Asylum Forums Pages (32): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 » ... Last »
Show all 796 posts from this thread on one page

Asylum Forums (
- The Lost Forum (
-- I am the Asylum Nation's God (

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 05:35 PM:

I am the Asylum Nation's God

They worship me. They hang on every word I write. They anxiously await my posts, then cannot help but reply to them.

I hear their prayers but I do not answer them.

Bow down before me, Asylum Nation. I am your Lord.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by billgerat on 04-05-2008 05:36 PM:

Butter – the everlasting delight of the gourmand, the faithful ally of the culinary arts, the constant symbol of good living.
Through time and across the globe, butter has had a sacred quality. From the ancient Fertile Crescent to the present day, butter has symbolized the powerful, life giving and sacred, the good, the happy, the healthy and pure. It has sustained lives, cultures and civilizations for millennia.

Butter is a culinary treasure as old as King Tut’s tomb. "She brought forth butter in a lordly dish" (Judges 5:25). A jug of wine, a loaf of bread – and butter! Pure butter is produced today essentially as it was in King Tut’s time, though butter made of milk from cows instead of camels or water buffaloes.

It takes 21 pounds of fresh, wholesome cow’s milk to make each pound of butter like the pat of butter on waxed paper (at right) at a French farm in Brittany.

We have record of its use as early as 2,000 years before Christ. The Bible is interspersed with references to butter, the product of milk from the cow. Not only has it been regarded from time immemorial as a food fit for the gods, but its use appears to have been divinely recommended and its users promised certain immunities against evil. Butter was the only food ever defined by an Act of the U.S. Congress prior to the enactment of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938.

The word butter comes from bou-tyron, which seems to mean "cowcheese" in Greek. Some scholars think, however, that the word was borrowed from the language of the northern and butterophagous Scythians, who herded cattle; Greeks lived mostly from sheep and goats whose milk, which they consumed mainly as cheese, was relatively low in butter (or butyric) fat.

Naturally, it is presumed that in four thousand years there has been considerable improvement in the manufacture of butter although we, of course, know little more of the method by which Sarah produced butter for the angels than we know of the means employed in the construction of the pyramids. The earliest details of method of manufacture are derived from the Arabs and Syrians, who appear to be as well satisfied with the original process of making butter as they are with other habits, since they have remained unchanged for centuries. The original practice of the Arabs and Syrians, so far as is known, was to use vessel made from goatskin for a churn. The animal was skinned, the skin sewed up tight, leaving an opening only at the left foreleg, where the cream was poured in. The "churn" was then suspended from the tent poles and swung until the "butter comes." This, incidentally, is the earliest known process of making butter.

Little is known of the part which butter played as an article of commerce in ancient times. In the first centuries butter was shipped from India to ports of the Red Sea. In the 12th century, Scandinavian butter was an article of oversee commerce. The Germans sent ships to Bergen, in Norway, and exchanged their cargoes of wine for butter and dried fish. It is interesting to note that the Scandinavian king considered this practice injurious to his people, and in 1186 compelled the Germans to withdraw their trade. Toward the end of the 13th century, among the enumerated wares of commerce, imported from thirty-four countries into Belgium, Norway was the only one, which included butter. In the 14th century, butter formed an article of export from Sweden. It may be fairly inferred that butter making in north and middle Europe, if not indeed in all Europe, was introduced from Scandinavia.

Some of the commonest archaeological finds in Ireland are barrels of ancient butter, buried in the bogs. The Norsemen, the Finns, the Icelanders, and the Scots had done the same: they flavored butter heavily with garlic, knuckled it into a wooden firkin, and buried it for years in the bogs‑for so long that people were known to plant trees to mark the butter's burial site. The longer it was left, the more delicious it became. A further advantage was doubtless the safety of supplies from robbers, or enemies in wartime. Most of the Irish archaeological specimens date from the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Although some of our sources imply that bog butter turned red, the firkins in the Irish National Museum contain "a grayish cheese‑like substance, partially hardened, not much like butter, and quite free from putrefaction" because of the cool, antiseptic, anaerobic, and acidic properties of peat bogs.

John Houghton, an Englishman, writing on dairying in 1695, speaks of the Irish as rotting their butter by burying it in bogs. This burying of butter in the peat bogs of Ireland may have been for the purpose of storing against a time of need, to hid it from invaders, or to ripen it for the purpose of developing flavor in a manner similar to cheese ripening.

Archeologists found a deposit of butter buried in peat bogs found wrapped in a skin in County Leitrim, and another packed in a tub with perforated wooden handles in County Tyrone, Ireland. It is believed possible that the practice of burying butter in Ireland ceased about the end of the 18th century and that many of the specimens which have been found are of far greater antiquity (11th to 14th century). The large number of specimens found, some of which weighed over 100 pounds, suggests that the burying of butter must have been a widespread practice in Ireland. Similar deposits of buried butter were also discovered in Finland.

Various other methods of packaging butter have been found mentioned in a variety of sources. A news item in the December 4, 1907 issue of the New York Produce Review and American Creamery tells of a traveler in Central Africa in 1872 being offered butter wrapped in leaves and then covered with a layer of cow dung which upon drying kept air from the butter. Repeated references are found in the literature of instances where pats of butter are cited as being "wrapped in cool cabbage leaves or freshly cut grass" -- a practice, which appeared to be rather common in various parts of Europe. As a matter of fact, it was a common practice in the earlier days of the South Water Street market in Chicago, for farmers to refrigerate their shipments of butter transported in open wagons by covering the same with grass freshly cut while still wet with dew.

