Author: Papa Giorgio

Make Greenland Great Again

Published by Papa Giorgio

UPDATED via HERITAGE FOUNDATION (hat-tip to James Carafano):

There is a strong desire in Greenland for full independence—especially among Greenland’s political elite. Only one political party does not support independence (and that party holds only one seat in the 31-seat parliament). 

For Greenland, the question is not if it will become independent, but when and how. 

Few inside Greenland’s government think it is ready now, but Denmark’s official position is that Greenland can become independent whenever it pleases.

After Germany invaded Denmark in 1940, the U.S. quickly deployed forces to protect Greenland from Nazi Germany. Ever since, the U.S. has maintained a military presence on the island. 

In 1946, the Truman administration tried, unsuccessfully, to buy the entire island from Denmark for $100 million. The U.S. was, however, granted long-term access to important military sites. 

Today, the main U.S. military presence is at Thule Air Base in the north of the country. Thule also serves as a very important early warning radar and satellite tracking station for the protection of the U.S. homeland.

So while the U.S.-Greenland security relationship is already good, U.S. policymakers should use the president’s newfound interest in Greenland to advance closer economic relations with the country and expand America’s diplomatic presence there.

[….]

The only way to fly commercially to Greenland is from Iceland or Denmark, but that could change in the coming years. Greenland is set to begin construction on three new airports this year, to be finished in 2023 (in Qaqortoq in the south, in Nuuk the capital, and Ilulissat in the north). 

Greenland’s government hopes the new airports will allow direct flights from North America and open up new opportunities for business and tourism.

The U.S. is also making new initiatives. 

After years of putting it on the back burner, the Trump administration recently announced that the U.S. will maintain a part-time diplomatic presence in Greenland. This is something The Heritage Foundation has been calling for. While this is a very welcome first step, over time this should become an enduring and permanent presence. 

The U.S. once had a consulate in Greenland, from 1940 to the early 1950s. Greenland is in America’s backyard and a critical part of America’s security architecture….

The whole “debacle” — so called — is putting Greenland’s interests first. I found out that apparently this has been in the works for some time. Since WWII in fact… as well as more recently (PJ-MEDIA):

….Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) took his two Harvard degrees over to The New York Times to explain just why our real estate mogul POTUS may be onto something.

After news leaked last week that President Trump had expressed interest in acquiring Greenland from Denmark, his critics predictably derided him as crazy. But once again, the president is crazy like a fox. The acquisition of Greenland would secure vital strategic interests for the United States, economically benefit both us and Greenlanders, and would be in keeping with American — and Danish — diplomatic traditions.

Strategically positioned in the Arctic Circle, Greenland has long attracted the attention of American policymakers. As far back as 1867, Secretary of State William Seward explored the acquisition of Greenland around the time that he negotiated the purchase of Alaska from the Russians. I myself raised the prospect of acquiring Greenland with the Danish ambassador just last year.

Take that, haters!

This country has needed some big, original thinking for a long time now. While the liberals are forever looking for new ways to suck the joy out of our lives and diminish American achievement, Trump’s all, “You know…Greenland is just sitting there.”

We haven’t done a major real estate deal in over 150 years and we’re certainly not picking up any new territory via warfare these days, so buying Greenland is looking better and better if the U.S. is going to remind the world what’s what.

Sen. Cotton again:

America is not the only nation to recognize Greenland’s strategic significance. Intent on securing a foothold in the Arctic and North America, China attempted in 2016 to purchase an old American naval base in Greenland, a move the Danish government prevented. Two years later, China was back at it, attempting to build three airports on the island, which failed only after intense lobbying of the Danes by the Trump administration.

Beijing understands not only Greenland’s geographic importance but also its economic potential. Greenland is rich in a wide array of mineral deposits, including rare-earth minerals — resources critical to our high-tech and defense industries. China currently dominates the market in these minerals and has threatened to withhold them from us to gain leverage in trade negotiations. Greenland also possesses untold reserves of oil and natural gas.

It just got moved into the “No-Brainer” column, people…..

In other words… China is looking to the mineral rich and strategically powerful option of Greenland… why shouldn’t we? In fact, this geopolitical chess match with China has been going on (over Greenland) for a few years now. More on this in the Washington Times article below.

Sebastian Gorka had James J. Carafano of the Heritage Foundation on his show, the discussion focused on Greenland:

The WASHINGTON TIMES (the indomitable Tammy Bruce in fact) notes that Greenland is mismanaged by Denmark:

…But this usual panic from the jealous chattering class once again reveals the Democrats and envious Trump haters’ biggest unforced error — constantly underestimating Donald Trump. This requires deliberately maintaining a remarkable ignorance about the economic and national security issues we face as a nation.

One of those issues is the vital importance of Greenland, its horrible mismanagement as the Danish elite virtue signal about their environmentalism, condemning its 55,000 residents to poverty-stricken lives, and the national security risks economic dereliction invite. The incompetence ruining Greenland, in fact, compelled Greenlandic officials to reach out to China as they searched for a Sugar Daddy to fund infrastructure projects….

The WT’s continues with the strategic infighting over the territory:

…what’s worth knowing is what precipitated the president’s comments. In 2017, Greenland’s prime minister flew to China and asked, as the Journal reported in February of this year, “Chinese state-run banks to finance the new commercial airports, including a big one for one of the smallest capitals on earth, Nuuk, which can now be served only by propeller planes. The bankers were interested, people at the meetings said, so long as a Chinese company constructed the airports.”

Reports indicate this action was triggered by Denmark refusing to help.

Then-Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis was not happy and convinced Danish officials to fund the infrastructure, sidelining China. This was an effort by China starting in 2018 and only ending when they officially withdrew in June of this year. For those who look past their shallow view of the United States and the administration, one would know it’s no coincidence that the president’s remarks on Greenland became public just two months after we successfully fought off China in their latest swing at the North American island….

Continuing still, the WASHINGTON TIMES notes the royal families response to the whole thing:

…After a few days of screeching from those paralyzed by Trump Derangement Syndrome, the Danish royal family is chiming in with comments indicating they may be moved by the art of the deal.

“In comments sent to Newsweek, along with other publications including The Sun, Dr. Princess Antonia of Schaumburg-Lippe … suggested the interest should be taken as a compliment. ‘A purchase offer is a compliment for magical Greenland, as only desirable areas receive offers,’ she said. ‘The people of Greenland should and can decide about their own destiny.’ Her son, Prince Mario Max Schaumburg-Lippe, added: ‘I love Greenland and want the beloved citizens there to be happy. ‘Whatever they feel best and decide, needs to be supported,’ ” the news magazine reported.

While Democrats and resisters continue to chase their tails, it would serve them well to stop and admit that American exceptionalism is back. For everyone.

On this episode of White House Brief [above], Jon Miller describes why Trump should take Greenland: ” President Trump canceled his trip to Denmark because of the prime minister’s rotten attitude over selling Greenland to us. America absolutely should acquire Greenland. It will capture our imagination and revitalize our spirit in a way not seen since the Louisiana Purchase.”

James Pinkerton over at BREITBART throws some “eco-unfriendly” water on the fire:

…Yet even from afar, we know that Greenland offers a fantastic development opportunity. And so, if the Danes are too green and politically correct to extract that wealth, perhaps the U.S. can blaze a rich new trail.

Of course, some will say that all this is a pipe-dream, even if the U.S. were to become sovereign in Greenland. That is, the greens in America would work just as hard as the greens in Denmark to stop any such development, preferring to leave Greenland as it is, undeveloped. Yes, American greens, backed up by numerous billion-dollar foundations, would do precisely that: They’d organize, agitate, and litigate to leave Greenland to the seals and polar bears.

So we can see: Green power is not to be underestimated. As a matter of fact, the greens are so powerful in the U.S. that they have, in much of the country, taken the issue of natural resource development off the table. That’s why, for example, efforts to fully exploit America’s hydrocarbon resources have been stymied. As has been pointed out by Breitbart News, the total value of oil and natural gas, under federal lands and waters, is $128 trillion. That’s a lot of wealth — six times America’s annual GDP, six times our national debt — and yet green power is such that few even talk about tapping into our natural abundance….

