Yes, images DO carry messages, as you well know, since rather than posting a photo of women religious you reference, you instead chose sisters from a different order, in habits. Below are the Sisters of Charity of New York. Their Instagram includes photos of "No Kings" rallies.

Brussels can trace a chicken from farm to fork, but apparently borders are too complicated

EXCLUSIVE: Leaked Home Office counter-terrorism documents link “nostalgia for traditionalism” and fears over immigration, liberalism and multiculturalism to “Christian extremism”. Officials propose working with churches to promote “theological resilience” against the use of Christian teachings to justify hatred or violence. I obtained dozens of pages from RICU’s report on “Christian extremism”. Among the findings: • Images of happy families in wartime, peaceful countryside and classical statues are described as a “hook” towards an extremist worldview. • Tommy Robinson’s rallies and a Christmas carol concert come under scrutiny, alongside Christian fitness groups. • “Bob from Speakers’ Corner” features, despite RICU identifying no extremist content from him. Yet the report acknowledges that the threat of violence from Christian extremists remains “low”. Jeremiah Igunnubole, UK legal counsel for ADF, says the report “suggests an institutional anti-Christian bias has taken hold in the Home Office”. stevenedginton.substack.com/…

History remembers Marie Antoinette through the lens of one of the world's first documented coordinated fake news campaign. Born an Austrian Archduchess in Vienna in 1755 and married at fourteen to the future King Louis XVI, the last Queen of France became the primary target of the radical Jacobins, the ideological ancestors of the modern political left. You have likely heard that when told the French peasants had no bread, she callously sneered, "Let them eat cake." That is a complete fabrication. The philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau penned that exact phrase in 1765 when Marie Antoinette was a nine-year-old child living in Austria. In reality, when grain shortages hit France, she personally wrote to her family about her moral obligation to aid the suffering working class and sold off royal assets to purchase grain for the poor. The truth of who Marie Antoinette really was emerged during her darkest hour in October 1793. Following the violent overthrow of the monarchy and the execution of her husband, the radical revolutionary government locked her in a damp, stone cell in the Conciergerie prison. Her hair had turned entirely white from grief, her health was failing, and the state had seized her children. Determined to annihilate her reputation before sending her to the guillotine, the state prosecutor and radical propagandist Jacques Hébert orchestrated a show trial where the guilty verdict was already guaranteed. Because the state lacked actual evidence of treason, the radicals resorted to psychological monstrosity. They isolated her eight-year-old son, manipulated the terrified boy, and coerced him into signing a fabricated statement accusing his own mother of horrific physical abuse. When Hébert proudly read this grotesque lie aloud in the packed courtroom, expecting the bloodthirsty crowd to erupt in cheers, the Queen remained utterly silent, staring straight ahead in stunned disbelief. The presiding judge demanded to know why she refused to answer the accusation. Slowly, the frail, widowed Queen rose from her chair. She ignored the corrupt prosecutors entirely and turned to face the gallery, which was packed with furious revolutionary women who had come to jeer at her demise. With a voice steady with maternal dignity, she declared, "If I have not replied, it is because Nature itself refuses to respond to such a charge laid against a mother. I appeal to all mothers who may be present in this room!" A stunned, heavy silence fell over the courtroom. The radical women in the gallery, who moments earlier were screaming for her blood, began to weep in sympathy. The moral clarity of a mother defending natural law shattered the state's propaganda in a single breath. When Maximilien Robespierre, the architect of the Reign of Terror, heard what happened at dinner that evening, he was so furious that he shattered his plate on the table, cursing Hébert as an idiot for turning the Queen into a figure of public sympathy. Two days later, she walked to the scaffold with unbroken composure and deep Christian faith; when she accidentally stepped on the executioner's foot, her final words on earth were a polite, "Pardon me, sir, I did not do it on purpose." The tragedy of Marie Antoinette is the ultimate blueprint for how the radical left operates today. The French Revolution literally gave birth to the political term "Left-wing," and their playbook has remained unchanged for over two centuries. When radicals seek to tear down Western tradition, faith, and sovereignty, they begin with a relentless media smear campaign to dehumanize their opponents. Next, they weaponize the justice system, staging political show trials to destroy anyone standing in the way of the regime. Finally, they attack the nuclear family itself, turning children against their own parents in service to the state. Yet Marie Antoinette’s final stand proves an eternal truth that conservatives still hold sacred today: when you stand firm on faith, family, and natural law, even the most vicious ideological mob cannot strip away your dignity.

This is a brilliant account. Every post from @Kristof_Poland a gem.

*THIS* post perfectly encapsulates the decadence and degeneracy of the contemporary US foreign policy establishment. In this view, a US Secretary of State is only *supposed* to travel to NATO capitals because a successful US foreign policy is what makes diplomatic counterparts in Paris, Berlin, and Brussels raise a champagne toast to “shared values” while flinging open their borders, destroying their economies, and apologizing for Western civilization. God forbid a US Secretary of State show his face in Bogotá, Quito, or Lima because that’s where mere “Assistant Secretaries” are supposed to tread. This smug approach led not only to predictably catastrophic results in the Western Hemisphere but also in Europe itself, where the combination of moral vanity and strategic incoherence also proved toxic. But sure: keep holding your academic seminars, writing your unread articles, awarding each other meaningless prizes, and looking down your noses at Donald Trump and Marco Rubio.

I'm going to NatCon Jerusalem. A few words about why. I wasn't planning on it. No, I did not "get the call". Heh. But after watching and reflecting on the last few years and what's been happening in public and behind scene lately, I do feel a call to attend. I'm taking time I don't have to do it because I think, in the spirit of what I've already started doing with @ApplyToForum (my new venture), we need to have real and honest conversations outside of Podcastistan in order to bolster the big, beautiful coalition that won in 2026. My cards on the table: I support our military always, as well as the President and his administration, but I am troubled about the conflict in Iran, and if I was in a position of power I would have consistently advised against it. I have many friends who disagree. I'm part of the America First/MAGA movement that's been busy rethinking foreign policy and all our alliances over the last decade, and this includes our relationship to Israel. The future of American-Israel relations will not likely look like that of the past. Nor should it. But what it will become must be determined by serious and frank discussion and new frameworks and approaches based on reality and truth rather than twitter mobs, paid hacks, and lies. FEW are willing to have adult discussions about these issues when influencers and their bots on either side (often supported by foreign actors on both sides) are constantly screaming at each other that they are either Nazis or Zionist pawns. MOST are thus prevented from making clear that while they do not hold the same position as a Huckabee or Cruz, and they do not think American and Israeli interests always intersect, they also don't hate Jews and aren't anti-Israel or pro-Muslim Brotherhood, or whatever the hell else. This dynamic preventing common sense talk might seem ridiculous - and it is - but it is resulting in real and harmful effects. Larger political forces are now using bad actors to try to divide the coalition, suddenly deeply concerned about anti-semitism, and increasingly attempting to besmirch the names of good people. They seek to use whatever means necessary to attack the Vice-President and others who represent the obvious future of the American right and muddy the waters for American Jews and older donors. American Jews and Israelis alike are understandably deeply concerned about the scene. But this makes them especially receptive to commentators and analysts who are spreading lies about the actual landscape of reality on the right. My concern is for America and the American political coalition, but I think this entire dynamic is also harming Israeli interests. The truth is that the vast majority of old and new right Republicans are not "anti-"Israel. And anyone on the right (both in American and Israel) needs to understand that prevailing changes in opinions about foreign policy on the right are not all based upon irrational hatred and cannot be countered, never mind prevented - by reacting as if they are. The way forward is frank foreign policy discussion and argument based on realism, and not the boomerisms nor the conspiracy theories of the past. This means getting clear on where our national interests align, and where they do not. And when they do not, it's OK. We are different nations. @yhazony has had a hell of a few years taking flak from all sides, but I am a rebel who doesn't like popular pile-ons. NatCon got people together when the think-tanks and other right-leaning groups in America did not. He should be praised for doing what a lot of people in America and Israel should have been doing, which is having the prescience to put future presidents on his stage. So I will go to Jerusalem, with the hope that sanity on all sides will yet prevail.

Jakie to jest dobre! Pomysłowe, bez zadęcia i bez kompleksów. Tego nie mógł zrobić nikt w typie @b_mroz_gorgon

