The Diplomatic Security Service was once thought of as a premier law enforcement organization. It was always supposed to be that way. After all‚ the State Department security agency has critical responsibilities.…

When sleep is fragmented or of poor quality‚ people often have better dream recall. In other words‚ they have a ... Read More &; Source The post WTF Fun Fact 13698 – Dream Recall appeared first on WTF Fun Facts.

The temperature of lightening might surprise you. Click to read the full fact. The post WTF Fun Fact 13699 – Temperature of Lightning appeared first on WTF Fun Facts.

Note: This an excerpt is from Sarah Cooper's book‚ How to Be Successful Without Hurting Men's Feelings.In this fast-paced business world‚ female leaders need to make sure they're not perceived as pushy‚ aggressive‚ or competent.One way to do that is to alter your leadership style to account for the fragile male ego.Should men accept powerful women and not feel threatened by them? Yes. Is that asking too much?IS IT?Sorry‚ I didn't mean to get aggressive there. Anyhoo‚ here are twelve non-threatening leadership strategies for women.When setting a deadline‚ ask your coworker what he thinks of doing something‚ instead of just asking him to get it done. This makes him feel less like you're telling him what to do and more like you care about his opinions.When sharing your ideas‚ overconfidence is a killer. You don't want your male coworkers to think you're getting all uppity. Instead‚ downplay your ideas as just "thinking out loud‚" "throwing something out there‚" or sharing something "dumb‚" "random‚" or "crazy."Pepper your emails with exclamation marks and emojis so you don't come across as too clear or direct. Your lack of efficient communication will make you seem more approachable.If a male coworker steals your idea in a meeting‚ thank him for it. Give him kudos for how he explained your idea so clearly. And let's face it‚ no one might've ever heard it if he hadn't repeated it.When you hear a sexist comment‚ the awkward laugh is key. Practice your awkward laugh at home‚ with your friends and family‚ and in the mirror. Make sure you sound truly delighted even as your soul is dying inside.Men love explaining things. But when he's explaining something and you already know that‚ it might be tempting to say‚ "I already know that." Instead‚ have him explain it to you over and over again. It will make him feel useful and will give you some time to think about how to avoid him in the future.Pointing out a mistake is always risky so it's important to always apologize for noticing the mistake and then make sure that no one thinks you're too sure about it. People will appreciate your "hey what do I know?!" sensibilities.Asking your manager for a promotion could make you seem power- hungry‚ opportunistic‚ and transparent. Instead‚ ask a male coworker to vouch for you. Have your coworker tell your manager you'd be great for the role even though you don't really want it. This will make you more likely to actually get that promotion.Sometimes not everyone is properly introduced at the start of a meeting. Don't take it personally even if it happens to you all the time‚ and certainly don't stop the meeting from moving forward to introduce yourself. Sending a quick note afterward is the best way to introduce yourself without seeming too self-important.When you get interrupted‚ you might be tempted to just continue talking or even ask if you can finish what you were saying. This is treacherous territory. Instead‚ simply stop talking. The path of least resistance is silence.When collaborating with a man‚ type using only one finger. Skill and speed are very off-putting.When all else fails‚ wear a mustache so everyone sees you as more man-like. This will cancel out any need to change your leadership style. In fact‚ you may even get a quick promotion!Many women have discovered the secret power of non-threatening leadership. We call it a "secret power" because no one else actually knows about it. We keep our power hidden within ourselves so that it doesn't frighten and intimidate others. That's what makes us the true unsung heroes of the corporate world.About the Author: Sarah CooperSarah Cooper is a writer‚ comedian‚ and author of 100 Tricks to Appear Smart in Meetings. Her new book‚ How to Be Successful Without Hurting Men's Feelings‚ is out now.A satirical take on what it's like to be a woman in the workplace‚ Cooper draws from her experience as a former executive in the world of tech (she's a former Googler and Yahooer). You can get the book here.This article was originally published on 3.25.19

