text:
Bazooka () is the common name for a man-portable recoilless anti-tank rocket launcher weapon, widely deployed by the United States Army, especially during World War II. Also referred to as the "stovepipe", the innovative bazooka was among the first generation of rocket-propelled anti-tank weapons used in infantry combat. Featuring a solid-propellant rocket for propulsion, it allowed for high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) shaped charge warheads to be delivered against armored vehicles, machine gun nests, and fortified bunkers at ranges beyond that of a standard thrown grenade or mine. The universally applied nickname arose from the M1 variant's vague resemblance to the musical instrument called a bazooka invented and popularized by 1930s American comedian Bob Burns.

During World War II, the German armed forces captured several bazookas in early North African and Eastern Front encounters and soon reverse engineered their own version, increasing the warhead diameter to 8.8 cm (among other minor changes) and widely issuing it as the Raketenpanzerbüchse "Panzerschreck" ("rocket anti-armor rifle 'tank scare). Near the end of the war, the Japanese developed a similar weapon, the Type 4 70 mm AT rocket launcher, which featured a rocket propelled grenade of a different design.

The term "bazooka" still sees informal use as a generic term referring to any ground-to-ground shoulder-fired missile weapon (mainly rocket propelled grenade launchers or recoilless rifles), and as an expression that heavy measures are being taken.

Name
The name "bazooka" comes from an extension of the word "bazoo", which is slang for "mouth" or "boastful talk", and which ultimately probably stems from Dutch bazuin (buisine, a medieval trumpet). "Bazooka" appears in the 1909 novel The Swoop, or how Clarence Saved England (the 'aughty kind of a feller who'd cleave you to the bazooka for tuppence with his bloomin' falchion) by P. G. Wodehouse, describing the character Grand Duke Vodkakoff, and a musical instrument used in music halls.

During World War II, "bazooka" became the universally applied nickname of the new American anti-tank weapon, due to its vague resemblance to the musical instrument, bazooka (instrument) invented and popularized by 1930s American comedian Bob Burns.

Shortly after the first prototype launcher and rockets had been tested by firing into the Potomac River, U.S. Army colonel Leslie Skinner, and lieutenant colonel Edward Uhl took the new system to a competitive trial of various types of spigot mortar (at that time seen as the most promising way to deliver a shaped charge), which was held at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in May 1942. The new rocket launcher scored several hits on a moving tank while the five different mortars achieved none; this was a considerable achievement since the launcher's sights had been fabricated that morning from a wire coat hanger bent with a broken nail. The trial was being watched by various senior officers, among them the chief of research and engineering in the Ordnance Department, Major General Gladeon M. Barnes. Barnes was delighted by the performance of the system and fired it himself, but commented: "It sure looks like Bob Burns' bazooka". Bob Burns was a popular radio comedian, who used a novelty musical instrument which he had devised himself and called a "bazooka".

History

Design and development
The development of the bazooka involved the development of two specific lines of technology: the rocket-powered weapon, and the shaped charge warhead. It was also designed for easy maneuverability and access.

World War I
The rocket-powered weapon was the brainchild of Robert H. Goddard as a side project (under Army contract) of his work on rocket propulsion. Goddard, during his tenure at Clark University, and while working at Worcester Polytechnic Institute's magnetic lab and Mount Wilson Observatory (for security reasons), designed a tube-fired rocket for military use during World War I. He and his co-worker, Clarence N. Hickman, successfully demonstrated his rocket to the US Army Signal Corps at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, on November 6, 1918, but as the Compiègne Armistice was signed only five days later, further development was discontinued. The delay in the development of the bazooka was as a result of Goddard's serious bout with tuberculosis. Goddard continued to be a part-time consultant to the US government at Indian Head, Maryland, until 1923, but soon turned his focus to other projects involving rocket propulsion. Hickman later became head of the National Defense Research Committee in the 1940s where he guided rocket development for the war effort, including completing the development of the bazooka.

Shaped charge development
Shaped charge technology was developed in the US into a shaped charge anti-tank grenade for use by infantry, effective at defeating up to 60 mm (2.4 in) of vehicle armor. The grenade was standardized as the M10. However, the M10 grenade weighed 3.5 lb (1.6 kg), proving difficult to throw by hand and too heavy to be launched as a rifle grenade. The only practical way to use the weapon was for an infantryman to place it directly on the tank, a dangerous and unlikely means of delivery in most combat situations. A smaller, less powerful, version of the M10, the M9, was then developed, which could be fired from a rifle. This resulted in the creation of a series of rifle grenade launchers, the M1 (Springfield M1903), the M2 (Enfield M1917), the M7 (M1 Garand), and the M8 (M1 carbine). However, a truly capable anti-tank weapon had yet to be found, and following the lead of other countries at the time, the U.S. Army prepared to evaluate competing designs for a more effective man-portable anti-tank weapon.

The combination of rocket motor and shaped charge warhead led to the Army's development of light antitank weapons.

Rocket-borne shaped charge weapons development
In 1942, U.S. Army colonel, Leslie Skinner, received the M10 shaped-charge grenade which was capable of stopping German tanks. He gave Lieutenant Edward Uhl the task of creating a delivery system for the grenade. Uhl created a small rocket, but needed to protect the operator from the rocket motor's exhaust. According to Uhl,

By late 1942, the improved Rocket Launcher, M1A1 was introduced. The forward hand grip was deleted, and the design simplified. The production M1A1 was 55 inches (1.37 m) long and weighed 12.75 pounds (5.8 kg).

The ammunition for the original M1 launcher was the M6 ("Trials" code: T1), which was notoriously unreliable. The M6 was improved and designated M6A1, and the new ammunition was issued with the improved M1A1 launcher. After the M6, several alternative warheads were introduced. Many older M1 launchers were modified to M1A1 standards in July and August 1943. Batches of M6 rockets designated M6A2 were overhauled with the latest ignition systems and had been modified to be able to be fired from the upgraded M1 launchers. The M6A3 rocket featured a blunt, rounded nose to lessen the chances of it ricocheting off of angled armor, and was meant to be fired from the M9, and later M9A1, launchers. Late in World War II, the M6A4 and M6A5 rockets with improved fuses were developed. These rockets arrived too late to see service during the war, but were used post-war.

The 2.36 inch (60 mm) smoke rocket M10 and its improved subvariants (M10A1, M10A2, M10A4) used the rocket motor and fin assembly of the M6A1, but replaced the anti-tank warhead with a white phosphorus (WP) smoke head. WP smoke not only acts as a visibility screen, but its burning particles can cause severe injuries to skin. The M10 was therefore used to mark targets, to blind enemy gunners or vehicle drivers, or to drive troops out of bunkers and dugouts. The 2.36-inch incendiary rocket T31 was an M10 variant with an incendiary warhead designed to ignite fires in enemy-held structures and unarmored vehicles, or to destroy combustible supplies, ammunition, and materiel; it was not often utilized.

The original M1 and M1A1 rocket launchers were equipped with simple fixed sights and used launch tubes without reinforcements. During the war, the M1A1 received a number of running modifications. The battery specification was changed to a larger, standard battery cell size, resulting in complaints of batteries getting stuck in the wood shoulder rest (the compartment was later reamed out to accommodate the larger cells). The M1 and M1A1 used a rear iron sight and a front rectangular "ladder" sight positioned at the muzzle. The vertical sides of the ladder sight were inscribed with graduations of 100, 200, 300, and 400 yards, with the user elevating the bazooka so the rear sight lined up with the selected "rung" on the front sight. On the M9, the ladder sight was replaced by the General Electric T43 aperture sight. Ranging was accomplished by looking through the rear sight's peep hole while rotating the assembly (which had graduations of 100, 200, and 300 yards) so it lined up with the blade positioned at the muzzle. In September 1944, during the production of the M9A1, the T43 sight was replaced by the Polaroid T90 optical reflector sight, which used an etched reticle for aiming. The T43 and T90 sights were interchangeable. Various types of blast deflectors were tried, and an additional strap iron shoulder brace was fitted to the M9 launcher.

The bazooka required special care when used in tropical or arctic climates or in severe dust or sand conditions. Rockets were not to be fired at temperatures below 0 °F or above 120 °F (−18 °C to +49 °C).

Field experience induced changes
In 1943, field reports of rockets sticking and prematurely detonating in M1A1 launch tubes were received by Army Ordnance at Ogden Arsenal and other production facilities. At the US Army's Aberdeen Proving Grounds, various metal collars and wire wrapping were used on the sheet metal launch tube in an effort to reinforce it. However, reports of premature detonation continued until the development of bore slug test gauges to ensure that the rocket did not catch inside the launch tube.

The original M6 and M6A1 rockets used in the M1 and M1A1 launchers had a pointed nose, which was found to cause deflection from the target at low impact angles. In late 1943, another 2.36-in rocket type was adopted, the M6A3, for use with the newly standardized M9 rocket launcher. The M6A3 was 19.4 inches (493 mm) long, and weighed 3.38 lb (1.53 kg). It had a blunted, more round nose to improve target effect at low angles, and a new circular fin assembly to improve flight stability. The M6A3 was capable of penetrating  of armor plate.

Battery problems in the early bazookas eventually resulted in replacement of the battery-powered ignition system with a magneto sparker system operated through the trigger. A trigger safety was incorporated into the design that isolated the magneto, preventing misfires that could occur when the trigger was released and the stored charge prematurely fired the rocket. The final major change was the division of the launch tube into two discrete sections, with bayonet-joint attachments. This was done to make the weapon more convenient to carry, particularly for use by airborne forces. The final two-piece launcher was standardized as the M9A1. In September 1944, the fragile folding aperture sight was replaced by a Polaroid optical reflector sight. However, the long list of incorporated modifications increased the launcher's tube length to 61 inches (1.55 m), with an overall empty weight of 14.3 lb (6.5 kg). From its original conception as a relatively light, handy, and disposable weapon, the final M9A1 launcher had become a heavy, clumsy, and relatively complex piece of equipment.

In October 1944, after receiving reports of inadequate combat effect of the M1A1 and M9 launchers and their M6A1 rockets, and after examining captured examples of the German 8.8 cm RPzB 43 and RPzB 54 Panzerschreck, the U.S. Ordnance Corps began development on a new, more powerful anti-tank rocket launcher, the 3.5-inch (90 mm) M20. However, the weapon's design was not completed until after the war and saw no action against an enemy until the Korean War.