Dairy work included milking, making cream and butter, and also the sophisticated art of making cheese. In Europe it was always done by women. The word "dairy" is from Middle English dey ‑ a female servant. The dairy was associated with the house as opposed to the lands; "inside" has always been female in the Western imagination, and "outside" male, so that the man's place was in the public eye while the woman's was at home. Also, milk was perhaps considered self‑evidently a woman's affair.

History records that a primary object of keeping cows was to supply the needs of the family for milk and butter. Butter was produced almost universally in olden times because it was more essential in the diet of most people, although it was several centuries before the consumption of fresh butter became established custom. The art of making butter, therefore, originated in the home.

As communities expanded and frontiers were pushed back with the growth of nations, many families were gradually forced to procure their supplies of milk and butter from farmers located in their vicinity. Then, as populations became more congested, and as cities sprang up, butter making on farms became more and more important. As our larger cities developed, important tracing areas also developed resulting eventually in the establishment of Boards of Trade and later in Mercantile Exchanges in New York and Chicago, for example.

The farm production of butter began to assume definite shape at least as early as 1791 as Willard stated in 1871 that "Orange County located 50 miles north of New York City had for 80 years devoted its chief attention to butter making and the production of fresh milk for the New York City Market." "Dairy butter," as this product made on the farm was called, made up for sale was oftentimes collected as "pats," "balls," "rolls" and even "prints."

This was particularly true in the Philadelphia market which long enjoyed high reputation for fine dairy butter. It was not uncommon for such "Philadelphia butter" to sell at a dollar per pound and even higher where the prevailing market prices were around 20 cents per pound or less. This fine Philadelphia butter was defined as:

"Our idea is that butter -- such butter as would give a man an appetite to look at, to smell of and taste of -- is as far removed from an oily, fatty, or tallowy substance as possible... a firm, fine- grained article, of rich golden color, sweet, nutty aromatic smell and unctuous taste, put up in pound or half-pound lumps, whether square or round, and which, when opened out from its moist, then white linen wrapper, invites both the senses of smell and taste."

In the late 19th century, marketing butter was thought to be the easiest part of the whole process, or the least important, judging by the manner in which it was done. If the maker was near a market, it was often put into half-pound or pound lumps, and printed or stamped with some emblematic device, such as a sheaf of wheat, a cow, a beehive, or the maker's initials. After the final working, a lump is cut off with the clapper, placed upon the scales, and either added to or taken from, always being sure to give rather over than under a pound. It is then taken from the scale by one clapper (roughly a spoon) in the right hand, and with the other clapper in the left, it is worked over into a ball by a few expert touches; and while held on the left-hand clapper, the right-hand one having been exchanged for the stamp-mould is dipped in cold water to prevent its sticking to the lump, and then pressed firmly upon it, then withdrawn, leaving a beautiful raised impression of the stamp upon it, and adding to its attractions.

The fashion was to make the lumps square, which was more convenient for use and for packing in the market tray. When it was all stamped, it was set aside in a cold place to thoroughly harden; in a tray in the spring-house water was best. When about to market it, each pound or roll was wrapped in a linen cloth taken out of ice water or cold spring water, and laid upon the shelf of the tray or tub. In the winter, the butter was often kept in a square box with a sliding lid and several shelves. In the summer, it was common to have a large tub made of cedar, with an inner tin vessel, with a well in each end for broken ice, an oil cloth covering, and shelves on each side of them on which the butter was placed, and was removed as it was sold.

Refrigeration was not common. Beginning in 1806, Boston traders conducted extensive commerce in enormous blocks of Arctic ice, towed to destinations all over the Atlantic world. In 1851, the first refrigerated rail car, cooled by natural ice, brought butter from Ogdensburg, New York, to Boston. Ice, however, remained, in most of the world, an expensive commodity, which could never be the basis of industrial freezing. The solution was the compressed-gas cooler, perfected in Australia in the 1870s (for brewing), and later used worldwide.

The linen wrappers or napkins used in the Philadelphia market for covering the print butter were often washed, ironed and returned by customers to the dealers in their market stalls. In other areas, the rolls, pats, or prints produced on dairy farms for sale were wrapped in freshly laundered pieces of cloth rags of either white or colored and printed fabrics which lead to the adoption of that rather descriptive term -- "shirt-tail wrappers." Cheesecloth was early adopted as an economical wrapper in the place of the linen wrappers or napkins used in Philadelphia and later replaced with a "butter" or "dairy cloth" made expressly for the purpose of wrapping rolls, pats and prints.

In the 1880's and 1890's, paraffin paper later replaced by vegetable parchment were used as wrappers in place of the various cloth fabrics. It might be mentioned in passing, however, that Hazard was not unaware of the possibilities of paper as a wrapper, for in his text can be found a statement relative to keeping butter fresh, which reads as follows:

" is then wrapped in clean white paper which has been coated on both sides with a preparation of white of egg and fifteen grains of salt to each egg, the paper then dried, and heated before the fire, or with a hot iron just before it is applied to the rolls of butter."

