Viking warriors had the skills to survive against various forms of warfare and combat.
The reason for the Vikings fighting prowess is found in the way they trained both with and without weapons. For combat without weapons, the Norse had developed a martial arts system called Glima.
To be a good fighter and survive the unpredictability of combat, a warrior must know how to defend themselves unarmed against an armed opponent.
Glíma, the ancient wrestling style.
The Norse developed Glima, which is a self-defense system that employs throws, blows, kicks, chokes, locks, pain techniques and some weapon techniques. It is comparable with the best martial arts systems from all around the world. The word glíma in Old Norse means “glimpse” or “flash,” which describes the system’s techniques…speed.
The Viking martial art is so named because the methods bring down their opponents with lightening quick moves and tricks using both feet and hands.
This style of combat training helped develop the strength, reflexes, endurance and courage that Viking warriors needed to survive in combat. Glima also builds self confidence and for Norse children, Glima training usually began at around 6 or 7 years of age.
Glima self-defense training was the foundation of a Viking warrior and these techniques are still practiced today in Scandinavia, Europe, North America, and South America.
Glima is mentioned in the Prose Edda in the book of Gylfaginning when the Æsir god Thor took his journey to Utgards-Loki and was defeated in a wrestling match by the female jötunn Elli (Old Norse “Elli” means “old age”). Yes, Thor was beaten by an old woman in hand to hand unarmed combat…but there’s more to the story as to why. (read the Gylfaginning)
In Gylfaginning, Thor and his companions Loki and Þjálfi are in the hall of the giant Útgarða-Loki where they meet difficult challenges testing their strength and skill. Thor has just been humiliated in a drinking challenge and wants to get even.
Then said Thor: ‘Little as ye call me, let any one come up now and wrestle with me; now I am angry.’ Then Útgarda-Loki answered, looking about him on the benches, and spake: ‘I see no such man here within, who would not hold it a disgrace to wrestle with thee;’ and yet he said: ‘Let us see first; let the old woman my nurse be called hither, Elli, and let Thor wrestle with her if he will.
She has thrown such men as have seemed to me no less strong than Thor.’ Straightway there came into the hall an old woman, stricken in years. Then Útgarda-Loki said that she should grapple with Ása-Thor. There is no need to make a long matter of it: that struggle went in such wise that the harder Thor strove in gripping, the faster she stood; then the old woman attempted a hold, and then Thor became totty on his feet, and their tuggings were very hard.
A depiction of Elli wrestling Thor (1919) by Robert Engels.
Yet it was not long before Thor fell to his knee, on one foot. Then Útgarda-Loki went up and bade them cease the wrestling, saying that Thor should not need to challenge more men of his body-guard to wrestling.
Glima is so important to Norse society, Thor is also the god of wrestling.
As with people of every age and nationality, the Norse loved sports.
Glima was not just used for self defense and combat, but was also a sport. Wherever Vikings gathered, Glima was a big part of the entertainment. It was the most widespread sport in the Viking Age and there were several variations of Scandinavian folk wrestling, such as: Lausatök, Hryggspenna, and Brokartök.
Glima is practiced by men and women of all ages.
The original Norwegian settlers in Iceland took Viking wrestling and the Glima combat systems with them, according to the Jónsbók law book from 1325 AD. In the Icelandic medieval book of laws known as Grágás (Gray Goose Laws), which refers to a collection of earlier Norwegian laws, there were rules for wrestling. The Icelandic populace has taken very good care of their Norwegian heritage, and Glima there is almost unchanged since Viking times.
Water wrestling was a wrestling match in the water and was the most popular form of swimming competition. The idea was to keep the opponents head under water until he gave up, and such matches could last for hours.
The skilled variants of Glíma wrestling, called Brokartök, Hryggspenna, and Lausatök, have complex rules with competitors divided into several classes based on strength and skill.
Brokartök (Trouser-grip)
Brokartök is by far the most widespread form of glima in Iceland and Sweden and it is this version of glima that is Iceland’s national sport.
