[Am Thinker] There are so many lies and liars, it’s hard to know where to begin, but here are my takes on this week’s unveiling of them.
Let’s begin with science. Seems like just yesterday Dr. Fauci and his crew were promoting "follow the science." Well, I follow what passes for it, and if you follow the direction it’s been heading in recent decades you’ll be trapped in a remote ditch.
SCIENCE
1) Neuroscience
Do you remember reading articles and books by Oliver Sacks? Perhaps the best known were Awakenings and The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat. From 1992 to 2024, The New Yorker, which boasts a fleet of fact checkers, published 28 of his articles. This week the publication admitted in a biographic article that much of Sack’s accounts of patient treatment were narratives lacking in veracity.
"I have some hard ’confessing’ to do -- if not in public, at least to Shengold -- and myself," Sacks wrote in his journal, in 1985. By then, he had published four books—"Migraine," "Awakenings," "A Leg to Stand On," and "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" -- establishing his reputation as "our modern master of the case study," as the Times put it. He rejected what he called "pallid, abstract knowing," and pushed medicine to engage more deeply with patients’ interiority and how it interacted with their diseases. Medical schools began creating programs in medical humanities and "narrative medicine," and a new belief took hold: that an ill person has lost narrative coherence, and that doctors, if they attend to their patients’ private struggles, could help them reconstruct a new story of their lives. At Harvard Medical School, for a time, students were assigned to write a "book" about a patient. Stories of illness written by physicians (and by patients) began proliferating, to the point that the medical sociologist Arthur Frank noted." ’Oliver Sacks’ now designates not only a specific physician author but also a... genre -- a distinctively recognizable form of storytelling."
But, in his journal, Sacks wrote that "a sense of hideous criminality remains (psychologically) attached" to his work: he had given his patients "powers (starting with powers of speech) which they do not have." Some details, he recognized, were "pure fabrications." He tried to reassure himself that the exaggerations did not come from a shallow place, such as a desire for fame or attention. "The impulse is both ’purer’—and deeper," he wrote. "It is not merely or wholly a projection -- nor (as I have sometimes, ingeniously-disingenuously, maintained) a mere ’sensitization’ of what I know so well in myself. But (if you will) a sort of autobiography." He called it "symbolic’exo-graphy.’ " Sacks had "misstepped in this regard, many many times, in ’Awakenings,’ " he wrote in another journal entry, describing it as a "source of severe, long-lasting, self-recrimination."
Harvard cognitive scientist Steven Pinker was shocked:
Bombshell: Oliver Sacks (a humane man & a fine essayist) made up many of the details in his famous case studies, deluding neuroscientists, psychologists, & general readers for decades. The man who mistook his wife for a hat? The autistic twins who generated multi-digit prime numbers? The institutionalized, paralyzed man who tapped out allusions to Rilke? Made up to embellish the stories. Probably also: the aphasic patients who detected lies better than neurologically intact people, including Ronald Reagan's insincerity.
Why did The New Yorker, which perpetuates the myth that they employ an army of meticulous fact-checkers, pollute our understanding of mind and brain by publishing these fabrications for decades?
2) Public Health
It was reported that the Food and Drug Administration is about to put a black box warning on Covid-19 vaccines. (Those which we were told would prevent infection and spread but which didn’t. Almost 40,000 deaths related to the vaccine are in the VAERS account.) Even though the reporting of adverse effects were seriously flawed and underreported, the connection to adverse effects remains clear. If the report is accurate the consequences of the black box warning are substantial:
A black box warning is the FDA’s nuclear option. It’s the strongest safety label the agency can place on any drug or vaccine, reserved for risks that are serious, potentially irreversible, or life-threatening. The warning is literally boxed in black ink at the top of the drug label so it cannot be overlooked, skimmed, or buried down in the fine print.
Black box warnings are not suggestions, footnotes, or talking points. They are how the FDA formally announces: this risk matters. Black boxes are rare, reputationally toxic, and legally consequential. Once applied, they signal to doctors, hospitals, insurers, and courts that the risk is "material" as a matter of law, not opinion.
Once a black box exists, the ground rules permanently change. Even the most enthusiastic, guideline-faithful physician cannot realistically ignore it without stepping into legal quicksand. The warning must be disclosed to patients as part of informed consent; failing to do so is no longer a judgment call but a liability problem. "Following APA guidance" stops working as a shield, because FDA labeling outranks press releases and reassurance campaigns. [snip]
But diabolical jab doctor, former vaccine committee member, and pharma shill Paul Offit told a podcast host this week that "myocarditis was a very small price to pay. People need to have realistic expectations; you’re going to learn as you go." Behold the grandfatherly banality of evil.
🚨 OFFIT: "With the mRNA vaccines, there was myocarditis which is inflammation of the heart muscle ... That was a very small price to pay ... People have to have realistic expectations of the fact that you're going to learn as you go." pic.twitter.com/RbfL2XIj69
How about that warm-spirited, scientific nuance? "We’ll learn about the risks together, as we go!" Now they tell us. Back when they were coercing people to take the shots -- jab or job! -- they weren’t nearly so nuanced. And, "it was a small price to pay," Offit quite generously declared. Yes, but who paid the price? Do the people who paid the piper also agree how small the price was?
Easy for him to say.
One thing we know for sure is that Paul Offit didn’t pay the price. It’s not his heart. Just the opposite. It’s well known that Paul made millions off his rotavirus vaccine, which he sold to Merck. He currently hogs a Merck-endowed chair at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (ironically, ’CHOP’), runs the school’s endowed Vaccine Education Center, and mints more money with grants related to vaccine development.
It’s pretty rich that he’s talking about the "price" that everyday people who aren’t compensated for injuries have to pay. [snip]
All in all, it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that Democrats’ long, failed experiment in coercive public health is finally, at long last, reaching a shuddering stop. As we’ve previously discussed, once the public finally grasps the horrifying extent of the fraud that was perpetrated upon us, it will crush into powder the last remaining shards of trust in the institutions. There’s no going back now.
3) Ezra Klein’s Pratfall
Now that it’s obvious that illegal aliens have been sucking up public health funds, Ezra Klein, a New York Times columnist, jumped in to call President Trump a liar and in the process self-owned himself as a fool:
Trump often lies about Democrats giving healthcare to undocumented immigrants. In California, Newsom actually did it. And defends it. "I'm proud of that. I believe in universal health care." But, he says, "we failed on the border. We need to own up to that."
So per Klein, Trump lied by telling the truth.
The Internationalists
Klaus Schwab
Klaus Schwab tweeted a self-encomium, promoting the organization he led -- the World Economic Forum -- and his new book. In it, he emphasizes how important open discussion is to him.
I have witnessed firsthand how bringing together people with different perspectives can foster innovative solutions, and I have always believed that progress is not inevitable — it must be shaped, guided, and achieved through collective effort.
The Forum’s success and impact have reinforced one of the key lessons of my life: nothing of great significance is achieved alone.
He cut off responses to his post.
European Opinion
I keep seeing opinion pieces saying that Trump is diminishing European opinion of the U.S. This week, Politico, reliably on the American Left, commissioned an interactive poll on this. Now, interactive polls are of dubious validity (actually, in my view all are) because only readers of that publication tend to participate. Still the results are worth mentioning.
In Germany, 53 percent of people thought Trump’s election was more significant for their country than the election of Merz, compared with 25 percent who thought the German election was more important.
In the U.K., 54 percent said Trump’s return was more significant than Starmer’s Labour Party taking power and ending 14 years of Conservative rule, compared with 28 percent who said the change of national government last year was more important for Britain.
French voters were a little less stark in their view, but still 43 percent thought Trump’s victory was more significant, against 25 percent who believed Macron’s election had a bigger impact on France.
They think their leaders are weak and I will not argue with that assessment.
Tim Walz
In Minneapolis, the loons are not only swimming in lakes. One inhabits the governor’s mansion.
Tim Walz says it's a "pretty hard reach" to expect the Somali community to not engage in the massive theft of tax dollars, criticizes @POTUS for calling them out: "Each community's got this... Donald Trump brought this to the attention... very dangerous."
If he truly believed that the Somali community was prone to theft of public funds, he should have kept auditors to prevent that instead of ignoring Minnesotan whistleblowers who told him what was happening. Right now, the loss due to such fraud is estimated at a billion dollars, but some say it’s multiple billions.
What links the leaders of France’s biggest far-left party and the podcaster (still connected) to TPUSA and the Heritage Foundation? Demonstrable and risible lies about Islam.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of the biggest far-left party in France, says that Muslim women are free and it’s Christian women who are oppressed: "Christianity is patriarchal, and women have to cover up and submit to men. In Islam, women submit to God only, therefore, their veil represents freedom and dignity."
