This is the story of ‘Cape Spear’, a collection of Irish and Newfoundland songs & stories, telling tales of this wonderful warm hearted Canadian seafaring community and its heritage.

When long time Canadian resident Patrick Sullivan visited Cape Spear on a sunny afternoon in 2006, a warm sea breeze and the vast blue expanse of the Atlantic Ocean evoked old feelings of growing up by the sea in Ireland.

Later Patrick embodied those feelings in a poem. When his buddy, Juno Award winning musician and song writer Derek Harrington read it, he immediately thought he would like set it to music. Derek worked his musical magic and subsequently several of Patrick’s poems emerged as songs.

Their friend Jan Peters in Newfoundland, heard these early versions she suggested they make a CD. So Derek persuaded his brothers Paul, famous in Ireland for his soft lilting voice, and Richard Harrington to join him performing his songs. So the album ‘Cape Spear’ was born.

Patrick says he will never forget Paul telling him at the studio one day, how he loves to sing songs that tell a story, and that is just what Patrick’s poetry does. When Paul recorded the title track ‘Cape Spear’ and ‘Coffin Ship’ his evocative singing gave these words and melodies life.

Derek has written most of the new material himself with Patrick Sullivan’s beautiful lyrics. The songs feature the voices of Derek, Paul and Richard Harrington. It also features two remastered tracks ‘Bunclody’ and ‘Sally Gardens’ from a previous Harrington Brother’s album ‘Monto on the Rock’.

David Matheson, whose musical creativity contributed greatly to this CD, Norm Barker and Richard Uglow joined the team early on and got the tape rolling.

D’Arcy Broderick, Graham Wells and Mike Hanrahan also contribute performing Naomi’s Reel, written by Derek and named after one of the worst coffin ships to sail to Canada in 1847.

Like so many journeys that start at Cape Spear, this one also began there. Along the way it brought people together in friendship and remembrance.

Continuing straight on from part two, what was behind Cain’s murderous act, what was his motive? Most people believe it was just the evil act of a jealous brother whose offering to The Lord was not acceptable, but what made it unacceptable? Was it just because it was not an animal that made it unacceptable or was there something else, and was the unsatisfactory offering of Cain symbolic of a deeper malaise within Cain, for we must not forget who his physical father was.

OK, we know, too, that there was an argument between the two half-brothers but what was the argument about?

Gen 4:8 (KJV) And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

Here, the word ‘talked’, is meaningless KJV understatement on the part of the translators – dissembling at its best and I jest not. Cain and Abel were arguing ferociously, but what about? Well, we have a good idea, because it was the subject of sacrifices or religious observances i.e. those that were acceptable to The Lord and those that were not. So what was unacceptable about Cain’s offering? Quite simply, it contained no blood, and it was one made partially with his hands. He had to plant the crops he offered, as opposed to Abel’s which was made totally without his hands and by God. Yashua Anointed is the Stone or Rock (please note, all you Roman Catholics) hewn without hands. Cain’s offering was a tarnished offering, an insulting offering, and Abel’s was unspotted and perfect, a lamb of the firstlings of his flock, a type of the Passover Lamb with its shed blood that soaked into the ground.

There was something else, too, within this rebellion of Cain, for it was not just spiritual. The spiritual dimension to all this was only the half of it, for be aware, the rebellious physical descendants of Cain are still with us today, as is his name. But how can a spirit, six thousand years old, have influence over us today, I hear you say? Again, quite simply, because it was the spirit of the Devil alive in Cain and a spirit would be carried over and through The Flood through Ham and his sinful shenanigans.

At this moment in time a descendant of Cain has recently stood in the American elections for the Republican Party – Senator McCain. Mac means ‘son of’, so there we have him, a son of Cain, hoping to be made President of the USA. Then we have Dick Cheney. If we harden the ‘ch’ as in the Chaldean/Hebrew tongue, what we have in reality is Dick Cainey. Yet another descendant of Cain as vice president of the US; how does that make you feel folks? Dan Quayle, too, is another Cainite name. They seem to like power, these descendants of Cain, do they not!!??

Having digressed, but keeping with the above theme, I’ll return to the historical account. Cain wanted to rule the roost in both areas of influence and stamp his authority on everything. All politics and religion – THE SYSTEM, THE MATRIX or THIS AGE or what the Holy Scriptures call THIS WORLD – the Old New World Order started here with Cain, and there was no way he was going to allow his upstart son of man half brother to have any authority over him. Cain, don’t forget, was a demonic hybrid – a half heavenly serpent being and half manly being – a ‘hu-man’ being, so no doubt considered himself far superior to his earthly, fully man, half brother. Furthermore, ‘hu’ from the Hebrew/Gaelic tongue means ‘serpent’ so a ‘hu-man’ is a ‘serpent-man’ and NOT a man. Mankind and humankind are two very different species.

Moreover, this spirit was Satan’s spirit, imparted to Cain by his father The Devil. Satan the Devil knew God’s plan would eventually mean men resurrected to Spirit status, a status that would give resurrected Spiritual men authority over him and his followers in the future. The Holy Scriptures bears this out when Paul said to the Corinthians:

1 Cor 6:3 (KJV) Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life?

Satan, therefore, was going to do all in his power to stop mankind attaining his ultimate prize – life eternal with authority over angels, for us as resurrected Spiritual beings in the Kingdom of God. His evil plan to thwart the progress of mankind, therefore, began with the murder of Abel through his son Cain and with this evil act came the infamous Mark of Cain:

Genesis 4:15 (KJV) And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And The LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

The question that now needs answering is WHY!!?? Why did The Lord spare Cain, for without any doubt it was a let off, if only a temporary let off. Under The Law (for The Law in Spirit was in force before Moses) of the Old Covenant he should have been slain immediately and in the same way as he had slain his brother – an eye for an eye etc.. So why did Yashua Anointed let him off? For the simple reason that everything is to God’s Glory and His Glory being ultimately served through His plan for mankind, which Satan was never going to stop – try as he will. In order to comprehend God’s ways, we must understand this fundamental of fundamentals. All the events in the narrative of the OT had to come to pass, in order to bring us to and necessitate Yashua Anointed’s birth into this world and then His sacrifice and His resurrection. This ‘Mark’ that Cain received is one and the same as the Mark of the Beast in Revelation, and I will deal with this in more detail later.

