News of the Day

I’m bombarded daily by news. It starts in the morning with husband’s look at the weather, today’s and the week. Then world/national news and local shootings and traffic accidents with a house fire or two through the night.

There isn’t any good economic news. The nation is set to collapse. The world is set to collapse too. Governments seek to ‘fix’ everything. Though, it’s the people who can make a difference, not rulers, presidents, representatives.

But we’re drowning in laws, regulations. We’re working hard to keep our heads above water and care for our families. But prices on everything are going up and our retirement savings have been taken away by stock market drops. There’s no place to put anything saved. We lose our principle in every place we used to sock a little money.

I’m looking for a person to run for president who will tell me there is hope. Real hope. Hope for my country. Hope for my family. Hope for the world. After Mr. Cain suspended his campaign, I see no one that fits that bill.

So I’ll just lean on Jesus. And do what I can to take his Gospel to those in need. I don’t know what others do without Him. He’s the only sanity in my world. He’s the only one with Good News. ♡♡♡

Is. 40:9 You who tell good news to Zion, go up on a high mountain; you who tell good news to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with strength; lift it up, don’t be afraid; say to the cities of Judah, Behold, your God!

Locations of Site Visitors

Advertisements
Posted in News of the Day | 18 Comments

President’s Day: What Made George Washington Great?

Posted in News of the Day | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Darwinian Skeptics

I’ll just leave this here.

1000 scientists are skeptics on Darwinian evolution.

~tannngl

Posted in News of the Day | Leave a comment

Argentina? America?

Just a thought or two.

~tannngl

Posted in News of the Day | Leave a comment

Give! To the Humane Society! Oh, WAIT…

This was to air as a Superbowl commercial today.

It’s what I think of The Humane Society. They hate humans. They are basically PITA!

Do not give to them. But support your local pet shelter if it is NOT The Humane Society.

~tannngl

Posted in News of the Day | Leave a comment

Death has no sting!

The Other Side

This isn’t death, it’s glory!
It isn’t dark, it’s light;
It isn’t stumbling, groping,
Or even faith,–it’s sight!

This isn’t grief, it’s having
My last tear wiped away
It’s sunrise, it’s the morning
Of my eternal day!

This isn’t even praying
It’s speaking face to face;
It’s listening, and it’s glimpsing
The wonders of His grace.

This is the end of pleading
For strength to bear my pain;
Not even pain’s dark memory
Will ever live again.

How did I bear the earth life
Before I came up higher,
Before my soul was granted
Its every deep desire,

Before I knew this rapture
Of meeting face to face
That One who sought me, saved me,
And kept me by His grace!

Penned by the widow of a missionary to South America

Posted in Some GOOD NEWS today! | Leave a comment

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION HAS MADE CHOOSING A THERAPIST EASY

Just ask about traditional masculinity.

The American Psychological Association has, in its words, issued “its first-ever guidelines for practice with men and boys.” These guidelines “draw on more than 40 years of research showing that traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful and that socializing boys to suppress their emotions causes damage.”

Three observations:

1) The last thing American males need today is less masculinity.

If you need proof, ask women who are looking for a husband whether the men they date exhibit too much masculinity, too little masculinity or just the right amount. I have talked to hundreds of women on my radio show (every week I have a “Male/Female Hour”), at speeches and in private who are dating to find a spouse. Not one has said men today are too masculine. Virtually all of them have said men today lack masculinity.

And why wouldn’t men lack masculinity? A vast number of boys grow up either with no father or with a father they rarely see. Their lives are dominated by women — their mother, virtually all their teachers, probably their school principal and probably their therapist.

As if that were not bad enough, many of the single mothers of these American boys are angry at the man who never married them, or at the man who divorced them, or at men in general. In addition, these boys’ women teachers suppress their natural testosterone-driven male behaviors. And now their teachers increasingly tell them they may not even be a boy.

Of course, some men are boors — demanding sex on the first date, sending sex-filled messages, etc. But most men know boorishness is not masculinity. Such behaviors emanate not from masculinity but from poor upbringing and/or the sexual revolution, which taught men and women that the sex drives of men and women are the same.