In 1945, the U.S. Army's Chemical Warfare Service standardized improved chemical warfare rockets intended for the new M9 and M9A1 launchers, adopting the M26 gas rocket, a cyanogen chloride (CK)-filled warhead for the 2.36-in rocket launcher. CK, a deadly blood agent, was capable of penetrating the protective filter barriers in some gas masks, and was seen as an effective agent against Japanese forces (particularly those hiding in caves or bunkers), whose gas masks lacked the impregnants that would provide protection against the chemical reaction of CK. While stockpiled in US inventory, the CK rocket was never deployed or issued to combat personnel.

Aviation use

Following Operation Overlord in 1944, the military version of the slow-flying Piper J-3 Cub high-wing civilian monoplane, the L-4 Grasshopper, began to be used in a light anti-armor role by a few U.S. Army artillery spotter units over France; these aircraft were field-outfitted with either two or four bazookas attached to the lift struts, against German armored fighting vehicles.
Upon arriving in France in 1944, US Army major, Charles Carpenter, an Army aviator flying liaison and artillery-spotting lightplanes like the military version of the Piper J-3 Cub, the L-4 Grasshopper, was issued a new L-4H version during the concluding stages of "Overlord", taking this "light attack" role against German armor by himself. With a 150-pound pilot and no radio aboard, the L-4H had a combined cargo and passenger weight capacity of approximately 232 pounds. This margin allowed him to eventually mount a total of six bazookas, three per side on the lift struts as other L-4s had done.

Within a few weeks, Carpenter was credited with knocking out a German armored car and four tanks. Carpenter's plane was known as "Rosie the Rocketer", and his exploits were soon featured in many press accounts, including Stars and Stripes, the Associated Press, Popular Science, The New York Sun, and Liberty magazine. Carpenter once told a reporter that his idea of fighting a war was to "attack, attack and then attack again". During the critical late-September Battle of Arracourt, Carpenter managed to achieve disabling hits on several German armored cars and two Panther tanks, along with killing or wounding a dozen or more enemy soldiers.

In the opening months of the Korean War, in August 1950, a joint US Navy and Marine Corps test used a newly-acquired Bell HTL-4 helicopter to test if a bazooka could be fired from a helicopter in flight. One of the larger, 3.5 inch, models of the Bazooka was chosen, and was mounted ahead and to the right of the helicopter to allow the door to remain clear. The bazooka was successfully tested, although it was discovered that it would require shielding for the engine compartment, which was exposed in the model 47 and other early helicopters. The helicopter itself belonged to HMX-1, a Marine experimental helicopter squadron.

Operational use

World War II

In September 1942, a consignment of 600 M1 bazookas was shipped to Egypt for use by the British Army in the Western Desert campaign. In a demonstration to British commanders, a bazooka penetrated the frontal armor of a captured Panzer III; however it was decided that the desert terrain lacked the concealment required for such a short range weapon and it was not deployed in that theater. In November 1942 during Operation Torch, early production versions of the M1 launcher and M6 rocket were hastily supplied to some of the U.S. invasion forces during the landings in North Africa. On the night before the landings, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower was shocked to discover from a subordinate that none of his troops had received any instruction in the use of the bazooka.

Initially supplied with the highly unreliable M6 rocket and without training for its operators, the M1 did not play a significant armed role in combat in the North African fighting, but did provide a German intelligence coup when some were captured by the Germans in early encounters with inexperienced U.S. troops. A U.S. general visiting the Tunisian front in 1943 after the close of combat operations could not find any soldiers who could report that the weapon had actually stopped an enemy tank. Further issue of the bazooka was suspended in May 1943.

During the Allied invasion of Sicily, small numbers of the M1A1 bazooka (using an improved rocket, the M6A1) were used in combat by U.S. forces. The M1A1 accounted for four medium German tanks and a heavy Tiger I, with the latter being knocked out by an improbable hit through the driver's vision slot.

When the existence of the bazooka was revealed to the American public, official press releases for the first two years stated that it "packed the wallop of a 155 mm cannon"—a great exaggeration.

In late 1942, numbers of early-production American M1 bazookas were captured by German troops from Red Army forces who had been given quantities of the bazooka under lend-lease. There were also examples captured during the Operation Torch invasions in the North African Campaign. The Germans promptly developed their own version of the weapon called the Panzerschreck, increasing the diameter of the warhead from 60 mm to 88 mm (2.4 to 3.5 in), which as a result, gave it significantly greater armor penetration. During U.S. trials of the M1, calls for a larger-diameter warhead had also been raised by some ordnance officers but were rejected. Later in the war, after participating in an armor penetration test involving a German Panther tank using both the Raketenpanzerbüchse, or RPzB 54 Panzerschreck and the U.S. M9 bazooka, Corporal Donald E. Lewis of the U.S. Army informed his superiors that the Panzerschreck was "far superior to the American bazooka": 'I was so favorably impressed [by the Panzerschreck] I was ready to take after the Krauts with their own weapon.'

The M1 bazooka fared much better on the rare occasions when it could be used against the much thinner armor typically fitted to the lower sides, undersides, and tops of enemy tanks. To hit the bottom of an enemy tank, the bazooka operator had to wait until the tank was surmounting a steep hill or other obstruction, while hitting the top armor usually necessitated firing the rocket from the upper story of a building or a similar, elevated, position. Even the heavy King Tiger tank only possessed hull and turret top armor of 44 mm ( in) thickness at best, able to be pierced by the bazooka's shaped-charge rocket. During the 1944 Allied offensive in France, when some examples of liaison aircraft with the U.S. Army began to be experimentally field-armed, and were already flying with pairs or quartets of the American ordnance—and most notably used during the Battle of Arracourt—Major Charles "Bazooka Charlie" Carpenter mounted a battery of three M9 bazookas on the wing-to-fuselage struts on each side of his L-4 Grasshopper aircraft to attack enemy armor, and was credited with destroying six enemy tanks, including two Tiger I heavy tanks. In the hands of American infantry the bazooka still enjoyed rare successes against heavy Nazi armored fighting vehicles. In 1945, during the failed Operation Nordwind offensive, a bazooka team managed the unlikely achievement of destroying a Jagdtiger heavy tank destroyer, the most heavily armored fighting vehicle in World War Two. The team managed to do this by positioning themselves to get a shot at the massive vehicle's thinner side armor, scoring a direct hit on the ammunition bustle and causing a catastrophic kill. This incident shows that when correctly aimed at vulnerable points on vehicles the bazooka could still be effective against even the largest of armored vehicles, though it required significant skill to accomplish.

Despite the introduction of the M9 bazooka with its improved rocket—the M6A3—in late 1943, reports of the weapon's effectiveness against enemy armor decreased drastically in the latter stages of World War II. New German tanks with thicker and better-designed armor plate appeared, and Schürzen armor skirts, originally intended to defeat Soviet antitank rifles but that also proved effective in defeating the bazooka's shaped charge warhead, were fitted. This development forced bazooka operators to target less well-protected areas of the vehicle, such as the tracks, drive sprockets, road wheels, or engine compartment. In a letter dated May 20, 1944, Gen. George S. Patton stated to a colleague that "the purpose of the bazooka is not to hunt tanks offensively, but to be used as a last resort in keeping tanks from overrunning infantry. To insure this, the range should be held to around 30 yards."

In the Pacific campaign, as in North Africa, the original bazookas sent to combat often had reliability issues. The battery-operated firing circuit was easily damaged during rough handling, and the rocket motors often failed because of high temperatures and exposure to moisture, salt air, or humidity. With the introduction of the M1A1 and its more reliable rocket ammunition, the bazooka was effective against some fixed Japanese infantry emplacements such as small concrete bunkers and pillboxes. Against coconut and sand emplacements, the weapon was not always effective, as these softer structures often reduced the force of the warhead's impact enough to prevent detonation of the explosive charge. Later in the Pacific war, Army and Marine units often used the M2 flamethrower to attack such emplacements. In the few instances in the Pacific where the bazooka was used against tanks and armored vehicles, the rocket's warhead easily penetrated the thin armor plate used by the Japanese and destroyed the vehicle. Overall, the M1A1, M9, and M9A1 rocket launchers were viewed as useful and effective weapons during World War II, though they had been primarily employed against enemy emplacements and fixed fortifications, not as anti-tank weapons. General Dwight Eisenhower later described it as one of the four "tools of victory" which won World War II for the Allies (together with the atom bomb, Jeep and the C-47 Skytrain transport aircraft).

During the war, bazookas were lend-leased to the United Kingdom, Brazil, Canada, China, and Free French forces as well as the Soviet Union. Some were supplied to French maquis and Yugoslav partisans.

Korean War

The success of the more powerful German Panzerschreck caused the bazooka to be completely redesigned at the close of World War II. A larger, 3.5 in (89 mm) model was adopted, the M20 "super bazooka". Though bearing a superficial resemblance to the Panzerschreck, the M20 had a greater effective range, penetrating capability and was nearly 20% lighter than its German counterpart. The M20 weighed 14.3 pounds (6.5 kg) and fired a hollow shaped-charge 9 lb (4 kg) M28A2 HEAT rocket when used in an anti-tank role. It was also operated by a two-man team and had a rate of fire of six shots per minute. As with its predecessor, the M20 could also fire rockets with either practice (M29A2) or WP smoke (T127E3/M30) warheads. Having learned from experience of the sensitivity of the bazooka and its ammunition to moisture and harsh environments, the ammunition for the new weapon was packaged in moisture-resistant packaging, and the M20's field manual contained extensive instructions on launcher lubrication and maintenance, as well as storage of rocket ammunition. When prepared for shipment from the arsenal, the weapon was protected by antifungal coatings over all electrical contacts, in addition to a cosmoline coating in the hand-operated magneto that ignited the rocket. Upon issue, these coatings were removed with solvent to ready the M20 for actual firing. However, budget cutbacks initiated by Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson in the years following World War II effectively canceled the intended widespread issue of the M20, and initial U.S. forces deploying to Korea were armed solely with the M9/M9A1 2.36-in. launcher and old stockpiled World War II inventories of M6A3 rocket ammunition.