We must also remember, as well, that our ways are not God’s ways; our logic and reasoning are not God’s logic and reasoning. Our ideas of logic and reasoning are based solely upon our puffed up “we think we know what’s best” vanity and pride, unless of course, we are Born of God (Born Again) and have a close brotherly relationship with Yashua Anointed who then teaches us His ways and His logic.

Cain’s ways are not Yashua Anointed’s ways, for Yashua Anointed is The Way. Cain’s ways involve philosophy and the intellect which man has emulated to his downfall. This means man’s pride and vanity, through his reliance on his own logic and reasoning, has created nothing but blasphemous error when it comes to matters Scriptural and Spiritual. In turn, this mindset, a mindset of philosophical intellectual reasoning has separated man from his Creator. A good example of this phenomena was a Canaanite Jew by the name of Philo who operated out of Alexandria in Egypt in the first century AD, from whence we get the word ‘philosophy’. He groomed and ‘educated’ the counterfeiting ‘church fathers’, so called, who then infiltrated the first century church in order to corrupt it and then go off in order to start their religion. This Philo being a Canaanite Jew made him a descendant of Cain.

Getting back to the story line we then have God punishing Cain for Abel’s murder, but with a punishment Cain cannot bear. How is it a punishment he cannot bear? He cannot bear it because man’s environment was to be cursed by God a second time. Man lost the beautiful environment of the Garden of Eden through Adam and Eve’s sin and he was about to loose the fertility of the earth as a whole. The Lord was going to curse the earth totally so that it would no longer yield any crops at all and all men would know that Cain was to blame for it and would therefore seek him out to kill him:

Gen 4:12 (KJV) When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

There we have it, Cain as fugitive on the run from his half-brother mankind for the rest of his days and, as a poverty stricken vagabond at that. Unsurprisingly, this was more than he could bear. So Cain pleads for mercy and The Lord hears him:

Gen 4:13-15 (KJV) And Cain said unto The LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. 15 And The LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And The LORD set a Mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

Again, there we have it and with Cain admitting that his face will be hid from The Lord and his life not worth a dime. So The Lord puts a Mark on Cain protecting him from his half-brother mankind lest any should attempt to kill him.

Now this is all very interesting I hear you say, but if we have modern descendants of Cain still with us today, do they still carry the same mark? Yes, of course they do. How do we know that? Easy, they get away with blue murder and never get apprehended. Here in Britain our ex-Prime Minister was nick named “Teflon Tony”, for it seemed nothing would stick to him. Crisis and crimes followed crisis and crimes, including unlawful wars and genocide in the Middle East, and he appeared untouchable which, of course, he was, and still is. Both he, and Bush, are highly suspect in many of their escapades and dealings, but has anyone here in The West charged them with a single offence? No, no way, not a chance. Why? Why, because of the Mark of Cain. Mr Blair was also nick-named B. Liar, which is a play on the name Belial, one of Satan’s princes, the sons of whom are known more commonly as ‘lying scoundrels’. Doesn’t that just about sum up all politicians? I reckon.

Finally, we then have Cain’s genealogy from Enoch:

Gen 4:18-22 (KJV) And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech. 19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. 20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. 21 And his brother’s name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. 22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-Cain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-Cain was Naamah.

Now this Naamah is reputed to have been Noah’s wife, but the Holy Scriptures again go stone cold on this topic, for Mrs Noah is never referred to by name. However, she is mentioned in The Book of Jasher as Noah’s wife. There is also other evidence, too, with the name of Cain being mentioned post-Flood via the name of a tribe of people known as the Kenites. In the Hebrew language their name is a derivation of Cain. In the Hebrew, it’s pronounced ‘qey-niy’ or ‘kay-nee’ and Cain is pronounced ‘qayin’ or ‘kay-yin’ so we can see there is a definite connection.

We then have the name Canaan which is pronounced ‘ken-na’an’ or ‘Ken-ah-an’. So as we can plainly see all these people are related and originate from Cain. This means that Cain’s race did not die out with The Flood, it continued, but how? All will be revealed in my next article. I will also be dealing with the subject of the giants – the ‘nephalim’, who lived upon the earth at that time, so stay with it folks.

My favorite writing style is historical fiction. Since John Jakes had such a large collection of Americana Books he had written, and I enjoyed his novels so much, I set out ambitiously to read everything I could get my hands on. The first series that i read was the Kent Family Saga and it turned out to be my favorite. I read all eight volumes in the series starting with the “Bastard”.

Philippe Charbonneau, born with his mother’s maiden name, later took his father’s name and Americanized it to Philip Kent when he was newly in America. He had grown up in France. His actress mother, Marie, had had an affair with a British nobleman and Philip grew up not knowing the truth. He was reared in a rather poor state in his mom’s french country Inn. Marie had wished that her son would one day be re-united with his rich dad in England. The Duke had sent some support over the years but the father and son had never met.

Once the truth came out as he entered adulthood, the mother and son were off to merry old England. Thought the duke was not at home when they arrived, they met his half brother and stepmother. Neither of them hit it off. The unfriendly sibling and his mean stepmother weren’t having any part of another share in the inheritance. The two brothers fought. The Duke was unaware of Philip and his mother being chased off. Philip’s brother’s wife, however, had an interest in Philip and soon a secret affair commenced as Philip stayed in the area for a while, hoping for a piece of the estate.

Eventually, they were chased out of the country by the brother, stepmother and their employees. Marie was heartbroken since her dream was now over. Philip wanted to seek his fortune in the new land and hoped to do it in the printing business. His distraught mother died on the way to the new world and she was buried at sea. Philip lost what little money he had left and arrived in America alone and penniless.

Philip found that Boston and the colonies were ripe for revolt when he arrived. They were in protest to the mother country against unfair taxes levied on the colonies. He falls under the spell of influential men such as Sam Adams, Ben Franklin, Paul Revere and the other pre-revolutionary figures. Also involved in the early dissent, was the lawyer father of his first love, Anne. They started the Kent family lineage and when she died, he had more children with Peggy. Philip met his brother again in America, now an officer with the British Army, as well as his widow, after Philip fought him a second time. She tried to restart the romance with him to no avail.