But as psychoanalyst Erica Komisar wrote in the Wall Street Journal last week, it is “a recipe for mental illness” to tell boys that “aggression, competitiveness and protectiveness is a sign of sickness.”

2. This is another example of the most important rule of contemporary life: The left ruins everything it touches.

The left has ruined the arts; the universities; high schools; the nuclear family; mainstream Protestantism, Catholicism and Judaism; the Boy Scouts; and journalism. And it is now doing the same to the sciences: Universities are increasingly choosing science faculty based on gender and race rather than on scientific expertise.

Psychology and psychiatry have long been homes to left-wing fools (recall the 1964 example of 1,189 psychiatrists declaring then-presidential candidate Sen. Barry Goldwater “psychologically unfit”). But the APA statement will do even more harm.

The American Psychological Association goes beyond defining “traditional masculinity” as “on the whole, harmful.” It urges therapists to help men “identify how they have been harmed by discrimination against those who are gender nonconforming.” That’s right. Your son’s psychotherapist will explain to him how it is entirely normal for a boy his age (beginning in kindergarten) to wear a dress, and that regarding an 8-year-old boy in a dress as not quite healthy is what is not quite healthy. In addition, the APA hopes this therapist will reassure your son that he, too, may well choose to be a girl.

In the words of Komisar, this is “an ideological claim transformed into a clinical treatment recommendation.” That “ideological claim” is, of course, leftism.

3. The APA statement makes choosing a psychotherapist simple.

The hardest part of starting psychotherapy is figuring out how to choose a psychotherapist. If you choose the wrong one, you will not only be wasting a great deal of time and money; you will not be helped, and you might well be harmed.

So, how does one go about choosing a psychotherapist? The APA just made the task much simpler: Just ask any therapist you are considering for yourself or someone else, “Do you agree with the American Psychological Association that ‘traditional masculinity is psychologically harmful’?”

If the therapist agrees, thank him or her for the time and leave. If the therapist starts giving a prolonged response, leave. Any therapist who cannot unequivocally condemn the APA statement is unworthy of your time and your money, let alone your psyche. Many will try to weasel out of directly agreeing (or disagreeing) with the statement. They will tell you that sometimes masculinity is a problem. But they are just being careful not to lose you as a potential client. Such a statement is meaningless: There is nothing that cannot be harmful at times. That includes femininity as much as masculinity, and it includes such normally good things as water (a lot of people drown, after all).

Without “traditional masculinity,” civilization is lost. Ask anyone you know who agrees with using the term “the greatest generation” to describe the generation that fought World War II whether the men of that generation would have fought, much less won, without “traditional masculinity.”

As a rule psychologists can be kooky and harmful. But this one rule on how to choose one is brilliant!

~tannngl

Posted in News of the Day | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Marijuana, Mental Illness and Violence

Marijuana?

Alex Berenson
Author, Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence

Alex Berenson is a graduate of Yale University with degrees in history and economics. He began his career in journalism in 1994 as a business reporter for the Denver Post, joined the financial news website TheStreet.com in 1996, and worked as an investigative reporter for The New York Times from 1999 to 2010, during which time he also served two stints as an Iraq War correspondent. In 2006 he published The Faithful Spy, which won the 2007 Edgar Award for best first novel from the Mystery Writers of America. He has published ten additional novels and two nonfiction books, The Number: How the Drive for Quarterly Earnings Corrupted Wall Street and Corporate America and Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on January 15, 2019, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C.

Seventy miles northwest of New York City is a hospital that looks like a prison, its drab brick buildings wrapped in layers of fencing and barbed wire. This grim facility is called the Mid-Hudson Forensic Psychiatric Institute. It’s one of three places the state of New York sends the criminally mentally ill—defendants judged not guilty by reason of insanity.

Until recently, my wife Jackie —Dr. Jacqueline Berenson—was a senior psychiatrist there. Many of Mid-Hudson’s 300 patients are killers and arsonists. At least one is a cannibal. Most have been diagnosed with psychotic disorders like schizophrenia that provoked them to violence against family members or strangers.

A couple of years ago, Jackie was telling me about a patient. In passing, she said something like, Of course he’d been smoking pot his whole life.

Of course? I said.

Yes, they all smoke.

So marijuana causes schizophrenia?

I was surprised, to say the least. I tended to be a libertarian on drugs. Years before, I’d covered the pharmaceutical industry for The New York Times. I was aware of the claims about marijuana as medicine, and I’d watched the slow spread of legalized cannabis without much interest.

Jackie would have been within her rights to say, I know what I’m talking about, unlike you. Instead she offered something neutral like, I think that’s what the big studies say. You should read them.

So I did. The big studies, the little ones, and all the rest. I read everything I could find. I talked to every psychiatrist and brain scientist who would talk to me. And I soon realized that in all my years as a journalist I had never seen a story where the gap between insider and outsider knowledge was so great, or the stakes so high.

I began to wonder why—with the stocks of cannabis companies soaring and politicians promoting legalization as a low-risk way to raise tax revenue and reduce crime—I had never heard the truth about marijuana, mental illness, and violence.

***

Over the last 30 years, psychiatrists and epidemiologists have turned speculation about marijuana’s dangers into science. Yet over the same period, a shrewd and expensive lobbying campaign has pushed public attitudes about marijuana the other way. And the effects are now becoming apparent.

Almost everything you think you know about the health effects of cannabis, almost everything advocates and the media have told you for a generation, is wrong.

They’ve told you marijuana has many different medical uses. In reality marijuana and THC, its active ingredient, have been shown to work only in a few narrow conditions. They are most commonly prescribed for pain relief. But they are rarely tested against other pain relief drugs like ibuprofen—and in July, a large four-year study of patients with chronic pain in Australia showed cannabis use was associated with greater pain over time.

They’ve told you cannabis can stem opioid use—“Two new studies show how marijuana can help fight the opioid epidemic,” according to Wonkblog, a Washington Post website, in April 2018— and that marijuana’s effects as a painkiller make it a potential substitute for opiates. In reality, like alcohol, marijuana is too weak as a painkiller to work for most people who truly need opiates, such as terminal cancer patients. Even cannabis advocates, like Rob Kampia, the co-founder of the Marijuana Policy Project, acknowledge that they have always viewed medical marijuana laws primarily as a way to protect recreational users.

As for the marijuana-reduces-opiate-use theory, it is based largely on a single paper comparing overdose deaths by state before 2010 to the spread of medical marijuana laws— and the paper’s finding is probably a result of simple geographic coincidence. The opiate epidemic began in Appalachia, while the first states to legalize medical marijuana were in the West. Since 2010, as both the epidemic and medical marijuana laws have spread nationally, the finding has vanished. And the United States, the Western country with the most cannabis use, also has by far the worst problem with opioids.

Research on individual users—a better way to trace cause and effect than looking at aggregate state-level data—consistently shows that marijuana use leads to other drug use. For example, a January 2018 paper in the American Journal of Psychiatry showed that people who used cannabis in 2001 were almost three times as likely to use opiates three years later, even after adjusting for other potential risks.

Most of all, advocates have told you that marijuana is not just safe for people with psychiatric problems like depression, but that it is a potential treatment for those patients. On its website, the cannabis delivery service Eaze offers the “Best Marijuana Strains and Products for Treating Anxiety.” “How Does Cannabis Help Depression?” is the topic of an article on Leafly, the largest cannabis website. But a mountain of peer-reviewed research in top medical journals shows that marijuana can cause or worsen severe mental illness, especially psychosis, the medical term for a break from reality. Teenagers who smoke marijuana regularly are about three times as likely to develop schizophrenia, the most devastating psychotic disorder.

After an exhaustive review, the National Academy of Medicine found in 2017 that “cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia and other psychoses; the higher the use, the greater the risk.” Also that “regular cannabis use is likely to increase the risk for developing social anxiety disorder.”

***

Over the past decade, as legalization has spread, patterns of marijuana use—and the drug itself—have changed in dangerous ways.

Legalization has not led to a huge increase in people using the drug casually. About 15 percent of Americans used cannabis at least once in 2017, up from ten percent in 2006, according to a large federal study called the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. (By contrast, about 65 percent of Americans had a drink in the last year.) But the number of Americans who use cannabis heavily is soaring. In 2006, about three million Americans reported using cannabis at least 300 times a year, the standard for daily use. By 2017, that number had nearly tripled, to eight million, approaching the twelve million Americans who drank alcohol every day. Put another way, one in 15 drinkers consumed alcohol daily; about one in five marijuana users used cannabis that often.

