PRESS RELEASE: The U.S. has withdrawn from an Obama-era agreement with the U.N. on mass migration! AMERICA FIRST!
The Trump Administration’s UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, said “America is proud of our immigrant heritage and our long-standing moral leadership in providing support to migrant and refugee populations across the globe… But our decisions on immigration policies must always be made by Americans and Americans alone.”
Those two lines are what have been so sorely missing from the American ideologies in the dreadful 8 years of Obama. Implicit in the America First phrase is that we are a sovereign nation, that our decisions must be made by Americans, and that they must be weighted towards what is in the national interest.
Ambassador Nikki Haley: “America is proud of our immigrant heritage and our long-standing moral leadership in providing support to migrant and refugee populations across the globe…But our decisions on immigration policies must always be made by Americans and Americans alone." pic.twitter.com/By2ObmBrEy
Poland refuses to take it’s EU immigrant quota. Germany threatens to fine Poland $75 million. Poland responds by demanding $1 trillion in WW2 reparations from Germany.
Relations between Germany and Poland have been strained over Germany’s push to share responsibility for refugees across Europe – which Poland has rejected.
Germany should consider paying Poland as much as $1 trillion in World War II reparations, according to the Polish foreign minister.
Poland’s foreign minister Witold Waszczykowski told local radio station RMF that “serious talks” were needed with Germany to “find a way to deal with the fact that German-Polish relations are overshadowed by the German aggression of 1939 and unresolved post-war issues.”
He said Poland’s material losses were about $1 trillion, or higher.
Polish defense minister Antoni Macierewicz also accused European critics of trying to “erase” the fate of the Poles at German hands during the war “from the historical memory of Europe”.
France and Germany recently stated that Poland should be forced to receive some of Europe’s new Trojan Horse inhabitants and this is their response. One that actually reflects the opinions of the people. Poland also has a booming birthrate, unlike most European countries, so they cannot use that excuse against them to get what they want.
Germany to Poland: We’d like to send a group of violent young men into your country who want to see your way of life eradicated and your people put into slavery…oh but don’t worry this isn’t an invasion, its humanitarianism.
Should I use primer as well as foundation? Will mascara do, or is it a false eyelash day? Many of us ask ourselves these questions every day, bleary-eyed before work or in front of a mirror for a night out.
But what do you when your beauty practices are disrupted, perhaps forever?
Business student Resham Khan survived an acid attack on her 21st birthday in London in July, sustaining burns to her face and body and damage to her left eye. Since then she has been blogging about what her make-up and beauty routine is like.
After pictures of Resham celebrating Eid were shared in national media, she revealed the tough reality of what it took to prepare for the photographs and posted photographs of herself without make-up.
“First of all I just wanted to make clear that what you see on the internet isn’t real,” Resham wrote in a post on Wednesday.
A Scientific Journal Produced a Study Advocating the Widespread Doping of the Population with the Female Hormone ‘Oxytocin’ to Promote Acceptance of ‘Refugees’ and the Elimination of ‘Nationalism’
A group of researchers from Germany and the United States have published a study which concludes that giving people Oxytocin and exposing them to some “positive social pressure” can make them be more accepting of refugees, even if they are afraid of them.
Oxytocin is a hormone that is naturally released in the blood and brains of mammals during sexual and social behavior. It is sometimes called the “Cuddle Hormone,” and it is produced by women in labor to help them to bond with their new babies. Research shows it can help breed generosity and trust in other people.
Would Globalists actually consider using drugs to make people compliant and more accepting of Refugees? You have to wonder if they had a drug that could do that, would they use it? Do they think that if a person is drugged and propagandized, they’ll accept their ethnic cleansing and replacement? Is that what this study is insisting should be forced on Western countries?
Proof positive that you need drugs to battle the “Mental Disorder known as Liberalism”.
In the midst of rapid globalization, the peaceful coexistence of cultures requires a deeper understanding of the forces that compel prosocial behavior and thwart xenophobia. Yet, the conditions promoting such outgroup-directed altruism have not been determined. Here we report the results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled experiment showing that enhanced activity of the oxytocin system paired with charitable social cues can help counter the effects of xenophobia by fostering altruism toward refugees. These findings suggest that the combination of oxytocin and peer-derived altruistic norms reduces outgroup rejection even in the most selfish and xenophobic individuals, and thereby would be expected to increase the ease by which people adapt to rapidly changing social ecosystems.