Pinkerton finishes his article with this:

…So let’s give Trump credit for his Greenland idea. Even if nothing comes of it during his presidency, he has expanded the “Overton Window” — that is, the range of acceptable political discourse — reminding us that greatness comes from expansion and innovation, not from contraction and enervation.

One fine day, development will come to Greenland, as well as to other desolate places. Such development can, and should, be done cleanly as well as profitably.

There may never be a Trump Tower in Greenland. But even so, the MAGA spirit could be extended to include the new phrase, MGGA — Make Greenland Great Again.

Responding To “Blasphemy” – The Chosen One, Trump

Published by Papa Giorgio

I have seen alll-over-Facebook issues with Trump turning away from cameras and saying he “is the chosen one” — BTW! This will be the first encounter you will have in quite some time of Democrats taking seriously and literally the Bible’s edicts. Not in the case of the homosexual lifestyle mind you, just as long as it maligns Trump. Here is the video:

One friend linked to this article from a religious #NeverTrumper: “Trump Breathes Blasphemy, so Where Is the Righteous Anger?“

So I decided to pool a couple of my responses across FB here to make the point… but I sometimes feel that when friend’s ask me my thoughts on this they expect me to be like this (animated GIF to the right):

Okay, after the post to the article I linked to above, here are my thoughts, and a response and my response to IT.

ME:

I bet you think he really asked Russia to hack Hillary. Or that Trump really believed he could could shoot someone on 5th street… etc. But humor and sarcasm are not the forte of the Left

  • “Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he’s not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is.” — Francis Bacon

A response from V.M.

Sean Giordano, either way he embraced blatant idolatry. He has been blasphemous before thousands!

In some countries blasphemy is a crime!

But our church leaders have said nothing! Only 2 Pastors I know of rebuked him and called for him to repent! Pastors Chuck Baldwin and Rick Wiles shouted publicly for trump to get on his knees and repent after he took our Lord’s name in vain from that political stump in NC last: “Trump called out by some Christians for using ‘Lord’s name in vain’ at fiery NC rally“

ME:

You use the word blasphemous often, but I do not think you know what the word means…

In another strain on GARY DEMAR’S Facebook, his posting Obama’s similarities to Messianism garnered a response to which I responded. But first, I wish to upload his pictures he posted with some others… all combined. (One of the commentators on Gary’s post linked to THE CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE’S post — which I threw in the mix):

Here is the comment I respond to:

R.L.

The difference is that Obama didn’t say it of himself or quote it of himself…these were ridiculous labels used by an over-reaching, left leaning media. President Trump grabbed a right leaning media personality statement, quoted it, and embraced the nonsense.

ME:

A quick look at Google (“obama messianism”) shows articles like these:

  • POLITICO: Messianic rhetoric infuses Obama rallies (In a giant Sunday afternoon rally suffused with Christian – and at times messianic – rhetoric,)
  • SLATE: Obama’s Cocky Messianism (But now, with Iowa as his witness, Obama is he starting to sound like he believes the prophecies, too.)
  • Don’t forget about this:

Comment two from ME: (I partly owe the humbly looking to heaven to plead not to be struck by lightning — as we have all done at some point in our lives, to my wife):

From one of my post many years ago, and would be a big (important) difference… Is that what does the base think? I am a conservatarian Evangelical… Would I or the media I follow think he (Trump) is a Messiah figure?

“He made so many promises. We thought that he was going to be – I shouldn’t say this at Christmastime, but – the next messiah” — Barbara Walters. “We”? The media? The left? Both? (RPT)

No. Since most religious people who view theology well are conservative, a belief in Trump being anything but reverent when he wrily looked to the sky to say “don’t smite me for saying this irreverent thing” — and then saying he is the chosen one to politically deal with the can kicked down the road for so long.

THAT is what he was saying. The crappy work of previous Presidents in this area forced him to be the “chosen one.”

Another person noted this BLOGSPOT BLOG about Obama’s messianism. See also my post that has a similar vein:

Fat | Dennis Prager and Vinnie Tortorich

Published by Papa Giorgio

Dennis interviews Vinnie Tortorich, author of the documentary, “FAT“. Here is a good intro to the Keto Diet.

The part about epilepsy is quite amazing! (JOHN HOPKINS MEDICINE) Enjoy the conversation.