Cannabis users today are also consuming a drug that is far more potent than ever before, as measured by the amount of THC—delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, the chemical in cannabis responsible for its psychoactive effects—it contains. In the 1970s, the last time this many Americans used cannabis, most marijuana contained less than two percent THC. Today, marijuana routinely contains 20 to 25 percent THC, thanks to sophisticated farming and cloning techniques—as well as to a demand by users for cannabis that produces a stronger high more quickly. In states where cannabis is legal, many users prefer extracts that are nearly pure THC. Think of the difference between near-beer and a martini, or even grain alcohol, to understand the difference.

These new patterns of use have caused problems with the drug to soar. In 2014, people who had diagnosable cannabis use disorder, the medical term for marijuana abuse or addiction, made up about 1.5 percent of Americans. But they accounted for eleven percent of all the psychosis cases in emergency rooms—90,000 cases, 250 a day, triple the number in 2006. In states like Colorado, emergency room physicians have become experts on dealing with cannabis-induced psychosis.

Cannabis advocates often argue that the drug can’t be as neurotoxic as studies suggest, because otherwise Western countries would have seen population-wide increases in psychosis alongside rising use. In reality, accurately tracking psychosis cases is impossible in the United States. The government carefully tracks diseases like cancer with central registries, but no such registry exists for schizophrenia or other severe mental illnesses.

On the other hand, research from Finland and Denmark, two countries that track mental illness more comprehensively, shows a significant increase in psychosis since 2000, following an increase in cannabis use. And in September of last year, a large federal survey found a rise in serious mental illness in the United States as well, especially among young adults, the heaviest users of cannabis.

According to this latter study, 7.5 percent of adults age 18-25 met the criteria for serious mental illness in 2017, double the rate in 2008. What’s especially striking is that adolescents age 12-17 don’t show these increases in cannabis use and severe mental illness.

A caveat: this federal survey doesn’t count individual cases, and it lumps psychosis with other severe mental illness. So it isn’t as accurate as the Finnish or Danish studies. Nor do any of these studies prove that rising cannabis use has caused population-wide increases in psychosis or other mental illness. The most that can be said is that they offer intriguing evidence of a link.

Advocates for people with mental illness do not like discussing the link between schizophrenia and crime. They fear it will stigmatize people with the disease. “Most people with mental illness are not violent,” the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) explains on its website. But wishing away the link can’t make it disappear. In truth, psychosis is a shockingly high risk factor for violence. The best analysis came in a 2009 paper in PLOS Medicine by Dr. Seena Fazel, an Oxford University psychiatrist and epidemiologist. Drawing on earlier studies, the paper found that people with schizophrenia are five times as likely to commit violent crimes as healthy people, and almost 20 times as likely to commit homicide.

NAMI’s statement that most people with mental illness are not violent is of course accurate, given that “most” simply means “more than half”; but it is deeply misleading. Schizophrenia is rare. But people with the disorder commit an appreciable fraction of all murders, in the range of six to nine percent.

“The best way to deal with the stigma is to reduce the violence,” says Dr. Sheilagh Hodgins, a professor at the University of Montreal who has studied mental illness and violence for more than 30 years.

The marijuana-psychosis-violence connection is even stronger than those figures suggest. People with schizophrenia are only moderately more likely to become violent than healthy people when they are taking antipsychotic medicine and avoiding recreational drugs. But when they use drugs, their risk of violence skyrockets. “You don’t just have an increased risk of one thing—these things occur in clusters,” Dr. Fazel told me.

Along with alcohol, the drug that psychotic patients use more than any other is cannabis: a 2010 review of earlier studies in Schizophrenia Bulletin found that 27 percent of people with schizophrenia had been diagnosed with cannabis use disorder in their lives. And unfortunately—despite its reputation for making users relaxed and calm—cannabis appears to provoke many of them to violence.

A Swiss study of 265 psychotic patients published in Frontiers of Forensic Psychiatry last June found that over a three-year period, young men with psychosis who used cannabis had a 50 percent chance of becoming violent. That risk was four times higher than for those with psychosis who didn’t use, even after adjusting for factors such as alcohol use. Other researchers have produced similar findings. A 2013 paper in an Italian psychiatric journal examined almost 1,600 psychiatric patients in southern Italy and found that cannabis use was associated with a ten-fold increase in violence.

The most obvious way that cannabis fuels violence in psychotic people is through its tendency to cause paranoia—something even cannabis advocates acknowledge the drug can cause. The risk is so obvious that users joke about it and dispensaries advertise certain strains as less likely to induce paranoia. And for people with psychotic disorders, paranoia can fuel extreme violence. A 2007 paper in the Medical Journal of Australia on 88 defendants who had committed homicide during psychotic episodes found that most believed they were in danger from the victim, and almost two-thirds reported misusing cannabis—more than alcohol and amphetamines combined.

Yet the link between marijuana and violence doesn’t appear limited to people with preexisting psychosis. Researchers have studied alcohol and violence for generations, proving that alcohol is a risk factor for domestic abuse, assault, and even murder. Far less work has been done on marijuana, in part because advocates have stigmatized anyone who raises the issue. But studies showing that marijuana use is a significant risk factor for violence have quietly piled up. Many of them weren’t even designed to catch the link, but they did. Dozens of such studies exist, covering everything from bullying by high school students to fighting among vacationers in Spain.

In most cases, studies find that the risk is at least as significant as with alcohol. A 2012 paper in the Journal of Interpersonal Violenceexamined a federal survey of more than 9,000 adolescents and found that marijuana use was associated with a doubling of domestic violence; a 2017 paper in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology examined drivers of violence among 6,000 British and Chinese men and found that drug use—the drug nearly always being cannabis—translated into a five-fold increase in violence.

Today that risk is translating into real-world impacts. Before states legalized recreational cannabis, advocates said that legalization would let police focus on hardened criminals rather than marijuana smokers and thus reduce violent crime. Some advocates go so far as to claim that legalization has reduced violent crime. In a 2017 speech calling for federal legalization, U.S. Senator Cory Booker said that “states [that have legalized marijuana] are seeing decreases in violent crime.” He was wrong.

The first four states to legalize marijuana for recreational use were Colorado and Washington in 2014 and Alaska and Oregon in 2015. Combined, those four states had about 450 murders and 30,300 aggravated assaults in 2013. Last year, they had almost 620 murders and 38,000 aggravated assaults—an increase of 37 percent for murders and 25 percent for aggravated assaults, far greater than the national increase, even after accounting for differences in population growth.

Knowing exactly how much of the increase is related to cannabis is impossible without researching every crime. But police reports, news stories, and arrest warrants suggest a close link in many cases. For example, last September, police in Longmont, Colorado, arrested Daniel Lopez for stabbing his brother Thomas to death as a neighbor watched. Daniel Lopez had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and was “self-medicating” with marijuana, according to an arrest affidavit.

In every state, not just those where marijuana is legal, cases like Lopez’s are far more common than either cannabis or mental illness advocates acknowledge. Cannabis is also associated with a disturbing number of child deaths from abuse and neglect—many more than alcohol, and more than cocaine, methamphetamines, and opioids combined—according to reports from Texas, one of the few states to provide detailed information on drug use by perpetrators.

These crimes rarely receive more than local attention. Psychosis-induced violence takes particularly ugly forms and is frequently directed at helpless family members. The elite national media prefers to ignore the crimes as tabloid fodder. Even police departments, which see this violence up close, have been slow to recognize the trend, in part because the epidemic of opioid overdose deaths has overwhelmed them.

So the black tide of psychosis and the red tide of violence are rising steadily, almost unnoticed, on a slow green wave.

***

For centuries, people worldwide have understood that cannabis causes mental illness and violence—just as they’ve known that opiates cause addiction and overdose. Hard data on the relationship between marijuana and madness dates back 150 years, to British asylum registers in India. Yet 20 years ago, the United States moved to encourage wider use of cannabis and opiates.

