History’s most amazing artifacts are the armors ancient warriors wore to battle. Not having the kind of technology we have today, it is amazing to see such intricate and outstanding work that survives to this day despite being battle-worn and suffering many blows in its days. The skillful hands of a blacksmith are what warriors and knights have to be thankful for. Without them, they would be riding to certain death. However, our concept and idea of what a battle armor in the ancient days are confined to the clunky, modern-day interpretation of Medieval European armor; those things that you see standing in dark hallways in horror movies or some creepy old guy’s dusty library. But the ancient world has a multitude of peoples in different countries and each country has a unique culture that is magnified by the clothes they wear, the food they eat, up to the garments they put on during war time. This helmet and the pair of greaves (shin guard), or cnemids, complementing it belong to the key elements of a panoply, the set of offensive and defensive arms that a Greek warrior would have used in combat. The Bronze Helmet (Greece) The Ancient Greeks are a talented civilization that has given us many things from astronomy to democracy. However, despite our understanding of them being scholars and politicians, the Greeks are also fierce warriors that have one of the most organized armies in the ancient world. The closest kind of armor that we are familiar with are those that we have seen in movies like Jason and the Argonauts and Clash of the Titans. While there may be similarities between those and their historical inspirations, we are only scratching the surface of what we know about Grecian battle armor. In 2007, a particular piece of armor was dredged up from Haifa Bay in Israel. It was a Greek helmet made of bronze and ornamented with gold leaves; images of snakes, lions, and a peacock’s palmette also add to the design of the interesting find. How it ended up in the bottom of the bay is still a mystery to researchers. However, it was not discounted that warriors who travel do lose some of their things such as weaponry, trinkets, and pieces of their garments for whatever reason. Archaeologists do believe that the helmet belonged to a wealthy Greek mercenary who might have taken part in a series of wars that ravaged the area which dates the helmet as far back as 2600 years old. Also, experts hypothesize that the unknown mercenary who owned the helmet might have fought for an Egyptian Pharaoh named Necho II. Further research on the helmet also revealed that it had similarities with another helmet found in the 1950s near the island of Giglio, Italy. “The gilding and figural ornaments make this one of the most ornate pieces of Greek armor discovered,” described Jacob Sharvit, director of the Marine Archaeology Unit of the Israel Antiquities Authority. Plant armor Plant Armor (Oceania and Micronesia) When we speak of armor, we think about heavy, shiny metal that is double – or triple – the weight of the average warrior. We imagine insanely hot smithies where blacksmiths hammer away at pieces of plate and sheet metal. However, in the far, coastal regions of Micronesia and Oceania, locals have found an unlikely yet very effective material to make their armor with plants. While the Greeks are also known to make their protective armors out of plant-based material, it is the warriors from the Kiribati Islands that have perfected the making of it. For the locals of this region of the Pacific, the armor and weapons that they produce were products of readily available material that they could forage such as palm fronds, tree bark, and even animal parts. Combining different materials from land and sea proved to be life-saving implements when battles began to arise. An example of this kind of armor is constructed using coir, a particularly strong fiber material harvested from coconut trees. Woven together and tightly, it forms an impenetrable layer that protects the body of the person wearing it. Also, like any battle armor, the plant armor comes in several parts that protect almost every part of the warrior’s body – it would even sometimes appear that a Kiribati warrior is more protected than his enemies. Covered from head to toe, a typical suit of armor from the Pacific and Oceania are a thick woven coat and trousers made of coir, a thicker woven vest, a woven back plate, and a helmet that is usually made out of dried carcasses of porcupine fish. It is said that the entire suit of armor can withstand projectile weaponry like arrows and spears as well as be able to parry bladed weapons in close quarter combat. 3,900-year-old bone armor suit discovered in Siberia Skin and Bone (Siberia) In September 2014, a team of archaeologists from Russia unearthed one of the world’s most mysterious pieces of armor. Made entirely out of bone, archaeologists believe that it belonged to a Siberian knight from 4000 years ago. What was even more stunning about the discovery was how they discovered it in near-perfect condition. Buried in the area of Omsk, Siberia, the armor was said to have consisted of several plates of varying sizes to match the wearer’s anatomy all made of bone that was woven together. Suspecting that the bones were from large animals like deer or horse, tests are still being made to find the exact age of the bone armor although, as researchers believe, it is most likely from the Bronze Age. However, what was quite puzzling about the remarkable find was that it was found to be buried on its own and not alongside a body. Because armor itself had great value during the Bronze Age, it took great lengths to keep it in great condition, and plenty of care and maintenance were required to keep it from deteriorating. The bone armor excavated in Omsk, therefore, suggests that it was buried as a form of offering. According to Yury Gerasimov, a researcher at the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography in Omsk, the bone armor would most likely have belonged to an elite soldier or warrior. It would have given him “good protection from weapons that were used at the time – bone and stone arrowheads, bronze knives, spears tipped with bronze, and bronze axes.” Another inconsistency found about the bone armor was that it was far from the style of battle garments worn in that region of Siberia. Experts claim that its design had a much closer resemblance to the cultures of a tribe that originated in the Altai Mountains, a region that is about 1000 km away from where the bone armor was found. This, therefore, led the research team to hypothesize that the bone armor may also be a war trophy or a gift from one culture to another. Armor (Tatami Gusoku) Tatami Gusoku (Japan) Metal is one of the most common and practical materials used in making suits of armor. Its hardness is highly valued regarding protecting the body of the wearer from attacks. However, despite skillful design, some suits of armor can still be clunky and difficult to transport when battles are done abroad. However, in ancient Japan, armor was made with the same discipline as they make their legendary swords. We know the Japanese to be a disciplined race who aim for beauty and perfection in everything they do from pouring tea to clipping branches. The same discipline to perfection is also applied to their one of a kind armor. Called Tatami Gusoku, it roughly translates as “to fold armor” or “folded armor.” The reason being is that these unique pieces are made in such a way that they can fit into a small box which makes it easy for individual soldiers to transport them. The armor consists mainly of an armored jacket, a foldable cuirass, as well as a helmet and hood to protect their heads. It had parts that corresponded to a traditional Japanese full suit of armor, the ones we are more familiar with in movies and pop culture. The Tatami Gusoku is constructed by binding each protective plate with chain mail that links together to form a shirt-like garment. Sensitive parts of the body, such as the chest, had larger plates of metal bound by these chains. Also, the unique construction and material of this suit of armor makes it considerably lighter than its contemporaries and allow warriors an even wider range of movement since they are not particularly hindered by large and heavy pieces of metal in places where they need to be nimble. Horned Helmet of Henry VIII The Horned Helmet (England) Designed and made by Austrian goldsmith, Konrad Seusenhofer, the Horned Helmet was originally part of an entire suit of armor gifted by the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I to Henry VIII in the 16th Century. The horned helmet is nothing new in the world of battle armor. Technically, it was not a helmet but an “armet”; a headpiece worn by soldiers that protect his head as well as his entire face during combat. First introduced in the 15th Century, armets were more popular and extensively used in areas of Italy, England, France, and parts of Spain. But for this list, let’s just stick to calling it a helmet. This particular helmet jumps to the top of our list for its, well… “unique”… looks. Designed to completely cover the wearer’s face, the Horned Helmet resembles the face of a smiling demon with sharp teeth. On its head was a pair of metal horns that twisted outwards. Another peculiar feature of the helmet was a pair of metal glasses that sit on its pointed nose. Rumor has it that these glasses served a functional purpose because Henry VIII was allegedly near sighted and had a collection of spectacles that was discovered after his death. It was also rumored that the helmet belonged to Henry’s court jester, Will Somers, when it was first discovered centuries later. The whereabouts of the rest of the armor are no longer to be found and are assumed to have been destroyed or discarded as scrap metal over the years. Thankfully, due to its grotesque appearance, the helmet was saved from destroyed and is now preserved in the collection of the Royal Armouries in Leeds. While many suits of armor and helmets were used in battle, this helmet and its now destroyed suit were mainly used by Henry VIII in ceremonies and parades. The post Secrets of the Battlefield: Five Legendary and Mysterious Armor appeared first on Anomalien.com.