It is action packed and continues until the second novel “The Rebel”. In the 2nd novel, he will take part in the American revolution. He just happens to bump into Lafayette who he had known during his French boyhood.

We all know, from his television commentaries with America’s NBC network, that Johnny Miller can talk the talk but for a time in the mid 1970s he also walked the walk – probably better than anyone else who ever stepped on a golf course.

Everyone he competed against, and that included Nicklaus, Watson, Weiskopf and Trevino, knew that if Miller blew hot he was unbeatable, and that even on an off day he was still pretty damned good. Nicklaus said of him: ‘The player who consistently hit his short irons closer to the hole than anyone I ever saw was Johnny Miller in his prime. There were parts of his game, in particular the short irons, that were better than mine.’

Watson, meanwhile, who played with Miller as he shot 61 in the final round to win the Tucson Open in 1974, said: ‘That was the best pure-striking round of golf I have ever seen.’ To which Miller replied: ‘For the past 12 months I’ve played better than anybody in the world.’

And so he had, but his was an unlikely and swift rise to prominence, followed by an even quicker fall back to, if not mediocrity, then at least to fallible human standards.

When he was 10 his older brother, with whom he was very close, drowned while swimming in the Pacific and his body was not found for several weeks. To help Johnny cope with the devastating loss his father set up a mat in the basement where the grief-struck lad could hit golf balls all day if he chose. It paid off to such an extent that in 1966, at the age of 20, Johnny went to the US Open at San Francisco with the intention of getting some work as a caddy. On a whim he entered final qualifying and made it into the field as a player, before finishing eighth.

He went on to take 24 US Tour titles, with eight of his victories coming in one season, 1974, and one of those wins, the Tucson Open, was by 14 strokes, against one of the strongest fields of the year. He also won two Majors, the 1973 US Open at Oakmont, regarded as one of the toughest of all American venues, and the 1976 Open at Royal Birkdale, where he held off a 19-year-old debutant called Seve Ballesteros. But it was the US Open that really made his name, as he won it with a final round 63, that remains the best ever last round to win a Major, and which could have been even better.

He later said: ‘So I birdie the first four, and I immediately start gagging. I know exactly what’s going on, too. I hit it to eight feet on five and leave it short, right in the heart. On eight, I hit a great 4-wood in there, 30 feet below the hole. I leave my birdie putt three feet short and then miss that one.

‘I just kept hitting it stiff – three feet, four feet, nine feet. If Watson had been putting for me, it might have been a 58.’

Last round or weekend charges were a Miller specialty because in addition to that memorable final day at Oakmont, his Open triumph in 1976 was courtesy of a fourth round 66, and the year before, in one of the greatest Masters ever seen, he failed to catch Jack Nicklaus by one stroke, having played the weekend in 65, 66.

Miller said that serenity comes from knowing that even your worst shot is going to be pretty damned good, and for a while in his heyday if he ‘missed’ an iron shot more than three feet off line he would get mad. His swing was so grooved and pure that he could hit an 8-iron, for example, a 7, 8 or 9-iron distance, with a few slight alterations that were almost imperceptible to onlookers. This was a trick he liked to reserve for those players who tried to check out which club he used on a par three hole. So he’d deliberately hit an 8-iron a 9-iron distance, and then watch with pleasure as the other guy airmailed the green.

During those glory years between 1973-6, Miller had everything – blond good looks, talent to burn and an innate curiosity about life, golf and people, which he has continued to show in his TV work. But of all the golfing comets that have blazed across our sky, his was the brightest but shortest lived and as quickly as the magical talent appeared, it disappeared.

There are three main reasons. First, he was a lifelong sufferer of the yips – despite being as hot a putter as anybody when he was on a streak – so to compensate he simply hit his approach shots even closer to the flag. He freely admits that the reason he has only played twice on the US Champions (Seniors) Tour is that he still battles the yips. So bad are they that even in his prime he once painted a dot at the bottom of his putter grip, and instead of watching the clubhead, he stared at the dot throughout the stroke.

He confesses that his worst ever time was in a 1977 match against Jack Nicklaus for the TV series Shell’s Wonderful World of Golf. He matched Nicklaus shot-for shot – except woefully, embarrassingly, on the greens, where he three-putted seven times. He said: ‘It was like I was holding a snake in my hands. I couldn’t make a three-footer. There is no worse feeling than standing over a short putt, knowing you’ve got no chance to make it.’

Second, he says that he spent a winter working at his ranch in Utah chopping down trees and when he got back on the course his swing was effectively gone, because of the build-up of muscles and loss of flexibility. He also believes that changing clubs from MacGregor to Wilson in ’75 immediately slipped him back two notches and is no doubt the reason for one of his sagest pieces of advice, still good today, which is: ‘Once you find a set of clubs you like, stay with them until they fall apart.’

Third, and probably most importantly of all, he is a devoted family man and always felt the narrow, obsessive world of top flight sports, with its endless suitcases and hotel rooms, to be both tedious and a little unhealthy for a sane man. He became bored with the travelling lifestyle of Tour golf and always had much broader interests than 72-hole tournaments. He is a committed member of the Church of Latter Day Saints (Mormons), has six children and resented being away from them for long periods when they were young.

When he made the transition to television analyst he achieved immediate notoriety by using one of his favourite words – ‘choke’. Miller confesses to being a real authority, as it’s a phenomenon he has studied with great interest all his life, because he believes himself to have been a world-class choker.

He says: ‘I choked so many times myself over the years that it’s a joke. To me, it wasn’t the result of a character flaw, it wasn’t that I lacked courage. Choking isn’t like that at all, it’s merely stress manifesting itself mentally and physically.’

In 1990 when he made his debut as a commentator at the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic. His good friend Peter Jacobsen faced a 225-yard shot over water from a downhill lie on the 18th at Pebble Beach. Miller studied Jacobsen’s body language, and everything else, before saying: ‘This is absolutely the easiest shot to choke I’ve ever seen in my life.’