At the outbreak of the Korean War, the South Korean military had 1,958 M9A1 rocket launchers that were given from the U.S. Forces Korea during withdrawal in 1948 to 1949, and they were the only anti-tank firearms that the Korean military had secured sufficient quantities. The South Korean military actively operated rocket launchers against North Korean armor. However, the 2.36-inch rocket launcher failed to show its power against the front armor of T-34-85, which was the biggest threat. The South Korean military responded by firing rockets into the side, rear, or track through ambushes, but it did not have much effect.

At the same time, the U.S. military dispatched its first troops to the Korean Peninsula without trusting reports that a 2.36-inch rocket could not destroy North Korean tanks. On July 5, 1950, during the Battle of Osan, Task Force Smith tried to stop North Korean tanks with 2.36-inch rocket launchers and 75 mm recoilless rifles but was overrun by 33 T-34-85s. One of the North Korean T-34 received a total of 22 shots on the side and rear at about 10 meters in distance, but survived the attack.

On July 8, Colonel Robert R. Martin, commander of the 34th Regiment of the 24th U.S. Division, was killed while operating a 2.36-inch rocket launcher to prevent North Korean tanks from advancing. Additionally, ordnance authorities received numerous combat reports regarding the failure of the M6A3 warhead to properly detonate upon impact, eventually traced to inventories of rocket ammunition that had deteriorated from numerous years of storage in humid or salt air environments. Therefore, the U.S. Army immediately airlifted a small number of available M20 Super Bazookas from the U.S. mainland after learning that it needed more powerful rockets. The rockets were deployed during the Battle of Taejon on July 18, and proved their power by destroying a number of North Korean tanks that entered the city on July 20. As a result, the U.S. Army rushed to secure more M20 rockets and was able to hold more than 900 Super Bazookas during the Battle of Pusan Perimeter. The South Korean military also began receiving M20 in early August, and successfully destroyed 4 tanks with M20s during their first usage on 9 August.

Large numbers of 2.36-inch bazookas that were captured during the Chinese Civil War were also employed by the Chinese forces against the American Sherman and Patton tanks, and the Chinese later reverse engineered and produced a copy of the M20 designated the Type 51. It is considered that the Communist-used bazookas destroyed more tanks than the UN bazookas did.

Vietnam War
The M20 was used in the early stages of the war in Vietnam by the U.S. Marines before gradually being phased out by the mid-1960s in favor of the M67 recoilless rifle and later, the M72 LAW rocket. The U.S. Army also used it in lesser quantity. While occasions to destroy enemy armored vehicles proved exceedingly rare, it was employed against enemy fortifications and emplacements with success. The M20 remained in service with South Vietnamese and indigenous forces until the late 1960s.

The Vietnam People's Army also developed their own bazooka under the management of Tran Dai Nghia. It was successfully test-fired in 1947. The anti-French Viet Minh received Chinese Type 51 bazookas. They were used by the Viet Cong as late as 1964.

Other conflicts
The Portuguese Armed Forces used quantities of M9A1 and M20 rocket launchers in their overseas provinces in Africa against Marxist guerrilla forces during the Portuguese Overseas War. The French Army also used the M9A1 and M20A1 launchers in various campaigns in Indochina, Korea, and Algeria. The M20A1 was replaced in the 1970s by the LRAC F1. Commonwealth armies also used the M20 and M20A1 under the name M20 Mk I and M20 Mk II. They were used until their replacement by the Carl Gustav L14A1. For instance, British Army used Super Bazookas during the Operation Vantage.

The Argentine Army fielded M20s during the Falklands War.

Variants

Rocket launcher, M1 "bazooka"
 First issued June 14, 1942; designed by Capt. L.A. Skinner
 Used the M6 HEAT and M7 training practice rockets (60 mm warhead)
 Can penetrate up to 3 inches (76 mm) of armor
 Velocity of
 Overall length: .
 Weight (unloaded): .

Rocket launcher, M1A1 "bazooka"

 Improved electrical system
 Simplified design
 Used the M6A1 HEAT and M7A1 practice rockets
 Forward hand grip removed
 Contact box removed
 Supplanted the M1 in production beginning in July 1943
 Overall length:
 Weight (unloaded):

Rocket launcher, M9 "bazooka"
 Battery ignition replaced by trigger magneto
 Could be disassembled into two halves for easier carrying
 Metal instead of wooden furniture
 Uses the improved M6A3 HEAT, M7A3 practice, and M10 bursting smoke (white phosphorus) rockets (weight: 3.4 lbs., velocity: 265 feet per second)
 Could penetrate up to 4 inches (102 mm) of armor
 Supplanted the M1A1 in production beginning in October 1943
 Overall length:  fixed /  disassembled
 Weight (unloaded):

Rocket launcher, M9A1 "bazooka"
An optical reflector sight replaced the iron sights beginning in September 1944. The M9A1 supplanted the M9 in production beginning in June 1944. It has an improved coupling mechanism for the launch tube; the overall length is  and  when folded. Unloaded weight is .

Rocket launcher, M18 "bazooka"
 Experimental version of the M9A1 made from aluminum alloy
 Ordered in late summer 1945, canceled at war's end
 Weight (unloaded):

Rocket launcher, M20 "super bazooka"

 Larger, 3.5 in (88.9 mm) caliber, and larger warhead
 Could penetrate up to 11 inches (280 mm) of armor
 Extended range by about 150 m
 Originally a larger version of the M9A1, designated M20 in late 1944
 Entered active service just before the start of the Korean War

Rocket launcher, M20A1 "super bazooka"
 Product improved variant with improved connector latch assembly, entering production in 1952
 Improved version of the M20

Rocket launcher, M20B1 "super bazooka"
 Lightweight version with barrels made of cast aluminum, other components simplified
 Used as a supplement to the M20

Rocket launcher, M20A1B1 "super bazooka"
 M20B1 upgraded with M20A1 improvements

Rocket launcher, M25 "three shot bazooka"
 Experimental tripod mounted rocket launcher with overhead magazine circa 1955

RL-83 Blindicide

 RL-83 Blindicide: An improved "bazooka" design of Belgian origin. Used by Belgian forces during the Congo Crisis and by the Swiss, Mexican and Israeli armies and various other armed forces.
 The Blindicide is not a direct derivative of the M20 design, being smaller caliber (83 mm not 88.9 mm). The aluminum launch tube is externally reinforced with glass reinforced plastic.
 The launch tube can be folded to just over half the opened length which makes it far easier to carry into combat
 The Blindicide rocket has another major difference from the "super bazooka" in that it is mechanically fired with a percussion cap system, the launcher having a simple mechanical hammer with a firing pin, that is cocked by the loader. There are two safety levers, one on the aimer's pistol grip, and another at the rear of the launch tube for the protection of the loader.
 Because no electrical connection had to be made between rocket and launcher, reload time is faster than for the "super bazooka" and a good team can fire off six rockets per minute.
 Blindicide rockets were designed to spin in flight, with six of the rocket's exhaust ports being angled to impart spin. While spinning the rocket has improved accuracy, centrifugal forces acting on the explosive jet tend to spread the jet, reducing the thickness of armor that it can penetrate.

3.5 in Hydroar M20A1B1 rocket launcher
 Brazil, manufactured by Hydroar SA—improved 3.5 M20A1B1. A hand grip with solid state firing circuit powered by two AA cells replaced the U.S.-designed hand grip with magneto trigger.

88.9 mm Instalaza M65
 Developed by Instalaza for use by the Spanish Army, the M65 is an improved version of the M20 "super bazooka". It uses an improved ignition method and new ammunition types. The available ammunitions used were the CHM65 (HEAT), MB66 (dual-purpose), and FIM66 (smoke) shells. Older versions were designated M53 and M58.

Specifications

M1
 Length: 54 in (137 cm)
 Caliber: 2.36 in (60 mm)
 Weight: 13 lb (5.9 kg)
 Warhead: M6 or M6A2 shaped charge (3.5 lb, 1.59 kg)
 Range
 Maximum: 400 yards (370 m)
 Effective: (claimed) 150 yards (140 m)
 Crew: 2, operator and loader

M1A1
 Length: 54 in (137 cm)
 Caliber: 2.36 in (60 mm)
 Weight: 12.75 lb (5.8 kg)
 Warhead: M6A1 shaped charge (3.5 lb, 1.59 kg)
 Range
 Maximum: 400 yards (370 m)
 Effective: (claimed) 150 yards (140 m)
 Crew: 2, operator and loader

M9/M9A1
 Length: 61 in (155 cm)
 Caliber: 2.36 in (60 mm)
 Weight: 14.3 lb (6.5 kg)
 Warhead: M6A3 shaped charge (3.5 lb, 1.59 kg)
 Range
 Maximum: 400–500 yards (370–460 m)
 Effective: (claimed) 120 yards (110 m)
 Crew: 2, operator and loader (M9 and M9A1)

M20A1/A1B1
 Length (when assembled for firing): 60 in (1,524 mm)
 Caliber: 3.5 in (90 mm)
 Weight (unloaded): M20A1: 14.3 lb (6.5 kg); M20A1B1: 13 lb (5.9 kg)
 Warhead: M28A2 HEAT (9 lb) or T127E3/M30 WP (8.96 lb)
 Range
 Maximum: 1000 yd (913 m)
 Effective (stationary target/moving target): 300 yd (270 m) / 200 yd (180 m)
 Crew: 2, operator and loader

Users

 : Super bazooka, replaced by AT4
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : RL-83
 : Super bazooka
 : Bazooka and super bazooka
 : Bazooka< and super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka During the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the anti-Castrist Brigade 2506 used 2.36 in bazookas against Castro's T-34s.
 : Super bazooka
 : Bazooka and super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
  Iraq: Super bazooka
 : M20A1
  Provisional Irish Republican Army: M20 Super Bazooka, first used in 1971.
 : M20A1 and RL-83 variants
 : JGSDF used super bazookas, replaced by the Carl Gustav recoilless rifles
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka

 : Super bazooka M20
 : M9A1 and M20 super bazooka
 : Used captured M1s as 6 cm Raketenpanzerbüchse 788 (a)
 : The M9A1 was used for a short period of time by the Dutch Army as the Raketwerper 2.36 inch. It served from the beginning of the 1950s to the end of the 1960s with the Landmacht as an instructional weapon, with the Troepenmacht in Suriname (TRIS, troop force in Surinam, part of the Landmacht), and the Nederlands Detachement Verenigde Naties (N.D.V.N.), Dutch Detachment United Nations) in 1950–1951 during the Korean War. During the Korean War, the 2.36-inch bazooka was replaced by the 3.5-inch M20. Although it replaced the M9A1 in 1951 with the N.D.V.N., the weapon was not introduced into the Landmacht until 1954. The M20 and M20B1 were later replaced by the 66 mm LAW in 1968, but the bazooka remained in inventory for reservists, mobilisation, and other non-priority uses until 1989.
  : Super bazooka M20
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka

 : Large numbers of 2.36-inch and 3.5-inch bazookas were captured by the Chinese communists during the Chinese Civil War and Korean War. China also copied the 3.5-inch as the Type 51—with a projectile 90 mm in diameter. The Type 51 can fire captured 3.5-inch projectiles (i.e. 90 mm), but 3.5-inch super bazookas cannot load projectiles made for the Type 51.
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : The armed forces received 1,958 M9A1s before the Korean War, and 609 M9A1s and 4,907 M20s were in service by the end of the war.
 : M9A1 and M20A1 variants
 : Bazooka
 : M20 bazooka and improved designs (M53, M58 and M65)
 : Super bazooka<
 : Super bazooka as คจตถ. 3.5 นิ้ว in the Royal Thai Army, replaced by the Type 69 RPG
 : Super bazooka
 : Super bazooka
 : Bazooka and super bazooka
 : Bazooka replaced by the M72 LAW
 : Type 51 bazooka, used by Viet Minh and Viet Cong
 : Super bazooka

See also
 List of U.S. Army weapons by supply catalog designation (Group B)

Citations

Sources
 .

  Article on early M1 Bazooka with rare photos.

  Page on Bazookas and equipment.

External links

American inventions
Anti-tank rockets of the United States
Anti-tank weapons
Weapons and ammunition introduced in 1942
Weapons of the Philippine Army
World War II infantry weapons of the United States


text:
package org.ethereum.net.rlpx.discover;

import org.apache.commons.codec.binary.Hex;
import org.ethereum.config.SystemProperties;
import org.ethereum.manager.WorldManager;
import org.ethereum.net.rlpx.Node;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
import org.springframework.beans.factory.annotation.Autowired;
import org.springframework.stereotype.Component;

import java.util.*;
import java.util.concurrent.*;

/**
 * Makes test RLPx connection to the peers to acquire statistics
 *
 * Created by Anton Nashatyrev on 17.07.2015.
 */
@Component
public class PeerConnectionTester {
    static final org.slf4j.Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger("discover");

    private static final int ConnectThreads = SystemProperties.CONFIG.peerDiscoveryWorkers();

    @Autowired
    WorldManager worldManager;

    // NodeHandler instance should be unique per Node instance
    Map<NodeHandler, ?> connectedCandidates = new IdentityHashMap<>();

    // executor with Queue which picks up the Node with the best reputation
    ExecutorService peerConnectionPool = new ThreadPoolExecutor(ConnectThreads,
            ConnectThreads, 0L, TimeUnit.SECONDS,
            new MutablePriorityQueue<Runnable, ConnectTask>(new Comparator<ConnectTask>() {
                @Override
                public int compare(ConnectTask h1, ConnectTask h2) {
                    return h2.nodeHandler.getNodeStatistics().getReputation() -
                            h1.nodeHandler.getNodeStatistics().getReputation();
                }
            }));

    private class ConnectTask implements Runnable {
        NodeHandler nodeHandler;

        public ConnectTask(NodeHandler nodeHandler) {
            this.nodeHandler = nodeHandler;
        }

        @Override
        public void run() {
            try {
                if (nodeHandler != null) {
                    nodeHandler.getNodeStatistics().rlpxConnectionAttempts.add();
                    logger.debug("Trying node connection: " + nodeHandler);
                    Node node = nodeHandler.getNode();
                    worldManager.getActivePeer().connect(node.getHost(), node.getPort(),
                            Hex.encodeHexString(node.getId()), true);
                    logger.debug("Terminated node connection: " + nodeHandler);
                    nodeHandler.getNodeStatistics().disconnected();
                }
            } catch (Exception e) {
                e.printStackTrace();
            }
        }
    }

    public PeerConnectionTester() {
    }

    public void nodeStatusChanged(final NodeHandler nodeHandler) {
        if (!connectedCandidates.containsKey(nodeHandler)) {
            logger.debug("Submitting node for RLPx connection : " + nodeHandler);
            connectedCandidates.put(nodeHandler, null);
            peerConnectionPool.execute(new ConnectTask(nodeHandler));
        }
    }

    /**
     * The same as PriorityBlockQueue but with assumption that elements are mutable
     * and priority changes after enqueueing, thus the list is sorted by priority
     * each time the head queue element is requested.
     * The class has poor synchronization since the prioritization might be approximate
     * though the implementation should be inheritedly thread-safe
     */
    public static class MutablePriorityQueue<T, C extends T> extends LinkedBlockingQueue<T> {
        Comparator<C> comparator;

        public MutablePriorityQueue(Comparator<C> comparator) {
            this.comparator = comparator;
        }

        @Override
        public T take() throws InterruptedException {
            return poll();
        }

        @Override
        public T poll(long timeout, TimeUnit unit) throws InterruptedException {
            if (isEmpty()) {
                return super.poll(timeout, unit);
            } else {
                T ret = Collections.min(this, (Comparator<? super T>) comparator);
                remove(ret);
                return ret;
            }
        }

        @Override
        public T poll() {
            if (isEmpty()) {
                return super.poll();
            } else {
                T ret = Collections.min(this, (Comparator<? super T>) comparator);
                remove(ret);
                return ret;
            }
        }

        @Override
        public T peek() {
            if (isEmpty()) {
                return super.peek();
            } else {
                T ret = Collections.min(this, (Comparator<? super T>) comparator);
                return ret;
            }
        }
    }

}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Q: Check of URL Parameters are set I was wondering if people knew how to check if a URL parameter is set?
For instance, I have an application that may or may not have a query attached to the URL. Something like this:

...salesforce.com/apex/project?id=##################

I understand to grab that ID in Apex it would look something like:
public String id = apexpages.currentpage().getparameters().get('id');

What I want to do is check if that's been set.
In PHP, I know you can check for things like this:
<?php
  if (isset($_GET['id'])) {
    // Do something...
  }
?>

I'm just looking for the Apex equivilant.
Hope I've been clear enough,
Thanks!

A: If I understand your question correctly it should simply be a case of:
    public String idParam = apexpages.currentpage().getparameters().get('id');

    if (idParam != null) {
      doSomething();
    }

You could also go a step further and check that it is an actual Id, not some other value such as a string:
if (idParam != null && idParam instanceOf Id)

I think Id is a reserved keyword in Apex so I've changed your param to 'idParam'.

A: I am checking it this way:

*

*key exists check

*key is not null

Example:
if(ApexPages.currentPage().getParameters().containsKey('param1') && ApexPages.currentPage().getParameters().get('param1') != '')
{
....
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


If you want to reach your goals, you have start one day! Thomas Oschwald started his new micro expedition a month ago in Ebikon. He packed his Stubby on a trailer and step by step he walked first through Switzerland to Basel, then along the Rhine-Rhone Canal to the Loire and finally along the longest river in France to the Atlantic Ocean in Saint Nazaire, where he was able to surf his first waves! More to come – stay tuned!


text:
Globalising Freedom
By Thomas N. Hale
What does President Bush mean by "freedom?" It seems worthwhile to ask following inaugural and State of the Union speeches in which the president dedicated the United States under his leadership to spreading freedom around the globe. There are elaborate philosophical debates surrounding the meaning of the word, but the president was making a case as appealing as it was simple – that people throughout the world should govern their own political destinies.
Why then do so many believers in rule by the people – on the American left, in Europe, in the developing world, and especially in the middle east – respond to these speeches with apprehension? Furthermore, why do critics like Naomi Klein remain sceptical in the wake of what serious observers are describing as a "groundswell" of democratic sentiment in the middle east (see Youssef M Ibrahim, "Will the Mideast Bloom?", Washington Post, 13 March 2005). Certainly not because they "hate freedom". Rather, the answer seems to rest in how they define the scope of democracy. The president's speeches advocate expanding democracy at the national and sub-national levels. However, in a globalised world dominated by a lone hegemon, governments must also consider the transnational aspects of democracy.
At the risk of oversimplification, let's say that at its heart democracy means giving people control over decisions that affect their lives. Totalitarian regimes like Saddam Hussein's Iraq patently fail to provide such control to their citizens; constitutional republics like the United States do so rather well.
That seems to be where the US administration's thinking on democracy ends. But what are the implications for democracy when decisions made in one country start mattering to people who live elsewhere? The problem arises especially in relation to the United States, which – because of its size, power, and policies – matters almost everywhere. It seems fair to argue, for example, that the average citizen of Fallujah has been more affected by US policy in the last year than the average American. Yet Americans are allowed to decide how the US government acts in the Iraqi city while its own residents are not.
That is an extreme example, but the disparity extends far beyond Iraq. Consider global warming. America creates far more greenhouse gases than any other nation, yet it is other places – places with no influence over American policy – that will face the harshest effects as the sea rises and tropical diseases spread to new regions. Would the US oppose the Kyoto treaty if Florida were a small island nation and Ohio were situated just north of the malaria line? Similar parochialism can be seen in US agricultural subsidies, Aids medicine patents, and a host of other cases in which US policies impinge sharply on the lives of foreigners, often with negligible benefit to Americans.
There are good reasons why people outside the United States cannot vote in US elections. After all, critics will contend, the American government is elected to represent Americans. Nonetheless, it is important for advocates of freedom to realise that defining democracy exclusively at the national level can lead to serious problems when political concerns become transnational.
The experience of the international financial institutions provides a fitting warning. During the 1990s environmental groups, labour unions, and poor countries condemned the "democracy deficit" they saw at organisations like the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organisation. In their view, globalisation was making these institutions' decisions increasingly important and painful to them, yet they had no way to make the bureaucrats in charge hear their pleas.
Today, US hegemony and the administration's foreign policy have created a similar situation, a "democratic mismatch" in which the people most affected by US policy feel increasingly locked out of decisions that can literally destroy their lives. The result is that citizens of states around the world increasingly see America as illegitimate and arrogant, even imperial. To answer a question asked with unfortunate frequency in recent years, this is – at least in part – "why they hate us".
It is also why so many people greeted the president's inaugural address and State of the Union speech with scepticism. Until the administration realises that spreading democracy across the world means giving people a say in all the decisions that affect them – including the ones that originate in Washington – it will fail to achieve its admirable goals.
Resolving the democratic mismatch does not require building a global republic. It does, however, necessitate giving greater weight to the concerns of people affected by American foreign policy. For a superpower, multilateralism is a necessary component of democracy because it gives people a say in decisions that touch their lives. In this sense, the United States spreads freedom when it consults with people and nations affected by its actions and works with international institutions and within international law.
The president is right to make country-level democratisation the centrepiece of US policy, and certainly democracy cannot be meaningful at the transnational level if it is denied locally. But it is equally true that in a globalised world dominated by one powerful nation, democratic values must spread beyond borders in order for the world's people truly to be free.
This article originally appeared on openDemocracy.net under a Creative Commons licence. To view the original article, please click here.
More Information on Globalization of Politics
More Information on Global Governance and the Three Sisters

