building projects.

        Not all his projects were in Palestine like the cities Sebaste and Caesarea, like the fortresses Herodion, Machaerus and Masada, and like the wonderful temple he built at his own expense for his Jewish subjects, he also restored much of the city and port of Rhodes which had been destroyed by Cassius.

            Looking for a moment at the darker side of Herod’s character we know that he executed three of his sons. Two had been executed on less than concrete evidence and partly as a result of the internecine quarrels of his womenfolk. At the time of the incident of the wise men and the babies in Bethlehem, he was debating the execution of his eldest son who was guilty of treason and plotting to murder his father The son was found guilty on the strongest possible evidence. Historians often tend to record spectacular incidents like this rather than take note of the deaths of a few babies in an obscure village. Children were all too often seen as commodities in that less compassionate age.

        Even when close to death at this time, he was able to deal rationally with these matters which suggest that he had an iron will and self-control. My G.P. has explained, after I wrote to him listing Herods symptoms, that Herod was suffering from cancer of the colon which had, by that time affected much of the lower part of his body so that some parts were clearly in a corrupt state and infected with maggots. He was in very great pain.

      As a young man he had accompanied his father on campaign and on diplomatic missions in the service of the rulers of Judea. Even later on in life he still took the field and seems to have had a gifted military mind. He was a loyal supporter of the Romans, and came to the help of leading Romans in their campaigns. Herod would have mixed with the Roman upper classes from Julius Caesar himself to his successor Augustus and his chief minister Agrippa, as well as many others not so well known outside academic circles.

        He was politically adept far beyond the skill of other rulers and understood, as his hot headed Jewish subjects did not, that being part of the Roman Empire was the safest policy for Palestine. Under Herod they had a great deal of freedom which was not properly appreciated by such people as the zealots who would have been seen by their bigoted fellow countrymen as ‘freedom fighters’. Herod saw them only as trouble makers who were likely to attract the legions to put down any rebellion. this would have been disastrous for the common people who would have been sold into slavery or killed in the ensuing war.

        He put down dissent ruthlessly and in doing so followed the example of his Roman friends and masters. He was chosen as king by Octavian (later titled Augustus) and Marc Anthony before their falling out, but was loyal to Anthony until, being besotted with Cleopatra, he refused Herod’s advice to abandon her. After the suicide of Anthony, Herod managed to make his peace with Octavian and to become his friend.

        On returning to Palestine, after his approval by the Senate he had a three year war with a rival to the throne and with the Parthians who supported his rival. His conduct in the war shows him more skilled both militarily and diplomatically than his Roman allies and all his enemies. He then gave the Jewish people decades of peace and prosperity.

        When famine struck the land he found himself short of ready cash because of his building programmes but melted down all the gold and silver furnishings and plate in his palaces and turned that into coinage to buy corn from Egypt to feed his people until the next harvest and wool to clothe them.

        That end of the Mediterranean called The Levant was the riches part of the Roman Empire. Though Herod was extremely rich he never made money his object but spent freely as with the famine relief and the building of the Temple. This undertaking employed thousands of skilled builders and architects including priests who alone were allowed to build the most sacred part of the buildings. The most sacred part took nearly two years and the rest seven years and still work carried on. If money kept his throne secure then he spent it and keeping the throne secure was achieved by seeing to the well-being of his people.

        Alright so he killed a couple of High Priests! That again can be seen as political expediency. That, of course does not excuse murder but we can understand it given the volatile political, religious and social situation of Palestine at that time. It was a lot like today really. 

        His generosity is seen in the way he cut taxes by as much as twenty-five percent on more than one occasion. He strove in every way he could to placate and earn the respect of his subjects but was hated by a few and resented by many. Even then he managed to keep the peace between the Jews and their neighbours, between them and Rome, also resented as an occupying power, and between the various Jewish factions.

        As well as open strife there were Parthian and Arab spies and subversives to deal with and the need to keep the Roman rulers happy. He had constantly to be looking over his shoulder to Rome. That is both to the Roman governor of Syria of which Palestine was officially a part, and to the capital of Empire, Rome itself.

        The fact that The Emperor and his friend Marcus Agrippa trusted him and made him their friend and that he was also the friend of Senators and other sophisticated Romans tells us a lot more about Herod’s character. Even Josephus has to admit that he was a charming companion and friend. Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem must have been the high point of Herod’s success and his popularity. Everywhere Agrippa was welcomed and indeed applauded by the people. When he offered sacrifices in the temple the Jewish people showed their gratitude in cheering him and desiring him to continue his visit.

        This side of Herod’s character which could inspire loyalty in all manner and ranks of men is also seen in the love he inspired in relatives and servants. When, in his final days he contemplated suicide servants and a cousin, with tears, begged him not to do away with himself. Indeed at the low point when he was in flight for his life from the Parthian invaders he was persuaded by his soldiers not to kill himself.