The remark created an immediate furore – Jacobsen refused to talk to him for five months, and only relented after seeing a tape of the incident – and almost before he had warmed his announcer’s chair Miller was hearing loud cries for him to be sacked. It is difficult now to imagine the fuss – he didn’t, after all, say that Jacobsen was a choker, or that he would succumb to the pressure, simply that the ingredients were there for it to happen. Over the next few weeks and months an unbowed Miller continued calling it as he saw it and American TV watchers began to realise that hearing an honest opinion was a refreshing change from the bland, inoffensive pap with which they are usually served.

He has never pulled his punches and the outspokenness he has shown throughout his life, which he happily took into the commentary booth, has earned him as many enemies as friends. But in fairness, he’s not abusive or vindictive in his comments, merely as brutally honest as he has always been and in American society, especially on television, no-bullshit straight-talking is the exception rather than the rule.

His nearest equivalent in sports commentary is probably John McEnroe – but Miller has an edge even here because throughout his career his play was not only astonishingly good but his behaviour was exemplary. Therefore, when he pulls up Tiger Woods, for example, for swearing audibly (and repeatedly) on the 18th tee at Pebble Beach in the US Open, he cannot be accused of hypocrisy because he was never heard to cuss on a golf course himself, and yet fewer golfers have had greater justification for letting fly with a few epithets.

And Miller has carried on being as brutally outspoken as he ever was. In March 2004 Craig Parry beat Scott Verplank in a playoff for the Doral Championship in Miami by holing a 6-iron from 176-yards on the first extra hole. Miller said that the Australian’s swing was that of a 15 handicapper and would have made Ben Hogan puke. Parry was so incensed he made an official complaint to the US Tour but Miller remained unrepentant and his ability to make such remarks, and then refuse to back down when they cause a furore, is probably the reason he remains the most successful American player not to have been offered the Ryder Cup captaincy.

And it was the Ryder Cup that got him into more hot water. During the infamous 1999 match at Brookline. Captain Ben Crenshaw, acting ‘on a hunch’ picked an out-of-form Justin Leonard to partner Hal Sutton in the second afternoon fourballs (they subsequently halved their match with Olazabal and Jimenez). Miller responded by saying: ‘My hunch is that Justin needs to go home and watch it on television.’ Leonard was furious, and was joined by Davis Love and Jim Furyk, who all said, in effect, that Miller didn’t believe in them and wasn’t supporting the home team as he should.

Miller told them to take a hike and pointed out that his job is not to act as cheerleader but offer an honest opinion. He was also outspoken in condemning the behaviour of American fans, who abused Colin Montgomerie, his wife and father, and generally behaved like a rabble, and then severely criticised the US team, led by Tom Lehman, for the infamous charge across the 17th green when Justin Leonard holed an outrageous putt in his singles match again Jose Maria Olazabal.

He told Golf Digest: ‘If Tom Lehman had done what he did at the Ryder Cup 10 years ago, he would have been banned from the Ryder Cup for life, or at least for one Cup. He was off the charts. He was out of control.’

Miller was always in control, and in his pomp he was as good as anyone who ever swung a golf club.

Johnny Miller on:

His own game: ‘I had a stretch there for a few years where I played some golf that bordered on the twilight zone. I can remember that I was literally getting upset that I had to putt.’

Colin Montgomerie: ‘Sometimes the guy has no filter between his heart, his brain and his mouth but his opinions aren’t detrimental to the game.’

Retief Goosen: It’s the worst three-putt in the history of golf,’ (after he’d failed to get down in two from 12 feet on the 72nd hole of the 2001 US Open; he subsequently won the playoff).

Peter Oosterhuis (leading the 1973 Masters after 54 holes): ‘He’ll probably have a good night’s sleep – all two-and-a-half hours of it.’

The Greatest: ‘When Jack Nickalus plays well he wins, when he plays badly he comes second. When he’s playing terribly, he’s third.’

In the Rosicrucian manifesto, Fama Fraternitatis, the youthful Christian Rosenkreutz acquires his knowledge of mysticism during a journey to the Holy Land, in a place called “Damcar,” described as a city in Arabia. While today the word “Arabia” tends to refer to the Arabian Peninsula, the Fama is probably using it merely to refer to lands inhabited by Arabs. Across four centuries, scholars have tried to identify the city of Damcar, but without success.

The likely reason for using Damcar, rather than the real name of the mystical city, is that the real name would openly identify one of the founders of the Rosicrucian brotherhood, surely something they wanted to keep a secret. In 1652, the first English translator of the Fama, Thomas Vaughan (who is quoted below), was totally confused by the meaning of Damcar, but seeing an apparent reference to Damascus and thinking Damcar may be the same place, opted to translate everything with the nonsensical “Damasco.” Original German words are in brackets:

“Brother C.R… went to Damasco [Damascum], minding from thence to go to Jerusalem; but by reason of the feebleness of his body he remained still there, and by his skill in Physick he obtained much favour with the Turks: In the mean time he became by chance acquainted with the Wise men of Damasco [Damcar] in Arabia, and beheld what great Wonders they wrought, and how Nature was discovered unto them.”

Here we learn that Damcar was a city of wise men who were mystically active. Since Brother C. R. became familiar with them in Damascus, Syria, we have to assume that the city of Damcar is relatively close to the city of Damascus.

The Fama continues: “hereby was that high and noble Spirit of Brother C.R. [C.R.C] so stirred up, that Jerusalem was not so much now in his mind as Damasco [Damcar]; also he could not bridle his desires any longer, but made a bargain with the Arabians, that they should carry him for a certain sum of money to Damasco [Damcar]; he was but of the age of sixteen years when he came thither, yet of a strong Dutch [teutschen] constitution.”

First of all, we observe that Brother C. R. and Brother C. R. C. cannot be the same person because Brother C. R. is afflicted with “the feebleness of his body” but Brother C. R. C. is only 16 years old and of strong constitution. Thus, while Brother C. R. is stuck in Damascus, Brother C. R. C. has to be in Jerusalem. Since Brother C. R. C. pays Arabs to carry him to Damcar, we have to assume that Damcar is relatively close to Jerusalem.

The city of Damcar is therefore close to Damascus and it is also close to Jerusalem. Where is it located? Obviously, the city of Damcar has to be located in northern Israel.