Tucker Carlson spreads pro-Qatar lies like this whopper, denies he receives Qatar money but brags he just bought a home in Doha:
Per @TuckerCarlson, Christians have it better in Qatar than Israel. The truth? There are 2x as many Christians in Qatar (~400K vs 188K), but they're almost all migrant workers. Despite Tucker's claim of "so many Christian churches in Qatar," there are SIX. Total. For 400K people. Meanwhile, Israel has hundreds of churches. Heck, there are more Baptist churches in Israel (17) than churches total in Qatar. Another key difference is that almost all of Israel's Christians are actually citizens. They vote, serve in the military, and hold elected office in the Knesset (Israel's parliament). By contrast, Qatar -- officially -- has NO Christian citizens. Why? Because in Qatar, it is illegal to convert from Islam. That's why Qatar closely monitors almost every significant aspect of Christian practice. All six churches by law must be in a single designated area, where the state holds ultimate control, and authorities force people to show ID in order to attend church -- a great way to ensure citizens aren't sneaking in. This is to say nothing of the reportedly horrific living and working conditions for the migrant workers, a system which many have likened to modern-day slavery. So to recap, Tucker took the only possible data points to show anything positive about Christian existence in Qatar -- the raw total number of Christians and the fact that they can attend church -- and obscured literally everything else. Even most paid propagandists would be a little squeamish with such open shilling. But not Tucker. Why?
Tucker also once again portrayed Israel as bloodthirsty warmonger. But his "contrast" was to Qatar, which bankrolls and/or provides diplomatic/media support to every Islamic terrorist group or regime targeting Israel. Stunning.
In the old days, calling out liars was something you could do only in small circles -- now all you have to do is go online.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/14/2025 06:30 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1800 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I credit Oliver Sacks with my development of a healthy BS detector.
[LIZA NEST] It’s a fact of life that the world is constantly changing. The technology and norms of yesteryear seem strange and quaint to us now, but they were once taken for granted. Many habits and rituals that we all have might not exist in the future; whether that’s for better or worse depends on how you look at it. Join us on a journey of speculation, where we consider the things considered normal today that might fade out of style in the near future. Some people’s guesses about the future may surprise you!
#1: Family Vloggers
Family vloggers, also dubbed "mommy vloggers" in some cases, have taken social media by storm. You’ve undoubtedly seen more than a few family "influencers" flooding your YouTube and Instagram feeds. These vloggers film themselves doing random stuff with their kids between ad spots and trying to sell you products.
Fans went wild for these family vloggers a few years ago. However, they’ve seen a decline in popularity in recent years. Many people have started to realize that it’s kind of weird to film small children without their consent, only to upload it for a bunch of strangers to see. Also, there aren’t many laws that protect these influencer kids from exploitation. Family vloggers seem normal now, but we have a feeling that their popularity is waning.
#2: Endless Paperwork
The healthcare system is notoriously slow to adopt administrative technology. We don’t blame them. Can you imagine converting a whole hospital and its staff to a new computer or digital filing system? It’s a huge task. That’s why most hospitals, nurses, and doctors still use physical paperwork in one form or another.
#4
Regarding #2 in the article, my experiences and those of my father indicate otherwise (CT & VA). Almost everything is computerized and much is done via apps, websites or emails. Even the vet I use for my dog does everything by computer.
[FoxNews] Experts say regime has few ways to hit back without damaging its own cash-starved operations
The Trump administration’s latest offensive move against Venezuela, the seizure of a tanker carrying U.S.-sanctioned oil, has triggered predictable outrage from Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s government.
But behind the rhetorical fire, analysts say the regime has few practical ways to hit back without doing even more damage to itself.
Experts say that Maduro could target U.S. oil interests in Venezuela, but doing so would almost certainly inflict more pain on his own cash-starved regime than on the United States.
Maduro could also halt U.S.-chartered deportation flights but again would be harming his own interests, experts say.
"Venezuelans are just leaving the country because of the terrible conditions the regime has created," said Connor Pfeiffer, a Western Hemisphere analyst at FDD Action. "By having people come back, even if they're on U.S. charter deportation flights, it kind of counters that narrative."
Western oil firms have significantly decreased their presence in Venezuela, home to world’s largest proven oil reserves, in recent years due to sanctions.
But U.S.-owned Chevron does still maintain a license to operate there, on the condition that the Maduro regime does not financially benefit from its operations. Instead, Chevron hands over to Maduro half of its oil production as payment, according to multiple reports.
"Chevron’s operations in Venezuela continue in full compliance with laws and regulations applicable to its business, as well as the sanctions frameworks provided for by the U.S. government," a Chevron spokesperson told Fox News Digital.
Imports of Venezuelan crude have declined to roughly 130,000 barrels per day (bpd) to 150,000 bpd in recent months, below the nearly 300,000 bpd imported under the prior petroleum licensing regime under the Biden administration. Most of Venezuela’s exports are now routed to Asia, with the bulk landing in China through intermediaries, according to data from Kpler.
Despite that flow of crude, analysts say the idea of Caracas striking back at Chevron is more potent as a talking point than as a viable policy option.
Shutting down or seizing the company’s operations would instantly cut off one of the few lifelines still feeding Venezuela’s collapsing oil sector. It also would risk triggering a swift and politically difficult American response, including a full reinstatement of the sanctions relief the regime has quietly relied on.
Pfeiffer noted that the Maduro government has been "very supportive of Chevron continuing to operate" because the arrangement provides tens of thousands of barrels a day of oil with minimal investment from Venezuelan-owned Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. Other analysts say that reality sharply limits Maduro’s room to maneuver, and that any attack on Chevron would strike at his own revenue stream first.
Another theoretical lever — military or maritime escalation — is widely viewed as even less credible. Venezuela has taken delivery of small Iranian-built fast attack craft equipped with anti-ship missiles, a fact that has fueled speculation Maduro could threaten U.S. or allied vessels.
But Venezuela’s navy suffers from years of maintenance failures and lacks the ability to sustain operations against American forces deployed in the Caribbean. Any aggressive move at sea would almost certainly invite a U.S. military response the regime is in no position to absorb.
Diplomatically, Caracas could suspend remaining channels with Washington or file legal challenges in U.S. courts or international forums. Yet previous efforts to contest sanctions-related seizures have gone nowhere, and Venezuela’s relationships in the hemisphere offer limited leverage.
Regional bodies have little sway over U.S. sanctions law, and even supportive governments in Russia, China or Iran are unlikely to intervene beyond issuing critical statements. Beijing, now the primary destination for Venezuelan crude, has economic interests at stake but few practical avenues to challenge U.S. enforcement actions.
Absent direct military strikes, cracking down on sanctioned oil exports is one of the most potent ways the U.S. can weaken the regime, according to Pfeiffer.
"This is one of his main sources of revenue keeping the regime afloat," he said.
[ZERO] My phone started dinging almost all at once.
Text messages, links, alerts—people were telling me that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins was about to make a major announcement on Dec. 10 related to regenerative agriculture. A YouTube link was circulating. The livestream was about to begin. There was a sense of anticipation in the air.
When the video came on, Rollins stood alongside Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and others. What stood out immediately was not the funding amount, but the language: soil health, human health, nutrient density, the microbiome, and microbiology. The living systems beneath our feet and within our bodies were finally being discussed as part of one connected reality.
That language matters.
Then the announcement itself came: $700 million allocated toward regenerative agriculture.
On paper, that sounds significant. In reality, when spread across acreage that is already regenerative, it comes out to roughly $16 per acre. My phone began lighting up again—this time with frustration and disappointment. Farmers were doing the math. Many compared it to the $12 billion recently allocated to soybean farmers to ease losses from China no longer buying at previous levels. The imbalance felt familiar.
I felt that disappointment myself. But I stopped.
Because the truth is, the government is not going to save us. It never was.
#2
RFK Jr is committed to making us healthy. I believe that Brooke Rollins has more interest in corporate profits.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
12/14/2025 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#3
rotational farming
I don't believe that agriculture would be possible on a rotating planet. The light would be coming from a constantly changing direction and the plants would have no idea which direction to grow in.
[ChroniclesMagazine] There are times when Europe succumbs to an urge for self-destruction that defies rational explanation. The Thirty Years’ War provides a particularly tragic example. It went on long after its early instigators and key participants were all dead. Rational actors could have brought it to a close well before it entered its most destructive phase in the 1630s, yet the leaders’ ability to strike a balance between ends and means was lost to audacity, fear, greed, and fanaticism.