The video opens with the introduction of a dog suffering from a terrible skin condition, immediately drawing viewers into her heartbreaking plight. Initially, it’s assumed she is a senior due to her severe state. Her skin is covered in scabs, giving off a yeasty smell, and her paws are swollen with painful sores scattered across... The post Adorable shelter dog experiences pure bliss when she gets her very first toy appeared first on Animal Channel.

CBS’s Stephen Colbert claimed on the Wednesday edition of The Late Show that “dumb people” who opposed same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court legalized it nationwide have had their “stupid arguments” debunked by a new study. However, Colbert naturally only focused on the more crazy predictions and not the realistic concerns that have come to pass. Colbert began, “Oh, here's something that's not surprising at all. It's been nine years since the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage nationally in Obergefell. Now, here’s the thing: according to a landmark new study, in that time, same-sex weddings haven't harmed straight marriage. Well, duh. Everyone knew that at the time. It's like announcing, ‘New study finds making love to wife doesn't get neighbor pregnant.’”     He continued, “Now, but back before, ten years ago in 2015 before the ruling, back before it became the law of the land, dumb people made all sorts of stupid arguments against same sex marriage, including saying that legalization would inevitably lead to people marrying animals. Well, of course, marriages between humans and animals did not come to pass.” After a bit of a digression into Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s brain worm story, Colbert added, “Not only has gay marriage not been harmful, the study says that by extending marriage rights to a greater number of couples, interest in marriage increased for the broader population.” Sure, there is no concentrated political or social movement built around people marrying a dog, but after proponents won in Obergefell they did not declare victory and then go back to work on their proverbial farm. Instead, they moved onto gender ideology and sent misnamed civil rights commissions after bakers and called them Nazis despite people like Colbert claiming that other people's gay weddings will have no effect on your life. It turns out conservatives aren't so "dumb" after all.  In other Colbert news, Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff joined him later in the program for an easy interview about what it is like to be the first male to hold his position and how he met Kamala Harris. Here is a transcript for the May 22 show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 5/22/2024 11:44 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Oh, here's something that's not surprising at all. It's been nine years since the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage nationally in Obergefell. Now, here’s the thing: according to a landmark new study, in that time, same-sex weddings haven't harmed straight marriage. Well, duh. Everyone knew that at the time. It's like announcing, "New study finds making love to wife doesn't get neighbor pregnant."  Now, but back before, ten years ago in 2015 before the ruling, back before it became the law of the land, dumb people made all sorts of stupid arguments against same sex marriage, including saying that legalization would inevitably lead to people marrying animals.  Well, of course, marriages between humans and animals did not come to pass, although I know one beautiful, lifelong union between a man and a worm. Not only-- why are you going "Aww?" Do you feel bad for the worm? Oh, no that worm has come down with Bobby Kennedy.  Not only has gay marriage not been harmful, the study says that by extending marriage rights to a greater number of couples, interest in marriage increased for the broader population. I mean that makes sense, once gay people get into something, it always becomes a trend. Like RuPaul's Drag Race, the music of Lady Gaga, or dressing like you have a shred of self-respect. The report also found that after gay marriage was legalized, same-sex households adopted more children and there was a drop in the rates of syphilis. Well, sure ‘cause once you have kids in the house, there's just no time for anything fun, like movies or restaurants or syphilis.