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
2023: Orji Kalu's secret visit to Nnamdi Kanu empty positioning for political office, says Ejiofor
Friday Olokor
Ifeanyi Ejiofor, lawyer to the detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, on Saturday, said the desperation by politicians especially of Igbo extractions to visit the IPOB leader in the custody of the Department of State Services is to boost their selfish interest in the 2023 elections.
He also described as empty positioning for political office, the recent visit to Kanu by a former governor of Abia State, Orji Uzor Kalu.
The lawyer said Kalu breached DSS protocols, adding that he visited the IPOB leader without the knowledge of his legal team or family members.
Ejiofor in a statement titled, 'Keeping the record straight', demanded that the DSS should launch a probe into Kalu's "clandestine" visit to Kanu which, he said, was laced with suspicion.
"Orji Kalu's hypocritical pretensions was worsened by the fact that he is a politician (and a wily one at that), and he is not related to Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu either by affinity or consanguinity."
"I make bold to say that the clandestine visit to Onyendu undertaken by Orji Uzor Kalu is no more than an empty positioning for political office come 2023.
Sit-at-home continues in Anambra, commercial activities grounded
FG charges not worth defending, Kanu tells court, gets Feb date
Kanu: Any attempt by FG to appeal N1bn damages is disrespect for judiciary —Lawyer
"In 2017, Orji Uzor Kalu exhibited similar inclination. He merely wanted to score a cheap political point. But his attempt failed woefully, and rightly so. Onyendu did not accord him any relevance whatsoever. This time, he initiated similar pretensions. Again, his shenanigan did not produce the desired effect," he said.
"We hereby invite the relevant authorities of the Department of State Security to investigate this. Further, Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was not informed beforehand that Orji Uzor Kalu was at the facility to see him. The information that was given to him, which he conveyed to me, was to the effect that an important personality was at the facility to see him. The identity of the so-called important personality was not disclosed to him. This is deceptive and a breach of the protocol of the DSS," the statement added.
Tags: 2023 IPOB Nnamdi Kanu Orji Kalu


Noll & Tam collaborated with stakeholders such as Scout representatives, the Benicia Senior Citizens Board of Directors, and interested neighbors to refine a design and program for this renovation. Major design components include a new entry foyer and main offices, conversion of existing rooms into City offices, and renovation of classrooms to serve as multipurpose spaces. One entire wing houses the local Boy and Girl Scout chapters. The new community center is an asset for the City, a place for residents to gather and enjoy yoga classes, Spanish lessons, computer classes, or cooking demonstrations.


text:
TNAU to host two-day workshop on preventing grain losses
With an objective to create an awareness on scientific practices for protection of grain, cereal and pulses during handling, transport and storage, a two-day workshop will be held from August 30 at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University here.
It is important to engage farmers in practical demonstration to make them understand the scientific practices to be adopted by them to save their grains in households and at village level from stored insect pests, said a press release from the University.
"Also there is necessity for active participation of students and research scholars in this aspect in the process of sharing and understanding scientific knowledge on this important subject. Awareness and capacity building are thus necessary and this is the reason behind the workshop," the release added.
The workshop will cover both classroom and practical sessions and the importance being is to reemphasise the heavy post harvest losses of grains during storage, handling and transport in the Indian context.
Other objectives include bringing all stakeholders on one platform to take this mission forward in an accelerated manner and the program in different regions of India for easy accessibility and convenience of all stakeholders in the region, thus to reduce storage losses by enhancing knowledge and skill of participants, it said.
About 300 delegates from across India including traders, exporters, Import processing industries and industry associations in grain, cereal and pulses segment, farmers in the region, warehousing and fumigation service providers, Government department representatives and scientists from state departments and State agricultural universities.