Abstract
Never before have individuals had to adapt to social environments defined by such magnitudes of ethnic diversity and cultural differentiation. However, neurobiological evidence informing about strategies to reduce xenophobic sentiment and foster altruistic cooperation with outsiders is scarce. In a series of experiments settled in the context of the current refugee crisis, we tested the propensity of 183 Caucasian participants to make donations to people in need, half of whom were refugees (outgroup) and half of whom were natives (ingroup). Participants scoring low on xenophobic attitudes exhibited an altruistic preference for the outgroup, which further increased after nasal delivery of the neuropeptide oxytocin. In contrast, participants with higher levels of xenophobia generally failed to exhibit enhanced altruism toward the outgroup. This tendency was only countered by pairing oxytocin with peer-derived altruistic norms, resulting in a 74% increase in refugee-directed donations. Collectively, these findings reveal the underlying sociobiological conditions associated with outgroup-directed altruism by showing that charitable social cues co-occurring with enhanced activity of the oxytocin system reduce the effects of xenophobia by facilitating prosocial behavior toward refugees.
Globalists consider doping the world to achieve their agenda, what does that say? If you have to drug a population to come to the same conclusion as you, then you definitely have the wrong opinion.
Asking “Is the Pope Catholic?” no longer seems to be a merely rhetorical question for many.
Around the world, Pope Francis is understandably rather popular. It’s not just that he’s a good pastor; it’s that he doesn’t hesitate to speak truth to power when he can have an effect.
But he’s probably less popular among US Catholics than anywhere else in the Church. The reasons for that are instructive, and not only for Catholics.
Tom Hoopes, writer in residence at Benedictine College, Kansas, recently published a book of reflections on the message of Pope Francis: What Pope Francis Really Said: Words of Comfort and Challenge. Having followed Hoopes’ writing for a number of years, I respect his opinions even when I disagree with him.
So a few days ago, I lapped up a promotional interview for his book: Why Aren’t Catholics Rallying Around the Pope?. It’s for a conservative Australian publication, and it’s a pleasure to hear him explain conservative American Catholics to conservative Australian Catholics!
One complaint common among Americans is that Francis represents a break with Pope Benedict. That isn’t really true, of course. Hoopes says it’s
“…a difference in style, not substance, in Francis from his predecessors. None of them can be classified as “conservative” or “liberal.” They all have “liberal” views on economics, the environment and immigration and “conservative” views on sexual ethics, the role of religion and “old fashioned” Catholic truths such as the Devil, Mary and Confession.
One stylistic difference is Francis’s harsh attitude toward economic sinners and his red-hot contempt for the Western “myths” he calls out: individualism, consumerism, and blind faith in technology.
That “stylistic difference,” however, sets many conservative American Catholics’ teeth on edge. Most such Catholics are Republicans, originally because of the abortion issue. To be Republican by conviction is, of course, to support “free-market” capitalism, including constant technological innovation and limited government, which usually translates into wanting less labor and environmental regulation as well as reined-in social spending. Given the wave of populism that brought Donald Trump into the White House, it now also means increasing restrictions on immigration and harsher penalties for illegal immigrants.
So it’s largely Francis’ politics that conservative American Catholics dislike. My friend David Mills, another Catholic journalist and editor, notes that they especially resent the Pope’s “…criticism of the kind of totalizing and optimistic kind of free market economics conservative American Catholics embrace…I don’t think you can exaggerate how devoted to their politics many Catholics are, to the point that it drives their religion. This has long been a conservative Catholic critique of liberal Catholics, and not unfairly, but it applies to the right as much as to the left.”
But conservative American Catholics also dislike Francis’ welcoming approach to the divorced-and-remarried. Though I’m all-too-familiar with the intricacies of the dispute, I can’t get into them here. Suffice it to say that many think he’s abandoning the Church’s traditional teaching about the indissolubility of marriage: not by denying it—he actually affirms it, in theory—but by making its pastoral application so flexible as to render it irrelevant. In the conservative Catholic mind, there could hardly be any greater papal sin than that.
The net effect of all these resentments is to make a large swath of theologically educated and influential American Catholics very angry with Pope Francis. Asking “Is the Pope Catholic?” no longer seems to be a merely rhetorical question for many. That is not edifying, but neither is it unprecedented.
