The device‚ based on simple tetromino shapes‚ could determine the direction and distance of a radiation source‚ with fewer detector pixels. The spread of radioactive...

In the years after the Nazis took power in 1933‚ they instituted hundreds of laws and policies at the national‚ state and local levels to systematically remove Jews from German society. Bans were placed…

Joe Biden’s effort to buy the votes of young Americans by ‘forgiving’ student loan debt – something the U.S. Supreme Court told him he couldn’t do – is benefiting wealthy families‚ not the…

How one New York band helped create another. The post “I was there”: Ezra Koenig on first hearing ‘The Rat’ by The Walkmen first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

To recognize appeasement‚ it’s best to learn from a master. One must not mistake Neville Chamberlain for a Nazi. He wasn’t. His antisemitism was that of T. S. Eliot — an offended sensibility‚ a mild disgust at there always being some untidy trouble attending them. He was a prim Englishman who dressed the part of the aristocracy‚ but who was more of an accountant than a man of leisure and noblesse oblige. He was secretive and manipulative when in power; he was easily threatened by brilliance and outspokenness‚ separately‚ and doubly threatened when both qualities were combined‚ to excess‚ in Winston Churchill. If civilization doesn’t bring forward those personalities who can read the psychopath and respond adequately‚ it will fall. Though he is famous for appeasement‚ he did draw a line‚ unexpectedly‚ and held to it. In the fall of 1938‚ he fervently believed that he and Hitler had saved the peace of Europe at Munich‚ and that Hitler could be trusted when he said that the Sudeten territory the Allies had carved off of Czechoslovakia and given him was the last of Germany’s territorial ambitions in Europe.  Then when less then six months later‚ Hitler gobbled up the rest of the country‚ after a slight delay‚ Chamberlain declared himself as having been bamboozled‚ and he drew a red line in front of where Hitler was heading next — Poland. When Hitler invaded Poland that September‚ Chamberlain did not pull an Obama and just pretend he had never made a commitment. He sent Germany an ultimatum‚ and by September 3‚ Britain was at war. But even at war‚ Chamberlain‚ along with his French ally‚ continued to behave as if he was still conducting a negotiation‚ and it affected the British war effort. Churchill had been brought into the government the moment the war started‚ and he was full of ideas on how to put the Nazis on their heels. Churchill oversaw the water aspect of the war‚ and the Germans began in his department‚ by striking at where Britain was most vulnerable – its sea lifeline. The Germans dropped mines all over the shipping lanes and their submarines started the terrible work. (READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin: No‚ Red Cows Won’t Spark War in Israel) Churchill sought to take away the momentum from the Nazis‚ and his thinking ran inventively‚ as was his wont. He put forth the plan of fluvial mines — launching hundreds of floating mines into the Rhine River to disrupt the river traffic that carried so much of Germany’s goods. It was a fine idea‚ but Chamberlain dithered for months‚ and when his government okayed it‚ the French dithered further‚ worried that such an escalation would unnecessarily provoke Hitler into the kind of serious fighting that the Allies dreaded.  Churchill proposed seizing the initiative in the air. Again‚ Chamberlain and the French demurred — Hitler might respond by bombing them‚ and there would be casualties. Churchill soon turned his eyes to another area. Germany imported its iron from Sweden. Some of the ore was shipped from Sweden‚ but British submarines operated in the international waters of the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Bothnia. The ore could also be shipped from neutral Norway’s port‚ Narvik. There‚ bands of small islands sheltered the coast for hundreds of miles‚ and the German cargo traffic could be safely routed through the sovereign Norwegian waters‚ immune from British interference. Churchill chafed at having to allow Hitler the iron his war effort needed. He urged Chamberlain to risk the confrontation with Norway and use the British fleet to interdict the supply. Chamberlain delayed for a long time‚ wanted to do it right‚ asked the Norwegian government‚ and accepted their no for an answer. By the spring of 1940‚ though‚ Chamberlain was at last convinced‚ but the Germans used that inter island passageway to send an invading fleet which swiftly put Norway under the Nazi thumb and gave the German navy many fine advanced bases on the Atlantic. The urge to appease is strong. If one is not dealing with a psychopathic nation‚ it is a healthy urge‚ Restraint runs deep in civilization; it is almost definitional. But the psychopath knows how to coax restraint from others while disguising his own aggressive aims until he has operational advantage. If civilization doesn’t bring forward those personalities who can read the psychopath and respond adequately‚ it will fall. Look at the urge to appease today. At last Iran has removed all doubt as to its intentions. But the headlines speak of Biden and his gang‚ the ever-appeasing Europeans‚ and of course‚ the Secretary General of the UN all urging restraint on Israel. Clearly‚ that is the key. Always pull your punches. Always seek the one further concession that will make the crazy guy your friend. And today’s virtue signaler has a trait Chamberlain transcended — they export the predictable evil consequence of their pusillanimity onto others. They will not directly suffer the consequences of leaving Hamas intact. Their wives won’t be tortured and raped; their grandchildren won’t be butchered or traumatized; their children won’t have to risk their lives to stop them‚ while all the while being slandered by comfortable‚ spoiled‚ coddled fools as being genocidal criminals. Chamberlain did believe he could escape war. In the end‚ he recognized he was wrong‚ resigned his leadership‚ and spent his waning life-energy in the war effort‚ eaten up by cancer long before victory came. (READ MORE: America’s Foreign Policy Utopians Ignore Culture) Our present -day appeasers have exhibited all the delusory smugness that characterized early Chamberlain. Perhaps they have it in them to realize their inadequacy as leaders‚ as he did‚ and to devote whatever energy and talents they have left to helping defeat the world menace they have themselves nurtured through their woeful‚ blind self-absorption. The post From Chamberlain to Biden‚ Lessons in Appeasement appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Just over two years ago‚ the courageous Australian cardinal George Pell‚ the late outspoken defender of the Catholic Church‚ referred to the pontificate of Pope Francis as “a disaster” and “a catastrophe.” Writing under the pseudonym “Demos” (Greek for “the people”)‚ Pell said that “Roma locuta. Causa finita est” was once the norm: Rome Spoke. The case is closed. Now‚ he said‚ it is much more a matter of “Roma loquitur. Confusio augetur.” Rome speaks. The confusion is increasing. The Pope’s role is not to make Catholic principles seem palatable to an increasingly degenerate world. While the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s (DDF) recent publication Dignitas Infinita is a welcome one — condemning such atrocities as abortion‚ surrogacy‚ gender theory‚ and transgenderism — it is arguably a rarity under the pontifical reign of Francis. The Jesuit Pope‚ as his order is wont to do‚ places a high premium on seeking out those on the margins of society‚ ministering to the most disturbed and the most confused. But in their missionary zeal‚ it is not unjust to question whether the Jesuits (including Pope Francis) have perhaps spent a little too much time at the margins of society. Mercy and missionary work are tremendous goods which the Catholic Church has always championed — but mercy must be tempered by justice and missionary work must aim not just to seek lost sheep but to return them to the flock. The Francis pontificate has seemingly immersed itself so completely in reaching out to the lost that it has at least risked losing those who never strayed far in the first place. In short‚ the moral teaching of Pope Francis and his allies and confidantes has been‚ as Pell noted‚ disastrous. (READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: Lessons From the Life of Evelyn Waugh) In a recent synodal synthesis report from the diocese of Owensboro‚ Kentucky‚ Catholic priests and laity expressed their concern over the “lack of clarity regarding Church teaching” emanating (or‚ rather‚ not emanating) from the Vatican. “There is a universal hunger for greater clarity from church leaders on Church teachings‚” the report noted. “[F]rustration was expressed about the lack of clarity from church leadership‚ citing especially Pope Francis.  This was generally related to Fiducia Supplicans and the confusion and consternation it caused among the faithful regarding what was perceived to be an approval for the blessing of same sex unions.” “Pope Francis was described as being ambiguous in his teaching and in his casual remarks‚” the report continued. “A plea was made for the Holy Father to ‘be direct and tell us what you actually mean.’” The report cited a priest of the diocese who commented‚ “A lack of clear statements from those in positions of authority in the church leaves people feeling confused and afraid.” This “lack of clarity” may be well-intentioned on the part of Pope Francis‚ a desire to reach out to sinners with love and forgiveness instead of rebukes and condemnation. But ultimately‚ this “lack of clarity‚” no matter how well-intentioned‚ is (quite literally) damning. A failure to proclaim moral truth with clarity and consistency can only ever result in confusion‚ apathy‚ and spiritual decay. There is a reason that bishops carry a crozier: it is not some mere fancy symbol of authority or office‚ it is the tool of their trade‚ for bishops are shepherds. A shepherd who does not guide his flock‚ who does not keep his sheep from wandering into thornbushes and off of cliffs‚ who tries to befriend the ravenous wolf is a poor shepherd. His staff (the bishop’s crozier) is intended to keep his flock from straying and to fight off wolves and jackals when they appear. That is the role of the Pope‚ of the bishops‚ and of priests: to guide faithful souls to Heaven and to strike out when evil rears its ugly head. The Pope’s role is not to make Catholic principles seem palatable to an increasingly degenerate world. His role is not to go to the ends of the earth to preach to remote peoples who have never heard of Christ before. His role is to stand in Rome‚ diligently protecting the doctrines and apostolic traditions of the Catholic Church‚ ensuring that they remain unmolested by heresy or apostasy‚ and boldly proclaiming them to all who might listen. In his 1907 apocalyptic novel Lord of the World‚ Monsignor Robert Hugh Benson wrote of the fictional Pope John XXIV‚ who regularly published letters‚ exhortations‚ and encyclicals to be distributed in parishes throughout the world. While the unified Freemasonic Marxist governments of the Americas and Europe rallied against the Vatican and the repurchased Papal States‚ the fictional pontiff quietly and simply continued his duty to teach the Faith in clear terms to Catholic faithful facing a world of hate. (READ MORE: DC Cardinal Surprisingly Praises Pope Francis on LGBT Issues) Although fictional‚ Benson’s model of Pontiff may be one for Francis‚ surely in the last years (perhaps even months) of his pontificate‚ to emulate. Of the current Pope‚ Pell wrote‚ “The Pope does not need to be the world’s best evangelist‚ nor a political force. The successor of Peter‚ as head of the College of Bishops‚ also successors of the Apostles‚ has a foundational role for unity and doctrine.” Of Francis’s yet-to-be-determined immediate successor‚ Pell counseled‚ “The new pope must understand that the secret of Christian and Catholic vitality comes from fidelity to the teachings of Christ and Catholic practices. It does not come from adapting to the world or from money.” Whether Pope Francis recognizes the cataclysmic damage his lack of clarity has visited upon the Church‚ whether he corrects course‚ whether the next Pope follows in the Jesuit Pope’s footsteps‚ the moral truths preserved and long preached by the Catholic Church will remain. All that is needed for them to dominate in the hearts of men is a Pope bold enough to speak them with clarity. The post Speak Boldly‚ Not Softly: Pope Francis and the Absence of Moral Clarity appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.