text:
No Halos Here
21st Jun 2022
Surrender vs. Trust
This week, in a solo episode, Jen tackles the concepts of surrender vs. trust. She unpacks what those words mean in her own life, how she has been applying them to her life and biz practices and looking at certain idiomatic phrases in English that use the words.
Phrases such as "surrender to the process" or "just trust" tend to over-simplify our relationship with these words.
But what does that really mean? And how can looking closely at your relationship with these words improve your life?
On the No Halos Here Podcast, we explore a wide range of topics broadly categorized as well-being. We encourage you to do your own research and make informed choices about your health and wellbeing. The information we provide is never a substitute for qualified advice specific to your individual needs. In listening, you take full responsibility for implementing any suggestions shared on the podcast and you agree to indemnify us completely against all consequences arising directly or indirectly from your choices.
About Jen and Jane
Jen Lang
Jen believes in the power and wisdom of women's voices. She's a guide for women who want to tune into and align their inner voice so their outer voice can shine; uniting physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual energies into a powerful voice ready to share your message.
Jane Stark
Passionate about energetic alignment and living life from a place of personal power, Jane is a heart-centered leader, certified health and life coach, and marketing strategist. She leads others to play bigger and feel lighter by helping them see and navigate their blocks and connect more deeply with themselves.
Continue the conversation:
Instagram: www.instagram.com/wearejenandjane
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/No-Halos-Here-Podcast
Community: Keep up on all things Jen & Jane: http://eepurl.com/hk31JX
Download the Empowerment Playbook: https://www.wearejenandjane.com/playbook
Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a note in the comment section below!
Follow our podcast
To receive automatic updates on this podcast, please follow on your platform of choice.
We appreciate every bit of feedback to make this a value-adding part of your day. Ratings and reviews from our listeners not only help us improve, but also help others find us in their podcast app. If you have a minute, please leave us a review on Apple Podcasts. Thank You!!
Jen Lang: 00:00:08
This is no halos here hosted by Jen Lang and Jane Stark, the place to inspire a change in your consciousness to elevate the world. We're to heart centered business owners nourishing our inner rebels while growing our respective businesses.
Jane Stark: 00:00:21
No halos here is the result of bringing together an opera singer turned spiritual mentor and a marketing professional turned while being coached to meditate daily. Together, we unite physical, mental, emotional and spiritual energies into a powerful presence to lead, heal and inspire. We love exploring the shadowed edges of life, the universe and beyond through honest and thought provoking conversations. Let's dive in.
Hi, everybody, welcome back to another episode of no halos here today, just with me, Jen Lang. And I want to talk today about this concept of surrender versus trust. This came up in my spiritual practice this morning. And one of the cards that came up for me was labeled trust. And it asked me to look at with this different relationship between surrender versus trust. And my first I was like, huh, I don't really, I don't really know, like it kind of, I know, they feel different in my body when I say those words. But I hadn't actually sat back and thought about it. And I, so many times these phrases come up in our language around surrender and trust, you know, surrender to the process. Trust, trust your heart, trust in the outcome, just trust. And sometimes that asks us to go quite deep. And if you haven't looked at your relationship with these words, if someone has trust issues, for example, have you ever unpacked and looked at what that means? And speaking of someone who definitely is a suspicious type, I'm suspicious Scorpio definitely have had trust challenges throughout a lot of my life. And I'm sort of reflecting for myself on how much of that is I'm not gonna say self created. But how much of that is I being shown situations, to deepen trust, so that I can deepen my trust in myself and in people around me? I've even I've even had exchanges with family members where, you know, I've said to them verbally, I love you, but I don't trust you. And that's such an interesting. Like, can you love someone fully and completely and not trust them? And like, my answer is, yes. And I think Jane and I need to unpack this topic together, because it is quite powerful. However, she is sick with the illness that shall not be named. So we are, like, I'll just take a solo episode this week and talk about this surrender, trust concept, the this love and trust piece, I still feel like you can love someone, perhaps even beyond the trust relationship, I feel like love does go deeper. And that as I think about this, and verbalize this to myself, and to you, the trust piece is if you don't trust somebody, then you're still speaking from a place of, and space of fear. Fear that they will break your trust again, or fear that they will betray you, or fear, you know, of whatever outcome it is that you're fearing. So, trust or a lack of trust can show you how to go deeper into love for a person or situation or even for yourself. However, when a relationship of trust has been damaged, sometimes that can even I'm going to say encourage or show you how to love even more deeply. And even more fully. That person or that situation that brought you they're not going to say it's going to be easy, because sometimes that really does push us to, to dig deeper. Now if we bring in this word, surrender, and you know, I feel like surrender can be taken in so many different ways. Surrender can be a place of disempowerment. Meaning, you begin, you give up. You're like I've hit my limit. I'm done. I surrender. You know, obviously, in traditional patriarchal, masculine terms, surrender is to give power or allow the other side to win. If you're talking in a sort of a binary competitive, two armies are at war and one surrenders, or two individuals battling and one surrenders than the other person is the winner or the victor. So there's that sort of, I think that's the aspect of surrender that most people are familiar with. Now, when we look at the word surrender through the lens of I'm going to say more, the more spiritual world, where you sort of surrender to the process, or you surrender the control over a specific outcome. That is trusting that
it's letting go, actually, it's a letting go of an expectation Do you might have about that outcome, where it's letting go of the pressure that either you or others have put on a perceived outcome on a situation now, what comes to mind, the, you know, that feeling of swimming upstream, and you're going through, you're moving through your day, and you might be running errands, and you hit every red light. And when you arrive at the grocery store, there's a lineup of two people, but when you finished your shopping, there's lineups of like 20 people. And that just seems like every next step, everyone knows that feeling, right? Where you're being sort of, blockaded, or, or delayed. At every step. Sometimes this happens in a work project. Sometimes this happens in our day to day lives or in, you know, in relationships. That is a time for both surrender and to trust. And it's not easy because in our achievement, get things done, form of society that we currently live in the maybe I'll call it like toxic busyness, toxic doing Enos, the aspect of things that keep us delayed from checking that next thing off the list, like Jane and I've talked about or keeping us so driven on the doing that we don't have, we don't even know what it's like to be. However, sometimes when we're put into these situations where we have to surrender, like you need to stop with the red light, or the uterus, or you risk an accident, and you stop at you, you know, before cellphones were a popular thing, when you lined up at the grocery store. That's why there's almost magazines at the grocery store aisle because they knew that you'd be waiting. And that you'd last minute, maybe you'd read an article in that magazine, or you'd see the cover and you pick it up and you throw it in your groceries in your grocery pile. So there's a surrendering to the delays that are a natural perceived delays that are a natural part of life. And sometimes it's a surrendering to the whatever is unfolding in front of you sometimes that surrender, and it kind of sets us up in this quote unquote, Battle of you know, you versus time, or you versus your errands. And that's kind of where that surrender piece. It's it's still set up really in the binary bipolar, like a bipolar, but it's not quite it's the binary of like this or that one or the other male or female. But what we want is this surrender to the flow of exactly where we are in our day to day lives. Without feeling like you're battling yourself or concept scuze me one moment.
So the I feel like as I talk through this topic for you all in this surrender versus trust piece, I want you to or invite you to look at those words and what they mean to you. And do you trust yourself in your day to day activities or what aspects of yourself to your trust? What aspects of your life are easy to trust, and what aspects of your life are less easy to trust or less easy to dig deep into that trust space? And then feel into the word surrender? And I feel like sometimes there's can be a softening in surrender. So if we remove it from this sort of battle, or by Binary opposites type of language, if we surrender maybe is that just an exhalation, it's just. And you kind of surrender to the aspects of your, whatever is unfolding for you. So those red lights, if you're running your errands, and you keep getting all those red lights, then that's an opportunity. And so by shifting your view on those perceived delays, instead to maybe their perceived pauses, and their gifts and their moments for you to close your eyes, and moments for you to take a breath, count to five, or count backwards from five and just to come back into yourself, that is surrendering to what is here right now. And trusting that you are exactly where you need to be at this moment in time. Now, doesn't mean that surrender is without action. I think I want to I probably I want to unpack this with Jane when she's back. But this surrender without action. Surrender with action piece might be surrender can just be a place of rest and being absolutely. But surrender might be, maybe you've been striving for something for so long. And for a, you know, could be years. And it's been all encompassing. Actually, this really funny example comes if you've ever seen the movie, The Princess Bride, and the Inigo Montoya character who says, Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father Prepare to die. He's been in the revenge business for so long. For I think it's like 20 years, 20 plus years. So he's trying to find track down the six fingered man who killed his father. So He's dedicated his entire life to fencing to tracking down this man to finding him, he finally finds him succeeds. Spoiler alert. Yep, that's part of the movie. And then the farmboy character, and Carrie always plays him. As he says, To Inigo Montoya, are the men of black, the band Black says to Inigo Montoya, I have you ever considered a career in privacy? Because Because the ego says, I've been in the revenge business for so long that I don't know what to do with myself. So in that case, you've been so focused on something for so long, that the idea of surrendering to something new, it feels so foreign, because you've lived your life with that purpose. But what if you experimented with surrender being the purpose? Or what if you began to play around with instead of pushing it as particular situation? What if I let a surrender to what is in front of a right now and see what happens, I think this kind of relates back to another episode that Jane and I recorded on the pressure, we sometimes feel to fix things for others. And this is a great opportunity to practice the surrender piece, because you've just surrendered to the possible outcome, that the person is not going to pick up the slack. And you have to be okay with leaving it to be okay with that outcome. So I feel like that is an aspect of surrender. And I'd say qualities of trust as well, because you are
both trusting yourself, not to, quote unquote, interfere or fall into old patterns or habits around helping someone through trying to fix something for somebody. And then you're surrendering to what comes next. And letting go of the outcome. And there is power in that as well. So I think I might sort of leave this episode here, and sort of leave you with these open ended questions around what is surrender to me? And what is trust to me? And interesting how trust can be broken, but surrender Can't we had that expression doesn't exist in English, maybe it exists in another language or another concept. So what are your feelings around surrender versus trust? And how do those words feel different for you? These are some journaling and reflection questions. I really encourage you to maybe do this while walking or moving your body and sort of playing with those words and those concepts and trying to bring And forward into your life examples of when your trust might have been broken or when a situation in trust might have been damaged. And then what did you do? Or what was your response to that situation? And is there healing for you to do there? And if so, choose the path of love and deepen your I'm gonna say deepen your loving relationship with yourself to move forward past that situation, and surrender to the love that wants to come forward for that specific reason. Yeah, just some examples and thoughts to play with, as always, wishing you a really fantastic day ahead. And one more note for you that Jane and I are taking a break over the summer, our summer here for July and August. There won't be new episodes coming out. But we will be releasing on social media we will be re releasing and bringing your attention to past episodes that we feel deserve more attention and love. So I hope you enjoy that we are doing a sort of a refresh and a relaunch over the summer. So we'll be back in September, with some new looks and feels. But in the meantime, we have another episode after this week's episode. So we will see you on our sort of season closer. Where are you further, you'll hear us we won't actually see you. But anyway, sending that out into the world and we'll catch you next week. You're on no halos here. Thanks for joining us. Bye for now. Thanks for joining us for these conscious combos. If you're ready to dive deeper head on over to we are Jen and jane.com to continue the conversation.
Next Episode All Episodes Previous Episode
Listen for free
RSS Feed Apple Podcasts Spotify Amazon Music Pocket Casts
Conscious Convos for an Elevated World
Are you looking for more than a 'surface' conversation about topics like spirituality, the self-help industry, or health & wellbeing? Maybe you're curious about exploring some of your own gifts or health challenges and want to know if others have experienced what you have. What about the intersection of entrepreneurship, family life, and self-care?
Join Jen Lang and Jane Stark, two heart-centred business owners, as they explore the shadowed edges of life, the universe, and beyond through honest and thought-provoking conversations. No topic is off-limits and is approached with an open heart and mind, active listening, and compelling guests. We may not have all the answers, but we know that the way forward is through these vulnerable conversations.
Listen in as we unite physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual energies into a powerful show to lead, heal, and inspire you.
Jane Stark - Passionate about energetic alignment and living life from a place of personal power, Jane is a heart-centred leader, certified health and life coach, and marketing strategist. She leads others to play bigger and feel lighter by helping them see and navigate their blocks and connect more deeply with themselves.
Jen Lang - Jen believes in the power and wisdom of women's voices. She's a guide for women who want to tune into and align their inner voice so their outer voice can shine; uniting physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual energies into a powerful voice ready to share your message.
Jane Stark & Jen Lang
Powered by image/svg+xml


Welcome Bella Gypsy Fans! Grab a hot cup of cocoa, turn up your favorite country Christmas music, and snuggle up to these great kits coming your way tomorrow! Leave a comment below with your e-mail address by 11:59 a.m. EST tomorrow (Friday, December 9) for a chance to win one of these great kits. Good luck!
This entry was posted in Sneak Peek by admin. Bookmark the permalink.
oh the blue one looks soo yummiee I can see loads of cards made with these :)thanks for the chance to win one of these pretty sets!
Looks like cute kits. I love this season. Thanks for the chance to win. ldscrappin at yahoo.
They are both GORGEOUS!!! Thanks for the chance to win!
Oh love them both. The first looks so warm and cozy even though it's a winter kit. And the second looks so fun and adorable.


As part of the Bronx Documentary Center's Holiday Portraits, Bronx residents and families are invited to be photographed as part of our Halloween Portraits.
As part of the Bronx Documentary Center's Holiday Portraits, Bronx residents and families are invited to be photographed as part of our Halloween Portraits. Each Bronx resident receives a free 8x10 print and an invite to upcoming events. Thanks to Fujifilm USA for their continued support for our events.