In both cases, we decided we could outsmart these drugs—that we could have their benefits without their costs. And in both cases we were wrong. Opiates are riskier, and the overdose deaths they cause a more imminent crisis, so we have focused on those. But soon enough the mental illness and violence that follow cannabis use will also be too widespread to ignore.

Whether to use cannabis, or any drug, is a personal decision. Whether cannabis should be legal is a political issue. But its precise legal status is far less important than making sure that anyone who uses it is aware of its risks. Most cigarette smokers don’t die of lung cancer. But we have made it widely known that cigarettes cause cancer, full stop. Most people who drink and drive don’t have fatal accidents. But we have highlighted the cases of those who do.

We need equally unambiguous and well-funded advertising campaigns on the risks of cannabis. Instead, we are now in the worst of all worlds. Marijuana is legal in some states, illegal in others, dangerously potent, and sold without warnings everywhere.

But before we can do anything, we—especially cannabis advocates and those in the elite media who have for too long credulously accepted their claims—need to come to terms with the truth about the science on marijuana. That adjustment may be painful. But the alternative is far worse, as the patients at Mid-Hudson Forensic Psychiatric Institute—and their victims—know.

Long? Yes.

Important? YES!

What they’re not telling you about marijuana…It causes a 5-10 fold increase in violent crime, it increases the disease, schizophrenia. People in institutions with mental illness who have committed violent crimes have almost all smoked marijuana.

READ! Maybe it’s not too late?

~tannngl

Posted in News of the Day | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan – The genocide of the Peoples of Europe

The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan – The genocide of the Peoples of Europe

Mass immigration is a phenomenon the causes of which are cleverly concealed by the political elites, and multicultural propaganda is employed to falsely portray immigration as inevitable. In this article we intend to prove once and for all, that mass immigration is not a spontaneous phenomenon. What the elites  try to present as an inevitability of modern life, is actually the product of a plan conceived around a table and prepared over decades, to completely change the face of our continent.

The Pan-Europe

Few people know that one of the main instigators of the process of European integration, was a man who also conceived the genocide of the peoples of Europe. He was a sinister individual whose existence is unknown to the masses of our people, but the political elites consider him the founder of the European Union. His name is Richard von Coudenhove Kalergi. His father was an Austrian diplomat named Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi (with connections to the Byzantine family of the Kallergis), and his mother the Japanese Mitsu Aoyama.

Thanks to his close contacts with European aristocrats and politicians, and due to the network of relationships created by his nobleman-diplomat father, Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi was able to work unseen, away from the glare of publicity, and he managed to engage the co-operation of the most influential European heads of state for his plan, making them supporters and collaborators in his “project of European integration”.

In 1922 he founded the “Pan-European” movement in Vienna, which aimed to create a New World Order, based on a federation of nations led by the United States. European integration would be just the first step in creating a world government. His earliest supporters included Czech politicians Tomáš Masaryk and Edvard Beneš, and the German Jewish banker Max Warburg, who invested 60,000 marks in the project. The Austrian Chancellor Ignaz Seipel and the next president of Austria, Karl Renner, took early responsibility for leading the “Pan-European” movement and later, French politicians, such as Léon Bloum, Aristide Briand, Alcide De Gasperi etc., offered their help.

With the rise of Fascism in Europe during the 1930s, the project of European integration was abandoned and the “Pan-European” movement was forced to dissolve. However, after the Second World War, and thanks to frantic and tireless activity and the support of Winston Churchill, the Jewish Masonic Lodge B’nai B’rith and major newspapers like the New York Times, Kalergi managed to gain acceptance for his plan by the United States Government and later the CIA became involved in driving the plan  towards completion.

The essence of the Kalergi plan

In his book ‘Praktischer Idealismus’, Kalergi explains that the citizens of the future “United States of Europe” will not be the people of the Old Continent, but a new mixed breed, the products of thorough and widespread miscegenation. He states that the peoples of Europe should interbreed with Asians and other non-White races, to create a multiracial population, with no clear sense of tradition or identity and therefore easily controlled by the ruling elite.