PBS NewsHour isn't normally an interview stop for comedians, but Bill Maher made an appearance on Tuesday night to promote his new book, a collection of his TV monologues. Overall, it honored Maher's HBO career in much the same way as Robert Costa on CBS. Host Geoff Bennett proclaimed Maher has "positioned himself as the ultimate truth-teller, who takes equal pleasure in punching at the left." Oh no! Then came a clip of Maher: It's not my fault the party of FDR and JFK is turning into the party of LOL and WTF." The most notable part came when Bennett complained to Maher: "What do you think accounts for the durability of Donald Trump as a political figure? By any objective or rational standard, the challenges facing him, the scandals, the criminal trials -- all of that should be disqualifying. And yet he's competitive!"   BILL MAHER : Competitive? He's winning. I mean, he's… BENNETT: Yes, the polls — some polls have him ahead, yes. MAHER: Most polls do, and in the states that matter. I mean, if I had to bet on this election — well, I wouldn't, but — I mean, I wouldn't. Yes, I wouldn't, because I couldn't bet against him. Certainly, it's at least a 50/50 that he's going to beat Biden. That's a great question, if only someone would write a book about Donald Trump. [Laughter] The funny part of Bennett question is brandishing an "objective or rational standard." PBS "progressives" simply don't understand that many Americans see an enormous double standard on scandals, that Bill Clinton can do what Trump cannot. Joe Biden can wildly exaggerate his life story, and Trump cannot.  Maher then repeated his CBS routine that Trump is insane, but voters overlook his bluster on the stump and on social media:  MAHER: I truly believe he's insane, in the sense that people talk about the malignant narcissism as if its some sort of quirk. It's more than a quirk. It's a real thing. But as a friend of mine always says, insanity photographs. You can't you can't take your eyes off it. There is a certain charisma quality to that, when somebody is just nuts,. And he is. He doesn't really ever think about what he's going to say. People give him credit for plotting this. He doesn't plot. Everything is just as it comes out of his mouth. One of the great advantages he has as a political candidate is that no one takes him seriously on policy pronouncements, because he just says anything and always has and always will. So, it's like, well, we can't really take it seriously. When he gets into office, he'll probably do the right thing. We like him. He's our kind of guy. So, that's actually kind of a great advantage when you are a politician. PBS types also can't understand that people are choosing policies, and not just people. They're not happy about inflation and untrammeled immigration. They don't like porny books in schools and transgender ideology and "systemic racism" talk. That's where "our kind of guy" comes from.  PS: Bennett also asked Maher about how he's been accused with all the "phobics" over the years:  BENNETT: Over the course of your career, your critics have said, that you are homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, sexist, fatphobic, ableist.What do you make of all that? MAHER: Well, I tell the truth as I see it, and I don't pull punches. That's always been the bond with my audience. People are hypersensitive, and I mean, I could go down that list. I don't think we have time. And I don't think you really want to get into every one of them. But they're all not true. I mean, I like all people. But there are things that have to be said about Islam. There are things that have to be said about health in America. There are things that have to be said about gender and what we're teaching children about it that are valid.

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing supposedly to discuss sunsetting Big Tech’s tightly clutched liability shield that allows for censorship. But free speech and Big Tech censorship were hardly part of the discussion. During the May 22 hearing the Committee heard from three left-wing witnesses, a plaintiff’s lawyer, a former Democrat committee staffer and the Director of Engine Executive, which is funded by Google. But despite the fact that Big Tech censors justify silencing their users under the protection of Section 230, the Committee did not manage to bring in a single witness who showed up in support of free speech. In the three-hour hearing, only four members of the Committee even asked questions about Big Tech censorship and free speech. MRC Free Speech Vice President Dan Schneider, who attended the hearing, criticized the witnesses and most of the members for focusing on prohibiting already illegal content rather than promoting free speech. “It is fine for the Committee to be angry that Big Tech fails to remove illegal content. Nobody should tolerate illicit drug sales, human trafficking and other illegal practices, but those things are already illegal online,” Schneider said, before adding, “We don’t need to make online crimes doubly illegal. The laws just need to be enforced. The systemic harm that must be addressed in any Section 230 reform legislation is the abuse by Big Tech in how they discriminate based on political disagreements.” Representatives Jay Obernolte (R-CA), Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), Russ Fulcher (R-ID) and Neal Dunn (R-FL) were the only members on the Committee who thought to address this discrimination.  Rep. Obernolte pushed a witness and former Democratic staffer, Organization for Social Media Safety CEO Marc Berkman, to address free speech concerns. [See More: Rep. Jay Obernolte Presses Witnesses Tummarello and Berman on Free Speech] Rep. Harshbarger asked Berkman about expanding “the rights of individuals to express views that often get conservatives kicked off of left-wing companies like Facebook.” Berkman ridiculously responded, “We do believe that’s a red herring.” But Berkman’s retort is contrary to the 6,816 cases of documented Big Tech censorship found on MRC Free Speech America’s exclusive CensorTrack database, including 187 against former President of the United States Donald Trump. Despite calling censorship a red herring, Berkman was unwilling to condemn discriminatory conduct by social media companies when Rep. Harshbarger provided him with a hypothetical case of a social media company shutting off comments on some posts but not others.  Rep. Dunn, to his credit, emphasized censorship when he spoke to the witnesses. “Today our internet is under attack. The American public gets very little insight into decision-making processes when content is moderated, and users have little recourse when they are censored or restricted. Recently, Americans have experienced a great deal of online politicizing from Big Tech during the last presidential election,” Dunn said. He followed with a reminder of the absurd Big Tech-government collusion in violation of Americans’ rights. “For example, you saw platforms like Twitter and Facebook immediately cut stories from being shared or talked about by the users on their platforms at the request of our government.”  The Organization for Social Media Safety CEO didn’t appear to care. When Dunn asked Berkman about how his proposal would impact free speech on the internet, Berkman claimed, “We believe the fears are really overblown in terms of impact on free speech that is happening over social media.”  Rep. Fulcher also spoke up for free speech, bringing up the important questions of whether users deserve transparency and accountability from the social media companies that censor them. Fulcher asked a witness, “When social media companies flag or remove content, is there any reporting requirement whatsoever necessary for that?”    Schneider panned the hearing, noting that all the witnesses and most of the members showed no concern for free speech. He even called out House Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) for arguing that the “tech oligarchs have not censored enough bad stuff,” instead of addressing the censorship of conservatives.  “The so-called free speech hearing left me speechless,” Schneider said, before adding, “This hearing intentionally hid the ball. The biggest problem facing America and the continuity of our system of government is Big Tech's silencing of viewpoints they disagree with. But for a couple of exceptions, all the questions focused on how there needs to be more censorship, not less.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

North Carolina State basketball star D.J. Burns Jr. has lost a shocking amount of weight in hopes of being drafted into the NBA.Burns brought his NC State men's basketball team to its first Final Four since 1983 and became a national sensation for his talent, charisma, and even his size.Listed at 6'9'', 275 pounds, Burns' impressive agility and athleticism was noted by reporters as his team made a historic run in the annual basketball tournament following their ACC championship.However, ahead of the NBA Draft, Burns has completely changed his image with a new nutritionist and cardio exercise regimen, which has resulted in a reported 45-pound weight loss.The forward responded to a fan who was looking to find out how he lost so much weight."Got any tips on weight loss?" the fan wrote."Work out more, eat less, stay at home lol," Burns replied.'He's been doing workout four days a week, at 5 a.m., he made a point to say there has been no Ozempic used.' — (@) Due to the popularity of weight-loss medications, Burns wanted to make sure basketball media knew that he wasn't cutting any corners.Reporter Shams Charania said he caught up with Burns at an agency Pro Day, and the big man emphasized that hard work was how he shed so many pounds."D.J. Burns Jr. ... there was a big deal made about his size, his frame, his weight, he was listed at 275 pounds when he finished the season in college," Charania said on "Run It Back.""I saw him at the Pro Day yesterday, he looked totally different," the reporter continued. "I talked to him afterwards ... D.J. Burns told me that he has lost 45 pounds in the last six and a half weeks.""He said he's been doing workouts four days a week, at 5 a.m., he made a point to say there has been no Ozempic used."Ozempic is a diabetes medication that has been famously used as a weight-loss drug, although that is not its intended purpose. — (@) Part of Burns' rise to fame has been his humbleness and honesty, which has included being openly Christian on social media and in interviews."God really blessed me with the opportunity to be able to showcase my talent more often, so it's a blessing," he said during his team's run. "Glory be to God. Through him it is always possible to overcome obstacles," Burns also wrote before the NCAA tournament. Two weeks later, he scored 16 points in 16 minutes in the tournament opener, seeing limited time despite starting the game.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley testified that the prosecutor on the case canceled an interview with Morris after receiving a CIA briefing.

This Could Get INTERESTING: China Surrounds Taiwan As It Launches Military Drills

EU Will Use Frozen Russian Assets to Fund Ukraine's Defense and Russia Retaliates

Signs Are Pointing Toward Another Leftist-Fueled Summer of Violence