We must now concentrate on the word “Dutch” toward the end of the last quote. Since “Damcar” is an enigma, could it be an anagram of a Dutch word? Let’s try DRAKEN, rearranged as Denkar, pronounced Damcar. Dragons. Yes, dragons. But a better translation of “teutschen” might be “German” rather than “Dutch.” The German word for dragon is “Drachen,” which is close enough because the Germanic “c”, “ch” and “k” have similar sounds, and all the same arguments apply.

For the Christian mentality of the early 17th century, the words “dragon” and “Arabia” would quickly conjure up only one thing: Saint George. Everyone knew that Saint George killed the dragon, by some legends near the Bay of Beirut, and by other legends in the Holy Land or in Libya, but nonetheless all Arabic places.

Next, we must take note of the noble “Spirit” of Brother C. R. C., which reminds us of the two “Sancti Spiritus” and the “Spiritum Sanctum” from elsewhere in the Fama. Thus, the Fama probably wants us to view only the “Saint” as a clue (and disregard the “George” except to work in English as this was the patron saint of England!). “Saint” is a word that has five letters and begins with the letter “S.”

To sum up: Damcar is a mystical city renowned for its wise men. It is located in northern Israel, and the real name of this city has five letters and begins with the letter “S.”

Safed, a city of northern Isreal, was the originating city of modern mysticism, known as Kabbalah. In the 15th and 16th centuries, wise men came from many places -from as far away as Spain- to congregate there. There can be no doubt that the indicated city is Safed because the Fama refers to the Kabbalah (Cabala) or cabalists in four different places.

Isaac Luria, famed founder of the Lurianic Kabbalah, was 36 years old (16 plus 20 or the “XX” part of “CXX” in the Fama) when he arrived in Safed in 1570 after getting a cold reception in Jerusalem (“Jerusalem was not so much now in his mind”). In sharp contrast, in Safed he was welcomed with open arms (“there the Wise men received him not as a stranger (as he himself witnesseth) but as one whom they had long expected”).

The story of Isaac Luria continues in Nova Atlantis, Rosicrucian “fragments” attributed to Sir Francis Bacon, where we encounter the mysterious “sacerdote Aegyptio.” These are Spanish words inexplicably inserted into an all-Latin text. The distinction can be significant: whereas the Latin “sacerdos” generally refers to a priest, the Spanish “sacerdote” can refer to a person who performs the rites of any religion. Later, the Nova Atlantis proclaims “Erat autem Iudaeus.” Isaac Luria was in fact an Egyptian rabbi.

The Nova Atlantis goes on to say that he was sometimes called the Milky Way (“Vocabat eum etiam quandoque viam lacteam”). Luria was widely known as ha-Ari, the Lion, where Leo is a constellation of the Milky Way. And he was sometimes called the Elijah of the Messiah (“quandoque Eliam Messiae”); Luria was noted for his frequent conversations with Elijah the prophet. And there were many other names that signaled his greatness (“aliis compluribus nominibus magnum eum insigniebat”): Ha’ARI Hakadosh, ARIZal, Rabbi Isaac ben Solomon Luria Ashkenazi. Above all, these words are quickly followed by a direct reference to the Kabbalah (“per secretam quandam cabalam”).

In conclusion, there is ample reason to suspect that Rosicrucian mysticism is a historical derivative of the Lurianic Kabbalah. Indeed, there seem to be many parallels in the teachings and beliefs of both.

The English adventurers and Spanish conquistadors were most certainly “brothers under the skin” in that they both set out to reap the rewards of the New World with little to no regard for the local peoples. They both faced the same problems back in Europe. These problems included disease, poverty, and overcrowding. There were simply too many people competing for the same things, whether they were money, food, or land. This coupled with stories of fortune and a Northwest Passage to Asia created a sense of hope that voyages west would solve the many problems of a needy continent. For this reason, both the English and the Spanish looked to the New World with the goal of finding treasures and later on, colonization. The idea that there were valuable land, resources, and treasures located in the New World that would alleviate or solve European problems motivated both countries to try their hand at exploration.

Of course, these rewards came at a cost to the native peoples of the Americas. As “brothers under the skin,” the English and Spanish viewed the natives as savages. They both believed that they had not only a right, but also a duty to instruct these people in that ways of European civilization and Christianity. However, they both used this as an excuse to exploit the local people. When Hernando Cortes raided Tenochtitlan, he wrote of attacking before dawn, vowing to do all the harm that he could. This included murdering woman and children, leaving them to rot in the streets while the Spanish conquistadors looted the homes and businesses of the city. The Aztecs had done no great harm to Cortes; in fact, they treated him and his men as gods. However, greed spurred Cortes and his men on to kill thousands. Of course, this did not bother anyone because the men, women, and children that they killed were savages that could not be saved.

Richard Hakluyt, an Englishman, wrote a letter detailing an almost identical plan to get England involved in the Americas. They would go over under the guise of spreading Christianity, but they would make full use of the resources and advance the economic interests of the country. He talked of putting the poor of England to work in the Americas. However, similarly to the Spanish, the plans necessitate the exploitation of the natives. He wrote, “If we find the country populous and desirous to expel us and injuriously offend us, that seek but just and lawful traffic, then, by reason that we are lords of navigation and they are not so, we are the better able to defend ourselves by reason of those great rivers and to annoy they in many places.” (Origins of English Settlement) As you can tell by this passage, not only is there a sense of entitlement and superiority that exists within the mind of the English, there are already plans to conquer the Indians.

To the royal governments of England and Spain, the English adventurers and the conquistadors served the same purpose. That is to secure a foothold in the New World from which to advance the causes of the country. More than that, the conquistadors and adventurers were men meant to bring civilization and religion to the uncouth idol worshippers of the New World. I am sure the leaders of England and Spain truly believed that they were doing a service to the Aztecs and other Indians by murdering them and taking their things. Both the English and the Spanish believed that the natives were savages that were beyond saving for the most part. For this reason, killing many was an evil that was necessary in order to save a few. They believed that as stronger, more developed countries, it was their duty to rid the world of this evil. It was their duty to instruct the savages in the ways of the Lord. To them, the adventurers and conquistadors were good, moral men that were doing the will of God. While in actuality, they were brutal, self-righteous thieves.

My name is Jay W. Nelmes, I was born in Petropolis Brazil in 1965. Although I did not live there long, I remember enough of this beautiful country that it has always intrigued me. My older brother John Charles is 16 years older than I am, so he had the opportunity to explore the jungle quite often and collect Butterflies as well as a vast array of other insects which he mounted in glass frame cases. His collection was fascinating and inspired me into the world of entomology.

With my attempt to imitate my brothers work, it was to no avail. His methods with the use of steam to open up there wings, and other methods to preserving them was something I never learned. We both departed when he had gone to England while I moved to the United States in 1970 at yrs. of age.

During my later childhood I still collected insects with the attempt to imitate my brother but never achieved the ability to do so. I then became attracted to the Reptile & Amphibian World since this began to intrigue me.

I began to build my first primitive cages for my first lizards which were anoles at age 14. The reptile world at that time was not common. So finding any at a pet store was not really available. The fish and bird world always seemed to be accessible, but not the reptile world, which made it all the more interesting to have and learn about.

Over the years I learned drafting, carpentry and electrical. I got married to my wife Tinamarie, and it was on our honeymoon where I learned she loved these types of animals when we brought home an Iguana on the train back home in CT in a Styrofoam cooler.

My wife became ill for several years shortly after our marriage. This is when I have focused my skills as a craftsman in fabricating decorative cages. for the reptile world since everything was focused on Birds & Fish. There seemed to be a demand for suitable housing for Reptiles so my mission was to channel my energies towards this field.

This allowed me to be home to care for her. I am happy to say she is doing well and has been my assistant now for over 25 years. We have traveled to over 36 states now delivering these enclosures for Residential, Museums & Universities even celebrities.

Each of these enclosures are hand crafted and designed specifically for the animal’s needs. These enclosures are especially suited for housing reptiles because I have designed these so they can contain large pools of water. Most of these enclosures are usually personally delivered and set up by me including interior settings as a complete system.

And best of all, the maintenance is quick because it comes equipped with an easy rinse & flush system.

Since 1997 we have been building and delivering these cages setting them up all over the USA.

John Baker Muwanga, one of the best regarded of Uganda’s boxing champions, was born on April 2nd 1956 in the vicinity of Kampala, growing up in Nsambya. Joseph Nsubuga, another of Uganda’s renowned former boxers, was Muwanga’s older half-brother.

Equally unique and fascinating is how Muwanga started boxing, how he progressed, and why and how he hang up his gloves. His pathway to boxing started when his half-brother Nsubuga who was born in Kenya in the early 1950’s showed up in 1963 at the family home in Nsambya while accompanied by his sister and mother. The father of the children had been employed by East African Railways and Harbors where he worked in Kenya. Muwanga was delighted to have an older brother around. Nsubuga had dabbled at boxing. Soon, Muwanga would accompany Nsubuga to the Police Boxing club in Nsambya, a few times. But Muwanga was not impressed with the sport. Also, Muwanga’s mother would soon vacate the house, taking with him Muwanga and one of his sisters to live elsewhere. He soon ended up being a pupil in Mugwanya Preparatory School (Kabojja), a boarding school; and thereafter he was transferred to the sister school St. Savio Primary School on Entebbe Road.

At Savio in 1969, Muwanga ended up fighting a bully who happened to be the son of a politically prominent person. Muwanga was expelled from school as a result. His father was very furious, and assured him that he would never amount to anything. Meanwhile brother Nsubuga was making steady boxing progress, Muwanga got the attention for just happening to be the brother–although he was put down as comparatively weak and not as tough as his boxing brother. It is here that Muwanga decided to try boxing. He was matched with play opponents, he was badly beaten and laughed at. People from northern Uganda were reputed to be good fighters, and Muwanga was discouraged from continuing with boxing on the grounds that such boxers would, “kill you for nothing.” But the taunting just made Muwanga the more determined to disprove skeptics.

Muwanga dared to enroll in the national junior championships which were held at the Nsambya Police shed. He would represent Nsambya Boxing Club. At that place and time, those days, medical tests were not up to standard and were not taken seriously. Muwanga was allowed to box. He was matched with an opponent Tilima from Naguru boxing Club. In the fight, Muwanga did not prove himself; his opponent who was much better than him did his best not to humiliate him. Tilima even pretended to be knocked down, even when he had not been hit. Muwanga writes (Personal communication, 10 June 2014):

“What a show!!! This guy tried everything not to humiliate me but failed people laughed until tears run down there cheeks. The guy even pretended to be knocked down by the air of a punch I had swung some 10 inches away from him. He got a warning for that. I lost and the crowd laughed.”

Muwanga’s associates would laugh at him because of that fight. This caused him to strive the more to become a good boxer. Early on a Sunday he decided to go to Kampala Boxing Club in Nakivubo. Muwanga writes, “I went to KBC in Nakivubo, determined to learn how to box or die” (Personal communication, 10 June 2014). The club was closed.

Muwanga returned to KBC early the next morning. There a fellow James Bond Okwaare made fun of how Muwanga had boxed. Okwaare was quickly rebuked by the national coach Erias Gabiraali. Muwanga started training there as he got to know some of the national boxers who dropped in. These inclued Ayub Kalule, Cornelius Bbosa Boza-Edwards, Mustafa Wasajja, Ben Ochan, Alex Odhiambo, Ochodomuge, and David Jackson. Even Muwanga’s brother Nsubuga would drop in. In concluding words Muwanga writes (Personal communication, 10 June 2014):

“One day I was shocked to hear that my brother was going to Scotland [Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh, 1970] to represent Uganda. I could not believe, not only that other urchins from the ‘village’ were also going, to make the pie sweeter boys from the slum next door which was Katwe Kinyoro, the likes of John Opio were also in the team!!! There was justice in honest sweat, hard work and discipline… the rest is history.”

At the Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh, on July 18th 1970, 16 year-old Joseph Oscar Nsubuga (lightweight) was defeated by points decision by Olympian Kenneth Mwansa of Zambia in the preliminary round.

At the Commonwealth Games of 1974 held in Christchurch, 20 year-old Nsubuga now a light-welterweight defeated Philip Sapak of Papua New Guinea. This happened in the preliminary first round on January 27th when the referee halted the fight early after Nsubuga had quickly overwhelmed his opponent. However, in the quarter-finals that were held two days later, James Douglas of Scotland defeated Nsubuga by points and thereby halted Nsubuga’s quest for a medal.

Months later, in August 1974, Nsubuga, fighting as a middleweight, would win a bronze medal at the inaugural World Amateur Boxing Championships in Havana. Nsubuga had moved up to the middleweight division.

The TSC Tournament was held at the Dynamo-Sporthalle in Berlin during October 3-7, 1974. In the quarter-finals, Nsubuga fighting as a middleweight beat Zaprianov (Bulgaria) by points. But in the semi-finals he was beaten, by points, by Peter Tiepold of the German Democratic Republic. He settled for the bronze medal. here Ugandans performed remarkably well: James Odwori (flyweight) and Ayub Kalule (light-welterweight) won gold; Vitalish Bbege (welterweight) won the silver medal.

Nsubuga would debut as a professional in May 1975 whereby he moved to Finland then to Norway; he would mostly fight in Europe. Nsubuga stopped competing in 1981 after he was knocked out by famous future world champion Davey Moore. Nsubuga’s most signified fight was his spirited gladiator battle (non-title bout) with renowned Panamanian Roberto Duran on January 13th 1980 in Las Vegas. The Panamanian seemed to be tiring, but Joseph “Stoneface” Nsubuga was knocked out at the end of the fourth round. He retired from boxing in 1981 with an impressive record of 18 wins and 3 losses. Nsubuga passed away in Helsinki on May 4th 2013, aged 59.

During the 1970’s while at Namasagali College in Kamuli District in Uganda, Muwanga displayed himself as a skillful, dreaded, and popular boxer. At the amateur national level, he is said to have defeated renowned future world champion and fellow Ugandan Cornelius Boza-Edwards (Bbosa) twice. In April 1973, the annual Golden Belt Tournament took place in Bucharest. Most of the winners and silver medalists turned out to be Cubans and Romanians. It was here that Muwanga, aged 17, first participated in international competition. Here Muwanga, together with his accomplices on the Uganda team–Ayub Kalule, Vitalish Bbege, and James Odwori–all won bronze medals in Romania. Later in the same 1973, Muwanga fought for Uganda twice in two Urafiki (Kenya vs. Uganda) tournaments; he was victorious. Muwanga soon became overwhelmed when the veteran Ugandan boxing legend Alex Odhiambo, who had heretofore been so critical of the younger boxer, subsequently gave him the nod and the thumbs up!

At the local level and during training, Muwanga did fight Odwori and another famous Uganda boxer “Kabaka” Nasego several times, but he did not win. Among the Ugandans he beat were Vincent Byarugaba, and several others. Muwanga’s stint as a national amateur boxer were from 1973 to 1977 when he was also a student at Namasagali College; thereafter he attended Oslo University while he fought as a professional. Muwanga recalls that at training camp, where behavioral attitudes varied from boxer to boxer, as admired example the skillful Odwori was particularly talkative, whereas Ayub Kalule preferred action to words (Personal communication, 29 October 2015):

“… guys like Ayub Kalule… preferred action to talk, a phenomena in my opinion. James Odouri talked a mile a minute but, had the rare ability to back up whatever he said. A very rare quality. We called him ‘Kasuku’ [parrot] behind his back.”

John Muwanga, as a light-flyweight represented Uganda at the inaugural world amateur championships held in Havana in August 1974. Notably Kalule and Nsubuga here won gold and bronze, respectively. Muwanga was eliminated in the preliminary round by a points decision in favor of Bejhan Fuchedzhiyev (Bulgaria). Quite notable is the aspect that a massive six of the Uganda contingent in Havana had studied at Namasagali–one of the few schools in Uganda that embraced boxing. In addition to Muwanga, those boxers that did attend Namasagali included Nsubuga, Odwori, John Byaruhanga, Vincent Byarugaba, and Shadrack Odhiambo.

Muwanga’s national status continued to rise and at age 20 he was selected to represent Uganda at the summer Olympics in Montreal. Most African countries, twenty-eight of them, boycotted the Montreal Olympic Games of 1976 when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) refused to bar from the Olympics countries from which athletes had participated in sporting events in apartheid South Africa. The New Zealand Rugby team was then touring South Africa. Countries like China, Iraq, and Guyana also withdrew; although with China it primarily had to do with a political name recognition issue–non-recognition of “Republic of China” vs. “Peoples’ Republic of China.”

The Uganda boxers withdrawn from participation because of the boycott included Baker Muwanga (bantamweight) alongside Venostos Ochira (light-flyweight), Adroni Butambeki (flyweight), Cornelius Boza-Edwards (Bbosa) (featherweight), David Ssenyonjo (lightweight), Jones Okoth (light-welterweight), Vitalish Bbege (welterweight), and John Odhiambo (light-middleweight). Non of these pugilists had represented Uganda at the 1972 Olympics held in Munich. Vitalish Bbege had won gold at the Africa Boxing Championships held in Kampala in 1974.

Muwanga started his professional career in Norway in April 1978, and ended it in October 1982. He mostly boxed as a lightweight. All his bouts took place in Norway, aside from the final two that took place in Finland. He did not lose any of the bouts but he likely would have liked to be exposed to more intensive competition and to also box in western countries where there are more top contenders and champions. A factor was the banning of professional boxing in Norway, this officially effective from the beginning of 1981.

Muwanga ended as undefeated as a professional boxer with 15 wins, 0 losses, with 6 knockouts (Boxrec.com). He regrets to some extend that he did not flourish as much as he would have wanted to as a boxer, but at the same time he is grateful that boxing took him to places and opened to him many advantages. He writes, “… my boxing career, in my opinion was not as exciting as I wanted it to be but I’m not complaining it opened a lot of doors for me and got me into places I never thought I would see… ” (Personal communication, 10 June 2014).

Very often we hear these terms used together-Wills and Trusts. However, they are not the same thing and, in many instances, serve different functions. It’s likely that many of us have seen those infamous scenes on T.V. programs, or movies, where the lawyer reads the Last Will and Testament of the deceased uncle to the surviving members of the family-each member on the edge of his/her seat wondering whether he/she was left the uncle’s millions. And, as for a trust, it’s likely that many of us think of wealthy adult children receiving money from a trust-often called trust babies. But, both of these images limit really how important it is for the every-day person to have some type of will or trust in place.

It is likely that you may be reading this because you, like so many of us, know that having some type of document directing how our assets are to be given away at death, as well as who will take care of our children at our death, is crucial. And, knowing we have these documents in place helps us sleep better at night. To this end, this week, which is Part 1 of 2, we will start with understanding will basics.

What’s probably the most important issue for many of us is that a well-drafted will tells our survivors who will be the guardian of our children. For example, if a single person with children dies without a will, his/her survivors must file papers with the court to determine who will be the guardian of the surviving children. This can be a long and expensive process and may not necessarily carry out the deceased person’s unwritten wishes. A well-drafted will is analogous to the adage-an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Please note that it cannot be stressed enough how important it is to seek guidance from an attorney regarding will formation. In fact, a well-drafted will distributes our property to the survivors we choose-like making sure your ’69 Camaro goes to your brother, your coin collection goes to your son, and your ’75 Thurman Munson baseball card goes to your best friend from childhood. However, without a will, it is unlikely that the ‘gifts’ will be made. In fact, in California, if you die without a will, then State law, not you, chooses how all of your property will be given away at your death. For example, if a married person, with no children, but surviving parents, dies without a will, then half of his/her property will go to his surviving wife, and the other half will go to his surviving parents. That’s it. So the car he wanted to give to his brother, and the baseball card collection he wanted to give to his best friend, may never happen.

So, why an attorney? And not a pre-printed form from a stationary store or an online form from a website that advertises wills? Like all areas of law, there are many concerns involving technicalities being carried out correctly so the will is valid when a person dies. An invalid will is the same as dying without a will. And, at times, portions of a will may be invalid without the proper legal guidance. For example, let’s look at a common scenario: A person has a valid will drafted where, among other things, leaves his expensive coin collection to his oldest brother. A few years later, he and his oldest brother have a falling out. So, this person takes a pen and crosses out his oldest brother’s name in his will and writes in his youngest brother’s name-believing that he cancelled the ‘gift’ to his oldest brother and made a ‘gift’ of this coin collection to his youngest brother. Are you ready for this? It is possible that neither brother will get the coin collection. And, it is possible that a will contest will be filed and dragged on for a period of time.

The law regarding crossing out on a will is complicated. And, often, when a person takes his/her own pen to a drafted will, problems arise. Thus, attorney guidance regarding will drafting, and even changes to the will, is highly recommended. In case you are curious, the coin collection could be distributed as if the person died without a will. So, if the man is survived by only his parents and the two brothers, then the entire coin collection may go to his parents. This is quite a dilemma now for the parents if they have to choose to whom the coin collection should be given.

Please note that the above information was kept in simplest form to help give you a primer of a situation that is important to many people’s piece of mind. As many areas of law, the complexity is understood and handled well by an attorney. Thus, it’s helpful to know that an experienced attorney is a phone call, or email, away to help provide guidance.

When we hear the word Rakhi, the first thing that comes to our minds is the ritual that takes place between a brother and sister. Many might also think about the Rakhi that one ties to the wrist of a brother. While brothers are an integral part of the festival, the role of bhabhi is also crucial. In the Indian culture, Bhabhis are considered as motherly figures and thus when a sister ties a Rakhi to his brothers, she also ties one to the brothers as well.

When we talk about Rakhis for Bhabhi, it’s not just a regions thing. It is about a fashion accessory. There are so many options in the market while many can buy the trendiest rakhi online as well. So, when buying the Lumba Rakhi for a Bhabhi one should keep in mind that the Bhabhi should be able to flaunt it as well.

A pearl-studded Lumba Rakhi

Nothing looks more beautiful than pearls when it comes to Indian accessories. A place that the pearl has cannot be replaced with anything else. When these pearls are studded on a Lumba Rakhi, they make the Rakhi look more beautiful. The way small and big pearls are placed on the Rakhi, it not only makes it look fabulous but traditional as well. To date, the pearl-studded Lumba Rakhi is a favorite choice of Rakhi when it comes to choosing an elegant yet classy piece.

Zardosi work Lumba Rakhi

Zardosi is a kind of work that all women love and like to flaunt. This type of work is traditional in Indian. For ages, people in the country have been doing it. Be it on their sarees or suits, the Zardosi work’s fan base is a totally different one.

You can surprise your sister-in-law with Rakhi which has intricate Zardosi work. It is not an example of perfect craftsmanship only. In fact, it is also a combination of beautiful colors. This Rakhi will definitely impress the Bhabhi of the house.

Dazzling stone-studded Lumba Rakhi

Indian festivals are about loud colors and dazzle. What could be better than purchasing a stone-studded Rakhi to add to the bling? Festivals are the time when people tend to wear bling clothes and when a dazzling Rakhi is seen by people when everyone will say that it is perfect for the occasion. Just like the stone-studded jewelry that your Bhabhi loves wearing, you can buy a Rakhi that matches her jewelry and outfits.

The kind of touch-customized gifts adds to the occasions. And nothing else can beat that. Customization means personalized. When personal feelings are attached to something then that makes a gift much more valuable. To make sure that your Bhabhi feels the same on the occasion of Rakhi, a personalized Rakhi can be gifted to her with her name or a picture on it. These kinds of gifts are something that may touch a person’s heart and that makes the person feel more special. These kinds of Rakhis can be paired with tassels.

An everyday wear bracelet or bangle Rakhi

What could be better than gifting your Bhabhi a Rakhi that she can wear every day? So, you can gift your Bhabhi a gold or silver rakhi bracelet or bangle. These can be worn on any other occasion as well. Plus, this will always remind your Bhabhi of the love you have for her in your heart. These can be customized as per your Babhi’s taste and style. In India, buying gold or silver is considered an investment. So, this will work in both ways.