text:
Hengstenberg's Commentary
Hengstenberg on John, Revelation, Ecclesiastes, Ezekiel & Psalms
Psalms 66
Calvin's Commentary
Everett's Study Notes
Geneva Study Bible
Trapp's Commentary
Poole's Annotations
Benson's Commentary
Spurgeon's Verse Expositions
Coke's Commentary
The Expositor's Bible Commentary
Wesley's Notes
Individual Books
Treasury of David
Smith's Writings
Scott on the Psalms
THE Psalm is a song of thanksgiving by the church of God, after protracted and severe trial. It is divided into three great parts. In the first, God is praised, ( Psalms 66:1-7), on account of what he does to Israel at all times, in the second. ( Psalms 66:8-12), on account of what he had just now done, and in the third, ( Psalms 66:13-20), the church vows that she will give thanks.
The relation in which the second division stands to the first, which is not that of something old to something new, but that of the general to the special, bears a striking resemblance to the plan adopted in Psalms 46, in which the general idea is first brought out, and then, in the third strophe, the matter of fact is touched upon in which it had been at present specially realized. In the same way also, Psalms 48 and Psalms 76 first describe the general relation of God to Israel, and then the individual instances of the divine favour.
All the three parts contain a significant number; the first, seven, which again breaks up, according to a common custom, into a three and four, the first and second together, twelve, and the whole three, twenty. The first main division is closed with a Selah: at the close of the second, this mark is wanting, because the division is sufficiently well indicated by the context: but instead of this, at the end of the first sub-division of the first and also of the third part, Psalms 66:4 and Psalms 66:16, in both places, as also in Psalms 66:7, before an imperative which introduces a new portion.
The Title is, To the Chief Musician, a song of praise. Its originality is supported by the first verse, which, if taken without the title, seems too short and abrupt, and in which the הריעו forms a sort of parallelism with שיר . The title announces neither the author, nor the occasion, nor the date of the Psalm; and modern criticism therefore is left at full liberty to indulge its diseased propensity to bring down the Psalms to as late a date as possible. It has been pretty generally affirmed, that the deliverance, celebrated in our Psalm, is the deliverance from the Babylonish captivity. The contents, however, are altogether against this idea. The expressions, "he suffered not our feet to slide," in Psalms 66:9, and, "I called to him with my mouth, and a song of Praise was on my tongue," i.e. "I had scarcely called upon him, when, by delivering me, he gave me occasion to praise him," exclude every reference to a calamity so grievous, and so protracted, as the Babylonish captivity. The detailed representation of suffering in Psalms 66:9-12, does not contain one word about the leading away of the people into captivity. The temple appears in Psalms 66:13 as standing, and there is no expression to indicate that it was in ruins: it is impossible to entertain the idea of a re-built temple, inasmuch as the people express their determination to give thanks to God in the temple for their deliverance, immediately after having obtained it, and a succession of years intervened between the completing of the second temple and the return of the exiles. Finally, the idea of the captivity is excluded by Psalms 66:18 th, where the people give great prominence to their innocence, and affirm that God, for this reason, had heard their prayer for deliverance. The captivity in Babylon was throughout distinguished as being an affliction for sin; compare the introduction to Psalms 44.
If we are thus compelled to take our stand on this side of the captivity, we shall be compelled, as appears from another reason, not to fix a date for the composition higher than the time of Hezekiah. The, "come, behold the deeds of the Lord," in Psalms 66:5, is literally copied from Psalms 46:8; we cannot consider as accidental, the occurrence of מפעלות in both of these passages. But we may quite as well suppose that the (Psalms 46) 46th Psalm refers to the one before us, as that it refers to the (Psalms 46) 46th: and, in favor of the priority of our Psalm, and its composition in the time of David, there is positively the ground, that all the nameless Psalms which stand among the Psalms of David and those of his singers are connection with those that precede them, so as to form with them one whole, and that thus the notices given of the authors of these apply also to the others.
The trouble and the deliverance are, with manifest design, depicted in so generally—under a fulness of figures, out of which only one thing comes forth as a plain matter of fact, viz., that it is a deliverance from the danger of an enemy that is treated of—that we cannot help assuming that our Psalm was intended to be a song of praise which might be used generally on every occasion of deliverance from hostile power. The significant allusion in Psalms 46:8, a Psalm which celebrates the deliverance through the Assyrians, shows how the Psalm before us accompanied the people of God in all ages. Such songs, however, for the church of all times, would ordinarily be sung only in those times, the events of which awakened in the spirits of men a lively sense of their contents.
Verses 1-7
The first strophe is Psalms 66:1-7. After an exhortation to the whole earth to praise God, Psalms 66:1-4, (compare at Psalms 47:1,) there follows, in Psalms 66:4-7, the basis of the same: the Lord manifests his glory in a multitude of mighty deeds, deliverances on behalf of his people, and judgments on the insolent heathen world. The Psalmist, before passing on to what is particular, marks out for it its proper place, by taking a rapid glance at the mighty whole into which it was to be put.
Ver. 1. Shout for joy to God, all lands. Ver. 2. Sing the glory of his name, give glory to his praise. Ver. 3. Say to God, How terrible art thou in thy works, on account of the multitude of thy strength thine enemies must feign (submission) to thee. Ver. 4. All lands worship thee, they sing to thee, they sing thy name. Ver. 5. Come and see the works of God, who is terrible in his deeds on the children of men. Ver. 6. He turns the sea into dry land, they go through the flood on foot, there we will rejoice in him. Ver. 7. He rules eternally by his power, his eyes spy out among the nations, the rebellious may not exalt themselves.
On "the glory of his name"="the glory which belongs to him according to his glorious deeds and manifestations," comp. Psalms 29:1-2. The parallel passages, Joshua 7:19, Psalms 29:1, Isaiah 42:12, Jeremiah 13:16, John 9:24, show that we cannot translate the second clause, "make his praise glorious," but only, "give glory as his praise," or, "to his praise:" כבוד , is the thing to be given, and the second object, is תהלתו . The angels give formally glory to God, in Psalms 29:9: compare "Holy, holy, holy, all lands are full of his glory," in Isaiah 6.
In Psalms 66:3 and Psalms 66:4, we have the words in which the nations of the earth should give glory to God. The translation, "how terrible are thy works," is not grammatically incorrect, but, on comparing Psalms 66:5, it becomes manifest that we must translate, "how terrible art thou in thy works,"—the מעשיך , as well as the עלילה being an accusative; comp. Ew. § 483. The "thou" is wanting, as in Psalms 68:35, "dreadful, God, (art thou,) from out of thy sanctuary." In reference to "they feign," compare Psalms 18:44. That all who oppose must be subject to God, must humbly submit, must conceal their aversion, shows how great is his might, how terrible is his doing. Pharaoh's is an example of such forced submission, comp. Psalms 66:6.
In Psalms 66:4, "they feign," renders it necessary for us to consider "they worship" as, equivalent to " they may worship."
The "come, see the deeds of God," in Psalms 66:5, to which allusion is so strikingly made in John 1:46-47, indicates the prominent place which the manifestation of the glory of God occupies before the eyes of the whole heathen world: it is not with idle phantoms but with realities that they have to do; and this is the reason why the confident hope is entertained, by the people of the revelation, that the heathen world shall be won over to God through the influence of what has happened. The church still addresses the same language, "come and see," to all who, whether inwardly or outwardly, stand afar off. The deeds of God are dreadful even to those to whom deliverance is brought. For his tremendous majesty is manifested in them, comp. Psalms 65:5, Psalms 65:8. The על points out the children of men as the object on which the deeds of God are performed:—the patient in opposition to the agent. The preterite הפך in Psalms 66:6, stands, as the following future shows, in the sense of a present. The Psalmist refers to the passage through the Red Sea and the Jordan, but not as to transactions which took place and were concluded at a given period of time, but as to events which are really happening in every age. God's guidance of his people is a constant drying up of the sea and of the Jordan; and the joy over his mighty deeds is always receiving new materials. The idea, that the sole reference is to those particular transactions, which took place at the origin of the nation, is inconsistent with what goes before, "Come and see the deeds of the Lord," which implies that it is something actually present that is referred to, with the entirely general contents of Psalms 66:7, with the future ישברו following immediately the preterite, and lastly, even although this in every case could be accounted for by a realization of past events, with the נשמחה which can be translated in no other way than by "we will rejoice," (comp. Psalms 42:4. Psalms 55:2), a resolution to do that for which God is giving a rich and present opportunity, and where we are not to think, except in a case of absolute necessity, of considering that "we" is used in the sense of national generality. Moreover, there is the less reason to maintain, in spite of all these arguments, the reference to past events, inasmuch as the deliverances which took place in the days of old, are not unfrequently in other passages spoken of as pledges of deliverances yet to come, and the succeeding events of God's gracious providence are described in figurative language borrowed from former events: comp. for example, Isaiah 11:15-16, where the drying up of the Red Sea and of the Euphrates, are spoken of as events which were expected to take place, Zechariah 10:11, "And the Lord passes through the sea, affliction, and smites the waves in the sea, and all the floods of the Nile shall be put to shame," and the Christology on these passages, especially on the last. When the sense of the verse generally is correctly defined, there remains no reason for departing from the usual sense in regard to "the flood," by which is meant of course the Euphrates:—especially, as in Isaiah 11:15, the Euphrates is substituted in room of the little Jordan, and in Zechariah 10:11, the Nile is named for the purpose of announcing that the wonder at the Jordan was to be repeated on a greater scale. "There," is,—"on the theatre of these glorious transactions." "We will rejoice," is an energetic expression for "we may rejoice."
The expression, "his eyes spy among the heathen," Psalms 66:7 indicates that the self-sufficiency of earthly power is only apparent. God from his high watch tower beholds every thing, guides every thing, tames every insolence which, imagining that the earth is contained in itself, rises against him and his kingdom. In the last clause, the expression assumes a hortatory character: "they may not exalt themselves," i.e. "I would advise them not to do so." For the contest against Omnipotence must bring evil upon them, and pride comes before a fall, as surely as there is a God in heaven. Compare the אל in Psalms 34:5, Psalms 41:2, Psalms 50:3. The למו shows that what is undertaken, with a view to their own advantage, had turned out to their own loss: Psalms 58:7, Psalms 64:5. Instead of the Hiph. to which we must supply the head, or some similar word, ( Psalms 110:7, Psalms 67:4), the Masorites read Kal:—this, however, is unsuitable, as it does not express the idea of action.
The second strophe is Psalms 66:8-12. The constant use of the preterites, throughout this passage, makes it evident that we have here a description of some special case, an individual trouble and deliverance, in which had been manifested his glory, which had been described in general terms in the preceding verses. Ver. 8. Praise ye nations our God, and cause the voice of his praise to be heard. Ver. 9. Who sets our soul into life, and does not suffer our foot to slide. Ver. 10. For thou didst prove us, O God, thou didst purify us as silver is purified. Ver. 11. Thou broughtest us into the net, thou laidest affliction upon our loins: Ver. 12. Thou didst let men ride upon our heads, we came into fire and into water, and thou didst lead as out to affluence.
In Psalms 66:9 the calamity is represented as a death, and the deliverance as a putting of the soul into life— a revivification: comp. Psalms 30:3, "thou hast brought up my soul from hell," and at Psalms 63:3. In reference to the "sliding," see Psalms 15:5, Psalms 55:22.
On "thou didst prove us," Psalms 66:10, the Berleb. Bible: "Thou hast by many heats of trouble tried the worth and the steadfastness of our faith, hope and patience, as men examine metals by the fire": compare Zechariah 13:9, 1 Peter 1:7. The "thou didst purify us," shows that the protestation of innocence in Psalms 66:18 th, has reference only to the fundamental aim, and does not exclude manifold sins of infirmity, which justified divine chastisement. The purification removes the dross: comp. Isaiah 1:25, "I will purify, as with prepared water, all thy dross, and I will take away all thy tin," Zechariah 13:9. Silver requires a particularly continuous and repeated purification: comp. Psalms 12:6; Isaiah 48:10, "I have refined thee, but not as silver, I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction."
The םעוקה , in Psalms 66:11, is straitness, oppression, sorrow: compare עקה in Psalms 55:3. The loins are named as the seat of strength: comp. Deuteronomy 33:11; Psalms 69:23, and Gesen. Thes. When they are weakened, the strength generally is gone, and the man is weak and miserable. Several translate erroneously: straitening, oppressing fetters; others: an oppressing burden. But fetters are not put on the loins, and loins do not carry burdens.
In Psalms 66:12 th, the head is named as the noblest part, without strict regard to whether, in the case of beasts, the rider sits on the head or not. In reference to אנוש , comp. at Psalms 8:4. The more miserable the master is, the more oppressive is the servant. On "we came into fire and water," comp. Isaiah 43:2. The רויה occurs only here and in Psalms 23:5. Calvin: "The sum is, although God may chastise severely his own people, yet he always gives them a happy and joyful issue." Arnd: "Many thousands of pious Israelites, under the Old Testament, and many thousands of Christians, under the New, have been literally delivered out of such troubles, but many thousands have had to lay down their lives, whom God has delivered and brought to life as regards their soul, as the pious martyr Babylas said when he was led to death: Be now joyous, O my soul, the Lord is doing good to thee.'"
The third strophe is from Psalms 66:13-20. Calvin: "The sum is, the glory of God would be unworthily suppressed, if, as often as he stands by us in trouble, our thanksgivings did not follow upon our obtaining deliverance." Instead of the "we," which occurs in the preceding paragraph, we have here "I." The speaker cannot be the Psalmist, or "any individual heart." Against this we have the magnificent character of the sacrifice, and the circumstance that the trouble and the deliverance which are here appropriated to one individual, are manifestly the same, as what are spoken of, as belonging to the whole, in the preceding part of the Psalm. In like manner, it cannot be king Hezekiah, because the general character of the whole Psalm is against such a historical view. The speaker is rather an ideal person, the personification of the people. It is evident from the address to the fearers of God, in Psalms 66:16, that we cannot exactly say that it is the people who are introduced as speaking. Similar personifications of the people are frequent: comp. for example, Psalms 60, Psalms 65:3.
Ver. 13. I will come into thy house with burnt offerings, I will pay to thee my vows. Ver. 14. Which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken in my trouble. Ver. 15. I will bring to thee burnt offerings of fat lambs with the smoke of rams, I will offer bullocks with goats.
Ver. 16. Come, hear, and let me tell, all ye that fear God, what he hath done to my soul. Ver. 17. I cried to him with my mouth, and a song of praise was under my tongue. Ver. 18. Had I regarded iniquity in my heart, the Lord would not have heard me. Ver. 19. But the Lord has heard me and marked my cry. Ver. 20. Blessed be God, who has not removed my prayer nor his grace from me.
This last strophe, like the first, contains the complete number of seven verses: the twentieth is to be considered as a conclusion: and the strophe is divided into two parts, consisting, the one of four, and the other of three verses.
The outward offerings, in Psalms 66:13-15, are to be considered only as embodiment of the gifts of the heart. The soul is the thanksgiving of the heart. Vows have burnt offerings for their subject matter. The full enumeration of the animals, to be offered in sacrifice, shows the zeal, with which the thanks and the offerings are given.
The פצו in Psalms 66:14, is "to open the mouth wide," and, secondarily, "to talk," Job 35:16. The expression indicates the pain which called forth the vow, so that the פצו contains in itself the in my trouble of the second clause.—מיחים , fat, in Psalms 66:15, is fat sheep. The smoke of rams, (used only here in this sense: in other passages always of incense), is the kindled fat of the rams. The עשה , to make, then to prepare, to set in order, is frequently used of the bringing of offerings
In Psalms 66:16-19, the reference to the opportunity afforded of rendering thanks to God, namely, the answer which had been vouchsafed to the speaker, prepares the way for passing on to the leading idea of this paragraph, viz. the emphatic declaration that this answer had been vouchsafed to him only on the ground of his innocence, the didactic and hortatory tendency of which is only slightly veiled, viz. that there is no way to salvation except that of well doing. The soul is named in Psalms 66:16 th, because it had been exposed to danger: comp. Psalms 66:9.
The רימם in Psalms 66:17, is a noun,— a lifting up, praise: see its plural, רוממות , Psalms 149:6. "Under my tongue," compare at Psalms 10:7, indicates the fulness of the song of praise. As soon as the Psalmist cried, he got occasion, through the deliverance vouchsafed, to praise God: comp. Psalms 18:3, "I cried unto the Lord, and I was delivered from my enemies," Psalms 34:4-6. We cannot translate, "I cried, etc. and now there is"; for the reference to the present would have been clearly intimated. According to the analogy of the first clause, it is only the preterite that can be supplied in the second. Even the deliverance itself belongs now to the past. But still less can we translate: "I praised God in confident expectation of his help." For in this case, it would not be the result that would be reported, yet in what follows, it is taken for granted that this has been done. The following are parallel passages to Psalms 66:18 th: Job 15:29, "The Lord is far from the wicked, and he hears the prayer of the righteous;" John 9:13; Isaiah 1:15, "Though ye pray ever so much, I will not hear you, your hands are full of blood;" Isaiah 59:2-3, "But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear, for your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity;" 1 John 3:21 "If our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence towards God, and whatsoever we ask we receive of him:" compare on the connection between righteousness and salvation, Psalms 17, Psalms 18, Psalms 34:11. The ראה is, as at Genesis 20:10, "to have before the eyes." The און is always unrighteousness, wickedness, never vanity, in the sense of false gods. The exposition, "if the design of my prayer had been directed to any thing evil," has resulted from doctrinal scruples. The language does not refer at all to the object of the prayer, but it intimates that the fundamental condition of the answer consisted in this, that notwithstanding all weakness, the inward fundamental aim of the soul is still pure and blameless, that the heart is entirely free from all secret wickedness— recondita malitia.
But God has heard, etc. Psalms 66:19, and therefore has shown that this hindrance to salvation does not exist in my case.
Psalms 66:20 th, if given in full, would have been, "Who has not removed my prayer from him, and his grace from me."
Hengstenberg, Ernst. "Commentary on Psalms 66". Hengstenberg on John, Revelation, Ecclesiastes, Ezekiel & Psalms. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/heg/psalms-66.html.


