Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Roger Ebert on Louis Malle's "Damage" (1992): "Watching 'Damage' (1992) is like watching an emotional traffic accident as it unfolds. The film is based on the best seller by Josephine Hart, which had a certain undeniable power, but the right place for this material is the screen, I think,...

40,321 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Conservative by Blood. My grandparents survived the Korean War, not because life was merciful, but because geography drew a thin line between freedom and a prison with no walls. I think of Yeonmi Park. She is not a distant cousin. She could have been me. I could have been her. If the border were drawn differently, my life would be measured in inches of height lost, pounds of flesh missing, and years stolen by famine. This is not an abstract policy debate. It is bone, marrow, and memory. It is the reason my conservatism is not a hobby, a hashtag, or a choice. It is survival encoded in DNA. So when you tell me you “hate communism,” I ask: do you know what communism means? Do you know the silence of a church outlawed, the emptiness of a child’s stomach, the weight of a government that tells you your soul does not belong to Christ but to the Party? If you truly care about humanity, you cannot flirt with Marxist dreams. You cannot soften tyranny with new names. Communism is not theory. It is graves without markers. It is families broken by borders. It is a people who look like me, but live as shadows of who they should have been, if they live at all. And if words aren’t enough, listen to Yeonmi Park. She tells how in North Korea, people ate rats who had eaten the flesh of surgery’s failed and forgotten a cycle of hunger so dark, it devours even the dead. That is communism. That is why I am conservative by blood. And the blood remembers. So when liberals approach me at work and expect me to fall in line just because I’m not white, it takes every fiber in my being not to be violent. They don’t know what they’re talking about. They don’t know what they want. They don’t know how this ends. I do. History does. I remember my ancestors. I know what they endured. It is not a hard decision. Their struggle was not about transgenderism, not about late term abortions. It was about life itself. About real freedom. And it is the easiest decision in the world.

Sovey

2,170,328 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The Constitution of Ireland begins not with government, but with the Nation—with the People themselves. That is not symbolism. That is authority. It is from the People that all power flows, and it is by our collective will that we established the Constitution as the supreme law of this State. Within it, we gave ourselves courts—not as instruments of control, but as guardians of liberty. Under Article 34, we vested those courts with a solemn duty: to protect and vindicate our personal rights. Those personal rights are not abstract ideas. They are expressly recognised and protected across the Constitution—beginning in Article 40, and extending through Articles 41, 42, 42A, 43, and 44. Together, they safeguard what it means to live freely and with dignity in Ireland: our personal liberty, our families, our children, our right to educate according to conscience, our private property, and our freedom of religion. These rights do not exist at the pleasure of the State. They do not depend on policy, preference, or administrative convenience. They are fundamental, and they are inalienable. What we are witnessing at this moment is something profoundly serious. A member of the Government—holding office as a Minister of State, an office that exists only by statute—has purported, through a statutory instrument, to prevent the People of Ireland from exercising their constitutional rights in their own courts. That cannot stand. No statutory instrument can override the Constitution. No minister, junior or otherwise, can suspend fundamental rights. No act of secondary legislation can lawfully obstruct access to the courts where those rights are vindicated. To suggest otherwise is not merely mistaken—it is constitutionally impossible. The courts do not belong to the executive. They do not belong to departments. They belong to the People, because the Constitution says so. And so, this is where the line is drawn. The Constitution is not optional. Fundamental rights are not negotiable. Access to justice is not a privilege to be rationed. Tomorrow, the law will be laid plainly before the Minister for Justice—not in defiance, but in fidelity to the Constitution; not in anger, but in duty to the People; not for personal grievance, but for the protection of all. Because if fundamental rights can be restrained today, they can be extinguished tomorrow. And if we do not stand now, we leave our children standing alone later. This is not about power. It is about principle. It is about ensuring that the Constitution lives—not on paper, but in practice. And it is about the furtherance of our fundamental rights, so that we may protect ourselves, our families, our children, the way we educate our children, our private property, and our religion—today, and for generations to come. #NoFeeOnGuarantee

Patrick McGreal

11,354 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten