Month: August 2024

Christopher Wray, directorul FBI, nu este foarte convins că Donald Trump a fost într-adevăr lovit de un glonţ în timpul tentativei de asasinat de la mitingul din Pennsylvania şi se întreabă, în schimb, dacă nu a fost vorba mai degrabă de şrapnel, relatează The Guardian, citat de News.ro.În timpul unei audieri care a avut loc miercuri la Washington, în faţa Comisiei judiciare a Camerei Reprezentanţilor, Wray le-a spus legislatorilor că nu este clar ce anume a provocat rănirea urechii lui Trump în timpul împuşcăturilor de la mitingul său de campanie din Butler, Pennsylvania, la începutul acestei luni.Rafalele trase de un trăgător aflat pe un acoperiş de pe care se putea vedea scena unde era Trump şi mulţimea participantă au ucis un participant la miting şi au rănit alte două persoane.”Există unele întrebări cu privire la faptul dacă este sau nu un glonţ sau e vorba de şrapnel care a lovit urechea”, a declarat Wray. “În acest moment, nu ştiu dacă acel glonţ, pe lângă faptul că a provocat zgârietura, ar fi putut ateriza şi în altă parte”, le-a spus el congresmenilor.La scurt timp după tentativa de asasinat, Trump a declarat pe reţeaua sa socială că a fost împuşcat cu un glonţ care i-a străpuns partea superioară a urechii drepte. “Am ştiut imediat că ceva nu este în regulă, în sensul că am auzit un şuierat, împuşcături şi am simţit imediat glonţul sfâşiind pielea”, a scris fostul preşedinte. “A avut loc o sângerare abundentă, aşa că mi-am dat seama atunci ce se întâmpla”, a povestit el.După împuşcături, Trump a publicat un raport despre recuperarea sa de la Ronny Jackson, fostul medic de la Casa Albă şi actual reprezentant republican, însă fostul preşedinte nu a permis profesioniştilor din domeniul medical care l-au tratat să vorbească public despre starea sa.Joi, dr. Jackson a răspuns la mărturia lui Wray într-o postare pe X, numind comentariile lui Wray către legislatori “absolut iresponsabile” şi “motivate politic”, îndreptate împotriva lui Trump.”Puţina credibilitate care i-ar mai fi putut rămâne a DISPĂRUT după ce a sugerat imprudent că Trump ar fi putut să nu fie lovit de un glonţ”, a spus Jackson. “A fost un glonţ”, a adăugat el. “Am văzut rana!”, a dat asigurări fostul medic devenit politician.De asemenea, şeful FBI, Christopher Wray, a declarat miercuri în faţa parlamentarilor că trăgătorul care a încercat să-l asasineze pe Trump, fiind apoi el însuşi împuşcat mortal de lunetişti Secret Service, a căutat pe internet informaţii despre asasinarea fostului preşedinte John F Kennedy în 1963, potrivit News.ro.

Archaeologists and genetic specialists have revealed disturbing truths about the origin of European populations. These have roots in one of the most deadly tribes in history, with the foundation of their formation marked by the most horrific and systematic genocide in European history. Genetic and archaeological studies over the past decade unveil a shocking and unsettling reality regarding the genetic origins of modern European populations and how they came into being on the ancient continent. Increasingly, experts argue that the peoples of Europe genetically emerged from the largest genocide in the continent’s history, with a genetic legacy dominated by the most violent tribe from the old continent. Initially believed to have peacefully settled among the Neolithic peoples of ancient Europe, recent research indicates a violent population change took place.

5,000 years ago, Europe was populated by Neolithic and Eneolithic tribes spread from the Balkans to the British Isles and the Scandinavian Peninsula. They were the creators of fascinating Danubian agrarian cultures or megalithic cultures in Western Europe, with Stonehenge being their most famous creation. It was an era of mega-settlements of farmers and shepherds, some in the form of mud-brick houses and mysterious megastructures, located near waterways and in elevated areas protected by ditches and sometimes palisades. These civilizations were dominated by earthly deities of fertility and fecundity, where shamans and chieftains played essential roles. Stone remained the primary material for tools and weapons.

Research shows that these Neolithic and Eneolithic cultures were not particularly warlike, with a limited arsenal of stone-tipped spears, arrows, and knives or axes. What fascinated about these shepherd and farmer tribes at the dawn of civilization was their rich spiritual and artistic world, evidenced by numerous idols and spectacular ceramics. Genetically, these populations were a mix of indigenous West European hunter-gatherer tribes overlaid by populations of the first European farmers, originating mainly from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) or the Aegean region. Knowledge of metallurgy was very limited, restricted in the Chalcolithic period to the use of copper but not on a large scale. However, 5,000 years ago, these civilizations vanished in flames, as evidenced by archaeological excavations revealing a violent cessation of habitation marked by intense fires.

Apart from an epidemic that decimated overcrowded and unsanitary Neolithic settlements, the destruction of major European agrarian civilizations is linked to the emergence of highly violent and skilled warrior tribes at Europe’s frontiers. These were the carriers of the Yamnaya culture, originating somewhere in the Caucasus region in southern Russia, spreading across the North Pontic steppes and northern Iran today. The Yamnaya people were nomadic herders who managed to domesticate horses and were adept at metallurgy, producing bronze weapons. They traveled swiftly, documented to use ox-drawn carts, either with two or four wheels. They buried their dead in pits, giving rise to the name Yamnaya, meaning “pit culture.”

For prominent figures of the tribe, renowned warriors or chieftains, burial mounds called kurgans were erected above the pits. They rarely practiced agriculture, settling on riverbanks when staying in an area for an extended period, fortifying their settlements. Otherwise, they led a nomadic lifestyle. Artisans held a special status within the Yamnaya society, with metal objects found in large quantities in elite tribe burials. Studies on discovered male skeletons reveal that Yamnaya warriors were tall, fair-skinned, likely with blond or reddish hair. The Yamnaya were known for their extreme violence, with archaeological and genetic evidence supporting them as perhaps the most aggressive population to ever reach Europe.

Driven towards European territories, the Yamnaya warriors proved unstoppable. Agrarian communities were their certain victims. Weakened by disease, lacking advanced military technology compared to the Yamnaya, the shorter statured, dark-skinned, brunet-haired European farmers succumbed to the invaders. Many experts attribute the devastating invasion to the destruction of most major Neolithic settlements, from the Danube region to the Neolithic tribes of Britain, including the builders of Stonehenge. Genetic and archaeological studies reveal a veritable extermination war. Essentially, the genes of Neolithic European men disappeared.

Most likely, the Yamnaya warriors exterminated the men of each community and retained some of the women. Danish specialists were shocked to find almost nothing of the genetics of the Neolithic ancestors remaining in the Danish population, with the Yamnaya culture dominating. “There was such a rapid population change, effectively without descendants of the predecessors,” stated paleoecologist Anne Birgitte Nielsen from Lund University. Interestingly, genetic and anatomical studies show that the migrating Yamnaya were predominantly male. It was a full-fledged military invasion, the first of its scale in European history. These warriors traversed the continent, leaving destruction in their wake, mounted on their small steppe horses wielding bronze weapons.

As outlined by several interdisciplinary studies, Kristian Kristinsen concluded that it was a continental-level genocide, with Yamnaya populations exterminating at least the male part of the old European farming tribes. “I have become increasingly convinced that it was a kind of genocide,” states the Swedish researcher. The genetic characteristics of Western and Northern European peoples, with fair skin, light-colored hair and eyes typical of the Yamnaya, suggest that the darker genes of the Neolithic farmers were almost lost in Central-Western and Northern Europe.

The Ancestors of European Peoples

Experts suggest that this Yamnaya invasion actually laid the genetic foundations of European populations, even to this day. “We have shown that the Bronze Age was a very dynamic period, involving massive migrations of populations largely responsible for shaping the demographic structure of present-day Europe and Asia,” as stated in the article “Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia” in the journal “Nature.” Genetic analyses on the Y chromosome of modern European populations reveal that the R1a/R1b haplogroups brought by the Yamnaya people are dominant in over half of the modern European population.

These analyses indicate two things: the near extermination of Neolithic farming populations and the fact that the Yamnaya tribes are actually the direct ancestors of modern Europeans. Maria Gimbutas identified the Yamnaya culture with the Proto-Indo-Europeans, while David Anthony mentioned that, linguistically, carriers of the Yamnaya culture were the ancestors of European languages. In conclusion, all of Europe’s genetics were altered and shaped by this devastating invasion of the Yamnaya warriors, who through genocide gave rise to European peoples.