If anyone had doubts as to the seriousness of the threat to the West and its heritage of political freedom‚ what happened this last week in the “Mother of Parliaments” should be enough to dispel them. [T]he fight is between those who hold civilization dear and those who embrace the pre-civilizational. When Pim Fortuyn was assassinated two decades ago in Holland‚ largely because of his opposition to multiculturalism‚ most shrugged it off as unimportant. When Islamists went on a rampage of murder after a Parisian satirical magazine published a satirical cartoon that offended many Muslims’ sensibility‚ that seemed like an isolated incident and why stir up trouble anyway? We wrote off concerns about radical political Islamism as racist‚ xenophobic‚ whatever‚ when they spawned political reactions in Switzerland‚ Sweden‚ and Hungary. (READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin: Antony Blinken Declares Israeli Settlements Illegal) But now it is in Britain. And it is huge and it is ugly.  Southend West Member of Parliament Sir David Amess was stabbed to death in 2021 by Ali Harbi Ali. Ali’s intended target had been Conservative Mike Freer‚ the MP for Golders Green‚ home to London’s largest Jewish community‚ who is himself not Jewish. Ali went to Freer’s office‚ didn’t find him‚ and went on to kill Arness. Freer announced about a week ago that he was calling it quits after thirty years in Parliament. He was subject to constant death threats; his office was torched in December‚ and he and his staff have had to wear stab vests whenever they went out. Freer finally had enough. He explained to the BBC the routine that eventually wore down his nerve: You just have to be aware of your surroundings. So when you park your car‚ just make sure there’s no one hanging around. When you approach the office‚ people quite legitimately could be waiting to see you. Always make sure you keep a distance. Always make sure the office is well lit‚ the CCTV is working‚ the panic buttons are there. If you do a public event‚ always make sure you have an exit that you can run to behind you‚ in case someone comes at you from in front. It’s all that kind of awareness that becomes engrained. Prime Minister Sunak properly condemned the attacks that led to Freer’s resignation: They’re not just an attack on him but an attack on British democracy … people are free to debate issues passionately and have robust debate. Intimidation and abuse is simply unacceptable. Nice words‚ and properly cautious to indicate that he was not quashing “robust debate.” Yet the rule of law along with free speech is in trouble in Britain right now‚ and Sunak’s proper words have not yet been matched by proper and effective action. Britain has had for some time strong laws against hate speech. They were employed to deny entry to Britain for radio talk host Michael Savage for his harsh criticism of political Islam. The same was true for Dutch politician Geert Wilders (whose recently won the Dutch election). Delicate concern for the sensitivities of Britain’s large and growing Muslim communities was clearly thought to be part of a quid pro quo. They thought that‚ offered special protection from hearing challenging opinions‚ this large population that came from authoritarian lands and cultures would then appreciatively assimilate into the British culture of robust free speech and fair play. That hope was laid to rest after October 7. Hamas’s orgy of rape and murder has lit a fire under terrorist wannabes and organized campaigns of violence and intimidation burst forth. Hundreds of thousands march the streets of London‚ and police who were quick to enforce the niceties of the hate speech laws against the likes of Savage and Wilders temporized in the face of the mobs chanting the exterminationist slogan “From the River to the sea‚ Palestine will be Jew free” (my slight emendation indicates what their euphemism really means‚ wink‚ wink) and threatening violence to all who oppose them. When asked why they did not arrest a man screaming for “Jihad” at one such rally‚ a senior police officer rationalized that “jihad” “can mean a lot of things to a lot of people.” (READ MORE: The American People Know the Real Hamas)  Indeed‚ it can. One can‚ though‚ make a reasonable inference from context‚ just as the university presidents asked us to do when excusing their egregiously antisemitic speech double standards before Congress. Their performance so disgusted us because we knew what draconian actions they had taken toward the least impropriety against a more intersectionally fashionable group. So‚ too‚ there is a building recognition that this new-found sensitivity to speech rights in Britain is intersectionally selective‚ and in real life‚ outside the fog of rationalizations‚ Jews are not receiving equal protection of the law in Britain. But Jews have served the world as the canary in the coal mine. Enemies of freedom regularly come for the Jews first‚ but you can be sure that the next target will be anyone who values the freedom implicit in Genesis’s assertion that all humans are created in the divine image. And so as the institution of Parliament comes under attack‚ and Parliament buckles before the mobs‚ the intimidators‚ and the assassins.  