      Less well known is also his skill as a business man. When Cleopatra persuaded Anthony, her paramour, to take the fabulously rich balsam groves near Jericho from Herod and give them to her, Herod accepted the situation. Whereas a lesser man would have made a fuss and complained, Herod instead rented them back from her and still made a profit from the balsam. Later of course he got them back anyway. Herod was also a patient man.

      So he killed one wife, two High Priests, three of his sons and a few babies. By modern liberal standards that makes him a cruel despot. But compare the good he did and take into account the political expediency of the time. Think also of what real cruelty is, of the labour camps of the Russian gulag and the dreaded Lubyanka; think of Aschwitz, Belsen, Sobibor, and others from the Nazi era. Then what about the Japanese prisoner of war camps and then further back in history of Attila, Genghis, Tamerlane and the many more utterly evil men whose cruelty far surpassed the relatively few political killings of Herod. Ruthless he may have been, cruel if need be, but a monster he was not.

1,639 words R.Penney              

HEROD: A GREAT KING OR A TYRANT?

By Roger Penney

        Most of us may have heard something about King Herod. All it usually amounts to is that he killed some babies and therefore was a thoroughly bad character and a tyrant like Stalin or Hitler. It may surprise many people to find that the reality is a lot more complicated and that as kings of that time go he was remarkably benign and even generous when it suited him.

        Medieval Christendom blew up this incident into something like the worst excesses of Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane or Stalin. They had Herod sending his soldiers to murder hundreds if not thousands of babies in his attempt to kill the Messiah.

The reality is that there were probably only a handful of infants under two in what was, in fact, an obscure little town or village.

            The incident is not recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus so some scholars argue that it did not happen. These fail to accept the Gospels as legitimate historical documents, especially as eighteenth and nineteenth century criticism argued that these were of a late date. It is now recognised that this was not true, indeed there are fragments of John’s Gospel of a very early date which strongly suggests that the Gospels were, as manuscripts go, contemporary.

        Josephus got all his information from a biography written by Herod’s friend Nicholas of Damascus. Sadly his work is lost and we only have Josephus. Some people do not think he is reliable. However he is all we have got and there are other things which tell us about Herod. In particular there are his buildings or what remains of them. He built temples, he built fortresses and he built cities. Like his friends, the Emperor Augustus and Augustus’s most loyal friend and supporter, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, Herod set his mind to great building projects.

        Not all his projects were in Palestine like the cities Sebaste and Caesarea, like the fortresses Herodion, Machaerus and Masada, and like the wonderful temple he built at his own expense for his Jewish subjects, he also restored much of the city and port of Rhodes which had been destroyed by Cassius.

            Looking for a moment at the darker side of Herod’s character we know that he executed three of his sons. Two had been executed on less than concrete evidence and partly as a result of the internecine quarrels of his womenfolk. At the time of the incident of the wise men and the babies in Bethlehem, he was debating the execution of his eldest son who was guilty of treason and plotting to murder his father The son was found guilty on the strongest possible evidence. Historians often tend to record spectacular incidents like this rather than take note of the deaths of a few babies in an obscure village. Children were all too often seen as commodities in that less compassionate age.

        Even when close to death at this time, he was able to deal rationally with these matters which suggest that he had an iron will and self-control. My G.P. has explained, after I wrote to him listing Herods symptoms, that Herod was suffering from cancer of the colon which had, by that time affected much of the lower part of his body so that some parts were clearly in a corrupt state and infected with maggots. He was in very great pain.

      As a young man he had accompanied his father on campaign and on diplomatic missions in the service of the rulers of Judea. Even later on in life he still took the field and seems to have had a gifted military mind. He was a loyal supporter of the Romans, and came to the help of leading Romans in their campaigns. Herod would have mixed with the Roman upper classes from Julius Caesar himself to his successor Augustus and his chief minister Agrippa, as well as many others not so well known outside academic circles.

        He was politically adept far beyond the skill of other rulers and understood, as his hot headed Jewish subjects did not, that being part of the Roman Empire was the safest policy for Palestine. Under Herod they had a great deal of freedom which was not properly appreciated by such people as the zealots who would have been seen by their bigoted fellow countrymen as ‘freedom fighters’. Herod saw them only as trouble makers who were likely to attract the legions to put down any rebellion. this would have been disastrous for the common people who would have been sold into slavery or killed in the ensuing war.

        He put down dissent ruthlessly and in doing so followed the example of his Roman friends and masters. He was chosen as king by Octavian (later titled Augustus) and Marc Anthony before their falling out, but was loyal to Anthony until, being besotted with Cleopatra, he refused Herod’s advice to abandon her. After the suicide of Anthony, Herod managed to make his peace with Octavian and to become his friend.

        On returning to Palestine, after his approval by the Senate he had a three year war with a rival to the throne and with the Parthians who supported his rival. His conduct in the war shows him more skilled both militarily and diplomatically than his Roman allies and all his enemies. He then gave the Jewish people decades of peace and prosperity.