Kalergi proclaims the need to abolish the right of nations to self-determination and outlines the break-up of nation states through the use of ethnic separatist movements and the destruction of the nations themselves through mass migration. In order for Europe to be easily controlled by the future elite, Kalergi proposes the creation of a homogeneous mixed breed population, and as to who should be the new elite? Kalergi is particularly illuminating on this point:

The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the current diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals. Instead of destroying European Judaism, Europe, against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats. This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews [due to the actions taken by the French Revolution]

Although no textbook mentions Kalergi, his ideas are the guiding principles of the European Union. The belief that the peoples of Europe should be mixed with Africans and Asians, to destroy our identity, to break down traditional ways of living and create a single mixed race, is the reason for community policies that promote minority interests. The underlying motives are not at all humanitarian, because the driving power behind the ruthless regime dominating the EU, plans the greatest genocide in history.

A prestigious prize is awarded every two years by the Coudenhove-Kalergi Foundation to Europeans who have excelled in promoting this criminal plan. Among those awarded with such a prize are Angela Merkel and Herman Van Rompuy.

The facilitation of genocide, is also the basis of the constant appeals from the United Nations, demanding that we accept millions of immigrants to help counter the low birth rate among Europeans. According to a report published in January 2000 by the population division of the United Nations in New York, under the title “Immigration replacement: A solution to declining and aging population,” Europe will need to accept 159,000,000 migrants by 2025. The citing of such precise numbers  is evidence of a premeditated plan.

Clearly a low birth-rate can easily be reversed with appropriate measures to support families and it is equally clear that the introduction of alien genes will do nothing to preserve our genetic heritage but will destroy it. The consequence of current policies promoting multiracialism is to create a weakened disparate population without national, historical or cultural cohesion. In short, the policies of the Kalergi plan have been and still are, the basis of official government policies intent upon the genocide of the Peoples of Europe, through mass immigration.

G. Brock Chisholm, a former director of the World Health Organization (OMS), demonstrated this well when he said: “What people everywhere need to do is to limit births and promote mixed marriages (between the different races), the outcome will be the creation of a single race throughout the world which can be directed by a central authority. “

Conclusions

If we look around us, the implementation of the Kalergi Plan seems to be at an advanced stage. We face Europe’s fusion with the Third World. The plague of interracial marriage produces each year thousands of young people of mixed race: ‘The children of Kalergi’. Under the dual pressures of misinformation and humanitarian stupefaction, promoted by the mass media, we Europeans are being taught to renounce our origins, and to renounce our national identity.

The servants of globalization are trying to convince us that to deny our identity, is a progressive and humanitarian act, that “racism” is wrong, because they want us all to be blind consumers. It is necessary, now more than ever, to counter the lies of the System, to awaken the revolutionary spirit among Europeans. Every one must be made aware of this truth, that European integration amounts to genocide. We have no other option, the alternative is national suicide.

Translator’s note: Although the reasons due to which Kalergi made the choices he made are of no particular interest to us, we will try to answer a question that will surely our readers have already asked: Why a European aristocrat with Flemish, Polish, Greek-Byzantine roots and even with some samurai blood in his veins (from his mother) was such body plans and organ in the hands of dark forces? The reasons, in our opinion, are multiple, idiosyncratic, psychological and … women.

We therefore observe a personality with strong snobbish attitudes, arrogance, and, allow me the term, “degenerate elitism.” Also, the fact that his mother was Asian, perhaps created internal conflicts and frustrations, something that can happen to people with such temperament. But the most decisive factor must have been the “proper teenager”, which incidentally of course, was beside him, and became his first woman (at age 13): The Jewess Ida Roland, who would later become a famous actress.

EUROPEAN COUNCIL

The award of the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize to President Van Rompuy

On November 16th 2012, the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, was awarded the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize, during a special conference in Vienna, to celebrate 90 years of pan-European movement. The prize is awarded every two years to leading personalities for their outstanding contribution to the process of European integration.

A decisive factor that helped him win the prize was the balanced way in which President Van Rompuy executed his duties in the new position of President of the European Council, which was established by the Treaty of Lisbon. He handled this particularly sensitive leading and coordinating role with a spirit of determination and reconciliation, while emphasis was also given to his skilful arbitration on European affairs and unfailing commitment to European moral values.