That war became infamous for its violence even before the Peace of Westphalia. In subsequent decades, Europe experienced several armed conflicts, but they were limited wars for limited objectives, fought within the balance-of-power system by adversaries of similar temper and mindset.
A new pancontinental carnage played out to the beat of "La Marseillaise" in 1792. Revolutionary levée en masse produced the first million-strong army—turning France into a veritable "nation at arms"—and the first modern-era genocide, in the Vendée. The mayhem took at least 7 million lives before it ended at Waterloo, 13 years later.
The ensuing peace lasted, with some adjustments and five localized wars, until 1914. Thanks to the skill of the four key players at the Congress of Vienna, the long 19th century brought Europe 99 years of unprecedented flourishing across all fields of human endeavor. It was truly the golden age of European civilization, perhaps of all civilization in all times. It ended, abruptly, in a new nightmare.
The "Second Thirty Years’ War" started with the lights going out all over Europe in 1914. It ended in 1945, with the continent in ruins, physically and spiritually. Its subsequent economic recovery was impressive, but the old intellectual and moral vigor was gone. This is especially evident in the low quality of the political class. No European leader of our time comes even close to the stature and vision of Charles De Gaulle or Konrad Adenauer, or even of their early successors. As a result, eight decades after the Red Army marched into Berlin, Europe’s politicians are displaying the same old mix of audacity, fear, greed, and fanaticism. It has the potential to result in a new, truly final, catastrophe.
After President Donald Trump started America’s gradual disengagement from what he has termed Biden’s war, the European Commission in Brussels and the governments in Berlin, Paris, and London formed the "Coalition of the Willing," an ad hoc alliance effectively devoted to defeating Russia. These who don't study history...
Its major protagonists—German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer—present the conflict with Russia as an existential test of resolve. "Ukraine’s future is our future," Starmer said in October.
The coalition maintains that Ukraine must be restored to its late-Soviet-era borders, including the Crimea; that Russia must pay for its reconstruction, with the EU and Britain preparing to seize its frozen funds under their control; that Kiev should be free to join NATO and to bring foreign troops to its territory; and that alleged Russian war criminals must be brought to "international justice." These demands are presented as nonnegotiable, with the implication that eventually Moscow will be compelled to sign on the dotted line by force of arms.
By insisting on what amounts to Russia’s surrender, the EU and major European governments are painting themselves into a corner. The resulting mindset was epitomized by Merz, who declared last September that "we are not at war, but we are no longer at peace, either." Last May, he pledged to make the Bundeswehr the "strongest conventional army in Europe." Germany’s defense expenditure rose by 28 percent last year to $90 billion, making it the world’s fourth-largest military spender. Annual spending is planned to double to at least $175 billion by 2029.
A new word has entered Germany’s common vocabulary: Kriegstuchtigkeit ("war-preparedness"). Next year, a military service law will make conscription mandatory if too few people volunteer during a time of crisis. Municipalities are preparing for war by identifying key infrastructure and protecting it from sabotage.
In the same vein, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen insists on the urgency of rearming Europe in response to "a clear and present danger." EU countries have five years to prepare for war, according to the Commission’s Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030, which was unveiled in October. The document asserts that "a militarized Russia poses a persistent threat to European security for the foreseeable future." In November, the Council and the European Parliament agreed to implement ReArm Europe, a $920 billion initiative to bolster the EU military. It includes a landmark decision to associate Ukraine with the European Defence Fund, effectively drawing it into Europe’s defense industrial base.
The war fever coincides with the German economy entering a chronic crisis. Industrial production has been particularly hard hit, especially in the key automotive sector, which has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs since 2022 and has seen as much as a third of its production volume decline since 2018. The key machinery sector has fallen by 22 percent over the past five years, and the electronics, energy, and construction sectors also saw major declines.
It may appear reckless for Merz to expand military spending on a grand scale while the country is in economic decline, but there is more to that decision than meets the eye. Germany and other EU countries benefit from the prolonged war in Ukraine because it offers a rationale for a massive injection of borrowed cash into their economies. Market demand is not an issue for European arms makers, who are experiencing an unprecedented windfall. There is hardly any competition, thanks to no-bid government contracts. Pricing is arbitrary, and the high cost of energy and labor that is killing other sectors is more than offset by sky-high profit margins.