        When famine struck the land he found himself short of ready cash because of his building programmes but melted down all the gold and silver furnishings and plate in his palaces and turned that into coinage to buy corn from Egypt to feed his people until the next harvest and wool to clothe them.

        That end of the Mediterranean called The Levant was the riches part of the Roman Empire. Though Herod was extremely rich he never made money his object but spent freely as with the famine relief and the building of the Temple. This undertaking employed thousands of skilled builders and architects including priests who alone were allowed to build the most sacred part of the buildings. The most sacred part took nearly two years and the rest seven years and still work carried on. If money kept his throne secure then he spent it and keeping the throne secure was achieved by seeing to the well-being of his people.

        Alright so he killed a couple of High Priests! That again can be seen as political expediency. That, of course does not excuse murder but we can understand it given the volatile political, religious and social situation of Palestine at that time. It was a lot like today really. 

        His generosity is seen in the way he cut taxes by as much as twenty-five percent on more than one occasion. He strove in every way he could to placate and earn the respect of his subjects but was hated by a few and resented by many. Even then he managed to keep the peace between the Jews and their neighbours, between them and Rome, also resented as an occupying power, and between the various Jewish factions.

        As well as open strife there were Parthian and Arab spies and subversives to deal with and the need to keep the Roman rulers happy. He had constantly to be looking over his shoulder to Rome. That is both to the Roman governor of Syria of which Palestine was officially a part, and to the capital of Empire, Rome itself.

        The fact that The Emperor and his friend Marcus Agrippa trusted him and made him their friend and that he was also the friend of Senators and other sophisticated Romans tells us a lot more about Herod’s character. Even Josephus has to admit that he was a charming companion and friend. Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem must have been the high point of Herod’s success and his popularity. Everywhere Agrippa was welcomed and indeed applauded by the people. When he offered sacrifices in the temple the Jewish people showed their gratitude in cheering him and desiring him to continue his visit.

        This side of Herod’s character which could inspire loyalty in all manner and ranks of men is also seen in the love he inspired in relatives and servants. When, in his final days he contemplated suicide servants and a cousin, with tears, begged him not to do away with himself. Indeed at the low point when he was in flight for his life from the Parthian invaders he was persuaded by his soldiers not to kill himself.

      Less well known is also his skill as a business man. When Cleopatra persuaded Anthony, her paramour, to take the fabulously rich balsam groves near Jericho from Herod and give them to her, Herod accepted the situation. Whereas a lesser man would have made a fuss and complained, Herod instead rented them back from her and still made a profit from the balsam. Later of course he got them back anyway. Herod was also a patient man.

      So he killed one wife, two High Priests, three of his sons and a few babies. By modern liberal standards that makes him a cruel despot. But compare the good he did and take into account the political expediency of the time. Think also of what real cruelty is, of the labour camps of the Russian gulag and the dreaded Lubyanka; think of Aschwitz, Belsen, Sobibor, and others from the Nazi era. Then what about the Japanese prisoner of war camps and then further back in history of Attila, Genghis, Tamerlane and the many more utterly evil men whose cruelty far surpassed the relatively few political killings of Herod. Ruthless he may have been, cruel if need be, but a monster he was not.

1,639 words R.Penney              

HEROD: A GREAT KING OR A TYRANT?

By Roger Penney

        Most of us may have heard something about King Herod. All it usually amounts to is that he killed some babies and therefore was a thoroughly bad character and a tyrant like Stalin or Hitler. It may surprise many people to find that the reality is a lot more complicated and that as kings of that time go he was remarkably benign and even generous when it suited him.

        Medieval Christendom blew up this incident into something like the worst excesses of Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane or Stalin. They had Herod sending his soldiers to murder hundreds if not thousands of babies in his attempt to kill the Messiah.

The reality is that there were probably only a handful of infants under two in what was, in fact, an obscure little town or village.

            The incident is not recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus so some scholars argue that it did not happen. These fail to accept the Gospels as legitimate historical documents, especially as eighteenth and nineteenth century criticism argued that these were of a late date. It is now recognised that this was not true, indeed there are fragments of John’s Gospel of a very early date which strongly suggests that the Gospels were, as manuscripts go, contemporary.

        Josephus got all his information from a biography written by Herod’s friend Nicholas of Damascus. Sadly his work is lost and we only have Josephus. Some people do not think he is reliable. However he is all we have got and there are other things which tell us about Herod. In particular there are his buildings or what remains of them. He built temples, he built fortresses and he built cities. Like his friends, the Emperor Augustus and Augustus’s most loyal friend and supporter, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, Herod set his mind to great building projects.

        Not all his projects were in Palestine like the cities Sebaste and Caesarea, like the fortresses Herodion, Machaerus and Masada, and like the wonderful temple he built at his own expense for his Jewish subjects, he also restored much of the city and port of Rhodes which had been destroyed by Cassius.