Make a lasting impact in your work.
HOPE Group is now hiring for BCBAs + RBTs.
Competitive salary + benefits packages.
Our Tucson Center Is Now Open!
Since 1997, HOPE Group has provided behavior analytic services to those diagnosed with developmental and neurological disorders, including individuals affected by autism spectrum disorder. All of HOPE Group's programs are based on applied behavior analysis (ABA) and grounded in evidence-based practices.
Our Comprehensive Early Intervention services provide a community-based service to individuals diagnosed with, or at-risk of an Autism diagnosis.
HOPE Group offers an array of services using the principles of applied behavior analysis, including comprehensive assessments, treatment plan development, data analysis, progress monitoring and direct treatment implementation by a qualified behavior technician under the supervision of our team of behavior analysts.
This specialized program provides services to individuals who display disruptive behavior that poses a risk of harm to self, others or the environment, or that impeded an individual's ability to establish meaningful behaviors. Our Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBA) use behavior analytic assessment and treatment procedures to produce the best possible outcomes for our clients.
HOPE Group offers an array of family support services including services for adults with developmental disabilities. Services may include, but are not limited to: parent consultation, social skills classes, guardianship and legal resources, as well as vocational training services.
HOPE Group provides client specific behavior and academic consultation to teachers and aides as well as school and district wide trainings on general treatment strategies. HOPE Group has been contracted to conduct skill assessments (VB-MAPP, ABLLS-R, AFLS, PEAK), develop discrete trail training programs (DTT) based on skill deficits, conduct Functional Behavior Assessments (FBA)/Functional Analysis (FA) and design corresponding Behavior Intervention Plans (BIP).
Habilitation and respite services are provided for Division of Developmental Disability (DDD) qualified members. Habilitation services focus on the direct implementation of Individualized Service Plan (ISP) Goals by a provider in the client's home and community. Individuals of all ages qualify for services and hours per week vary from 5-30 depending on clinical necessity. Habilitation services are not a replacement to childcare. Respite services provide short-term relief for parents and caregivers, occurs in the client's home and community.
Children with Autism are not Learning Disabled, They are Teaching Challenges.
HOPE Group is a proud supporter of Not Your Typical Deli in Gilbert, Arizona!


get latest info on wpc wall cladding, suppliers, manufacturers, wholesalers, excellent wood effect exterior cladding . a to zee interior & exterior products.
ultrashield composite wood cladding is the solution for exterior or outdoor walls because it combines capped wood composite cladding toughness and longevity. all details an architect needs to evaluate, select and specify the products.
quality wpc wall cladding manufacturers & exporter - buy exterior wpc wall wood plastic composite material: environmental green product, recyclable. 1.
cladco exterior wall covering, whether on a new build or renovation project, wall cladding can have a dramatic impact on a building's appearance and can provide both warmth the product should be supported with batons every 400mm.
alibaba.com offers 25819 wpc wall panel products. outdoor wood plastic composite exterior decking wall panel/wall board wpc wallboard 148*21.
wpc wood plastic composite exterior wall fencing board 150 x 25 mm. item no. : product origin: exterior concrete wall panel, wpc waterproof wall board.
wpc wall panel is a new eco-friendly, environmentally and renewable material for wall decoration. wpc wall cladding is produced from reclaimed plastic and bamboo fiber. product: wall cladding. item no: 013. color: carribean coffee.


text:
Albons is een klein dorp en een gemeente in de Spaanse provincie Gerona. In 2007 telde Albons 625 inwoners. De steden Gerona en Figueres liggen in de directe nabijheid.

Albons is een van de oudste vissersdorpen van de Costa Brava. Het ligt ca. 4 km vanaf het eerste strandje van de kustplaats L'Escala.

Demografische ontwikkeling

Bron: INE, 1857-2011: volkstellingen

Gemeente in Gerona

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
<PopulateCache name='PopulateCache-1'>
  <CacheResource>cache1</CacheResource>
  <Source>request.header.nonce</Source>
  <Scope>Application</Scope>
  <CacheKey>
    <Prefix>nonce</Prefix>
    <KeyFragment ref='request.header.nonce' />
  </CacheKey>
</PopulateCache>