Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

My thoughts on Magda, mass formation psychosis, no pure bloods and not turning to the dark side. ???‍♂️???? UTL COMMENT:- I agree with everything he said!! Let's remove the feelings of vengeance from our hearts!!!

There are very few now paying any attention. Most of the brainwashed fools and uneducated idiots out there will help usher the New World Order in. They will be the death of billions.

     The post Happy Gilmore 2 first appeared on Worth it or Woke.

     The post Frankenstein – Guillermo del Toro first appeared on Worth it or Woke.

"A karaoke favourite."

On July 16, 2021, Pope Francis released the apostolic letter Traditionis custodes, a special papal motu proprio that sought to enforce specific guidelines on the liturgy of the Catholic Mass. According to the language of the document, this was done, “In order to promote the concord and unity of the Church, with paternal solicitude towards those who in any region adhere to liturgical forms antecedent to the reform willed by the Vatican Council II, my Venerable Predecessors, Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI, granted and regulated the faculty to use the Roman Missal edited by John XXIII in 1962.” This is a bishop who does not want to be a guardian of tradition. He wants to employ a document with that deceptive title to undermine tradition. As one might imagine, the guidelines are very technical. The document itself is a testimony to just how messy those guidelines are. Recall that Francis said that he wanted to “make a mess of things” with his pontificate. “I want a mess!” he declared in the opening months of his papacy. And boy, did Traditionis custodes make a mess of things. The two words translate to “guardians of Tradition.” In truth, Traditionis custodes was anything but that. It is telling that when you Google “Traditionis custodes” the first thing that pops up is a Wikipedia definition rightly stating that the document “restricts the celebration of the Tridentine Mass of the Roman Rite, sometimes colloquially called the ‘Latin Mass’ or the ‘Traditional Latin Mass.’” That’s a universal interpretation of Francis’ goal with the document. Or as others put it, Traditionis custodes became infamous for “imposing severe restrictions on the celebration of the Mass in Latin.” It has been widely viewed as a “punitive” measure to “suppress” the Latin Mass and even to vilify traditionalists who Francis disliked. Francis, who constantly talked of “mercy,” portrayed traditionalists as modern Pharisees, engaging in what he condemned as “Pharisaism.” In a particularly cruel homily at Casa Santa Marta in October 2018, Francis lambasted “rigid” Catholics as akin to the “Pharisees and doctors of the Law.” Quoting Jesus Christ, he called them “evil,” like “whitened sepulchres” who are shiny and clean on the outside but “wicked” on the inside. The pope who famously said of homosexuals, “Who am I to judge?” did not hesitate to judge these “rigid” traditionalists: “Beautiful on the outside, all perfect … all perfect … but within, full of rottenness, therefore of greed, of wickedness.” The pope of mercy warned the faithful of these cretins: “Be careful around those who are rigid. Be careful around Christians — be they laity, priests, bishops — who present themselves as so ‘perfect,’ rigid. Be careful.” Francis again judged them: “There’s no Spirit of God there.” On another occasion in June 2019, aboard one of his infamous plane-ride press conferences, Francis roasted these Catholics as “fundamentalists” with a nostalgia for “returning to the ashes.” He said that these traditionalists seek to “safeguard the ashes” of the past. Thus, Francis declared a need to step in and “guard tradition” from these reprobates. Not surprisingly, Francis’ progressive enthusiasts seized on his Traditionis custodes to undermine tradition, weaponizing it against their shared enemy. To liberal Catholics who don’t like traditional Catholics, the motu proprio was like manna from heaven. They must have roared with delight that they had a document from the pope himself titled “Guardians of Tradition” that actually went after the very folks in the Church who cared most about the traditions that they as liberals didn’t give a damn about. The liberals wanted to destroy tradition, not guard it. Now they had their piece of paper, with a title that gloriously seemed to mock the traditionalists. It’s akin to secular leftists employing words like “tolerance” and “inclusion” for the contrary purpose of intolerance and exclusion of conservative Christians. What was most ironic about this is that traditional Catholics, especially the young people and families preferring the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), tend to be the more devout Catholics. Not only are they reverent with a deep desire for the transcendent, but they attend Mass faithfully and have large families that produce religious vocations. The liberal Catholics are not producing priests and nuns, nor even having large families. The TLM folks are doing that, and at a time when the Church is dying for vocations. The liberal and apathetic Catholics are not even attending Mass regularly. And what especially infuriated traditional Catholics is that the obvious problem at parishes is those who abuse and disrespect the liturgy. On any given Sunday anywhere in America and the West, liberal clergy and Baby Boomer choirs turn the sacred liturgy into a clown show. Every Catholic reading this article could recite horror stories. Take a look at this sacrilegious performance last year at a Novus ordo (non-TLM Mass) at a church in Germany, where the congregants received Holy Communion to the literal sounds of the “Chicken Dance!” Sadly, I can’t say that such a spectacle is rare. Last summer I attended a “Mass” at a parish in Paris that was so arguably heretical by the arrogantly freelancing priest that my family and others declined to receive Communion because we felt it probably was not a valid consecration. Two years ago at a church in Indiana, we watched aghast as two middle-aged women who had hijacked the choir snapped their fingers and bebopped to some tune that in every way violated even the new norms of Vatican II. At any given parish on a Sunday, you’ll hear maracas and electric guitars and obnoxiously loud drums banged by narcissists who think that Christ’s Holy Mass is a place for them to perform. I could go on and on. To be sure, it was always hard to imagine Pope Francis supporting any of that insanity. If you watched any of his Vatican Masses, you saw reverence, Latin, chant, Palestrina, kneeling, and other-worldly holiness. The Vatican Mass is beautifully traditional. All of which begs the question: Did Francis know what the hell was going on inside these parish crazy-houses? As always with the Francis papacy, you never really knew. But instead, Pope Francis spearheaded a crackdown directed at the very people who sought a return to reverence. Traditionis custodes targeted them. They feared that it was intended to destroy tradition. And alas, to the most enthusiastic Francis advocates, Traditionis custodes is being used to do just that. Charlotte Bishop Annihilates Tradition That brings me to a rather outrageous case in point unfolding right now in the Diocese of Charlotte. It has exploded in the last few days thanks to a heroic leak that made its way first to the traditionalist blog Rorate Caeli and then to the National Catholic Register. The perpetrator is Bishop Michael Martin of Charlotte, who has proposed shocking restrictions on the Catholic Mass in his diocese. These include (to quote the Register) “barring ad orientem worship and traditional prayers at the foot of the altar, including the St. Michael Prayer,” as well as restricting if not banning altar rails, kneeling, chants, the wearing of veils, and limiting if not terminating the Latin language in ways that surely would violate Vatican II and subsequent guidelines under every pope since (including Francis). The lengthy document and its breathtaking litany of nitpicky restrictions by the bishop is astonishing to behold. The desire to which Bishop Martin wants to control everything would be laughable if not so disturbing. One would have to think that even Pope Francis would object and tell this man to back off, and maybe even submit to a psychological evaluation. Then again, Francis probably would not. After all, Francis focused not on the unhinged “reformers” — call them the “Chicken Dance” crowd — but the “rigid” traditionalists. Predictably Francis-like, Charlotte’s liberal bishop is doing this for the stated intention of “purifying and unifying the celebration of the Mass” in the diocese. Martin says that his actions are consistent with Traditionis custodes aimed at promoting “concord and unity.” And naturally, the bishop’s letter to his fellow priests in the diocese is titled, “Go In Peace.” Yes, peace. Once again, in the name of concord and unity, we see division being fomented. This document would bring not peace but strife. And the people in the Charlotte diocese of 565,000 Catholics (as well as many Catholics nationwide) are fuming. I have been emailing with sources from the diocese. One of them said of the bishop: “He is a boomer tyrannical ‘70s liberal priest in the style of Francis. Absolutely awful.” Another told me: “Bishop Martin is not a leader but a manipulator. He is unqualified but promoted by the Bishop of Atlanta. Charlotte had an excellent Bishop, who became ill. Francis has poisoned the well with Martin. Terrible outcome, folks are outraged.” This is a bishop who does not want to be a guardian of tradition. He wants to employ a document with that deceptive title to undermine tradition. Bishop Martin’s severe and unjust restrictions on the use of Latin during Mass (whether TLM or Novus Ordo liturgies) and more have everyone scratching their heads. The document is filled with exaggerations if not erroneous assumptions. The bishop’s ideas are so restrictive that they clash with the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops and even liberal cardinals like Blase Cupich in Chicago, who by comparison is more tolerant. How this plays out remains to be seen, but here’s why it’s especially significant at this very moment: The Charlotte document was being worked on while Pope Francis was alive. Now, with Francis out, and a more traditional Pope Leo XIV in, the move by Bishop Martin serves as a direct challenge to the new pope. It forces confrontation, a decision, and resolution. “The controversy in Charlotte is rising to international attention, as it represents the first major liturgical dispute during the reign of Pope Leo XIV, who has pledged to bring unity to a divided Church,” writes the National Catholic Register. “The North Carolina diocese is now considered a test case to see what, if any, indication Leo gives about not only the future of the TLM but also Vatican II’s authoritative teaching on the liturgy more broadly.” It does indeed. And here’s where the plot has suddenly thickened. It was just reported by The Pillar and The Charlotte Observer that Bishop Martin last month had a one-on-one hourlong meeting in Rome with — behold — Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, i.e., the future Pope Leo XIV. Prevost was prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery of Bishops. And with charges circulating that Martin was guilty of “arbitrary micromanagement” and leading with an “autocratic approach,” including hastening to unilaterally rush ahead with ambitious plans for a new cathedral, he came under Prevost’s radar. In the words of The Observer, Martin had been summoned to Rome to discuss “administrative matters.” Bishop Martin told the newspaper that Prevost was “very, very relaxed” and “calm” as they discussed “a few things that needed to be addressed.” He said that the future pope was “interested in me and what was happening in Charlotte.” Prevost did not publicly comment on the meeting. But in the words of The Pillar, “Prevost — now Pope Leo XIV — encouraged Martin to make change more slowly.” Importantly, that meeting with Prevost came before the aforementioned leaked document was published by Rorate Caeli and the National Catholic Register. One wonders what Prevost — now Leo XIV — is thinking now. How Pope Leo responds will tell us much about the new pope, Bishop Martin, and the future of Traditionis custodes. READ MORE from Paul Kengor: A Hopeful Pope Leo Change for Life ‘Peace Be With You’: The Deep Meaning in Leo XIV’s First Words The post Destroyers of Tradition appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