            Looking for a moment at the darker side of Herod’s character we know that he executed three of his sons. Two had been executed on less than concrete evidence and partly as a result of the internecine quarrels of his womenfolk. At the time of the incident of the wise men and the babies in Bethlehem, he was debating the execution of his eldest son who was guilty of treason and plotting to murder his father The son was found guilty on the strongest possible evidence. Historians often tend to record spectacular incidents like this rather than take note of the deaths of a few babies in an obscure village. Children were all too often seen as commodities in that less compassionate age.

        Even when close to death at this time, he was able to deal rationally with these matters which suggest that he had an iron will and self-control. My G.P. has explained, after I wrote to him listing Herods symptoms, that Herod was suffering from cancer of the colon which had, by that time affected much of the lower part of his body so that some parts were clearly in a corrupt state and infected with maggots. He was in very great pain.

      As a young man he had accompanied his father on campaign and on diplomatic missions in the service of the rulers of Judea. Even later on in life he still took the field and seems to have had a gifted military mind. He was a loyal supporter of the Romans, and came to the help of leading Romans in their campaigns. Herod would have mixed with the Roman upper classes from Julius Caesar himself to his successor Augustus and his chief minister Agrippa, as well as many others not so well known outside academic circles.

        He was politically adept far beyond the skill of other rulers and understood, as his hot headed Jewish subjects did not, that being part of the Roman Empire was the safest policy for Palestine. Under Herod they had a great deal of freedom which was not properly appreciated by such people as the zealots who would have been seen by their bigoted fellow countrymen as ‘freedom fighters’. Herod saw them only as trouble makers who were likely to attract the legions to put down any rebellion. this would have been disastrous for the common people who would have been sold into slavery or killed in the ensuing war.

        He put down dissent ruthlessly and in doing so followed the example of his Roman friends and masters. He was chosen as king by Octavian (later titled Augustus) and Marc Anthony before their falling out, but was loyal to Anthony until, being besotted with Cleopatra, he refused Herod’s advice to abandon her. After the suicide of Anthony, Herod managed to make his peace with Octavian and to become his friend.

        On returning to Palestine, after his approval by the Senate he had a three year war with a rival to the throne and with the Parthians who supported his rival. His conduct in the war shows him more skilled both militarily and diplomatically than his Roman allies and all his enemies. He then gave the Jewish people decades of peace and prosperity.

        When famine struck the land he found himself short of ready cash because of his building programmes but melted down all the gold and silver furnishings and plate in his palaces and turned that into coinage to buy corn from Egypt to feed his people until the next harvest and wool to clothe them.

        That end of the Mediterranean called The Levant was the riches part of the Roman Empire. Though Herod was extremely rich he never made money his object but spent freely as with the famine relief and the building of the Temple. This undertaking employed thousands of skilled builders and architects including priests who alone were allowed to build the most sacred part of the buildings. The most sacred part took nearly two years and the rest seven years and still work carried on. If money kept his throne secure then he spent it and keeping the throne secure was achieved by seeing to the well-being of his people.

        Alright so he killed a couple of High Priests! That again can be seen as political expediency. That, of course does not excuse murder but we can understand it given the volatile political, religious and social situation of Palestine at that time. It was a lot like today really. 

        His generosity is seen in the way he cut taxes by as much as twenty-five percent on more than one occasion. He strove in every way he could to placate and earn the respect of his subjects but was hated by a few and resented by many. Even then he managed to keep the peace between the Jews and their neighbours, between them and Rome, also resented as an occupying power, and between the various Jewish factions.

        As well as open strife there were Parthian and Arab spies and subversives to deal with and the need to keep the Roman rulers happy. He had constantly to be looking over his shoulder to Rome. That is both to the Roman governor of Syria of which Palestine was officially a part, and to the capital of Empire, Rome itself.

        The fact that The Emperor and his friend Marcus Agrippa trusted him and made him their friend and that he was also the friend of Senators and other sophisticated Romans tells us a lot more about Herod’s character. Even Josephus has to admit that he was a charming companion and friend. Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem must have been the high point of Herod’s success and his popularity. Everywhere Agrippa was welcomed and indeed applauded by the people. When he offered sacrifices in the temple the Jewish people showed their gratitude in cheering him and desiring him to continue his visit.

        This side of Herod’s character which could inspire loyalty in all manner and ranks of men is also seen in the love he inspired in relatives and servants. When, in his final days he contemplated suicide servants and a cousin, with tears, begged him not to do away with himself. Indeed at the low point when he was in flight for his life from the Parthian invaders he was persuaded by his soldiers not to kill himself.

      Less well known is also his skill as a business man. When Cleopatra persuaded Anthony, her paramour, to take the fabulously rich balsam groves near Jericho from Herod and give them to her, Herod accepted the situation. Whereas a lesser man would have made a fuss and complained, Herod instead rented them back from her and still made a profit from the balsam. Later of course he got them back anyway. Herod was also a patient man.

      So he killed one wife, two High Priests, three of his sons and a few babies. By modern liberal standards that makes him a cruel despot. But compare the good he did and take into account the political expediency of the time. Think also of what real cruelty is, of the labour camps of the Russian gulag and the dreaded Lubyanka; think of Aschwitz, Belsen, Sobibor, and others from the Nazi era. Then what about the Japanese prisoner of war camps and then further back in history of Attila, Genghis, Tamerlane and the many more utterly evil men whose cruelty far surpassed the relatively few political killings of Herod. Ruthless he may have been, cruel if need be, but a monster he was not.

1,639 words R.Penney              

HEROD: A GREAT KING OR A TYRANT?

By Roger Penney

        Most of us may have heard something about King Herod. All it usually amounts to is that he killed some babies and therefore was a thoroughly bad character and a tyrant like Stalin or Hitler. It may surprise many people to find that the reality is a lot more complicated and that as kings of that time go he was remarkably benign and even generous when it suited him.

        Medieval Christendom blew up this incident into something like the worst excesses of Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane or Stalin. They had Herod sending his soldiers to murder hundreds if not thousands of babies in his attempt to kill the Messiah.

The reality is that there were probably only a handful of infants under two in what was, in fact, an obscure little town or village.

            The incident is not recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus so some scholars argue that it did not happen. These fail to accept the Gospels as legitimate historical documents, especially as eighteenth and nineteenth century criticism argued that these were of a late date. It is now recognised that this was not true, indeed there are fragments of John’s Gospel of a very early date which strongly suggests that the Gospels were, as manuscripts go, contemporary.

        Josephus got all his information from a biography written by Herod’s friend Nicholas of Damascus. Sadly his work is lost and we only have Josephus. Some people do not think he is reliable. However he is all we have got and there are other things which tell us about Herod. In particular there are his buildings or what remains of them. He built temples, he built fortresses and he built cities. Like his friends, the Emperor Augustus and Augustus’s most loyal friend and supporter, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, Herod set his mind to great building projects.

        Not all his projects were in Palestine like the cities Sebaste and Caesarea, like the fortresses Herodion, Machaerus and Masada, and like the wonderful temple he built at his own expense for his Jewish subjects, he also restored much of the city and port of Rhodes which had been destroyed by Cassius.

            Looking for a moment at the darker side of Herod’s character we know that he executed three of his sons. Two had been executed on less than concrete evidence and partly as a result of the internecine quarrels of his womenfolk. At the time of the incident of the wise men and the babies in Bethlehem, he was debating the execution of his eldest son who was guilty of treason and plotting to murder his father The son was found guilty on the strongest possible evidence. Historians often tend to record spectacular incidents like this rather than take note of the deaths of a few babies in an obscure village. Children were all too often seen as commodities in that less compassionate age.

        Even when close to death at this time, he was able to deal rationally with these matters which suggest that he had an iron will and self-control. My G.P. has explained, after I wrote to him listing Herods symptoms, that Herod was suffering from cancer of the colon which had, by that time affected much of the lower part of his body so that some parts were clearly in a corrupt state and infected with maggots. He was in very great pain.

      As a young man he had accompanied his father on campaign and on diplomatic missions in the service of the rulers of Judea. Even later on in life he still took the field and seems to have had a gifted military mind. He was a loyal supporter of the Romans, and came to the help of leading Romans in their campaigns. Herod would have mixed with the Roman upper classes from Julius Caesar himself to his successor Augustus and his chief minister Agrippa, as well as many others not so well known outside academic circles.

        He was politically adept far beyond the skill of other rulers and understood, as his hot headed Jewish subjects did not, that being part of the Roman Empire was the safest policy for Palestine. Under Herod they had a great deal of freedom which was not properly appreciated by such people as the zealots who would have been seen by their bigoted fellow countrymen as ‘freedom fighters’. Herod saw them only as trouble makers who were likely to attract the legions to put down any rebellion. this would have been disastrous for the common people who would have been sold into slavery or killed in the ensuing war.

        He put down dissent ruthlessly and in doing so followed the example of his Roman friends and masters. He was chosen as king by Octavian (later titled Augustus) and Marc Anthony before their falling out, but was loyal to Anthony until, being besotted with Cleopatra, he refused Herod’s advice to abandon her. After the suicide of Anthony, Herod managed to make his peace with Octavian and to become his friend.

        On returning to Palestine, after his approval by the Senate he had a three year war with a rival to the throne and with the Parthians who supported his rival. His conduct in the war shows him more skilled both militarily and diplomatically than his Roman allies and all his enemies. He then gave the Jewish people decades of peace and prosperity.

        When famine struck the land he found himself short of ready cash because of his building programmes but melted down all the gold and silver furnishings and plate in his palaces and turned that into coinage to buy corn from Egypt to feed his people until the next harvest and wool to clothe them.