Circling Wagons Around Google (MSM Bias)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Robert Epstein discusses how the Left alienated him for researching the effects of Google’s search bias and why Google is working with China and ICE. The article from VANITY FAIR is entitled, “Trump, Cranking the Crazy To 11, Says Google Cost Him ‘16 Million Votes’”. The first thing I would say is (learned from Apologetics) one should say “may” and not “will.” But Dr. Epstein humorously points out a truthism about Trump. But Glenn, Stu Burguiere, and Dr. Epstein dismantle the obviously biased article. The same bias can be found at POLITIFACT

OBAMAGATE: The Biggest Scandal In Our History (Gorka)

Published by Papa Giorgio

In this special edition of AMERICA First, Sebastian spends the full three hours focusing on the massive scandal known as “Obamagate,” from the illegal surveillance of the Trump campaign to the Deep State attempts to bring down the Trump Presidency, with special guests Joe DiGenova, Victoria Toensing, Sara Carter, John Solomon, and Chris Farrell of Judicial Watch.

Can Gay Men and Women Become “Non-Gay”?

Published by Papa Giorgio

Keep in mind that the Left says that sex is by choice (men and women who feel like another sex or no sex). But they say that people are always gay, and cannot be otherwise. You see, “Gender is fluid,” but being gay is not.

Stanton L. Jones describes his and Mark A. Yarhouse’s “longitudinal study of religiously mediated change in sexual orientation,” which used current social science research standards to address the questions Is changing homosexual orientation possible? and Might the attempt to change be harmful? In this video, Jones focuses on previous research and the methods used in this study.

In this video, Jones focuses on the specific results and wider implications of this study.

In this video, Jones answers questions about possible bias in the study due to its funding and publishing by two religious organizations, Exodus and InterVarsity.

Another Gay Man That Opposes Same-Sex Marriage #SSM

Published by Papa Giorgio

(Originally posted March 28, 2013)

Here is what Doug Mainwaring has to say on the issue via his article: “Same-Sex Marriage: We’re Playing Chess, Not Checkers” In another article, Ryan Anderson notes the tactics of the Left:

The Left’s Three Techniques on Marriage Redefinition — and How to Counter Them

This week, everyone’s talking about gay marriage. And as the Supreme Court weighs opinions on two, key court battles, both sides of the ongoing debate are on edge and continuing to advance their views on the matter. But among the many voices speaking out against same-sex marriage is one that may shock you: Doug Mainwaring, a conservative activist who is gay.

But the Left also has deployed three distinct tactics: First, they’ve been successful at oversimplifying the issue, personalizing it and refusing to engage the complexities of social reality. Second, they’ve implied that the LGBT community speaks in one voice. And third, they’ve demonized their opponents as “bigots” and “haters.”

We need to better understand the Left’s strategy, for there are lessons here.

Who could be against expanding benefits for more people? That’s the first technique the Left used: Oversimplify the issue while personalizing it. Redefine marriage so more people get health care or tax exemptions or whatever other grab bag of goodies you want to focus on. (Never mind that you don’t have to redefine marriage to solve policy problems.)

Viewed in this light, the marriage debate is like so many other liberal-conservative divides. Take almost any bad social or economic policy. It’s easy to identify the winners—the family getting Obamacare, the corn farmer getting a subsidy, the bank getting bailed out, the worker making an inflated wage. These all can be cast as stories of people getting “stuff.”

[….]

This is hard to counter, but it can be done. And we have to do a better job at it. We need to call out the Left when they oversimplify complex human realities. We also need to effectively communicate complexities using stories and examples.

The Left’s second technique is to disparage dissenters. Marriage revisionists mimic the tactics of abortion advocates. Pro-life women have been demeaned as women-in-name-only. Now gays and lesbians who oppose redefining marriage are described as self-loathing. Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer claim to speak for all women on abortion, while Andrew Sullivan and Zach Wahls are held up to speak for all LGBT families.

It is a strategy expressly devised to marginalize the experiences of folks like Bobby Lopez (see his article “Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Child’s View”) and Doug Mainwaring (who was raising his kids with his partner when he realized they needed a mom—his ex-wife—and wrote “I’m Gay and I Oppose Same-Sex Marriage”).