This week, in continuing to muse over Douglas Murray’s newest book, On Democracies and Death Cults, I turn to something avoided by most of the media, even in Israel. The devastation wreaked on lives and societies by abuse of drugs such as fentanyl, cocaine, meth, and heroin should horrify us. It is the worst of the West, evidence to groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and other similarly authoritarian ideologues of decadence and soul rot in those who do not accept their particular disciplined way of life. Just as the cruel inequities of Jim Crow gave Stalin’s propagandists plenty of cover in the Thirties, so too does our inability to inspire so many people to avoid a life of dissolution weigh on the Western soul. His point was the depth of the horror that was inflicted and a hellish collision of those seeking to celebrate life … with those seeking … death and torturous humiliation. Israel, too, has its drug problem. No one wanted to draw any attention to that in the wake of the atrocities of Hamas and of the exterminationist threat that Iran continues to promote. No one wanted to suggest a moral equivalence, even among those who had formerly done so. But Murray does not believe the truth should be hidden. This piece follows his thought as he set down the horror of the Hamas onslaught on a dance festival of young people, which there as here, many or most high on various drugs. Not just any drug. Although, as Murray made clear, drugs such as cocaine were present, which deliver a very specific kind of pleasurable feeling, at festivals such as this, the use of psychedelics are key. October 7, 2023 was a Jewish holiday, observed with much joy every year. But in Israel, as in many places in the modern world, and in ages past, young people seek their own pathways for celebration, community, and inspiration. As in Western democracies, participation in religion is up to the individual, and young people in particular feel the pull of something higher than any law or custom drawing them. For better or worse, that has meant for some psychedelic drugs and dancing. Peyote was used in traditional worship by some Native Americans in the Southwest. Those psychedelic cactus buttons could even be purchased mail order. Scientists synthesized its active ingredient, mescaline, and Aldous Huxley, author of the dystopian novel Brave New World, wrote a moving book about his experience taking the drug (still legal at the time). He titled the book The Doors of Perception, taken from the words of the British visionary William Blake, which he felt encapsulated the experience: “If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things thro’ narrow chinks of his cavern.” Huxley was followed in this genre by theologian Alan Watts in his The Joyous Cosmology, which brought a similar report about the recently discovered drug LSD. Researchers in several universities continue in recent times to explore the therapeutic possibilities of these and other psychedelics. In 1965, while all these drugs were still legal, Ken Kesey and his Merry Pranksters placed LSD at the center of the free-form events they started holding on the West Coast, which they entitled Acid Tests. Kesey employed the brand-new band the Grateful Dead as the house band at these events, which the Dead’s Jerry Garcia described in a 1989 interview: It wasn’t one of those things where people paid to come and see us specifically, so we had the option to be able to not play…. Since nobody had any expectations about what we were going to play, we could play anything that came into our minds. Openness to the unfolding of the world accompanied by a roomful of other explorers, entirely open and vulnerable in a world of unfolding mysteries. Tom Wolfe, who chronicled these events in his Electric Kool- Aid Acid Test, described what happened at one of these events, in which the audience was as much a part of the show as anyone else. A woman had taken a turn down a dark pathway of her mind, and suddenly, her cries started being picked up by microphones and heard by all. “Ray, Ray, who cares? Who cares?” On and on, rattling the nerves of those who were open to anything and quite vulnerable. Hugh Romney, present at that event, heard that call as a moral summons: Do we really care? It became a spiritual rallying point, and Romney found he could help direct everyone’s caring towards the woman, who passed through the danger. Garcia, who was there at that Who Cares? “Acid Test,” spoke to an interviewer in 1991 about how he has been constantly