        That end of the Mediterranean called The Levant was the riches part of the Roman Empire. Though Herod was extremely rich he never made money his object but spent freely as with the famine relief and the building of the Temple. This undertaking employed thousands of skilled builders and architects including priests who alone were allowed to build the most sacred part of the buildings. The most sacred part took nearly two years and the rest seven years and still work carried on. If money kept his throne secure then he spent it and keeping the throne secure was achieved by seeing to the well-being of his people.

        Alright so he killed a couple of High Priests! That again can be seen as political expediency. That, of course does not excuse murder but we can understand it given the volatile political, religious and social situation of Palestine at that time. It was a lot like today really. 

        His generosity is seen in the way he cut taxes by as much as twenty-five percent on more than one occasion. He strove in every way he could to placate and earn the respect of his subjects but was hated by a few and resented by many. Even then he managed to keep the peace between the Jews and their neighbours, between them and Rome, also resented as an occupying power, and between the various Jewish factions.

        As well as open strife there were Parthian and Arab spies and subversives to deal with and the need to keep the Roman rulers happy. He had constantly to be looking over his shoulder to Rome. That is both to the Roman governor of Syria of which Palestine was officially a part, and to the capital of Empire, Rome itself.

        The fact that The Emperor and his friend Marcus Agrippa trusted him and made him their friend and that he was also the friend of Senators and other sophisticated Romans tells us a lot more about Herod’s character. Even Josephus has to admit that he was a charming companion and friend. Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem must have been the high point of Herod’s success and his popularity. Everywhere Agrippa was welcomed and indeed applauded by the people. When he offered sacrifices in the temple the Jewish people showed their gratitude in cheering him and desiring him to continue his visit.

        This side of Herod’s character which could inspire loyalty in all manner and ranks of men is also seen in the love he inspired in relatives and servants. When, in his final days he contemplated suicide servants and a cousin, with tears, begged him not to do away with himself. Indeed at the low point when he was in flight for his life from the Parthian invaders he was persuaded by his soldiers not to kill himself.

      Less well known is also his skill as a business man. When Cleopatra persuaded Anthony, her paramour, to take the fabulously rich balsam groves near Jericho from Herod and give them to her, Herod accepted the situation. Whereas a lesser man would have made a fuss and complained, Herod instead rented them back from her and still made a profit from the balsam. Later of course he got them back anyway. Herod was also a patient man.

      So he killed one wife, two High Priests, three of his sons and a few babies. By modern liberal standards that makes him a cruel despot. But compare the good he did and take into account the political expediency of the time. Think also of what real cruelty is, of the labour camps of the Russian gulag and the dreaded Lubyanka; think of Aschwitz, Belsen, Sobibor, and others from the Nazi era. Then what about the Japanese prisoner of war camps and then further back in history of Attila, Genghis, Tamerlane and the many more utterly evil men whose cruelty far surpassed the relatively few political killings of Herod. Ruthless he may have been, cruel if need be, but a monster he was not.

1,639 words R.Penney              

HEROD: A GREAT KING OR A TYRANT?

By Roger Penney

        Most of us may have heard something about King Herod. All it usually amounts to is that he killed some babies and therefore was a thoroughly bad character and a tyrant like Stalin or Hitler. It may surprise many people to find that the reality is a lot more complicated and that as kings of that time go he was remarkably benign and even generous when it suited him.

        Medieval Christendom blew up this incident into something like the worst excesses of Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane or Stalin. They had Herod sending his soldiers to murder hundreds if not thousands of babies in his attempt to kill the Messiah.

The reality is that there were probably only a handful of infants under two in what was, in fact, an obscure little town or village.

            The incident is not recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus so some scholars argue that it did not happen. These fail to accept the Gospels as legitimate historical documents, especially as eighteenth and nineteenth century criticism argued that these were of a late date. It is now recognised that this was not true, indeed there are fragments of John’s Gospel of a very early date which strongly suggests that the Gospels were, as manuscripts go, contemporary.

        Josephus got all his information from a biography written by Herod’s friend Nicholas of Damascus. Sadly his work is lost and we only have Josephus. Some people do not think he is reliable. However he is all we have got and there are other things which tell us about Herod. In particular there are his buildings or what remains of them. He built temples, he built fortresses and he built cities. Like his friends, the Emperor Augustus and Augustus’s most loyal friend and supporter, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, Herod set his mind to great building projects.

        Not all his projects were in Palestine like the cities Sebaste and Caesarea, like the fortresses Herodion, Machaerus and Masada, and like the wonderful temple he built at his own expense for his Jewish subjects, he also restored much of the city and port of Rhodes which had been destroyed by Cassius.