We need to do more to make heard the voices of such brave people. And in doing so we’ll address that first challenge of demonstrating complexities through real-life examples.

Lastly, the Left has tried to bully us into silence. A principal strategy of the forces that have worked for 20 years to redefine marriage has been cultural intimidation—threatening defenders of marriage with the stigma of being “haters” and “bigots.”

They’ve said anyone who disagrees is the equivalent of a racist. They’ve sent a clear message:  Stand up for marriage, and we will, with the help of our media friends, demonize and marginalize you. Just ask Dan Cathy, president and chief operating officer of Chick-fil-A.

And now this last technique has made its way into a Supreme Court decision. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion that the only reason Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996 was to “disparage,” “injure,” “degrade,” “demean” and “humiliate” gay and lesbian Americans. 

This kind of grotesque incivility is toxic. The fact that it is part of a majority opinion is not just outrageous but frightening.

[….]

So we marriage advocates must continue speaking out.  But we also need to learn how to state our case succinctly and winsomely: Marriage is the way that societies from time immemorial have united a man and woman as husband and wife to be mother and father to any children born of their union. That’s how children are provided with the precious gift of being brought up in the publicly supported bond of the mom and dad whose union gave them life.

Let’s refuse to be cowed into silence. Let’s redouble our efforts to help our fellow citizens to understand what every political community prior to the year 2000 understood.

Catchy slogans can address complicated issues for only so long. Eventually reality prevails. Silencing dissent may be possible at first, but over time more and more people find their voices.

Bullies may intimidate for a season, but in the end truth wins out.

See also THE BLAZE’S post about Doug entitled, “GAY ACTIVIST SHOCKS CRITICS WITH THIS SCATHING OP-ED…AGAINST SAME-SEX MARRIAGE” (Also LIFE SITE NEWS as well as Doug’s PDF)

Don’t know that “nixing” gender comes with these cases that this brave gay man mentioned above when he said, “Same-sex marriage will do the same, depriving children of their right to either a mom or a dad.” Here is part of the bill from Minnesota, Doug’s home state, that attempted just this:

But a look at SF925 reveals that something much more insidious than advocates let on is underway. This bill would strip the words “mother” and “father” of meaning under Minnesota law. Henceforth, the bill states, these words — among the most beloved and culturally freighted in the English language — “must be construed in a neutral manner to refer to a person of either gender.”

For more on this, see my post linked in the picture above, as well as Massachusetts doing the same. This should engender ANY conservative or conservatively minded libertarian (gay or straight) to oppose this movement predominantly guided by the Left and the many low-information (young) voters.

“[The laws of any state rest on] the basis that the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization, the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement.” — Supreme Court, 1885

Here is another gay man talking about what marriage IS:

One of the most respected Canadian sociologist/scholar/homosexual, Paul Nathanson, writes that there are at least five functions that marriage serves–things that every culture must do in order to survive and thrive. They are:

1. Foster the bonding between men and women
2. Foster the birth and rearing of children
3. Foster the bonding between men and children
4. Foster some form of healthy masculine identity
5. Foster the transformation of adolescents into sexually responsible adults

Note that Nathanson considers these points critical to the continued survival of any culture. He continues “Because heterosexuality is directly related to both reproduction and survival, … every human societ[y] has had to promote it actively . … Heterosexuality is always fostered by a cultural norm” that limits marriage to unions of men and women. He adds that people “are wrong in assuming that any society can do without it.”

Going further he stated that “same sex marriage is a bad idea” …[he] only opposed “gay marriage, not gay relationships.”

The Press Passes On Democrat Anti-Semitism Again

Published by Papa Giorgio

Two stories I think that are nails in the coffin of these two radical anti-semites The first links to multiple stories for the reader to follow, and comes from ONE NEWS NOW:

One fact reportedly whitewashed by the mainstream media in all its coverage about the trip Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) planned to Israel is that it was sponsored by an Islamic terrorism-supporting group.

The two Muslim congresswomen did not plan their trip via the conventional bipartisan route.