In other words, EU leaders are using the war in Ukraine as an excuse to apply Keynesian stimulus to increase aggregate demand, and thus to ameliorate the historic economic downturn. The formula is reminiscent of the way Hitler’s deficit financing made a massive rearmament program possible in the 1930s, eliminating unemployment. This also may explain why the leaders of the Coalition of the Willing have a powerful incentive to claim that "a militarized Russia poses a persistent threat to European security for the foreseeable future."
This claim is incongruous. The war was caused by the cumulative effect of NATO’s eastern expansion—with the stated objective of admitting Ukraine and Georgia into the alliance—and by blatant Western disregard for the Minsk I and II agreements, and the parallel decision to use the time thus gained to weaponize Ukraine against Russia. Had Ukraine remained a neutral buffer zone, there would have been no war.
The notion that if Russia prevails in Ukraine, it will march westwards in relentless pursuit of territory and plunder has no basis in reality. The Russian army is still holding roughly the same one-fifth of Ukraine it initially occupied in the spring of 2022. After many costly battles over secondary objectives (Mariupol) and eminently minor ones (Bakhmut, Pokrovsk, etc.), it is still unable to advance to the Dnieper River or recover Kherson, let alone to occupy the whole of Ukraine.
It is ludicrous to claim that the Russian army has the operational capacity, or that the Kremlin leadership has the political will, to expand the war by attacking the three Baltic republics, let alone Poland or Romania, and then to march across the Oder and the Pannonian Plain. To point out the absurdity of this claim in public, however, invites the accusation of "spreading disinformation" and acting as "Putin’s puppet," with dire consequences for the culprit, especially in Germany. The cynically manipulated war fever thus becomes a handy tool not only to pump fiat money into increasingly sluggish economies, but also to solidify an already oppressive mechanism of control over public discourse.
For the same ruling elite, it is equally heretical to claim that a community must possess a high degree of ethnic and cultural homogeneity to be able to aspire to "democracy" of any kind. European elites demonize any attempt to encourage and maintain social cohesion based on a common ethnic origin as a "racist" relic of the past. Their visceral hatred of Russia is at least partly due to its refusal to submit itself to the Western ethos of demographic and cultural self-annihilation.
In the task of erasing ethnic homogeneity, Eurocracy has defined two main enemies. The first is the traditional family, the basis of biological and cultural survival of every nation, the transmitter of collective memories, emotions, and loyalty. The second is resistance to unfettered immigration. The essence of politics, as differentiating friend from foe, is demonized as "racism." Brussels encourages the disappearance of national communities in favor of groups of citizens as consumers of goods and atomized lifestyle-based "communities" promoted by powerful lobbies. Any criticism of the EU from the standpoint of a nation’s interests indicates "right-wing populism," ergo fascism.
It is in the American interest, and in the interest of the endangered European nations and their wounded civilization, that the EU project collapses over Ukraine. The irrationality of the leaders of the former European great powers preparing a new Drang nach Osten ("eastward thrust") may hasten the unraveling, even if at a high price. That is still preferable to the long road to nothingness.
It is possible that the EU will continue on its current course for a long time without collapsing, but it is not likely. The pace of history is accelerating, and too many variables are entering the equation. When the economic foundations of the German-led Brussels project collapse—which seems more likely today than at any time since the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957— the credibility of the entire EU apparatus will collapse along with it.
Serious resistance may then begin to arise among many Europeans who had been willing to tolerate the ideological agenda of the ruling elite, provided that their personal material prosperity and the parallel welfare-state safety net were not called into question. Under the circumstances of a deep, chronic crisis of the system, we may see that there are still hundreds of millions of Europeans who will not go gentle into that good night.
The alternative is the eternal Now of Eurocratic totalitarianism, devoid of politics, sterile and pointless in equal measure, with no light at the end of the tunnel. Faced with that option, an honorable European faithful to his heritage will fight with body and soul for any other outcome.
Posted by: Grom the Affective ||
12/14/2025 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1801 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The alternative is the eternal Now of Eurocratic totalitarianism, devoid of politics, sterile and pointless in equal measure, with no light at the end of the tunnel.
We Greeks, called the Muslim Turks, "The grand masters of torture." The barbarity of the Muslims against the Christian Greeks had begun from the very first days of the Revolution. As historical sources report, the Turks, in order to intimidate the rebels, systematically committed… https://t.co/0kpjmr0Ffvpic.twitter.com/DN4kUi1n2W
We Greeks, called the Muslim Turks, "The grand masters of torture." The barbarity of the Muslims against the Christian Greeks had begun from the very first days of the Revolution. As historical sources report, the Turks, in order to intimidate the rebels, systematically committed atrocities that the human mind cannot comprehend.
On page 236-237 of the historical book "What You Didn't Know About Turkish Rule and the Greek Revolution of 1821," the following is written:
As soon as the Revolution of 1821 broke out, the Turks, in their attempt to intimidate the rebels, butchered those they captured or threw them to the ground and slaughtered them like animals. In some cases, they exceeded the limits of brutality. In Patras, they captured a father and son and, after impaling them, lit a fire and forced the other captives to roast them like lambs. Ali Pasha at that point was more inventive: When he impaled Christians, he forced their relatives to turn the spit, threatening that otherwise he would impale them too.
Immediately after the hanging of Patriarch Gregory V in Constantinople, the Turks hanged three metropolitans at various points in the city. However, one of them, the very elderly Metropolitan of Nicomedia, breathed his last before reaching the place of execution. Such, however, was the Turks' mania for revenge that they punished even the dead man by hanging his... corpse.
After the hanging of the Patriarch, the Turks daily engaged in massacres of Christians who were trying to escape from the City. Then the Sultan sent a firman to the Patriarchate, which prohibited the departure of Christians from Constantinople, making them "jointly liable" in groups of five. This meant that if one from a group of five escaped, the remaining four would pay with their lives.
More at the link
Posted by: badanov ||
12/14/2025 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1750 views]
Top|| File under: Sublime Porte
[FoxNews] Intelligence director blames Biden administration for allegedly allowing 18,000 known or suspected terrorists into country
The previous number I saw was 2000. I’m glad they’re doing the work.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard issued a warning about suspected terrorists inside the United States, blaming the Biden administration for what she called a "direct threat" to the lives of the American people.
The National Counterterrorism Center says about 18,000 known or suspected terrorists were allowed into the country under the previous administration. Gabbard said her greatest concern about the influx is that there are "so many more that we are not aware of yet."
"The Biden administration did not take their vetting responsibilities seriously," Gabbard said on "Saturday in America."
The Trump administration has frequently criticized the Biden team’s immigration policy and vetting process. During his second term, Trump launched a nationwide crackdown on illegal immigration.
Of the estimated 18,000 known or suspected terrorists, Gabbard said 2,000 were Afghan nationals who entered following the 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Over 100,000 Afghans were evacuated when the United States left Afghanistan, and multiple members of Congress have said the speed of the evacuation led to incomplete vetting.
Fox News Digital reached out to former President Biden for comment.
Did the poor man know what day it was?
Gabbard said whistleblowers have come forward who were part of the vetting process following the withdrawal and told her they were ordered to rush the vetting process so migrants could enter the country during the massive, rapid influx.
"They [whistleblowers] were told, ‘Hurry up, don't do the thorough vetting that you normally do because we have to hurry up and get these people into the United States,’" Gabbard said.
She called the situation "devastating" and said it has already led to real-world consequences.
"What we are seeing right now is the exact result where we have a direct threat on the lives of the American people, and we have the kind of tragedy that we experienced on Thanksgiving with the shooting," said Gabbard.
The day before Thanksgiving, two National Guard soldiers were shot. One was killed, and the other continues to fight for his life. The suspected shooter is an Afghan national.
We watched him do it. The correct verb is accused.
[Fox] A beloved treat may hold a surprising secret to healthy aging, researchers say, but they warn it’s not a free pass to load up on sweets. Sure, kill the buzz. A-holes.
Researchers at King’s College London say theobromine, a natural compound in dark chocolate, is linked to slower biological aging, according to their study of nearly 1,700 adults across the U.K. and Germany. The findings were published this week in the journal Aging.
Participants with higher levels of theobromine consistently appeared biologically younger than their actual age, according to the research. The team detected the slower biological aging by comparing theobromine levels with key aging markers, including DNA-based tests that estimate how fast your body is aging and telomere length, the protective caps on chromosomes that shorten with age and are linked to age-related diseases.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