Concerning the molding and packing of butter in California in 1870, butter was sent to market in barrels, half-barrels and in two-pound rolls placed in packages. The rolls were made three inches in diameter and nearly seven inches long. A mold used for the purpose of forming these rolls had two iron handles crossing each other on a pivot and used similarly to a pair of nippers. By applying pressure on the two handles, butter was compressed in the mold into a solid roll. The roll was smoothed by rolling with a wooden paddle following which each roll of butter was wrapped in cloth. Fine cambric cloth cut in strips long enough to surround the roll and wide enough to leave about one-half inch of cloth at each end served as the wrapper. The wrapped rolls were then set on end in an oblong box of either cedar or redwood and securely held in place with the cover fastened down. Such rolls were supplied the San Francisco market.

In 1877 Vermont, if the butter was to be packed into tubs, it was best not to put in small pieces at a time and pound it in, but rig up a lever and put in enough to half fill the tub at a time, and press it firmly down. This would retain the grain of the butter. The butter maker would put the butter up in pound prints. Not using a mold -- it gave the butter a dull look. They would press it into the form of a brick with a stout paddle, and press cross lines on one side with the edge of the paddle. Each pound would be wrapped in a piece of white cloth. Print butter would be shipped in a neat clean package, nicely painted on the outside. In 1894, the "World's Largest Creamery" was located at St. Albens, Vermont which was reputed to have made 25,000 pounds of butter daily.


"Republicans: the party that brought us 'Just Say No.' First as a drug policy, then as their entire platform." -Stephen Colbert -

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 05:41 PM:

As I mentioned, worshipers like billgerat cannot help but follow me. He followed me to Executive Suite, where he has been afraid to speak.

Bow down before me, rodent. Worship your Lord.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by DevilMoon on 04-05-2008 05:41 PM:

They should merge all of your threads.

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 05:45 PM:

A new worshiper threatens mod abuse. That's because the Asylum Nation cannot match their new Lord.

Billgerat is a coward...he has no honor. DevilMoon is a coward.

Bow down before your Lord.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by billgerat on 04-05-2008 05:46 PM:

The Soviet Union and the United States
Relations between the Soviet Union and the United States were driven by a complex interplay of ideological, political, and economic factors, which led to shifts between cautious cooperation and often bitter superpower rivalry over the years. The distinct differences in the political systems of the two countries often prevented them from reaching a mutual understanding on key policy issues and even, as in the case of the Cuban missile crisis, brought them to the brink of war.

The United States government was initially hostile to the Soviet leaders for taking Russia out of World War I and was opposed to a state ideologically based on communism. Although the United States embarked on a famine relief program in the Soviet Union in the early 1920s and American businessmen established commercial ties there during the period of the New Economic Policy (1921-29), the two countries did not establish diplomatic relations until 1933. By that time, the totalitarian nature of Joseph Stalin's regime presented an insurmountable obstacle to friendly relations with the West. Although World War II brought the two countries into alliance, based on the common aim of defeating Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union's aggressive, antidemocratic policy toward Eastern Europe had created tensions even before the war ended.

The Soviet Union and the United States stayed far apart during the next three decades of superpower conflict and the nuclear and missile arms race. Beginning in the early 1970s, the Soviet regime proclaimed a policy of dtente and sought increased economic cooperation and disarmament negotiations with the West. However, the Soviet stance on human rights and its invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 created new tensions between the two countries. These tensions continued to exist until the dramatic democratic changes of 1989-91 led to the collapse during this past year of the Communist system and opened the way for an unprecedented new friendship between the United States and Russia, as well as the other new nations of the former Soviet Union.

Early Cooperation: American Famine Relief
After the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the ensuing Civil War produced acute food shortages in southwestern Russia. Wartime devastation was compounded by two successive seasons of drought, and by 1920 it was clear that a full-scale famine was under way in the Volga River Valley, Crimea, Ukraine, and Armenia. Conditions were so desperate that in early 1920 the Soviet government sent out a worldwide appeal for food aid to avert the starvation of millions of people.

Several volunteer groups in the United States and Europe had by then organized relief programs, but it became clear that help was needed on a larger scale because an estimated 10 to 20 million lives were at stake. Although it had not officially recognized the Soviet regime, the United States government was pressed from many sides to intervene, and in August 1920 an informal agreement was negotiated to begin a famine relief program. In 1921 President Warren Harding appointed Herbert Hoover, then secretary of commerce, to organize the relief effort.

Congress authorized $20 million, and Hoover proceeded to organize the American Relief Administration (ARA) to do the job. Under Hoover's terms, the ARA was to be a completely American-run relief program for the transport, storage, and delivery of relief supplies (mainly food and seed grain) to those in the famine region. After Soviet officials agreed, hundreds of American volunteers were dispatched to oversee the program. The ARA gradually earned the trust of the local Communist authorities and was given a virtually free hand to distribute thousands of tons of grain, as well as clothing and medical supplies. This remarkable humanitarian effort was credited with saving many millions of lives.

ARA aid continued into 1923, by which time local farms were again producing and the famine's grip was broken. Hoover and his ARA were later honored by the Soviet government for the care and generosity that the United States had shown in this desperate crisis.

Early Cooperation: Economic Cooperation
During the 1920s and early 1930s, tensions between the Soviet Union and the West eased somewhat, particularly in the area of economic cooperation. Following their consolidation of political power, the Bolsheviks faced the same economic challenge as had the government ministers of the tsarist regime: how to efficiently organize the vast natural and human resources of the Soviet Union. The economic situation was made even more difficult by the immense social and economic dislocation caused by World War I, the revolutions of 1917, and the Civil War of 1918-21.

As factories stood idle and famine raged in the countryside, Vladimir Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1921 to infuse energy and direction into the fledgling Communist- controlled economy. NEP retreated from Communist orthodoxy and opened up the Soviet monolith economically.

For a variety of reasons -- compassion for the sufferings of the Soviet peoples, sympathy for the great "socialist experiment," but primarily for the pursuit of profit -- Western businessmen and diplomats began opening contacts with the Soviet Union. Among these persons were Averell Harriman, Armand Hammer, and Henry Ford, who sold tractors to the Soviet Union. Such endeavors facilitated commercial ties between the Soviet Union and the United States, establishing the basis for further cooperation, dialogue, and diplomatic relations between the two countries. This era of cooperation was never solidly established, however, and it diminished as Joseph Stalin attempted to eradicate vestiges of capitalism and to make the Soviet Union economically self-sufficient.

Soviet and American Communist Parties
The Soviet Communist party evolved from the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party's Bolshevik wing formed by Vladimir Lenin in 1903. Lenin believed that a well-disciplined, hierarchically organized party was necessary to lead the working class in overthrowing capitalism in Russia and the world. In November 1917, the Bolsheviks seized power in St. Petersburg (then called Petrograd) and shortly thereafter began using the term Communist to describe themselves. In March 1918, the Bolsheviks named their party the Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik). The next year, they created the Communist International (Comintern) to control the Communist movement throughout the world. After the Comintern's dissolution in 1943, the Soviet party's Central Committee continued to use Communist parties from other nations as instruments of Soviet foreign policy. Each national party was required to adhere to the Leninist principle of subordinating members and organizations unconditionally to the decisions of higher authorities.

Strongly influenced by the success of the Bolshevik Revolution, American socialists and radicals met in Chicago in 1919 to organize an American Communist party. But the Americans were so divided they created two parties instead. One group consisted primarily of relatively recent Russian and East European immigrants, who emphasized adherence to Marxist orthodoxy and proletarian revolution. The other group, dominated by native-born, somewhat more pragmatic American radicals, sought mass influence. Such conflicting goals combined with the discrepancy between Communist doctrine and American reality, kept the Communist movement in the United States a small sectarian movement.

In 1922 the Comintern forced the two American parties, which consisted of about 12,000 members, to amalgamate and to follow the party line established in Moscow. Although membership in the American party rose to about 75,000 by 1938, following the Great Depression, many members left the party after the signing of the Nazi-Soviet Nonaggression Pact of 1939. Others left in 1956 after Nikita Khrushchev exposed some of Stalin's crimes and Soviet forces invaded Hungary. Only the hard-core members remained after such reversals of Soviet policy. The American party, a significant although never major political force in the United States, became further demoralized when Boris Yeltsin outlawed the Communist party in Russia in August 1991 and opened up the archives, revealing the continued financial as well as ideological dependency of the American Communists on the Soviet party up until its dissolution.

World War II: Wartime Alliance
Despite deep-seated mistrust and hostility between the Soviet Union and the Western democracies, Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 created an instant alliance between the Soviets and the two greatest powers in what the Soviet leaders had long called the "imperialist camp": Britain and the United States. Three months after the invasion, the United States extended assistance to the Soviet Union through its Lend-Lease Act of March 1941. Before September 1941, trade between the United States and the Soviet Union had been conducted primarily through the Soviet Buying Commission in the United States.

Lend-Lease was the most visible sign of wartime cooperation between the United States and the Soviet Union. About $11 billion in war material was sent to the Soviet Union under that program. Additional assistance came from U.S. Russian War Relief (a private, nonprofit organization) and the Red Cross. About seventy percent of the aid reached the Soviet Union via the Persian Gulf through Iran; the remainder went across the Pacific to Vladivostok and across the North Atlantic to Murmansk. Lend- Lease to the Soviet Union officially ended in September 1945. Joseph Stalin never revealed to his own people the full contributions of Lend-Lease to their country's survival, but he referred to the program at the 1945 Yalta Conference saying, "Lend-Lease is one of Franklin Roosevelt's most remarkable and vital achievements in the formation of the anti-Hitler alliance."

Lend-Lease material was welcomed by the Soviet Union, and President Roosevelt attached the highest priority to using it to keep the Soviet Union in the war against Germany. Nevertheless, the program did not prevent friction from developing between the Soviet Union and the other members of the anti-Hitler alliance. The Soviet Union was annoyed at what seemed to it to be a long delay by the allies in opening a "second front" of the Allied offensive against Germany. As the war in the east turned in favor of the Soviet Union, and despite the successful Allied landings in Normandy in 1944, the earlier friction intensified over irreconcilable differences about postwar aims within the anti-Axis coalition. Lend-Lease helped the Soviet Union push the Germans out of its territory and Eastern Europe, thus accelerating the end of the war. With Stalin's takeover of Eastern Europe, the wartime alliance ended, and the Cold War began.

World War II: American POWs and MIAs
The guns of distant battles fell silent long ago, but unanswered questions concerning United States servicemen missing in action and unrepatriated prisoners of war continue to concern the nation. Recently, the missing and prisoners of war from the Vietnam War have been the focus of attention.

But Soviet archival documents -- from an earlier era after World War II -- reveal that Americans were detained, and even perished, in the vast Soviet GULAG. To find out additional information about Americans liberated from German prison camps by the Red Army and then interned in Soviet camps, the U.S./Russian Joint Commission on POW/MIAs was formed early in 1992. Library of Congress officials, among others, have been authorized to research Russian archival materials on the subject in Moscow.

Through such efforts and additional cooperation, the fate of those missing in the Cold War may become known as well. Russian news reports tell of a United States B-29 aircraft shot down by Soviet interceptors over the Baltic Sea in April 1950. One of the Soviet pilots who downed the B-29 reported that the aircraft was recovered from the sea, but the fate of the crew is unknown.

The history of warfare cruelly suggests that some questions concerning the missing in action and prisoners of war will never be answered. Nevertheless, candor, goodwill, and a spirit of cooperation on all sides can minimize such questions. The opening of archives is a step forward in getting at the truth which can clear up the confusion and suspicion created in the past.

Cold War: Postwar Estrangement
The Western democracies and the Soviet Union discussed the progress of World War II and the nature of the postwar settlement at conferences in Tehran (1943), Yalta (February 1945), and Potsdam (July-August 1945). After the war, disputes between the Soviet Union and the Western democracies, particularly over the Soviet takeover of East European states, led Winston Churchill to warn in 1946 that an "iron curtain" was descending through the middle of Europe. For his part, Joseph Stalin deepened the estrangement between the United States and the Soviet Union when he asserted in 1946 that World War II was an unavoidable and inevitable consequence of "capitalist imperialism" and implied that such a war might reoccur.

The Cold War was a period of East-West competition, tension, and conflict short of full-scale war, characterized by mutual perceptions of hostile intention between military-political alliances or blocs. There were real wars, sometimes called "proxy wars" because they were fought by Soviet allies rather than the USSR itself -- along with competition for influence in the Third World, and a major superpower arms race.

After Stalin's death, East-West relations went through phases of alternating relaxation and confrontation, including a cooperative phase during the 1960s and another, termed dtente, during the 1970s. A final phase during the late 1980s and early 1990s was hailed by President Mikhail Gorbachev, and especially by the president of the new post-Communist Russian republic, Boris Yeltsin, as well as by President George Bush, as beginning a partnership between the two states that could address many global problems.

Cold War: Soviet Perspectives
After World War II, Joseph Stalin saw the world as divided into two camps: imperialist and capitalist regimes on the one hand, and the Communist and progressive world on the other. In 1947, President Harry Truman also spoke of two diametrically opposed systems: one free, and the other bent on subjugating other nations.

After Stalin's death, Nikita Khrushchev stated in 1956 that imperialism and capitalism could coexist without war because the Communist system had become stronger. The Geneva Summit of 1955 among Britain, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States, and the Camp David Summit of 1959 between Eisenhower and Khrushchev raised hopes of a more cooperative spirit between East and West. In 1963 the United States and the Soviet Union signed some confidence-building agreements, and in 1967 President Lyndon Johnson met with Soviet Prime Minister Aleksei Kosygin in Glassboro, New Jersey. Interspersed with such moves toward cooperation, however, were hostile acts that threatened broader conflict, such as the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962 and the Soviet-led invasion of Czechoslovakia of 1968.

The long rule of Leonid Brezhnev (1964-1982) is now referred to in Russia as the "period of stagnation." But the Soviet stance toward the United States became less overtly hostile in the early 1970s. Negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union resulted in summit meetings and the signing of strategic arms limitation agreements. Brezhnev proclaimed in 1973 that peaceful coexistence was the normal, permanent, and irreversible state of relations between imperialist and Communist countries, although he warned that conflict might continue in the Third World. In the late 1970s, growing internal repression and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan led to a renewal of Cold War hostility.

Soviet views of the United States changed once again after Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in early 1985. Arms control negotiations were renewed, and President Reagan undertook a new series of summit meetings with Gorbachev that led to arms reductions and facilitated a growing sympathy even among Communist leaders for more cooperation and the rejection of a class-based, conflict-oriented view of the world.

With President Yeltsin's recognition of independence for the other republics of the former USSR and his launching of a full-scale economic reform program designed to create a market economy, Russia was pledged at last to overcoming both the imperial and the ideological legacies of the Soviet Union.


"Republicans: the party that brought us 'Just Say No.' First as a drug policy, then as their entire platform." -Stephen Colbert -

Posted by Pinecrika on 04-05-2008 05:50 PM:

Re: I am the Asylum Nation's God

Originally posted by Executive
They worship me. They hang on every word I write. They anxiously await my posts, then cannot help but reply to them.

I hear their prayers but I do not answer them.

Bow down before me, Asylum Nation. I am your Lord.

I like 'zecutive. I should stick my dick in his ass to show him my esteem.

"Let Ebola decide. " ....Tuba

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 05:50 PM:

billgerat admits defeat, and simply googles info and posts it. He cannot equal the Executive's flames.
billgerat is a gnat compared to his better, the Executive.

I have left you a message at Executive Suite, bitch.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by billgerat on 04-05-2008 05:51 PM:

The Janissaries (derived from Ottoman Turkish: ينيچرى (yeniçeri) meaning "new soldier") comprised infantry units that formed the Ottoman sultan's household troops and bodyguard. The force originated in the 14th century; it was abolished by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826 in The Auspicious Incident.

Contents [hide]
1 Origin of the Janissaries
2 Significance of the Janissaries
3 Recruitment, training and status
4 The Janissary corps
5 The Janissary revolts
6 Janissary music
7 Appearances in popular culture
8 See also
9 Sources and references
10 References
11 External links

[edit] Origin of the Janissaries

Gun-wielding Ottoman Janissaries Knights of Saint John, Siege of Rhodes, 1522.Sultan Murad I of the fledgling Ottoman Empire founded the units around 1365. It was initially formed of Dhimmi (non-Muslims, originally exempted from the military service), especially Christian youths and prisoners of war, reminiscent of Mamelukes. Sultan Murad may have also used futuwa groups as a model.

Such Janissaries became the first Ottoman standing army, replacing forces that mostly comprised tribal ghazis, whose loyalty and morale could not always be trusted.

As corps other than the infantry were added, the totality of the Ottoman standing army corps was called Kapıkulu, however the term Janissary, which formally refers to one of the Kapıkulu corps is often used interchangeably (albeit incorrectly) for all of the Ottoman Kapıkulu Corps.

[edit] Significance of the Janissaries
The Janissary corps were significant in a number of ways. The Janissaries wore uniforms, were paid in cash as regular soldiers, and marched to distinctive music, the mehter, similar to a modern marching band. All of these features set the Janissaries apart from most soldiers of the time.

The Ottomans were the first state to maintain a standing army in Europe since the Roman Empire. The Janissaries have been likened to the Roman Praetorian Guard and they had no equivalent in the Christian armies of the time, where the feudal lords raised troops during wartime.[1] A janissary regiment was effectively the soldier's family. They lived in their barracks and served as policemen and firefighters during peacetime.[2]

A Janissary drawing by Gentile Bellini (15th century).The Janissary corps was also distinctive in the regular payment of a cash salary to the troops, and differed from the contemporary practice of paying troops only during wartime. The Janissaries were paid quarterly and the Sultan himself, after authorizing the payment of the salaries, dressed as a Janissary, visited the barracks and received his salary as a regular trooper of the First Division.[3]

The Janissary force became particularly significant when the foot soldier carrying firearms proved more effective than the cavalry equipped with sword and spear.[4] Janissaries adopted firearms very early, starting in 15th century. By the 16th century, the main weapon of the Janissary was the musket. Janissaries also made extensive use of early grenades and hand cannon, such as the Abus gun.[3]

The auxiliary support system of the Janissaries also set them apart from their contemporaries. The Janissaries waged war as one part of a well organized military machine. The Ottoman army had a corps to prepare the road, a corps to pitch the tents ahead, a corps to bake the bread. The cebeci corps carried and distributed weapons and ammunition. The Janissary corps had its own internal medical auxiliaries: Muslim and Jewish surgeons who would travel with the corps during campaigns and had organized methods of moving the wounded and the sick to traveling hospitals behind the lines.[3]

These differences, along with a war-record that was impressive, made the Janissaries into a subject of interest and study by foreigners in their own time. Although eventually the concept of the modern army incorporated and surpassed most of the distinctions of the Janissary, and the Ottoman Empire dissolved the Janissary corps, the image of the Janissary has remained as one of the symbols of the Ottomans in the western psyche.

In modern times, although the Janissary corps no longer exists as a professional fighting force, the tradition of mehter music is carried on as a cultural and tourist attraction.

[edit] Recruitment, training and status
The first Janissary units comprised war captives and slaves, selecting one in five for enrollment in the ranks (Pencik rule). After the 1380s Sultan Mehmet I filled their ranks with the results of taxation in human form called devshirmeh: the Sultan's men conscripted a number of non-Muslim, usually Christian Balkan boys, taken at birth at first at random, later, by strict selection – to be converted to Islam and trained. Initially they favoured Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians and Albanians (who also supplied many gendarmes), usually selecting about one boy from forty houses, but the numbers could be changed to correspond with the need for soldiers. Boys aged 14-18 were preferred, though ages 8-20 could be taken. Initially Greeks formed the largest part of the Janissary units[citation needed]. As the Turks expanded their borders, the devshirmeh was extended to also include Serbs, later especially Ukraine and southern Russia. The Janissaries started accepting enrollment from outside the devshirmeh system first during the reign of Sultan Murad III (1546-1595) and completely stopped enrolling devshirmeh in 17th century. After this period, volunteers were enrolled, mostly of Muslim origin.[3]

Janissaries trained under strict discipline with hard labour and in practically monastic conditions in acemi oğlan ("rookie" or "cadet") schools, where they were expected to remain celibate. They were also expected to convert to Islam. All did, as Christians were not allowed to bear arms in the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century. Unlike other Muslims, they were expressly forbidden to wear beards (a Muslim custom), only a moustache. These rules were obeyed by Janissaries, at least until 18th century when they also began to engage in other crafts and trades, breaking another of the original rules.

For all practical purposes, Janissaries belonged to the Sultan, carrying the title kapıkulu ("door slave") indicating their collective bond with the Sultan. Janissaries were taught to consider the corps as their home and family, and the Sultan as their de facto father. Only those who proved strong enough earned the rank of true Janissary at the age of twenty-four or twenty-five. The regiment inherited the property of dead Janissaries, thus amassing wealth (like religious orders and foundations enjoying the 'dead hand').

Janissaries also learned to follow the dictates of the dervish saint Hajji Bektash Wali, disciples of whom had blessed the first troops. Bektashi served as a kind of chaplain for Janissaries. In this and in their secluded life, Janissaries resembled Christian military orders like the Johannites of Rhodes.

In return for their loyalty and their fervour in war, Janissaries gained privileges and benefits. They received a cash salary, received booty during wartime and enjoyed a high living standard and respected social status. At first they had to live in barracks and could not marry until retirement, or engage in any other trade but by the mid-18th century they had taken up many trades and gained the right to marry and enroll their children in the corps and very few continued to live in the barracks.[2] Many of them became administrators and scholars. Retired or discharged Janissaries received pensions and their children were also looked after. This evolution away from their original military vocation was the essence of the system's demise.

[edit] The Janissary corps
Year Number of Jannisaries[5]
1514 10156
1526 7885
1567-68 12798
1609 37627
1660-61 54222
1665 49556
1669 51437
1670 49868
1680 54222

Janissary - watercolor on paper by Haydar Hatemi-2003.The full strength of the Janissary troops varied from maybe 100 to more than 200,000. According to David Nicolle, the number of Janissaries in the 14th century was 1,000, and estimated to be 6,000 in 1475, whereas the same source estimates 40,000 as the number of Timariot, the provincial soldiers. After the defeat in 1699, the number was reduced, but it was increased in the 18th century to 113,400 soldiers according to Ottoman, but most were not actual soldiers and were accepted into the army through corrupt means and were only taking salary.[citation needed]

The corps was organized in ortas (equivalent to regiment) An orta was headed by çorbaci. All ortas together would comprise the proper Janissary corps and its organization named ocak (literally "hearth"). Suleiman I had 165 ortas but the number over time increased to 196. The Sultan was the supreme commander of the Army and the Janissaries in particular, but the corps was organized and led by their supreme ağa (commander). The corps was divided into three sub-corps:

the cemaat (frontier troops; also spelled jemaat), with 101 ortas
the beyliks or beuluks (the Sultan's own bodyguard), with 61 ortas
the sekban or seirnen, with 34 ortas
In addition there was also 34 ortas of the ajemi (cadets).

Originally Janissaries could be promoted only through seniority and within their own orta. They would leave the unit only to assume command of another. Only Janissaries' own commanding officers could punish them. The rank names were based on positions in a kitchen staff or troop of hunters, perhaps to emphasise that Janissaries were servants of the Sultan.

In the first centuries, Janissaries were expert archers, but they adopted firearms as soon as such became available during the 1440s. The siege of Vienna in 1529 confirmed the reputation of their engineers, e.g. sapping and mining. In melee combat they used axes and sabres. Originally in peacetime they could carry only clubs or cutlasses, unless they served in border troops. Local Janissaries, stationed in a town or city for a long time, were known as yerliyyas.

The Ottoman empire used Janissaries in all its major campaigns, including the 1453 capture of Constantinople, the defeat of the Egyptian Mamluks and wars against Hungary and Austria. Janissary troops were always led to the battle by the Sultan himself, and always had a share of the booty.

Janissaries’ reputation increased to the point that by 1683, Sultan Mehmet IV abolished the devshirmeh as increasing numbers of originally Muslim Turkish families had already enrolled their own sons into the force hoping for a lucrative career.[citation needed] Every governor wanted to have his own Janissary troops.

[edit] The Janissary revolts
Main article: Janissary revolts
As Janissaries became aware of their own importance they began to desire a better life. In 1449 they revolted for the first time, demanding higher wages, which they obtained. Similar scenarios took place a number of times during the following centuries. As the Janissaries were amassing more power and wealth, they gradually turned into a corrupt and largely useless caste, wielding an influence akin to that of the Roman Praetorian Guard. Finally, Mahmud II succeeded in forcibly disbanding them in 1826.

[edit] Janissary music
The military march music of the Janissaries is characteristic because of its powerful, often shrill sound combining davul (bass drum), zurna (a loud oboe), naffir (trumpet), bells, triangle, and cymbals (zil), among others. Janissary music influenced European classical musicians like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Ludwig van Beethoven, both of whom composed marches in the Turkish style (Mozart's Piano Sonata in A major, K. 331 (c. 1783), and Beethoven's incidental music for The Ruins of Athens, Op. 113 (1811), and the final movement of Symphony no. 9).

In 1952, the Janissary military band, Mehter, was organized again under the auspices of the Istanbul Military Museum. They have performances during some national holidays as well as in some parades during days of historical importance. For more details, see Turkish music (style) and Mehter.

[edit] Appearances in popular culture
Janissaries appear in Ensemble Studio's Age of Empires II and Age of Empires III as the standard Ottoman infantry unit.

In Sid Meier's Civilization IV, every civilization in the game has an unique unit related to their country. The Ottoman Empire, which appears at the Warlords expansion, has the Jannisary as its own unique unit.

[edit] See also
Ottoman military band
Devşirme system
Culture of the Ottoman Empire
Cantonist recruitment
Millet system
Ottoman Turkish language



"Republicans: the party that brought us 'Just Say No.' First as a drug policy, then as their entire platform." -Stephen Colbert -

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 05:54 PM:

Executive = God


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by DevilMoon on 04-05-2008 05:56 PM:

Originally posted by Executive
A new worshiper threatens mod abuse. That's because the Asylum Nation cannot match their new Lord.

Billgerat is a coward...he has no honor. DevilMoon is a coward.

Bow down before your Lord.

You need to work on your technique. While you've been more successful than I would have guessed, if you knew the audience you'd have a better shot of starting one of the epic shitstorms we've had here. But you've come at it too hard already and from completely the wrong approaches. You really only have a few courses of action at this point.

1) Slowly slip out of your schtick and become a regular poster.
2) Stick with the schtick and remain a niche/novelty poster.
3) Re-register with a different nick, pretend you aren't you, and become a regular poster.
4) Fade out, take what you've learned, work on becoming better at what you want to do, and come back here as a different character in a few months. I don't think you'd be successful, but you never know.

Good luck!

Posted by deadjennies on 04-05-2008 05:59 PM:

Re: Re: I am the Asylum Nation's God

Originally posted by Pinecrika
.. I should stick my dick in his..

I warned you it always comes to anal sex. now where did I put those wet naps?

Posted by bacidath on 04-05-2008 06:02 PM:



Refers to the part consisting of leather horse ass never seen a dense fibrous tissue.

Posted by billgerat on 04-05-2008 06:12 PM:

Originally posted by Executive
A new worshiper threatens mod abuse. That's because the Asylum Nation cannot match their new Lord.

Billgerat is a coward...he has no honor. DevilMoon is a coward.

Bow down before your Lord.

I've got no need to go back to your site. Anyone there who reads such tripe will realize just what a pathetic, whining little cocksucker you are. Your membership there is as small as your dick.

Besides, you spend more time here than you do there, so why go anywhere to show that you are an ineffective pissant who can't decently flame anyone to save your worthless existence.



"Republicans: the party that brought us 'Just Say No.' First as a drug policy, then as their entire platform." -Stephen Colbert -

Posted by ignatz mouse on 04-05-2008 08:17 PM:

Executive = delusional

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 10:38 PM:

A simple explaination: Assylum Nation already lost

1) Use of Personal Information, given by mods and admins.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

2) Threat to reveal Personal Information by fubar.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

3) Threat by SimpletonSimon to sue Executive then refuses to follow through.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

4) Mods/Admins tamper with signiture.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

5) SimpletonSimon says he'll put Executive's PI "to good use" then backs off again.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

6) Thread after thread started about Executive.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

7) Makes false accusations of Alpha being Executive. Then fails to back this up with facts.

LOSS for Assylum Nation.

Yes, the evidence is clear..Assylum Nation has lost a board war on their own board. This is possibly a first on the web.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 10:49 PM:

Originally posted by DevilMoon
You need to work on your technique. While you've been more successful than I would have guessed, if you knew the audience you'd have a better shot of starting one of the epic shitstorms we've had here. But you've come at it too hard already and from completely the wrong approaches. You really only have a few courses of action at this point.

1) Slowly slip out of your schtick and become a regular poster.
2) Stick with the schtick and remain a niche/novelty poster.
3) Re-register with a different nick, pretend you aren't you, and become a regular poster.
4) Fade out, take what you've learned, work on becoming better at what you want to do, and come back here as a different character in a few months. I don't think you'd be successful, but you never know.

Good luck!

Zzzz...are you getting paid by the word or do you really enjoy making yourself look like an ass.

I have no need to reregister at this PI pushing shithole mainly because I have no need to impress a group of losers like this "club".

I'm here to get in your faces and make your e-lives miserable. Which I've already succeeded in, demonstrated by how you cannot resist responding to each post made by me, your GOD.

I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by MstrG on 04-05-2008 11:02 PM:

Enough of this litter, time to start merging threads.

Posted by gregisbored on 04-05-2008 11:09 PM:

Originally posted by Executive

I'm here to get in your faces and make your e-lives miserable. Which I've already succeeded in, demonstrated by how you cannot resist responding to each post made by me, your GOD.

damn, i think ur right. i do have an unfailing itch to reply to your bullsh.. excuse me lord ex.. your highly informitive posts. only because i want to curry favor with you. (i'm secretly trying to lure these dupes into thinking you are an unimaginative closet crossdressing parasite, just to get them off the scent of your master plan, master ex) i think its working... because i not only respond but so do others because they can't resist... NOT BECAUSE WE HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO.. master

endless evenings of non-exist are getting shorter, monotonous. like an intruder i belong outside.

Posted by Lu on 04-05-2008 11:12 PM:


/me giggles


Dance with the Devil, the Devil don't change, the Devil changes you. Kill me

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 11:18 PM:

Oh boys...

You're busted

So much for "no censorship" eh guys?

I knew you would fold after a short period of time.

It's easy to talk the talk but harder to walk the walk, eh?


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 11:22 PM:

The wonderaz/Asylum Nation help thread

Actually, nothing can help wonderaz or Asylum Nation.

They're just a club of immature, snickering wimps unable to handle a little flaming in their own flame forum.

Now, if I really did think they could be helped I would offer some...but I'm afraid they are way too lame to actually improve.

Thank god they've got the mods to whine to, otherwise they would probably be shooting themselves in the head by now.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by Straightman on 04-05-2008 11:22 PM:

For the cheap seats...

Originally posted by MstrG
Enough of this litter, time to start merging threads.

All internet tough guys pass through three stages. First they are ridiculed. Second they are violently flamed. Third they claim to be Marines.--Straightman.

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 11:23 PM:


He really does suck.


I don't deserve a sig.

Posted by Executive on 04-05-2008 11:26 PM:

A simple explaination: Asylum Nation deletes posts

You lose guys.

I knew that sooner or later you would have to resort to censorship.

Ya can dish it out but you can't take it, can you?


I don't deserve a sig.

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32 AM. Pages (32): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 » ... Last »
Show all 796 posts from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.8
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Limited 2000 - 2002.
Copyright © 2014- Imaginet Inc.
[Legal Notice] | [Privacy Policy] | [Site Index]