            Looking for a moment at the darker side of Herod’s character we know that he executed three of his sons. Two had been executed on less than concrete evidence and partly as a result of the internecine quarrels of his womenfolk. At the time of the incident of the wise men and the babies in Bethlehem, he was debating the execution of his eldest son who was guilty of treason and plotting to murder his father The son was found guilty on the strongest possible evidence. Historians often tend to record spectacular incidents like this rather than take note of the deaths of a few babies in an obscure village. Children were all too often seen as commodities in that less compassionate age.

        Even when close to death at this time, he was able to deal rationally with these matters which suggest that he had an iron will and self-control. My G.P. has explained, after I wrote to him listing Herods symptoms, that Herod was suffering from cancer of the colon which had, by that time affected much of the lower part of his body so that some parts were clearly in a corrupt state and infected with maggots. He was in very great pain.

      As a young man he had accompanied his father on campaign and on diplomatic missions in the service of the rulers of Judea. Even later on in life he still took the field and seems to have had a gifted military mind. He was a loyal supporter of the Romans, and came to the help of leading Romans in their campaigns. Herod would have mixed with the Roman upper classes from Julius Caesar himself to his successor Augustus and his chief minister Agrippa, as well as many others not so well known outside academic circles.

        He was politically adept far beyond the skill of other rulers and understood, as his hot headed Jewish subjects did not, that being part of the Roman Empire was the safest policy for Palestine. Under Herod they had a great deal of freedom which was not properly appreciated by such people as the zealots who would have been seen by their bigoted fellow countrymen as ‘freedom fighters’. Herod saw them only as trouble makers who were likely to attract the legions to put down any rebellion. this would have been disastrous for the common people who would have been sold into slavery or killed in the ensuing war.

        He put down dissent ruthlessly and in doing so followed the example of his Roman friends and masters. He was chosen as king by Octavian (later titled Augustus) and Marc Anthony before their falling out, but was loyal to Anthony until, being besotted with Cleopatra, he refused Herod’s advice to abandon her. After the suicide of Anthony, Herod managed to make his peace with Octavian and to become his friend.

        On returning to Palestine, after his approval by the Senate he had a three year war with a rival to the throne and with the Parthians who supported his rival. His conduct in the war shows him more skilled both militarily and diplomatically than his Roman allies and all his enemies. He then gave the Jewish people decades of peace and prosperity.

        When famine struck the land he found himself short of ready cash because of his building programmes but melted down all the gold and silver furnishings and plate in his palaces and turned that into coinage to buy corn from Egypt to feed his people until the next harvest and wool to clothe them.

        That end of the Mediterranean called The Levant was the riches part of the Roman Empire. Though Herod was extremely rich he never made money his object but spent freely as with the famine relief and the building of the Temple. This undertaking employed thousands of skilled builders and architects including priests who alone were allowed to build the most sacred part of the buildings. The most sacred part took nearly two years and the rest seven years and still work carried on. If money kept his throne secure then he spent it and keeping the throne secure was achieved by seeing to the well-being of his people.

        Alright so he killed a couple of High Priests! That again can be seen as political expediency. That, of course does not excuse murder but we can understand it given the volatile political, religious and social situation of Palestine at that time. It was a lot like today really. 

        His generosity is seen in the way he cut taxes by as much as twenty-five percent on more than one occasion. He strove in every way he could to placate and earn the respect of his subjects but was hated by a few and resented by many. Even then he managed to keep the peace between the Jews and their neighbours, between them and Rome, also resented as an occupying power, and between the various Jewish factions.

        As well as open strife there were Parthian and Arab spies and subversives to deal with and the need to keep the Roman rulers happy. He had constantly to be looking over his shoulder to Rome. That is both to the Roman governor of Syria of which Palestine was officially a part, and to the capital of Empire, Rome itself.

        The fact that The Emperor and his friend Marcus Agrippa trusted him and made him their friend and that he was also the friend of Senators and other sophisticated Romans tells us a lot more about Herod’s character. Even Josephus has to admit that he was a charming companion and friend. Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem must have been the high point of Herod’s success and his popularity. Everywhere Agrippa was welcomed and indeed applauded by the people. When he offered sacrifices in the temple the Jewish people showed their gratitude in cheering him and desiring him to continue his visit.

        This side of Herod’s character which could inspire loyalty in all manner and ranks of men is also seen in the love he inspired in relatives and servants. When, in his final days he contemplated suicide servants and a cousin, with tears, begged him not to do away with himself. Indeed at the low point when he was in flight for his life from the Parthian invaders he was persuaded by his soldiers not to kill himself.

      Less well known is also his skill as a business man. When Cleopatra persuaded Anthony, her paramour, to take the fabulously rich balsam groves near Jericho from Herod and give them to her, Herod accepted the situation. Whereas a lesser man would have made a fuss and complained, Herod instead rented them back from her and still made a profit from the balsam. Later of course he got them back anyway. Herod was also a patient man.