During his speech, Mr Van Rompuy described the unification of Europe as a peace project. This idea, which was also the objective of the work of Coudenhove-Kalergi, after 90 years is still important. The award bears the name of Count Richard Nicolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi (1894-1972), philosopher, diplomat, publisher and founder of the Pan-European Movement (1923). Coudenhove-Kalergi was the pioneer of European integration and popularized the idea of a federal Europe with his work.

Among the winners of the award, the Federal Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel (2010) and the President of Latvia Vaira Vike-Freiberga (2006), are included.

This article is a translation of an Italian article, originally posted on Identità.

What do you think?

Looks pretty real to me.

~tannngl

 

Posted in News of the Day | Leave a comment

John Lott on Pittsburgh’s Proposed Gun Control Ordinance

John Lott on Pittsburgh’s Proposed Gun Control Ordinance

Dr. John Lott’s newest piece in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review discusses Pittsburgh’s proposed gun control laws. The piece starts this way:

Pennsylvania’s 1.3 million concealed handgun permit holders may soon be considered criminals while visiting Pittsburgh. The proposed gun control ordinance bans everything from so-called assault weapons to starter pistols for track meets.

The ordinance prohibits citizens from carrying guns except on their property or in their homes or “fixed place of business.” There is an exception to the ban that would allow permit holders to carry, but there is just one problem. The exception clause refers to and depends on a nonexistent statute.

Is this an honest mistake or an underhanded way to ban concealed carry? The mayor and city council members have been informed of the “mistake” multiple times, but have refused to rewrite the ordinance. The result will be a ban on carrying guns for any reason outside of one’s home or business.

If you don’t have that permit, you will be committing a crime by taking a gun from a gun store to your home. Pittsburgh police could simply wait in gun store parking lots and arrest most of the people when they leave the store.

But the ban doesn’t stop at real guns. It also encompasses, “Any toy, antique, starter pistol or other object that bears a reasonable resemblance to an operable firearm, or any object that impels a projectile by means of a spinning action, compression or CO2 cartridge.” Your 10-year-old son will be committing a crime by carrying a brightly-colored Nerf gun. No one would ever confuse such a toy with a real gun, but it fires a foam projectile and is thus covered by the ordinance.

Some parts of the ordinance are useless, such as the requirement that people show a photo ID to any individual or business that they buy ammunition from. Even assuming that the seller remembers whom he sold the ammunition to, what would the police do with that information?

The assault weapons ban is just as pointless. It is modeled after the federal ban that was in place from September 1994 to September 2004. Peer-reviewed papers by economists and criminologists have failed to find a benefit from the federal law.

None of the weapons banned under the 1994 legislation or the proposed Pittsburgh ordinance are “military” weapons. The killer at the Pittsburgh synagogue used a Colt AR-15 rifle and three Glock .357 handguns. The Colt AR-15 bears a cosmetic resemblance to the M-16, which has been used by the U.S. military since the Vietnam War. The call has frequently been made by Gov. Tom Wolf and Mayor Bill Peduto there is “no reason” for such “military-style weapons” to be available to civilians.

Yes, the Colt AR-15 rifle is a “military-style weapon.” But the key word is “style” — it is cosmetically similar to military guns, not in the way it operates. The guns covered by the federal ban and the proposed ordinance are not the fully automatic machine guns used by the military, but semiautomatic versions of those guns.

At least there would be some logic to banning all semiautomatic guns, rather than listing specific models to ban based on how they look. Semiautomatic weapons also protect people and save lives. Single-shot rifles may not do a lot of good when facing multiple criminals or when a first shot misses or fails to stop an attacker.

Pittsburgh’s proposed ordinance is poorly written. Possibly that was the intent so as to create an even more extensive set of gun bans than anyone intended, but the real victims will be the defenseless law-abiding citizens of Pittsburgh.

There’s more of this article here.

Good luck Pittsburgh. We had an open carry rally there last week. But even factions of those who want to protect the 2nd Amendment are not united; they’re bickering over ego.

These thugs will win if we don’t get together.

~tannngl

Posted in News of the Day | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Socialism is Like a Mousetrap

Posted in News of the Day | Tagged , | Leave a comment