Archaeologists and genetic specialists have uncovered disturbing truths about the origins of European peoples. They trace back to one of the most ruthless tribes in history, with the foundation of their formation being the most horrific and systematic genocide in European history. Genetic and archaeological studies over the past decade reveal a shocking and unsettling reality regarding the genetic origins of modern European peoples and how they came into existence on the continent. Increasingly, experts argue that the peoples of Europe genetically emerged from the largest genocide in the continent’s history, with a genetic legacy dominated by the most violent tribe in ancient Europe. Initially, it was believed that this tribe peacefully settled among the neolithic peoples of ancient Europe, but recent research indicates a violent population shift occurred. A world of agrarian civilizations and megalithic constructions 5000 years ago, Europe was inhabited by neolithic and eneolithic tribes spread from the Balkans to the British Isles and the Scandinavian Peninsula. They were the creators of fascinating Danubian agrarian cultures or megalithic cultures in western Europe, with Stonehenge being their most famous creation. It was an era of mega-settlements of farmers and shepherds, some resembling proto-cities built of clay houses and mysterious mega-structures, located near rivers and on elevated terrains protected by ditches and sometimes palisades. These civilizations were dominated by earthly deities of fertility and fecundity, where shamans and chieftains played essential roles. Stone was still the primary material used for tools and weapons. According to archaeological research, these neolithic and eneolithic cultures did not appear to be very warlike, possessing a limited arsenal of stone-tipped spears, arrows, and daggers or axes. What fascinated about these shepherd and farmer tribes at the dawn of civilization was their exceptionally rich spiritual and artistic world, evidenced by numerous idols and spectacular ceramics. Genetically, these populations were a mix of indigenous west European hunter-gatherer tribes overlaid by populations of the first European farmers mainly coming from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) or the Aegean region. Their knowledge of metallurgy was very limited, restricted in the Chalcolithic period to the use of copper but not on a large scale. However, 5000 years ago, these civilizations vanished in flames. Archaeological research in many sites reveals a violent cessation of habitation, marked by intense fires. Death brought by tall, fair-skinned, violent, and predatory warriors Besides an epidemic that had plagued the overcrowded and unsanitary neolithic mega-settlements, the destruction of the great European agrarian civilizations is linked to the appearance at Europe’s frontiers of extremely violent and highly skilled warriors. They were carriers of the Yamnaya culture, originating somewhere in the Caucasus region, southern Russia, spreading across the North Pontic steppes and northern Iran. The people of the Yamnaya culture were nomadic herders who, as Martin Trautmann shows in his work “First bioanthropological evidence for Yamnaya horsemanship,” managed to domesticate the horse. Additionally, they were knowledgeable in metallurgy, particularly in crafting bronze weapons. They moved swiftly, documented to use ox-drawn wagons, both two-wheeled and four-wheeled. They buried their dead in pits. In fact, Yamnaya means precisely that, “the culture of pits.” For important figures of the tribe, renowned warriors or chieftains, mounds called kurgans were erected above the pits. They rarely practiced agriculture, settling on riverbanks when spending extended periods in one place, fortifying their settlements. Otherwise, they led a nomadic lifestyle. Artisans held a special status in the Yamnaya world, with metal objects found in large quantities in elite graves. Based on discovered male skeletons, Yamnaya warriors were tall, fair-skinned, likely with blond or reddish hair. Primarily, the Yamnaya were highly martial peoples, possessing numerous military advantages, from their bronze axes to mounted combat and physical strength. In contrast, neolithic European populations were shorter, darker-skinned, with brown hair. Moreover, they lacked a culture of war and did not excel in metallurgy, relying on stone weapons. Yamnaya probably also relied on their diet. Unlike European neolithic tribes, they were lactose tolerant and consumed a diet primarily based on milk, meat, and other dairy products. “It seems they mostly ate meat and dairy products,” says specialist Kristian Kristiansen from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. This Yamnaya tribes were extremely violent, as evidenced by archaeological and genetic findings, likely being the most brutal population ever to reach Europe. A continental genocide Once set in motion towards European territories, the Yamnaya warriors could not be stopped. Agricultural communities were easy prey. Weakened by epidemics and lacking advanced military technology compared to the Yamnaya, the shorter old European farmers succumbed to the invaders. More and more specialists attribute the devastating destruction of the majority of great neolithic settlements, from the Danubian region to even the neolithic tribes of Britain, including the builders of Stonehenge, to this invasive warfare. Genetic and archaeological studies reveal a true extermination war. Effectively, the genes of neolithic European men vanished. Most likely, the Yamnaya warriors exterminated the men of each community and retained some of the women. Danish specialists were shocked to find nearly nothing of the genetic structure of the Danish people today from their neolithic ancestors but mostly from the Yamnaya culture. “It was such a rapid population change, essentially without descendants of the predecessors,” noted paleoecologist Anne Birgitte Nielsen from Lund University. Interestingly, genetic and anatomical studies on discovered Yamnaya skeletons show that those moving westward were exclusively men. It was a full-fledged military invasion, the first in European history on such a scale. They likely roamed the continent in search of new pastures, but they undeniably traversed it from end to end, leaving fire and bronze axes in their wake, riding their small steppe horses. As results from several interdisciplinary studies emerge, Kristian Kristinsen concludes that it was a continental genocide, with Yamnaya populations exterminating at least the male part of the old European farming tribes. “I have become increasingly convinced that it was a kind of genocide,” says the Swedish researcher. Indeed, as shown by the genetic characteristics of western and northern European peoples, with fair skin, light-colored hair, and eyes, typical of the Yamnaya culture, it appears that the ‘brunette’ genes of the early European farmers were almost lost in central-western and northern Europe. The forebears of European peoples Specialists argue that this Yamnaya invasion actually laid the genetic foundations of European peoples, even up to today. “We have shown that the Bronze Age was a very dynamic period, involving massive migrations of populations largely responsible for shaping the demographic structure of today’s Europe and Asia,” as stated in the article “Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia” in the journal “Nature.” Genetic analyses on the Y chromosome of present-day European peoples show that haplogroups R1a/R1b brought by the Yamnaya culture dominate over half of the modern European population. These analyses reveal two things: the near extermination of neolithic farmer populations and that the Yamnaya tribes are, in fact, the primary ancestors of today’s Europeans. Maria Gimbutas identified the Yamnaya culture with Proto-Indo-Europeans, and David Anthony pointed out that, linguistically, carriers of the Yamnaya culture were the ancestors of European languages. In conclusion, all of Europe’s genetics were altered and shaped by this devastating invasion of Yamnaya warriors, who through genocide gave rise to European peoples.

Archaeologists and genetic specialists have uncovered disturbing truths about the origins of European peoples. They trace back to one of the most ruthless tribes in history, with the foundation of their formation being the most horrific and systematic genocide in European history. Genetic and archaeological studies over the past decade reveal a shocking and unsettling reality regarding the genetic origins of modern European peoples and how they came into existence on the continent. Increasingly, experts argue that the peoples of Europe genetically emerged from the largest genocide in the continent’s history, with a genetic legacy dominated by the most violent tribe in ancient Europe. Initially, it was believed that this tribe peacefully settled among the neolithic peoples of ancient Europe, but recent research indicates a violent population shift occurred. A world of agrarian civilizations and megalithic constructions 5000 years ago, Europe was inhabited by neolithic and eneolithic tribes spread from the Balkans to the British Isles and the Scandinavian Peninsula. They were the creators of fascinating Danubian agrarian cultures or megalithic cultures in western Europe, with Stonehenge being their most famous creation. It was an era of mega-settlements of farmers and shepherds, some resembling proto-cities built of clay houses and mysterious mega-structures, located near rivers and on elevated terrains protected by ditches and sometimes palisades. These civilizations were dominated by earthly deities of fertility and fecundity, where shamans and chieftains played essential roles. Stone was still the primary material used for tools and weapons. According to archaeological research, these neolithic and eneolithic cultures did not appear to be very warlike, possessing a limited arsenal of stone-tipped spears, arrows, and daggers or axes. What fascinated about these shepherd and farmer tribes at the dawn of civilization was their exceptionally rich spiritual and artistic world, evidenced by numerous idols and spectacular ceramics. Genetically, these populations were a mix of indigenous west European hunter-gatherer tribes overlaid by populations of the first European farmers mainly coming from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) or the Aegean region. Their knowledge of metallurgy was very limited, restricted in the Chalcolithic period to the use of copper but not on a large scale. However, 5000 years ago, these civilizations vanished in flames. Archaeological research in many sites reveals a violent cessation of habitation, marked by intense fires. Death brought by tall, fair-skinned, violent, and predatory warriors Besides an epidemic that had plagued the overcrowded and unsanitary neolithic mega-settlements, the destruction of the great European agrarian civilizations is linked to the appearance at Europe’s frontiers of extremely violent and highly skilled warriors. They were carriers of the Yamnaya culture, originating somewhere in the Caucasus region, southern Russia, spreading across the North Pontic steppes and northern Iran. The people of the Yamnaya culture were nomadic herders who, as Martin Trautmann shows in his work “First bioanthropological evidence for Yamnaya horsemanship,” managed to domesticate the horse. Additionally, they were knowledgeable in metallurgy, particularly in crafting bronze weapons. They moved swiftly, documented to use ox-drawn wagons, both two-wheeled and four-wheeled. They buried their dead in pits. In fact, Yamnaya means precisely that, “the culture of pits.” For important figures of the tribe, renowned warriors or chieftains, mounds called kurgans were erected above the pits. They rarely practiced agriculture, settling on riverbanks when spending extended periods in one place, fortifying their settlements. Otherwise, they led a nomadic lifestyle. Artisans held a special status in the Yamnaya world, with metal objects found in large quantities in elite graves. Based on discovered male skeletons, Yamnaya warriors were tall, fair-skinned, likely with blond or reddish hair. Primarily, the Yamnaya were highly martial peoples, possessing numerous military advantages, from their bronze axes to mounted combat and physical strength. In contrast, neolithic European populations were shorter, darker-skinned, with brown hair. Moreover, they lacked a culture of war and did not excel in metallurgy, relying on stone weapons. Yamnaya probably also relied on their diet. Unlike European neolithic tribes, they were lactose tolerant and consumed a diet primarily based on milk, meat, and other dairy products. “It seems they mostly ate meat and dairy products,” says specialist Kristian Kristiansen from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. This Yamnaya tribes were extremely violent, as evidenced by archaeological and genetic findings, likely being the most brutal population ever to reach Europe. A continental genocide Once set in motion towards European territories, the Yamnaya warriors could not be stopped. Agricultural communities were easy prey. Weakened by epidemics and lacking advanced military technology compared to the Yamnaya, the shorter old European farmers succumbed to the invaders. More and more specialists attribute the devastating destruction of the majority of great neolithic settlements, from the Danubian region to even the neolithic tribes of Britain, including the builders of Stonehenge, to this invasive warfare. Genetic and archaeological studies reveal a true extermination war. Effectively, the genes of neolithic European men vanished. Most likely, the Yamnaya warriors exterminated the men of each community and retained some of the women. Danish specialists were shocked to find nearly nothing of the genetic structure of the Danish people today from their neolithic ancestors but mostly from the Yamnaya culture. “It was such a rapid population change, essentially without descendants of the predecessors,” noted paleoecologist Anne Birgitte Nielsen from Lund University. Interestingly, genetic and anatomical studies on discovered Yamnaya skeletons show that those moving westward were exclusively men. It was a full-fledged military invasion, the first in European history on such a scale. They likely roamed the continent in search of new pastures, but they undeniably traversed it from end to end, leaving fire and bronze axes in their wake, riding their small steppe horses. As results from several interdisciplinary studies emerge, Kristian Kristinsen concludes that it was a continental genocide, with Yamnaya populations exterminating at least the male part of the old European farming tribes. “I have become increasingly convinced that it was a kind of genocide,” says the Swedish researcher. Indeed, as shown by the genetic characteristics of western and northern European peoples, with fair skin, light-colored hair, and eyes, typical of the Yamnaya culture, it appears that the ‘brunette’ genes of the early European farmers were almost lost in central-western and northern Europe. The forebears of European peoples Specialists argue that this Yamnaya invasion actually laid the genetic foundations of European peoples, even up to today. “We have shown that the Bronze Age was a very dynamic period, involving massive migrations of populations largely responsible for shaping the demographic structure of today’s Europe and Asia,” as stated in the article “Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia” in the journal “Nature.” Genetic analyses on the Y chromosome of present-day European peoples show that haplogroups R1a/R1b brought by the Yamnaya culture dominate over half of the modern European population. These analyses reveal two things: the near extermination of neolithic farmer populations and that the Yamnaya tribes are, in fact, the primary ancestors of today’s Europeans. Maria Gimbutas identified the Yamnaya culture with Proto-Indo-Europeans, and David Anthony pointed out that, linguistically, carriers of the Yamnaya culture were the ancestors of European languages. In conclusion, all of Europe’s genetics were altered and shaped by this devastating invasion of Yamnaya warriors, who through genocide gave rise to European peoples.

this is a body for an article about cooking and recipes recipes and recipes

this is a body for an article about cooking and recipes

Mihai Viteazul a fost ucis de propriul succes, îngenuncheat de propria faimă. Cel puțin asta cred o serie de specialiști. Marele comandant de oști valah, unul dintre cei mai renumiți principi europeni ai vremurilor sale, a fost omorât la comandă, culmea chiar în mijlocul armatei sale.Pe 9 august 1601, în tabăra militară de la Turda, Mihai Viteazul, unul dintre cei mai cunoscuți voievozi români, dar și unul dintre cei mai faimoși principi ai vremurilor sale, era ucis de un grup de mercenari. Moartea bruscă și extrem de violentă a lui Mihai Viteazul a lăsat în urmă multe semne de întrebare. Printre altele, cine l-a vrut mort pe Mihai Viteazul? De ce nimeni, din anturajul său nu a reacționat atunci când voievodul era ciopârțit iar trupul său batjocorit?Mihai Viteazul, ciopârțit iar trupul său batjocorit de un grup de mercenariDupă victoria de la Gorăslău, de pe 3 august 1601, contra rebelilor transilvăneni, Mihai și-a despărțit armata de cea a generalului Basta și a campat la Turda, dorind să plece către Făgăraș, în Țara Românească, acolo unde frații Buzești deja îi alungaseră pe Movilești. Nu avea să mai ajungă vreodată în Valahia. Pe 9 august, dimineața devreme, în fața cortului său au ajuns 300 de mercenari valoni, conduși de Jaques Beauri. Deși Mihai îi întâmpină cu brațele deschise, mercenarii valoni se reped asupra lui și-l ucid cu bestialitate. “Iar când fu într-o dimineaţă văzu viind oaste nemţească către cortul lui, unii călări, alţii pedeştrii şi socoti că aceştia sunt ajutorul lui, şi nimic de dânşii nu se temea. Iară ei procleţii nu i-au fost de ajutor, ci vrăjmaşi. Şi dacă văzu că sosesc, ieşi din cort înaintea lor şi le zise: Bine aţi venit, voinicilor, vitejilor!”. Iară ei se repeziră asupra lui ca nişte dihănii sălbatice cu săbiile scoase. Iar unul cu suliţa şi-l lovi direct în inimă, iar altul degrab îi tăie capul”., precizează o cronică anonimă. Cronicarul polonez Szamoskozy oferă o variantă mai detaliată și mai dramatică asasinatului. “”Unul din căpitani cu numele de Beaurius a intrat în cort împreună cu încă câţiva. Au pus mâna pe Mihai zicând: Mihai i-a zis: şi a pus mâna pe sabie s-o scoată. Un valon ţintind cu puşca a slobozit-o şi l-a lovit în mâna stângă cu care a căutat să scoată sabia (n.r. – Mihai Viteazul era stângaci). Alt valon i-a străpuns îndată pieptul cu sabia, al treilea valon l-a împuşcat în spate şi astfel prăbuşindu-se i-au tăiat capul cu propria sabie”,preciza cronicarul polon. Tot Szamoskozy spunea că trupul lui Mihai Viteazul a fost batjocorit, de aceeași mercenari. După ce i-au jefuit cortul, trupul decapitat i l-au aruncat într-un șanț. Capul i l-au pus pe un cal mort și a fost lăsat acolo trei zile.Invidia lui Basta. Victimă a propriului succes?Întrebarea legitimă care și-a pus-o oricine după moartea neașteptată a lui Mihai Viteazul, a fost cine l-a vrut mort pe principele valah? Cine i-a plătit pe valoni să-l ucidă? Unul dintre răspunsuri, născute chiar în epoca sa ar fi invidia generalul habsburgic Basta. Mihai Viteazul era o figură deja legendară în rândul creștinătății. Făcuse ravagii la sud de Dunăre în teritoriile otomane, făcuse o figură frumoasă în bătălia de la Călugăreni, contra unei uriașe armate otomane iar mai apoi reușise să câștige Transilvania și Moldova, din mâinile unor lideri tentați să fraternizeze cu turcul.Mihai Viteazul devenise cruciatul ideal, în spiritul Ligii Sfinte, înființată de împăratul romano-german pentru a uni țările creștine europene în lupta cu Imperiul Otoman. Chiar și după ce a pierdut totul, Mihai Viteazul, pribeag cu toată familia sa, prin Sfântul Imperiu German, reușește să fie considerat util de împăratul Rudolf al II lea. Primește o armată și se acoperă din nou de glorie la Gorăslău, învingând revolta transilvănenilor contra habsburgilor. Practic, Mihai a salvat pielea generalului Basta, care pierduse rușinos Transilvania și era cât pe ce să fie ucis de nobilii transilvăneni. O parte a contemporanilor, precum polonezul Szamoskozy, și a cercetătorilor au fost tentați să creadă că orgoliul lui Basta ca și onoarea sa au fost grav lezate. Invidios pe faima principelui valah, în contrast cu eșecurile sale, l-ar fi făcut pe Basta să plătească un grup de mercenari valoni care să-l ucidă.Mihai Viteazul, folosit și mai apoi omorâtIstorici precum P.P. Panaitescu spun însă că Basta nu avea cum să facă așa ceva de capul lui. Fără să-și piardă viața evident. Basta ar fi fost implicat în uciderea lui Mihai Viteazul, dar ca simplu executant. Specialiștii spun că de fapt, împăratul Rudolf al II lea ar fi ordonat moartea lui Mihai Viteazul după ce nu i-ar mai fi fost util. În timpul pribegiei sale din Imperiul Romano-German, Mihai nici nu prea a fost luat în seamă de împăratul Rudolf. Atunci, însă, când nobilii transilvăneni s-au ridicat împotriva lui Basta, care guverna regiunea în numele habsburgilor, împăratul Rudolf și-a adus aminte, brusc de Mihai. Mai ales că arhiducele Maximillian i-ar fi spus împăratului, verde-n față, că numai principele valah poate rezolva situația. Problema era cu atât mai gravă, cu cât, Basta a pierdut total controlul Transilvaniei, iar în locul său, nobilii revoltați l-au adus pe Sigismund Bathory, un om al turcilor.”În februarie 1601, nobilii în frunte cu Czaki s-au ridicat împotriva generalului imperial, îl arestară şi în cele din urmă Basta eliberat, e silit să plece la Dej şi de acolo la Satu Mare, pierzând Ardealul în chip ruşinos, fără luptă, după ce vărsare atâta sânge să-l cucerească. Arhiducele Maximillian aflând de retragerea lui lui Basta, spune pe faţă, că nu e alt chip să ţii în frâu pe ardeleni, decât cel cu care începuse Mihai”, scria P.P Panaitescu în “Mihai Viteazul”. Împăratul Rudolf discută cu Mihai Viteazul și îi oferă prințului valah, 10.000 de taleri și o moșie în Boemia, plus libertatea de a se întoarce și ataca Transilvania. Cu această sumă, destul de mare pentru acele vremuri, Mihai angajează mercenari din toate colțurile Europei. Generalul Basta, s-a alăturat cu armata sa, celei de mercenari a lui Mihai și împreună l-au învins, la Gorăslău pe Sigismund Bathory. Mihai Viteazul s-a acoperit din nou de glorie. Apar inclusiv miniaturi și pagini tipărite cu chipul său în Europa Centrală. Faima principelui valah, nu-i convenea împăratului Rudolf. Se temea să nu devină prea îndrăzneț, sau poate să se alieze cu otomanii. În plus, a aflat că Mihai se pregătea să facă din nou legea prin Transilvania, o provincie pe care habsburgii o doreau doar pentru ei.”Curtea Imperială nu stabilise dinainte soartea Ardealului după recucerire, nici rolul lui Mihai. Acesta fusese recunoscut odinioară, măcar de Pezzen, ca guvernator al Ardealului, înţelegea deci să stăpânească iar această ţară, cu învoirea împăratului. (…) De aceea Basta a lucrat pentru stăpânii lui, care vroiau să aibă Ardealul direct sub cârmuirea lor, înlăturând pe Mihai. Basta era un general în slujba lor şi nu ar fi făcut această faptă, dacă nu ar fi ştiut că ea va fi aprobată”, preciza P.P Panaitescu. Pe scurt, Mihai Viteazul a fost folosit de imperiali și mai apoi, după stingerea revoltei și readucerea sub ascultarea a Transilvaniei, Mihai a fost ucis. Motivele principale sunt faima prea mare a prințului valah, o faimă care-l făcea periculos în ochii imperialilor, dar și ambițiile lui Mihai de a stăpâni Transilvania.Misterul uciderii saleAsasinarea lui Mihai ridică semne de întrebare dintr-un alt punct de vedere. Cum a putut fi ucis voievodul, în mijlocul taberei sale. De obicei, cortul conducătorului unei armate, se află în mojlocul taberei, și este bine păzit. Sau măcar, Mihai ar fi trebuit să aibă în preajmă servitori, paji. Practic, în momentul asasinatului, Mihai era efectiv singur. Nici măcar după zgomotele puternice produse de pistoale și flintă, ca și strigătele evidente, nu a intervenit nimeni. Valonii au putut să-i batjocorească trupul, în voie, fără să fie deranjați. Un lucru absolut bizar. În plus, trupul său dar și capul tăiat și pus pe un cal mort, au zăcut trei zile, fără ca cineva să le strângă, să le depună. Una dintre variante este aceea că, efectiv, Mihai a fost trădat de marii nobili și implicit de armată. Cu alte cuvinte, comandanții lui Mihai, oamenii săi, ar fi fost cumpărați la rândul lor de imperiali, poate tot prin intermediul lui Basta, pentru a nu interveni. Este cunoscut faptul că frații Buzești . oamenii si de încredere, se aflau în Valahia la aceea vreme, alungându-i pe Movilești. Nici măcar Buzeștii nu era ușă de biserică, fie prezenți la înlăturarea lui Mihai de pe tron, în anul 1600, alături de alți conspiratori. Ulterior s-au împăcat.

Franța – Spania este prima semifinală de la Euro 2024, după ce Mbappe și compania au trecut de Portugalia lui Cristiano Ronaldo la loviturile de departajare, după 0-0 la finalul a 120 de joc. Lusitanul Joao Felix a fost singurul care nu a putut marca de la 11 metri, trimițând mingea în bară.Pe arena Volksparkstadion din Hamburg, cele două formații s-au întrecut în ratări pe întreg parcursul meciului Ajunsă din nou la lovituri de departajare, norocul nu a mai fost de partea Portugaliei. Pe rând, Dembele, Cristiano Ronaldo, Fofana, Bernardo Silva, Kounde, Bradley Barcola și Nuno Mendes au transformat, în vreme ce Joao Felix și a ratat execuția din 11 metri, penalty-ul câștigător fiind transformat de Theo Hernandez.Franța nu a marcat niciun gol din acțiune până acumPortugalia părăsește așadar competiția, după ce nu a mai reușit să mai marcheze din al doilea meci din grupă, 3-0 cu Turcia. A urmat meciul cu cântec cu Georgia (0-2) și optimea cu Slovenia (0-0), în care portarul Diogo Costa a parat toate cele 3 lovituri executate de foștii iugoslavi și 0-0 acum, cu Franța.Aflat la al 6-lea turneu final european din carieră – record absolut – Cristiano Ronaldo nu s-a lipit la gol în niciun meci de la Euro 2024, lucru care nu s-a mai întâmplat în cele 5 ediții precedente, în care punctase de 14 ori. Lusitanul, primul jucător din istorie care ajung la 30 de meciuri jucate la Campionatele Europene, și-a dorit atât de mult să marcheze, încât nu a reușit absolut nimic la acest turneu final.Franța – Spania în semifinaleDe partea cealaltă, Franța a ajuns în semifinale într-un mod uluitor, fără să marcheze vreun gol din acțiune. Cu Austria și cu Belgia, Les Bleus au câștigat cu 1-0, în urma câte unui autogol, cu Olanda au remizat alb, iar cu Polonia au egalat la 1 în urma unui penalty. Acum, au trecut de lusitani după 0-0 la finalul a 120 de minute.Franța, care a jucat ultima repriză adițională fără starul Kylian Mbappe, accidentat, urmează să întâlnească Spania în prima semifinală de la Euro, pe 9 iulie, la Munchen (ora 22.00).Portugalia – Franța (Hamburg) 0-0 (3-5 la lovituri de departajare)

Franța – Spania este prima semifinală de la Euro 2024, după ce Mbappe și compania au trecut de Portugalia lui Cristiano Ronaldo la loviturile de departajare, după 0-0 la finalul a 120 de joc. Lusitanul Joao Felix a fost singurul care nu a putut marca de la 11 metri, trimițând mingea în bară.Pe arena Volksparkstadion din Hamburg, cele două formații s-au întrecut în ratări pe întreg parcursul meciului Ajunsă din nou la lovituri de departajare, norocul nu a mai fost de partea Portugaliei. Pe rând, Dembele, Cristiano Ronaldo, Fofana, Bernardo Silva, Kounde, Bradley Barcola și Nuno Mendes au transformat, în vreme ce Joao Felix și a ratat execuția din 11 metri, penalty-ul câștigător fiind transformat de Theo Hernandez.Franța nu a marcat niciun gol din acțiune până acumPortugalia părăsește așadar competiția, după ce nu a mai reușit să mai marcheze din al doilea meci din grupă, 3-0 cu Turcia. A urmat meciul cu cântec cu Georgia (0-2) și optimea cu Slovenia (0-0), în care portarul Diogo Costa a parat toate cele 3 lovituri executate de foștii iugoslavi și 0-0 acum, cu Franța.Aflat la al 6-lea turneu final european din carieră – record absolut – Cristiano Ronaldo nu s-a lipit la gol în niciun meci de la Euro 2024, lucru care nu s-a mai întâmplat în cele 5 ediții precedente, în care punctase de 14 ori. Lusitanul, primul jucător din istorie care ajung la 30 de meciuri jucate la Campionatele Europene, și-a dorit atât de mult să marcheze, încât nu a reușit absolut nimic la acest turneu final.Franța – Spania în semifinaleDe partea cealaltă, Franța a ajuns în semifinale într-un mod uluitor, fără să marcheze vreun gol din acțiune. Cu Austria și cu Belgia, Les Bleus au câștigat cu 1-0, în urma câte unui autogol, cu Olanda au remizat alb, iar cu Polonia au egalat la 1 în urma unui penalty. Acum, au trecut de lusitani după 0-0 la finalul a 120 de minute.Franța, care a jucat ultima repriză adițională fără starul Kylian Mbappe, accidentat, urmează să întâlnească Spania în prima semifinală de la Euro, pe 9 iulie, la Munchen (ora 22.00).Portugalia – Franța (Hamburg) 0-0 (3-5 la lovituri de departajare)

President Trump’s recent actions to restrict visitors from specific countries have raised concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest between his business dealings and his presidential duties. The executive order, titled “Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States,” targets seven nations: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, where Trump has no business interests.Interestingly, NPR’s Greg Myre highlights the fact that no Muslim extremists from these countries have carried out fatal attacks in the U.S. for over two decades. In contrast, the terrorists involved in the September 11 attacks hailed from countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates – all unaffected by Trump’s immigration restrictions but where he does have business ties.Trump’s extensive commercial ventures in countries like Turkey, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, and Dubai, as well as the formation of companies in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, have drawn criticism. Critics argue that by overlooking the terrorist links in countries like Saudi Arabia and Turkey, Trump may be playing favorites based on his personal interests.Norman Eisen, a former ethics adviser to President Obama, has raised legal and constitutional concerns regarding Trump’s actions. He points out potential violations of the emoluments clause in the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits officials from accepting gifts from foreign entities. Eisen suggests that Trump’s decisions may lead to legal challenges, especially from American citizens separated from their families due to the immigration restrictions.The Institute for Policy Studies has strongly criticized Trump, accusing him of shaping U.S. foreign policy to benefit his personal business interests. Despite the glaring connections between countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia to terrorism, they were notably absent from Trump’s list of restricted nations, leading to questions about conflicts of interest rather than mere coincidence.