aware of the extraordinary openness of those at his events. For him, his art was infused with responsibility. Garcia said: I thought, if I’m going to be onstage I’m not going to say anything to anybody or address the crowd, because it doesn’t matter what you say, sometimes just the sound of your voice might inadvertently set somebody off. The situation with psychedelics is so highly charged that you never know what’s leaking in. I don’t mind doing it in the music, because that’s where I divest myself of ego. It’s egoless, something I trust. If the band has something to protect, it’s the integrity of the experience, which remains shapeless and formless. As long as it stays that way, everything’s okay. In a world that was formless and soon, after 1966, beyond the law, those who believed in its worth had to assume responsibility for the integrity of what they did. Is not that assumption of personal responsibility the key to civilized life? Human laws change, the various forms by which we order ourselves constantly change. It is our job here in such a world to find the highest kind of order, the beckoning call of that which drives our own self and gives it integrity, and live by it in such a compelling way that it draws others to its life. This lies at the heart of Western civilization — the compelling love of the self-evident truths that make a civil order possible. We do not need others to order us — we seek the great integral order with all our hearts. Hundreds of young Israelis were at the Nova Festival on October 7, and, as Douglas Murray reported, many of them were under the influence of psychedelics, treading the now well-worn path pioneered, for better or worse, by Kesey and the Grateful Dead among others, sixty years ago. Many were deep in the extremely open mental state of connection to their fellow dancers if not to the whole of the mystically unfolding world around them. And as dawn came, the party was attacked by land and air by Hamas. The death worshippers had come, bringing not care and love, but deliberately planned death, sexual torture, and abduction. Murray wrote: People who had taken [psychedelic drugs] would have almost no ability to comprehend the situation in which they found themselves. People who had literally prepared themselves to be at one with the best aspects of the universe instead found themselves face-to-face with the worst things anyone could see.… To come across the worst sights imaginable — of friends being murdered in front of you — at the exact moment when your mind and body are least expecting it is something very few people could live through.… A number of the young people who had survived had been sectioned into mental institutions. A number had killed themselves. Others had tried to kill themselves in the hospitals. Psychedelics were illegal in Israel then, as in most places. Murray was not advocating or excusing the drug use at Nova or making a case for their use, as did Huxley and Watts among others, past and present. His point was the depth of the horror that was inflicted and a hellish collision of those seeking to celebrate life in a state of incredible openness with those seeking only to impose death and torturous humiliation on those whose existence they have dedicated themselves to obliterate. Murray challenges us: do we see the reality of the horror here, or do we turn away from it, and discount it by one rationalization or another? Do we use our inevitable imperfections as an excuse to stop exercising moral discernment? Do we have the courage to recognize that in order to be free, we must choose with all our heart and soul and everything else we can discover to devote ourselves to the freedom that is the West’s precious heritage? Do we worship a tyrannical being who can find no better way to establish order than horror and brutality? Or do we use force only to stop those who would destroy the image of the God who calls us out of slavery and invites us to discipline ourselves lovingly to an order that frees us all? That, Murray makes clear in his harrowing meditation, is the issue at stake. The beauty of truth that draws us forward, the compassion that enables us to live with each other’s imperfections and inspires us to reach ever higher beyond them. READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin: The Israeli Tragedy and Douglas Murray’s Churchillian Voice Trump Tries a Different Approach to Arab Hitlerism The post Drug Abuse Hinders Our Defense of Civilization appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.