Here’s the story. Parliamentary tradition has established days in which the parties who are in opposition get to propose motions that normally would not get to the floor. The main British opposition is the Labour Party. Labour had gone hard-core antisemitic for a number of years‚ and were crushed at the polls for it. A new leader took over in the aftermath‚ Keir Starmer‚ who made an effort to rid the party of antisemites. However‚ he is faced with the same dilemma facing Democrats here — they have a large Islamist constituency that is very happy with the antisemitism and wants it back. They are pushing Labour to renew the hostility to Israel that had attracted them to the party. On this Opposition Day‚ Starmer was put into a corner by the small Scottish National Party‚ a hard left antisemitic party. The SNP used this day to put a motion that called for a Gaza ceasefire together with blaming Israel for “collective punishment” of the Gazans. Not a word about the massacre‚ rape‚ and kidnapping that Hamas set in motion and which it is committed to doing again‚ nor of its atrocious policy of hiding among civilians. This placed Starmer in a pickle. The motion elides over Hamas’s ghastly atrocities executed on a mass scale‚ and places the blame on Israel for the war crime Hamas committed by using civilians for human shields when Israel responded to the war Hamas began. Starmer made his reputation on being above such hate. But with the angry mobs making their violent mood known and smelling blood with the success of their intimidations so far‚ the antisemites in Labour were about to join the Scottish party’s motion‚ and so embarrass Starmer and perhaps bring his leadership to an end. At this point‚ the Speaker of the House of Commons‚ Lindsay Hoyle‚ suddenly jettisoned decades of precedent and allowed Labour to amend the SNR’s resolution by eliminating the repugnant libeling of Israel’s refusal to grant Hamas victory for the war crime of using civilians as a shield. The governing Conservative Party and the SNP both objected to the unprecedented ruling of the Speaker and walked out‚ enabling Labour to save face and carry the amended motion‚ purged of antisemitism‚ saving Starmer for the moment. (READ MORE: Trump: The New Churchill) The Speaker‚ however‚ was facing censure for his breaking of the established rules of the day. He apologized to the House‚ while claiming that he did what he did to protect the lives of Members of Parliament which he felt were in immediate danger from the Jew-hating mob.  He wasn’t wrong on that danger. Politico.eu reports a Labour MP commenting on the danger he and his colleagues face:  I’ve a wife and a three-year-old son at home‚” said a male Labour MP. “They aren’t elected‚ and even if they were‚ why should my home be a target for anyone? In what civilized world should politicians have their homes or their lives targeted? Correct. In no civilized world. As Victor David Hanson puts it‚ the fight is between those who hold civilization dear and those who embrace the pre-civilizational. It is a fight against the great bulwarks of civilization‚ the Jews as representatives of the Biblical tradition‚ and constitutional government and its rule of law. And as Hanson points out‚ civilization only survives if it refuses to be confined to the rules that its enemies will never obey‚ and fight for its life. What does that take? A Labour member of Churchill’s wartime coalition‚ Hugh Dalton‚ described how in the darkest days just after Dunkirk‚ with Britain now all alone against the onslaught of organized savagery. Churchill was incandescent in a meeting with his ministers. He told them how he had considered and rejected the idea of entering into negotiations with Hitler. They could only lead into subjection to the savagery by choice. He was sure that all agreed. Dalton quoted Churchill’s finish: “And I am convinced‚” he concluded‚ “that every man of you would rise up and tear me down from my place if I were for one moment to contemplate parley or surrender. If this long island story of ours is to end at last‚ let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.” Britain‚ like America and like Israel‚ is facing the violence-loving heirs of Hitler. To temporize about that is contemptible. As in the face off between Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson in 2019‚ Britain faces again the choice between the ghost of its pre-constitutional past‚ when it was the first nation to expel its Jews‚ and its finest hour when it stood alone and faced down Nazis.  The choice must be made again and again‚ by Britons and Americans alike. And it must be with a commitment as stark as the terror and hatred we all face. Now‚ again and again‚ must be our finest hour. The post Britain Again Has a Choice: Civilization or Savagery appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Two years ago this month‚ a memo began circulating among the College of Cardinals excoriating Pope Francis’s pontificate and thoroughly analyzing its many failures. Entitled “The Vatican Today‚” the detailed evaluation was signed simply by “Demos‚” a Greek word meaning “the people.” Shortly after his death‚ it was revealed that Demos was in fact the late‚ great champion of the Church Cardinal George Pell. In that memo‚ Pell described the present pontificate as “a disaster in many or most respects; a catastrophe‚” and faulted Pope Francis for brokering bad deals with the Chinese Communist Party‚ allowing the Catholic Church in Germany to run headlong towards heterodoxy and outright schism‚ and damaging Rome’s credibility through a lack of transparency on issues from clerical sex abuse to financial crime. Finally‚ the unnamed cardinal explains‚ the College of Cardinals has become increasingly irrelevant and even purposeless under the reign of the Dictator Pope. Now‚ a new memo is making the rounds‚ signed by “Demos II.” The author begins by explaining that his analysis is “intended to build on those original reflections” Pell wrote two years ago. “Conditions in the Church since that text appeared have not materially changed‚ much less improved‚” Demos II writes. While crediting Pope Francis for emphasizing “compassion toward the weak‚ outreach to the poor and marginalized‚ concern for the dignity of creation and the environmental issues that flow from it‚ and efforts to accompany the suffering and alienated in their burdens‚” the unnamed cardinal does not shy away from the Holy Father’s failures. Demos II writes that the Francis pontificate is characterized by “an autocratic‚ at times seemingly vindictive‚ style of governance; a carelessness in matters of law; an intolerance for even respectful disagreement; and — most seriously — a pattern of ambiguity in matters of faith and morals causing confusion among the faithful.” He adds‚ “Confusion breeds division and conflict. It undermines confidence in the Word of God. It weakens evangelical witness. And the result today is a Church more fractured than at any time in her recent history.” (READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: Bishops Against Proposal to Fund American Indian Abortions) However‚ Demos II isn’t writing a review of Francis’s papacy‚ he’s drawing a blueprint for the next Pontiff to follow. “The concluding years of a pontificate‚ any pontificate‚ are a time to assess the condition of the Church in the present‚ and the needs of the Church and her faithful going forward‚” Demos II writes. “The task of the next pontificate must therefore be one of recovery and reestablishment of truths that have been slowly obscured or lost among many Christians.” Demos II notes seven areas in which Francis has weakened the Church and offers seven corresponding “practical observations” that the next Pope may use to undo the damage done. First‚ the unnamed cardinal explains that the Pope is not intended to be a dictator. “Real authority is damaged by authoritarian means in its exercise‚” writes Demos II. “The Pope is a Successor of Peter and the guarantor of Church unity. But he is not an autocrat. He cannot change Church doctrine‚ and he must not invent or alter the Church’s discipline arbitrarily.” The author notes that the Pontiff “governs the Church collegially with his brother bishops in local dioceses” and “always in faithful continuity with the Word of God and Church teaching.” Demos II adds‚ “‘New paradigms’ and ‘unexplored new paths’ that deviate from either are not of God. A new Pope must restore the hermeneutic of continuity in Catholic life and reassert Vatican II’s understanding of the papacy’s proper role.” However‚ Demos II warns‚ “Just as the Church is not an autocracy‚ neither is she a democracy.” Under the Francis Pontificate‚ democracy has nearly run rampant‚ with the most recent example being the German Church tiptoeing closer and closer to replacing the authority of local bishops with a “Synodal Council‚” comprised of both clergy and laity. Although the Vatican has expressly forbidden the creation of any such body‚ Pope Francis and his curial advisors have indicated an openness to discussing the German bishops’ vision for an anti-clerical Church. “The Church belongs to Jesus Christ.” Demos II writes. “She is his Church. She is Christ’s Mystical Body‚ made up of many members. We have no authority to refashion her teachings to fit more comfortably with the world.” Referring to the global Synod on Synodality‚ with its heterodox brainstorming amid so-called listening sessions‚ which prominently featured non- and ex-Catholics‚ Demos II adds‚ “Moreover‚ the Catholic sensus fidelium is not a matter of opinion surveys nor even the view of a baptized majority. It derives only from those who genuinely believe and actively practice‚ or at least sincerely seek to practice‚ the faith and teachings of the Church.” Over the past decade‚ Pope Francis has garnered a reputation for ambiguity — a reputation no doubt solidified and immortalized by his disastrous decree Fiducia Supplicans‚ which claims to uphold the Church’s moral teachings on marriage and sexuality while simultaneously allowing and emboldening ideologically-motivated clerics to undermine that very teaching. “Ambiguity is neither evangelical nor welcoming‚” Demos II writes. “Rather‚ it breeds doubt and feeds schismatic impulses. The Church is a community not just of Word and sacrament‚ but also of creed. What we believe helps to define and sustain us.” Singling out Pope Francis’s seeming disregard for the doctrinal clarity and evangelical fervor of his predecessors Pope St. John Paul II and the late Pope Benedict XVI‚ the unnamed cardinal adds that “doctrinal issues are not burdens imposed by unfeeling ‘doctors of the law.’ Nor are they cerebral sideshows to the Christian life. On the contrary‚ they’re vital to living a Christian life authentically‚ because they deal with applications of the truth‚ and the truth demands clarity‚ not ambivalent nuance.” Demos II also notes Pope Francis’s penchant for issuing motu proprios‚ which are the papal equivalent of an American president’s executive orders. In addition to his administrative dictatorship — perhaps most clearly seen in his vengeful treatment of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Joseph Strickland — Pope Francis has‚ as Demos II points out‚ developed an “excessive reliance on the motu proprio as a tool for governance‚” often circumventing the necessity of adjusting of canon law. Demos II adds‚ “Canon law orders Church life‚ harmonizes its institutions and procedures‚ and guarantees the rights of believers.… Again‚ as with ambiguity of doctrine‚ disregard for canon law and proper canonical procedure undermines confidence in the purity of the Church’s mission.” (READ MORE: German Bishops’ Schism Averted — For Now) Insisting‚ as the great G.K. Chesterton did some 100 years ago‚ that “we do not want … a Church that will move with the world. We want a Church that will move the world‚” Demos II castigates the Francis Pontificate’s overemphasis on sociology and seeming engagement with secular standards of ethics. He writes‚ “One of the key flaws in the current pontificate is its retreat from a convincing ‘theology of the body’ and its lack of a compelling Christian anthropology … precisely at a time when attacks on human nature and identity‚ from transgenderism to transhumanism‚ are mounting.” It’s no secret that Pope Francis’s health is failing‚ and has been for several years. Demos II also criticizes the current Pontiff’s frequent travel‚ noting that travel “served a pastor like Pope John Paul II so well because of his unique personal gifts and the nature of the times‚” but the times have changed. The Church is in crisis‚ its financial institutions mired in scandal and sin‚ and the halls of the Vatican packed with self-serving career bureaucrats and closeted homosexuals. “The Vatican itself urgently needs a renewal of its morale‚ a cleansing of its institutions‚ procedures‚ and personnel‚ and a thorough reform of its finances to prepare for a more challenging future‚” Demos II writes. “These are not small things. They demand the presence‚ direct attention‚ and personal engagement of any new Pope.” Finally‚ the unnamed cardinal explains‚ the College of Cardinals has become increasingly irrelevant and even purposeless under the reign of the Dictator Pope. “The College of Cardinals exists to provide senior counsel to the Pope and to elect his successor upon his death‚” Demos II explains. “That service requires men of clean character‚ strong theological formation‚ mature leadership experience‚ and personal holiness. It also requires a Pope willing to seek advice and then to listen.” Pope Francis has placed a high premium on “diversifying” the College of Cardinals‚ selecting non-traditional and unexpected candidates over the past ten years‚ and stacking the deck with his own allies‚ regardless of their moral‚ pastoral‚ or spiritual fitness for the role. A prime example would be San Diego’s Cardinal Robert McElroy‚ a heterodox bishop who has advanced homosexuality‚ an end to priestly celibacy‚ climate hysteria‚ and even tolerance for abortion. Furthermore‚ Pope Francis has not fostered the “collegial” dimension of the College of Cardinals‚ failing to summon the cardinals together in regular (mush less frequent) consistories‚ and often only listening to those he has placed in his own curial sphere‚ discarding the counsel and advice of cardinals who aren’t his favorite. “In the future‚ if the college is to serve its purposes‚ the cardinals who inhabit it need more than a red zucchetto and a ring‚” Demos II writes. “Today’s College of Cardinals should be proactive about getting to know each other to better understand their particular views regarding the Church‚ their local church situations‚ and their personalities — which impact their consideration of the next pope.” (READ MORE: Virginia’s Bishops Speak Out Against Euthanasia) It’s no secret that Pope Francis’s health is failing‚ and has been for several years. The time is rapidly approaching when a new Pope will ascend to the Chair of St. Peter. Since Francis has effectively stacked the College of Cardinals with his own relatively inexperienced cohorts and proteges and blocked cardinals over the age of 80 from even participating in the preparatory debates and discussion preceding papal conclaves (cardinals of that age are already ineligible to vote in the conclave)‚ the analysis‚ counsel‚ and advice of men like Pell and his pseudonymic successor seem ever more crucial to the future of the Catholic Church.       The post Revisiting A Catastrophe: A Cardinal’s Blueprint for the Next Pope appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.