Brokartök Glima wrestling
The Brokartök form of glima favors technique over strength. Each of the two wrestlers wear a special belt around the waist and separate additional belts on the lower thighs of each leg, which connect to the main belt with vertical straps. A fixed grip is then taken with one hand in the belt and the other in the trousers at thigh height. From this position the glima-wrestler attempts to trip and throw his opponent. In this style of glima, a thrown wrestler may attempt to land on his feet and hands and if he succeeds in doing so he has not lost the fall. The winning condition in this type of glima is to make the opponent touch the ground with an area of the body between the elbow and the knee.
There are four points that differentiate Brokartök from other forms of wrestling:
The opponents must always stand erect.
The opponents step clockwise around each other (looks similar to a waltz). This is to create opportunities for offense and defense and to prevent a stalemate.
It is not permitted to fall down on your opponent or to push him down in a forceful manner, as it is not considered sportsman-like.
The opponents are supposed to look across each other’s shoulders as much as possible because it is considered proper to wrestle by touch and feel rather than sight.
The core of the system are eight main brögð (techniques) which form the basic training for approximately 50 ways to execute a throw or takedown.
Brokartök glíma is different from all other ethnic grips in three ways:
Upprétt staða Pursuers shall remain upright. The positioning in many of the ethnic grips sports often resembles a setsquare but in Brokartök glíma that is called ousting or “bol” and is banned.
Stígandinn Brokartök glíma involves steps, which involves contestants stepping forth and back like they are dancing in a clockwise motion. Stígandi is one of the characteristics of Glíma and designed to avoid a standstill and create opportunities for offence and attack.
Níð It is forbidden in Brokartök glíma to tail your opponent to the floor or push your opponent down with force. That is considered to be unsportsmanlike and opposing the nature of Glíma as a sport for honorable sportsmen and women. The Brokartök glíma sportsman or sportswoman shall conquer his or her opponent with a Glíma grip so well implemented that it suffices in a “bylta”, which forces your opponent to fall to the ground without any further action. The concept “níð” does not exist in other ethnic grip sports.
Hryggspenna (Backhold wrestling)
Hryggspenna is more similar to other styles of wrestling and is considered to be more a test of strength than of technique. In Hryggspenna the opponents take hold of each other’s upper body and whoever touches the ground with any part of the body except the feet has lost.
Lausatök (Loose-Grip or Free-Grip)
Lausatök is the most widespread form of Glima practiced and there are regular competitions of this form of Glima, such as the Norwegian Glima Championship. In Lausatök Loose-Grip wrestling, the contestants may use the holds they wish. Lausatök, or Løse-tak in Norwegian, is quite aggressive and differs in many ways from the other styles of Viking wrestling. This style was banned in Iceland for a period of about 100 years before being taken up again recently, within the last generation.
Lausatök, or Løse-tak in Norwegian, is quite aggressive and differs in many ways from the other styles of Viking wrestling. Lausatök comes in two forms: A version for self-defense or combat and a version for friendly competition.
In both, all kinds of wrestling techniques are allowed, but in the friendly version they are still taught to be executed in a way so they won’t cause the opponent injury. In such a friendly match the winner is considered the one who is standing tall while the other is lying on the ground. This means that if both the opponents fall to the ground together the match will continue on the ground by the use of techniques to keep the other down while getting up.
Excessive use of techniques aimed at deliberately injuring an opponent is frowned upon in sport Lausatök glíma. It is enough to use glima techniques that send an opponent to the floor, to inflict ‘pain’ on the floor, to ‘slap’ and opponent as opposed to ‘punch’ and kicks aimed at shocking an opponent rather than breaking bones. Such actions are considered níð; unsportsmanlike and opposing the nature of Glíma as a sport for honorable sportsmen and women. The concept “níð” does not exist in other ethnic grip sports.
Old Norse: nīð (Old English: nīþ) was a term for a social stigma implying the loss of honor and the status of a villain. A person affected with the stigma is a nīðing (Old Norse: níðingr, Old English: nīðing, nīðgæst).
Surrounding glima is a code of honor called drengskapur that calls for fairness, respect for and caring about the security of one’s training partners. You do not injure your opponent in the training and glima as a sport.
Lausatök glima for combat and self-defense was the basis for the Vikings fighting expertise and also includes techniques against weapons. In order to have a structured form of unarmed combatives against striking weapons, the Vikings had to know how to use a variety of weapons, such as sword, axe, spear, seax, long seax, stick and knife. The foundation for the use of these weapons is found in Lausatök combat glima.
As Brokartök is the most widespread form of Glima in Iceland and Sweden, Lausatök is by far the most widespread form of Glima practiced in Norway, Europe and North America. There are regular competitions in this form of Glima such as the Norwegian Glima Championship.
In Lausatök Loose-Grip wrestling, the contestants may use the holds they wish and it is practiced both outdoors and indoors year round in Scandinavia.
Glíma as a sport has also gone by the name of Scandinavian Wrestling and Viking Wrestling (Vikingbryting).
The Official logo of the IGA association Two staves, kept in the shoes, gapaldur under the heel of the right foot and ginfaxi under the toes of the left foot, to magically ensure victory in bouts of Icelandic wrestling (glíma).
Jana K Schulman, The Laws of Later Iceland: Jónsbók: The Icelandic Text According to MS AM 351 fol. Skálholtsbók eldri. With an English Translation, Introduction and Notes (2010).
A community group in Yorkshire has signed a three-year lease on a petrol station
The Upper Dales Community Partnership hopes its a move to self-sufficiency
Depleting services across rural England has seen communities take action
Numbers of petrol stations have dropped from 37,000 in 1970 to 8,600 in 2013
Traditionalists have been talking about having our own communities since as long as anyone can remember, its one of Neo-aristocracies main themes. The topic is a popular one among the hardcore, but for almost all its only ever a day dream a nice idea if you will, and just about the hardest of all ideas to put into action. However where we Traditionalists still struggle there are groups all across the world doing exactly what we dream about albeit not with the same ideological backdrop.
A community group in Yorkshire has taken over its only remaining petrol station out of fear that it would have been bought by property developers, making it the latest acquisition for a village bent on self-sufficiency.
The Upper Dales Community Partnership (UDCP) in Hawes is a non-for-profit company that began 20 years ago amid mass closures of facilities and depleting services to the area, populated by 1,137 people.
According to a 2016 report by Rural England, provision of services to rural areas like Hales has presented challenges due to the increase of online interactions mixed with sparsely populated and ageing demographics- creating the need for community action.
The UDCP is doing just that.
The village of Hawes, pictured, has a population of roughly 1,137 people bent on a self-sufficient village
Speaking to the Times, UDCP spokesperson John Blackie said: ‘In other communities they say “Why isn’t the government providing for us?” Here we say, “If you aren’t going to provide for us we are going to provide it for ourselves.”‘
Having initially started by taking over the local library the UDCP soon moved to set up a bus service in 2011 to replace the rural routes that were being axed- it makes £60,000 a year from the fares of roughly 65,000 passengers.
Petrol stations have equally diminished alongside bus routes- the Times reporting that numbers have dropped from 37,000 in 1970 to 8,600 in 2013.
The closure of the Hawes petrol station would have meant a 36mile round-trip to the nearest petrol station.
But the three-year lease that the UDCP now possesses will see a 24-hour self-service facility. It is further expected to bring revenue to the other service UDCP offers as it is in one of 17 areas eligible for a 5p per litre rural rebate, which was rolled out in 2015.
In 2011 the Upper Dales Community Partnership started its own bus service, pictured, that rakes in a revenue of £60,000 a year from the fares of roughly 65,000 passengers
The local post office in Hawes also risked closure but was taken over by the Upper Dales Community Partnership, who employs 18 paid workers
The library in Hawes, pictured, is open five days a week and another facility run by the Upper Dales Community Partnership
Last month the UDCP employs 18 paid staff as well as 40 volunteers and has an annual turnover of around £350,000.
The UDCP has also attained the Post Office, built a one-stop shop community centre and soon plans to build two plots of land to build affordable homes.
Mr Blackie told the Times: ‘I hope other communities will look at us and see that, if we can do it, they can do it too. If nobody will do it for us, then we will do it for ourselves.’
Traditionalists must start to take seriously the predicament we as a people are in and at least entertain other forms of ethnic an cultural survival, control of our goods and services. Schools, places of worship, farms, the local store, all critical to the life of small communities and the well being of the folk. Others have shown the way. It is possible if we have the collective will to realise it.
Ireland is about to pass “one of the most radical hate speech bills” in the entire world which will throw people in jail for possessing “hateful” material on their devices and consider the accused guilty until proven innocent.
“Ireland is about to pass one of the most radical hate speech bills yet,” Irish nationalist Keith Woods said on Twitter. “Merely possessing ‘hateful’ material on your devices is enough to face prison time.”
“Not only that, but the burden of proof is shifted to the accused, who is expected to prove they didn’t intend to use the material to ‘spread hate’. This clause is so radical that even the Trotskyist People Before Profit opposed it as a flagrant violation of civil liberties. Dark times.”
“This is a massive attack against freedom of speech,” Elon Musk responded.
“It’s insane what’s happening in the ‘free world,’” Donald Trump Jr. commented.
“Thank you for standing for free speech!” Woods responded. “What’s happening in the West is tragic. And now Meatball Ron [DeSantis] is signing hate-speech legislation for Florida in a foreign country. I hope you take your country back!”
“Ireland has had uninterrupted rule of far left extremists for decades. Ireland embraced neo-marxism as much as any small state, growing the economy on its ‘competitiveness’ for American companies and finance capital,”
“Now that the transformation into an identityless global economic zone is almost complete, hate speech and similar legislation are necessary to ensure the Irish people cannot again express sovereignty over their homeland.”
Earlier this year, the Irish police announced they were monitoring Woods just for interviewing Catholic reactionary Nick Fuentes for a podcast talking about politics. Generally speaking these type of extremist policies are often rolled out in one country as a test for others. Simply put if the mass doesn’t stand against these vile anti west extremists now then it will be too late
There’s no drawbridge, but Great Tangley Manor—the oldest continuously inhabited home in the UK—does have a moat. And now it can be yours for £11 million ($13.5 million).
The Grade I-listed home dates all the way back to 1016 and sits on nearly 10 acres of land in Surrey, England. Spanning 11,225 square feet, the residence is divided into two wings known as Great Tangley Manor and Great Tangley Manor West. Internally, it comprises 10 bedrooms, six bathrooms, seven living rooms and an indoor swimming pool. The grounds of the estate also feature a walled garden, tennis court, WWII air raid shelter, a lake, sprawling meadow and a helicopter hanger. While it may not be entirely medieval in its appearance, one of the dwelling’s most defining characteristics is a moat that surrounds the entire property.
With a home being on the site for over a thousand years and possibly the longest inhabited house in Britain, naturally Great Tangley has evolved over time with each addition and renovation being carefully designed and carried out by the best craftsmen of the day.”
Since 1947, the ancient abode has been owned by four different families. Although, its current inhabitants have made the most dramatic upgrades to the ancient manor—most notably the addition of a glass-walled extension, air conditioning and three EV charging ports. “This is a house that is a testament to how done correctly, homes can change and grow over time to suit the needs of their owners, yet not detract from its architectural integrity and incredible history,” adds Welsh.
The dining room contains timber from the Spanish Armada
Its very interesting past, includes ties to multiple British monarchs, the Spanish Armada, award-winning architects and even the Vanderbilts. The manor is said to have first served as a hunting lodge for Prince John during the 12th century. At the time, part of the home was lost in a fire, but it was later rebuilt as a medieval hall house in the 15h century. Its Tudor façade and upper floor were added in 1582. Meanwhile, its owner is believed to have aided in the British fight against the Spanish and was gifted timbers from the Spanish Armada, which can now be seen in the dining room.
In the years since Great Tangley Manor has been visited by royals and historical figures alike. In fact, Queen Mary, King George V and King George VI reportedly frequented the property and etched their signatures on the windowpanes using a diamond ring. Gladys Vanderbilt, an American heiress from the Vanderbilt family, took up residence here in the summer of 1913 and during her stay, gave birth to her second child.
“Homes like Great Tangley Manor are an important part of the rich history of the UK and just a small part of what makes those isles stand out among the rest of the west, as it goes on sale we wonder and we hope that somehow it will survive this new dark age this new anti culture era. we are entering into so that future generations may marvel in its very unique and very British character.
The idea behind free software is that the owners and users of computing devices (computers, printers, smartphones, etc.) should be free to do what they wish with the devices they buy, and that device vendors should not be able to place limits on the use of devices or otherwise dictate to owners how to use those devices. In order to maintain this control over their devices, owners need access to the source code of the software that runs (or runs on) the device. Enter free software.
Free software (FS) should not be confused with “freeware.” Freeware is software that you can obtain and use free of charge, but you don’t have access to its source code. The difference between the two distribution models is often expressed as free software is “free as in speech,” freeware is “free as in beer.” Although, as it turns out, if it is “free as in speech,” it will probably be “free as in beer.” Perhaps the best way to understand what free software is, is to think of it as being “free as in freedom.” The GNU Project identifies four specific freedoms, but really there are three. You have the right to:
1. Run the program any way you see fit 2. View and modify the source code 3. Make copies and share the code (modified or unmodified) with others
A BRIEF HISTORY
Prior to the late 1970′s the overwhelming majority of software programs were free in the sense of freedom. At that time, software companies began a deliberate campaign to force developers to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) and agree not to share the source code of the programs they were developing. Although this didn’t sit well with many of them, they were eventually convinced, by the financial benefits, to go along.
One committed hacker, (((Richard Stallman))), balked and started his own campaign to “re-free” software. Stallman used the burgeoning internet community to advance his idea and created the GNU Project as a vehicle to accomplish his goal.
Because of the way software copyright laws work, Stallman needed to copyright all of his code or risk losing it to the public domain. This created a paradox. His goal was to undo the damage caused by copyright practices concerning software, but yet he would have to copyright his work or lose control over it, including the ability to make it free. He and his collaborators originated the idea of a “copyleft.” They would copyright their software and release it under a license that mandated that, while users of the software were guaranteed their freedoms, if they chose to redistribute the software they had to do so under the same license. This license is called the GNU General Public License (GPL).
The GNU Project’s stated aim was “to create a complete, free operating system.” They decided to make it POSIX compliant. Basically it would be a kind of clone of Unix – a powerful and popular operating system of the time. They were well on their way toward this goal, when a young Swedish student (who was a citizen of Finland), Linus Torvalds, announced that he was going to create a Unix-like operating system, that ran on the under-powered personal computers of the day. Ultimately, Torvalds, realizing the complementary aspects of the two projects, adopted much of the GNU Project’s software and released his kernel to the public under the GPL.
Big software companies began to take notice. In the two decades or so, that software had become proprietary, one company, Microsoft, had built a virtual monopoly for software running on personal computers. Competitors began to evaluate Linux as a means of breaking Microsoft’s monopoly. In the year 2000, IBM decided to invest $1 billion in Linux. This investment proved a boon to free software.
Today, there are over 50,000 free software projects. Some, like Linux, MySQL, Apache, and the GNU Compiler Collection are leaders in their respective fields. Free software systems, featuring the Linux kernel, run on everything from mainframes to tiny embedded devices and everything in between. If you surf the web, use a cell phone, or record television shows, chances are you’re using free software.
OPEN FOR DEBATE
Prior to IBM’s investment in the Linux kernel – and by extension free software – a debate began about what to call free software. Stallman preferred the term “free software” because he felt it emphasized the importance of source code freedom. Others disagreed. They argued that corporations would never be able to identity the value of something that they perceived as being “free as in beer.” They lobbied for a change in name to “open source software.” They felt this removed the emphasis from “free” and allowed them to demonstrate that this development model would enable more innovation, higher quality code, and faster development times. This counter-revolution would largely win out. Most folks today call free software, “open source software” and this may be the term with which you are familiar. But a horse by any other color, is still a horse and free software (regardless of what it is called) has certainly come of age.
(Editor’s note: This entry was originally published in October 2013. It was revised and updated March 2019, and again in December of 2021.)
________________
This article is copyright 2013, 2019, 2021 and licensed under the Creative Commons BY-ND 4.0 International License. You are free to republish verbatim copies of it (in whole or in part) in any form (hard copy, digital, etc.) as long as you provide proper attribution. Click on the link above for complete license terms.
There is a war on, a war against creativity a war against individuality a war against beauty, national consciousness, a war against the western ideal.
How often do you stop and admire the aesthetics of say, a chair, a building, or a beautifully manicured public space? While it’s not unnatural to admire the beauty of art and other objects when visiting an art museum, we often take everyday aesthetics for granted. But we shouldn’t, here’s why.
Simply put, aesthetics make us happy. On an emotional level they elicit feelings of happiness and calm. They connect us to our ability to reflect on and appreciate the world around us which in turn gives us feelings of contentment and hope. Further still a connection to the area that surrounds us from our own street to the country as a whole, it gives us a identity, it enforces a identity.
A team of researchers set out to uncover the main driving factors of happiness in five major cities including – New York City, London, Paris, Toronto, and Berlin.
Using statistical analysis on data gathered by Gallup happiness surveys, as well as data they collected on their own, they discovered that people’s happiness can be contributed to living in an aesthetically beautiful city.
The things they are surrounded by in their daily environment had the greatest effect on their happiness including – history, green spaces, beautiful architecture, and cobblestone streets to name a few. People who live in aesthetically pleasing environments are prone to a strong sense of regional or national identity, which in turn often leads to patriotism.
They also concluded that our perception of beauty produces feelings we associate with happiness – like calmness, appreciation, reflection and hope. So in essence, experiencing beauty alters our emotions and makes us feel happier.
Since the end of world war 2 Western governments have declared war on beauty, this began in the great rebuilding programs of the 1950’s, when new housing shot up like wheat in a farmers field. Old and bomb damaged buildings were torn down and replaced with soulless uniform concrete blocks. it was often remarked that you could be anywhere in such streets as the buildings all looked the same from London to Moscow.
In conclusion the war of Aesthetics is for the large part not unseen but the unknown, the unspoken war on the western ideal and in turn the west itself. We can and we must resist, it can be as simple as dressing beautiful or going that extra mile and creating something marvelous. Support the classic arts, buy better, demand better, be better.
Dr. Paul Offit, one of the world’s top experts on vaccines, isn’t taking any more COVID vaccines. I learned about Paul’s conversion to anti-vaxxer status from reading Brucha Weisberger’s substack article.
First, watch this TV news clip paying very close attention starting 50 seconds into the clip:
Here’s the definition of an anti-vaxxer:
He also said he’s not getting any more COVID shots until he sees more data
And more vaccine hesitancy…
The question for your blue pilled friends
“So, if Dr. Paul Offit isn’t getting any more shots, why are you? Do you know something he doesn’t?”
Summary
We now have one more anti-vaxxer in the world.
Neo-Aristocracy emailed Paul asking him if he wants to join Martin Kulldorff and see the Israeli safety data that the Israeli Ministry of Health does not want anyone to see. Let’s see how red pilled Paul really is. I’ll update this article if he responds. Don’t hold your breath. Apparently, being open to seeing safety data that is counter-narrative is a career limiting move.
Hungary has long pushed to raise the birthrate of its country without relying on mass immigration
From Thursday, all pregnant women in Hungary who want an abortion must first listen to the heartbeat of their fetus before going through with the procedure, according to an announcement from Minister of the Interior Sándor Pintér, who is also responsible for healthcare and education in Hungary.
“The presented medical findings must record that the healthcare provider presented the factor indicating the vital functions of the fetus to the pregnant woman in a clearly identifiable manner,” said the minister. He said that the new ministerial decree requiring pregnant women to listen to the baby’s heartbeat was not a new law but simply a continuation of the 1992 abortion law, which has not been changed since it was passed.
The regulation requirement will be included in all applications for performing an abortion starting on Sept. 15, according to Hungarian newspaper Magyar Nemzet.
Several Christian-conservative organizations, such as CitizenGO and the Szent István Institute, welcomed the ministerial decree on the presentation of the fetal heartbeat to mothers.Tímea Szabó, the co-chair of green party Párbeszéd, said he believes that this step by the ruling party could be the beginning of an abortion ban, and therefore demands the immediate withdrawal of the measure.
Hungary has long pushed to raise the birthrate of its country without relying on mass immigration the tool of the vast majority of western nations, and part of that strategy has been trying to not only reduce abortions but also provide financial and societal incentives for couples to have children, including more access to daycare, better parental leave, and financial bonuses for buying a house and having more than one child.
While serving as family minister of Hungary, the country’s current president, Katalin Novák, celebrated huge progress on pro-family policies in 2020 by saying: “The recent demographic figures speak for themselves; the number of marriages is at a 40-year high, and the fertility rate is at a 20-year high, while the number of divorces hasn’t been as low as last year in the last six decades,” she said. Novák added that the country has favored policies that grow the country’s population without relying on the mass migration seen in many other European countries, which has been a priority for Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
“In all of Europe there are fewer and fewer children, and the answer of the West to this is migration,” said Orbán in 2018. “They want as many migrants to enter as there are missing kids so that the numbers will add up. We Hungarians have a different way of thinking. Instead of just numbers, we want Hungarian children. Migration for us is surrender.”
In Hungary, abortion is allowed until the 12th week of pregnancy under certain conditions, including the pregnancy endangering the life of the mother, if the fetus has a high risk of being born malformed, the pregnancy resulted from rape, and if the woman is in a severe crisis. Certain allowances also push the abortion limit to the 18th week of the pregnancy.
Hungary although far from perfect is consistently striving for the western ideal and at the same rate embarrassing the rest of the west. Here you have proof of what can be done when the state works for the people its responsible for.
The study, entitled “X-ray dating of a linen sample from the Shroud of Turin,” went relatively unnoticed when it was published on April 11th, 2022. However, its conclusions deserved accolades from the scientific community and beyond.
A new analysis by Italian scientists of the Shroud of Turin using X-ray technology proves that the famous cloth dates back 2,000 years, contrary to the medieval origin suggested by the disputed 1988 carbon-14 analysis.
Until now, the carbon-14 dating carried out in 1988 dictated public opinion. At the time, many precautions had been taken to give the carbon experiment authority. Three independent laboratories, located in Zurich, (Switzerland), Oxford (UK), and Tucson (Arizona), had analysed fragments of the Shroud and had all come to the conclusion that the Shroud was a medieval forgery.
However, within the same year, many voices were raised that objected to the method used in the testing, with a battery of different arguments. Carbon-14 dating, which is based on the radiological measurement of the carbon-14 naturally contained in organic matter, can be used to estimate the age of certain, very old artefacts or natural materials. It is commonly used in palaeontology or archaeology, but its relevance increases with the age of the object of study—ideally between 6,000 and 50,000 years. The technique was therefore not suitable for an object as recent—even assuming it was 2,000 years old—as the Shroud, and could only give an uncertain result, with a potential margin of error of several hundred years. Moreover, carbon-14 dating would not be able to rule out the many more recent foreign bodies that may have crept into the interstices of the cloth, and risk distorting the result. Another explanation was advanced saying the experiment was done on a latter fragment issued from a reparation of the original shroud.
The X-ray dating technique used by the Italian scholars is a completely different and much more precise process. It involves analysing the Shroud at the level of atoms. The researcher will measure the natural ageing of the linen cellulose using X-rays, and then convert it into the time elapsed since manufacture. The results obtained from the Shroud were compared with those of other authenticated linen fabric samples, ranging in age from 3000 BC to 2000 AD. The measurements of the shroud were found to be particularly close to those of a linen fabric that historical records date back to the siege of Masada in Israel, between 55 and 74 AD. These results are therefore far from the medieval hypothesis put forward in 1988.
The X-ray technique offers a number of additional guarantees of reliability, explains Liberato De Caro, member of the research team, in an interview with the National Catholic Register. First, the sample required for the analysis is much smaller than that used for carbon-14 dating: 0.5 x 1 mm. The risk of finding exogenous particles is therefore considerably reduced. In addition, X-ray analysis can be carried out several times without damaging the support, whereas carbon-14 dating can only be done once per sample, which prevents any cross-checking in the event of doubt or error in the protocol.
The results obtained and published in April are only a first step. The research team intends to have the experiment repeated by several other independent laboratories, on several samples, to establish a more conclusive body of evidence. In any case, these findings are in addition to other interesting signs already observed that point to the authenticity of the Shroud, such as the presence of old pollens found only around the Dead Sea. But the most important sign for the believer is certainly the presence of a body, printed in negative, on the Shroud, which was revealed in 1898, during the printing of a photograph, a phenomenon that to this day remains completely unexplained by science—but which faith in Christ can account for.
The map above shows the percentage of residents in various European countries who are willing to fight and go to war for their country.
As war with Russia escalates and the western powers continue to poke the already wide awake Russian bear, we take a look at just how likely the various European countries would actually follow through on their threats. From high to low, these are the percentages by country:
A total of 62,398 persons were interviewed globally. In each country a representative sample of around 1000 men and women was interviewed either face to face (30 countries; n=32258), via telephone (12 countries; n=9784) or online (22 countries; n=20356). Details are attached. The field work was conducted during September 2014 – December 2014. The margin of error for the survey is between 2.14 and 4.45 +3-5% at 95% confidence level.
Europe is the continent with the fewest people willing to fight a war for their country. Globally, an average of 61% of respondents in 64 countries said they would. Morocco (94%), Fiji (94%), Pakistan (89%), Vietnam (89%) and Bangladesh (86%) had the highest percentage willing to fight.
The country with the fewest people willing to go to war was Japan, with just 11% of respondents saying they would fight.
Russia aside i think its there’s more of a story here, you have 2 glaringly obvious avenues of concern. One that it’s non western nations that are far more willing to fight for their country than western ones which of course presents a major problem in the long term given the declining western birth rate, and overall ever diminishing status. Two that the people of western nations seem more and more detached from the countries they are born into. Long gone are the days of for King country and God.
Many of our readers will agree of course and have firmly decided some time ago they won’t fight for the various western occupational governments as they see it and its understandable of course, however the findings here set an alarming picture of the collective western decay. The figures reek of disunity disloyalty and not least disenfranchised.
You have a mixture of people that do love their country but wont fight for their corrupt governments and on the other hand a large % of the population that can’t even be bothered to object in any capacity verbally or otherwise the daily crimes of the state let alone risk their lives defending the homeland.
Its a red flag for all those still hell bent on pandering to the mass for western salvation / rebirth.
There is a war on, a war against creativity a war against individuality a war against beauty, national consciousness, a war against the western ideal.