My assessment of libertarianism as wholly unequipped for the particular monsters of our age hasn’t changed since this speech I delivered in 2023 at the WFBjr Program’s celebration of Friedman’s Capitalism and Freedom: “Recently I had occasion to re-read Milton Friedman’s Capitalism and Freedom. I expected to find there the same extraordinary case for human freedom I remembered from my first encounter with this book a decade ago as a university student. Instead, while those declarations of freedom were still in there, I found myself troubled as to the extent of their relevance and application to the challenges that confront us, and the country we love, in the 21st century. For example, Friedman writes about the shortcomings of collective political decision-making. He thought the democratic process suffered by comparison to the free and individualist market, in which every man can choose for himself and himself only among nearly endless options. The political, in Capitalism and Freedom, is an imperfect solution of last resort, to be avoided if a market solution is feasible. But consider that today, the political may be our only defense against exactly the type of private tyranny whose existence, this book insists, is impossible. Consider further a couple of specific examples from Capitalism and Freedom: the BBC could only refuse Winston Churchill access to the ears of the British public because it was state-owned, and the state before WWII considered Churchill’s warnings about Hitler’s rise unacceptably incendiary. True enough, so far as it goes. But today the coordinated actions of nearly all major tech companies can collude to strip from the digital public square all ideas contrary to the narrative in which they share belief. Even hearings held by our elected officials, if they contain unacceptable crimethink, have been removed from YouTube and subsequently are unable to be shared across various platforms. It seems that the private market can indeed accomplish anything the government can, at least as effectively—including censorship. Friedman also writes that the profit motive will protect us from such censorship, because, in his words, “the publisher cannot afford to publish only books with which he agrees.” But the publisher (or distributor) very much cando so, as we’ve seen with books like those of Ryan Anderson and Abigail Shrier on the subject of transgenderism, banned from Amazon and Target along with other retailers. This is especially the case if the publisher can count on his major competitors, who overwhelmingly went to the same schools and subscribe to largely the same ideas about what is unacceptable, to do the same. In fact, as that imperfect political sphere has receded, the resulting vacuum has not been filled by a purely free market so much as a managerial and bureaucratic class and economy, both, and sometimes jointly, public and private. James Burnham, not Friedman, proved the more prophetic about the world we now live in… In looking around us today, it seems that the proper role of government in a free society must, at some base level, include the role of cultivating the sorts of citizens who can perpetuate that free society. That might be a vision of government too energetic to fit comfortably into the vision described in Capitalism and Freedom... Without such “pre-modern” concerns as a conception of the common good and commitment to non-neutral, normative values about what constitutes the good life, the free market alone cannot muster any defense against the self-destructive and nihilistic impulses that threaten, not just the capitalist system, but the entirety of the American project.” americanmind.org/features/tw…

Well said @InezFeltscher - it is not a question of being anti-libertarian but as @pegobry_en pointed out, you can only have a small state in a high trust society ... and liberalism's cultivation of vice & perversion destroyed high trust societies

In 1980 the Pope from Poland asked: "France, what have you done with your baptism?" In 2026 the Pope from America wakes the French with these words: "This cathedral has been born anew so that you may be reborn with it." A million people on the Champs-Élysées is the answer to both.

President Trump @POTUS honors and thanks our great 250 year ally and partner #poland

We welcome the United States’ request to intervene in this case. Elon Musk and X were given a €120m fine under the Digital Services Act—an EU censorship law—last year. X is challenging the fine, the first ever issued under the DSA, at the General Court of the EU, with the support of Alliance Defending Freedom. The European Commission is attempting to pierce the ‘corporate veil’, by making Elon Musk and unrelated companies he owns liable for the DSA fine. If they prevail in this, US companies will be significantly less likely to invest in the EU in the future. This EU regulation is self-defeating: it is not in the interest of either Europeans or Americans. X’s lawsuit against the Commission is essential to challenge the enormous powers granted by the DSA to censor the internet not just in Europe, but across the whole world. We are proud to stand alongside X in its fight for free speech. Dr Adina Portaru, European Director for Alliance Defending Freedom, said: “This lawsuit turns on whether the powers given to the European Commission under the DSA are compatible with the rule of law. “Under the DSA, the Commission is able to define the rules for so-called ‘content moderation’, launch investigations, enforce them, and impose massive penalties for noncompliance, all with no meaningful checks and balances. The threat to free speech is severe. ”X’s legal challenge of the European Commission in this case matters for free speech not just in Europe, but around the world.”

“Archbishop Sheen’s heroic commitment to nourishing the soul of our country will inspire others to follow his example and lift our Nation upward and ever higher to God.” @POTUS whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta…

Right. Why didn't Jason stay friends with Medea? Insanity.

Based

Real communism has indeed been tried.

The communist party Die Linke won 51% of Muslim voters in Berlin. That Muslim vote led the party to victory with 25 percent of the vote overall, and means that communists will be in charge of the German capital for the first time since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Where's the Spanish Inquisition when you really need it.

EU Declares Canada Weak Enough to Join Them buff.ly/KkoPv9k