      So he killed one wife, two High Priests, three of his sons and a few babies. By modern liberal standards that makes him a cruel despot. But compare the good he did and take into account the political expediency of the time. Think also of what real cruelty is, of the labour camps of the Russian gulag and the dreaded Lubyanka; think of Aschwitz, Belsen, Sobibor, and others from the Nazi era. Then what about the Japanese prisoner of war camps and then further back in history of Attila, Genghis, Tamerlane and the many more utterly evil men whose cruelty far surpassed the relatively few political killings of Herod. Ruthless he may have been, cruel if need be, but a monster he was not.

1,639 words R.Penney              

This body was discovered in Berlin, the Russian contingent and was assumed to be Adolf Hitler. It is actually Gustav Weler  Hitler’s doppelganger (body double), who was executed with a gunshot to the forehead. You might find this picture anywhere on the net but the information provided above is rare.

The remains above are kept in a cardboard box in the State Archives of the Russian Federation, Moscow, where they were removed to after the Russian invasion in Berlin. They are believed to be Hitler’s — charred, age 50’s, and dead from a gunshot wound suicide.

On account of some witnesses, Adolf Hitler shot to Eva Braun before committing suicide. Later, the dictator’s adherents spilled gasoline to the bodies and burned them to avoid their profanation(below). In the end of the 20th Century, the Soviet authorities opened the historical files to the public. In one of the documents a picture of the “possible remains of Adolf Hitler” appears(up).

A Soviet soldier holding the gasoline can which is believed to be used then to burn the bodies of Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun.

According to new evidence suggests that Adolf Hitler may not have died in his bunker, as historians have long claimed. In fact, new tests on the skull fragment long held up as evidence of his demise indicate The skull really belongs to a woman.Scholars will doubtless present daring new theories to contend with this development, but others are straightforward about the fact that we may never know what really happened to the tyrant. 

A strange book from  the Macaulay Company named “The Strange Death of Adolf Hitler”  even states that Adolf Hitler had his double.

For more info click here.

                                                  ~~**~~

If you want to earn some money please click and join here. This site is not a scam, sends no scam emails, just join with a $5 starting bonus, there are 4 offers worth $11 that require no such work, try those, earn some cash, cashout can be done through check, or Paypal!! Enjoy!

What was the situation in France before Napoleon took power in 1799? France had experienced the revolution in 1789 and had gone through several different types of government. France was changed, during the revolution, from a monarchy-governed state to a republic, to a revolutionary government to being ruled by the directory, a group of five men who were elected by a council. It was this government that Napoleon overthrew by plotting with members of the directory and his brother, who held the position of speaker in the Council of Five Hundred. The directory was overthrown and was replaced by the Consulate, with Napoleon running everything as First Consul. Five years after the overthrowing of the directory, Napoleon crowned himself Emperor of France, and the story has it that he seized the crown out of the hands of Pope Pius VII to avoid subjugation to the authority involved there – many of these acts have lead me personally to believe that his seizure of power was more tyrannical in nature than heroic.

     Napoleon was a great general and a true master of stratagem; it was his strategies and tactics that allowed him to conquer most of Europe through a series of wars and battles. He was, more often than not, victorious, and his actions in battle were seemingly very heroic. Long before Napoleon was a general, he was a lowly artillery commander who battled in the siege of Toulon; it was his plan that led to the capture of the city. During the battle he was wounded in the thigh, and after his victory was promoted to the rank of Brigadier General. Many of his actions and decisions in battle could be viewed as tyrannical, such as his re-establishment of slavery in the French colonial territories. When his army was retreating from Russia, suffering from plague and cold, he had many of the sick men and stragglers poisoned to avoid them falling into the hands of the Russians. It may have been a sacrifice for his country, but he was still killing off his own men to avoid them getting captured, which is, presumably, the act of a tyrant. He was apparently ruthless, and it was this attribute combined with superior stratagem and strength of arms that allowed Napoleon to win so many battles.

     To many of the conquered countries, Napoleon was indeed considered a tyrant. The British considered him a ravenous conqueror, and a nursery rhyme suggested that he ate children, warning youngsters of the Bonaparte Bogeyman. They propagandized Napoleon as being freakishly short and many cartoons frequently mocked his diminutiveness. He was often caricatured with a ridiculously large hat and belly for such a short man. I suppose it’s just the fate of any world figure, tyrant or no: to be made fun of for every little shortcoming that you possess. It’s as true today as it was two hundred years ago.

     My conclusion is, though Napoleon possesses many heroic deeds and attributes, he gives me reason to believe that he is more of a tyrant than a hero. It seems like he wished to win at almost any cost, sacrificing the lives of his men in bloody battles and campaigns. He even had his men kidnap the Pope at one point; forcing the evangelical leader to travel with him to adopt policies and gain power. Despite his tyrannical side, Napoleon was and remains to this day, a symbol of military genius and political power, and many of his contributions to Europe, such as the Napoleonic Code, have gone unrivalled. He was truly a great man, hero or tyrant.