“The most important element of the story is the fact that two American congresswomen shunned a bipartisan congressional delegation to Israel to go on an independent trip to Israel sponsored by vicious anti-Semites,” NATIONAL REVIEW REPORTED. “Another important element of the story is that – as of [Friday] – the mainstream media have whitewashed Omar and Tlaib’s vile associations.”

The Washington Examiner reported that only one of seven Associated Press reports on the Omar-Tlaib Israel visit mentioned Miftah, with the six others merely calling it a Palestinian advocacy group – similar to the New York Times. The Los Angeles Times and Washington Post both referred to Miftah as “a nonprofit organization headed by Palestinian lawmaker” with the latter associating it to “longtime peace negotiator Hanan Ashrawi.” Reuters, ABC News and Yahoo did not mention Miftah’s anti-Semitic nature and Bloomberg News omitted its mention entirely.

Expecting Israel’s open arms when planning its demise?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu’s initial denial of Tlaib’s and Omar’s entry into Israel days before their scheduled visit – he later permitted Tlaib to visit her aging grandmother in the West Bank after her plea, which she rejected when offered – appears to be well-warranted in lieu of the discovery that the trip was sponsored by Miftah, known for its jihadist ties and anti-Semitic teachings.

“Miftah – which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed was funding their trip – is an extremely anti-Semitic Palestinian advocacy group with ties to Palestinian terrorism,” THEBLAZE NOTED. “The organization even once promoted Neo-Nazi material.”

In addition, Miftah has spread other anti-Semitic lies – some of which it has tried to wash its hands.

“Miftah… promotes anti-Semitic doctrines, like the ‘blood libel,’ which claims ‘the Jews used the blood of Christians in the Jewish Passover,’” THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER ASSERTED…….

This second piece notes the passing on of cartoons between the two women on Twitter that are done by clear anti-Semites.

The CONSERVATIVE TRIBUNE writes further:

…Ungar-Sargon pointed out that the artist behind this tripe entered work in Iran’s International Holocaust Cartoon Contest in 2006 and won second place. (Just ask yourself, what kind of country has a Holocaust cartoon contest? And what kind of man would enter such a thing?)

His cartoon was a work that showed a man wearing the Arab head scarf known as a keffiyeh – possibly made best known by the late PLO leader Yasser Arafat – along with the striped uniform of Jewish concentration camp prisoners of the Holocaust.

Just the kind of charmer who would fit right in with Tlaib, Omar and the rest of “the squad.”…

BREITBART has this story: “Rashida Tlaib Suggests HBO Boycott After Bill Maher Calls Antisemitic BDS Campaign a ‘Bulls*it Purity Test’”

Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) suggested a boycott of HBO after the network’s host Bill Maher ripped the anti-Israel “boycott, divestment, sanctions” (BDS) movement and called it a “bullshit purity test.”

“BDS is a bullshit purity test by people who want to appear woke but actually slept through history class,” Bill Maher said Friday.

“It’s predicated on this notion, I think — it’s very shallow thinking — that the Jews in Israel, mostly white, and the Palestinians are browner, so they must be innocent and correct, and the Jews must be wrong,” the Real Time host continued. “As if the occupation came right out of the blue, that this completely peaceful people found themselves occupied.”….

The Current State Of The Democratic Party | Dov Hikind

Published by Papa Giorgio

Former NY State Assembly Member DOV HIKIND comes on to THE LARRY ELDER SHOW to talk about the current state of the Democratic Party, AOC, the BDS movement, and more. (This is only a portion of the fuller interview.) Dov Hikind is a Democrat by-the-by. He is founder of Americans Against Antisemitism.

Here are a couple stories (and a TWEET) regarding Dov:

Here is the TWEET:

Presidential Death Threats | Michael Brown | “Good Nazi’s”

Published by Papa Giorgio

Larry Elder dispatches quickly the idea that Obama received an abnormal amount of death threats:

He also discusses *Michael Brown and some of the candidates for the 2020 race saying he was murdered. Then I add-in Larry’s montage of media and Democrats saying Trump said “there were good Nazis.” (See more here: “Trump Is Right – Good People On Both Sides“) That begins at the 5:03 mark of the audio. More here. Enjoy:

*

* Here are other audios I have uploaded to my site on the topic: