February 25, 2025

Disney and the Fight for Our Children They are teaching your child his LGBTs. We must protect them if they are to have a future.


Disney and the Fight for Our Children. 
They are teaching your child his lgbts. We must protect them if they are to have a future.

 

FROM THE JULY 2022

Philadelphia Trumpet

By Joel Hilliker and Andrew Miiller

Disney is 99 years old. It has carefully curated a reputation as the main seller of family entertainment to American parents and children.

This megaconglomerate owns abcespn, Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm, Fox Entertainment, National Geographic, Touchstone Pictures and dozens of other companies. It is worth $67 billion to its shareholders for the core reason that it can reliably use music and images to attract and influence children and their parents.

Disney is the mainstream of American entertainment. It has shaped generations’ ideas and feelings about childhood, fatherhood, motherhood, family, romance, fear, rebellion, deceit, magic, politics, race, killing and more. Disney has been teaching you—and it wants to teach your children much more.

Most of us don’t realize how much we have already absorbed what you could call “Disney attitudes” about love, romance and even sex. And our children will not realize what they have absorbed as their minds were fed and educated by their entertainment. It will all just seem normal and right.

Executives at Disney are well aware of this. They and their cohorts at other media corporations are exercising this power to contribute to a single trend that can, all by itself, destroy our society.

Here is how.

Behind the Scenes

Disney is “adding queerness” to children’s programming wherever it can, as one executive producer in the company put it. The producer said she was delighted by how welcoming other Disney leaders were as she implemented her “not-at-all-secret gay agenda.”

That producer is currently working on an animated show about a family. This show is scheduled to include at least 17 celebrity sexual deviants voicing characters, including two homosexuals of different races who have adopted a 14-year-old activist daughter.

Her comments came from a conference call that included a Disney corporate president who described herself as the mother of “one transgender child and one pansexual child.” This woman celebrated the fact that Disney has “many, many, many lgbtqia characters in our stories,” but then fretted, “yet we don’t have enough leads.” She then tearfully pushed for half of Disney characters to be either sexually deviant or racial minorities.

What was the purpose of the conference call? To organize Disney executives into a political push: Make it legal for teachers to give lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and other sex instruction in the classroom—to third graders, second graders, first graders and kindergartners.

Disney’s chief executive officer sent a memo to the company’s tens of thousands of employees, stating, “I believe the best way for our company to bring about lasting change is through the inspiring content we produce, the welcoming culture we create, and the diverse community organizations we support.”

Disney’s sexual perversion is coming out into the open. But this campaign to lower children’s inhibitions toward romance, sexuality, and ultimately toward sex acts, homosexuality, cross-dressing, genital mutilation, pedophilia and more didn’t start just this year. It started subtly, decades ago—when many of us were children.

For years, children have been absorbing attitudes about love, romance and sexuality that were invented, enhanced and distributed by corporate executives in Southern California. There is a reason why the tens of thousands of “family friendly” movies and television series released in your lifetime nearly always feature children—and no involved, admirable father. There is a reason why they nearly always portray romance and “obligatory sex scenes” featuring increasingly young actors.

But these “family friendly” corporations didn’t stop there.

Out of the Closet

Even in the 1980s and 1990s, Disney employed many openly homosexual animators, composers, lyricists, casting managers, producers and other staff members at all levels, and contracted homosexual actors and voice actors. Some of these people produced characters with effeminate and other homosexual and bisexual traits, often as villains or comedic characters, and always subtle, understated and coded.

You can see a steady blurring of the lines just as you progress through the catalog of Disney content from The Little Mermaid in 1989 to The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Mulan, w.i.t.c.h., Gravity Falls, Star vs. the Forces of Evil, Doc McStuffins, Marvel Rising, Star Wars Resistance, Onward, Good Luck Charlie, Duck Tales, Out, Finding Dory, Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, The Avengers, The Owl House, The Proud Family, Luca, High School Musical, Frozen, The Ghost and Molly McGee, Amphibia, Andi Mack, Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker, Cruella, Eternals, Rise Up Sing Out, Jungle Cruise, Lightyear … to be continued.

Disney purchased abc in 1995. At that time, abc already had a history of pro-homosexual programming. Then ceo Michael Eisner had already agreed to extend health insurance benefits to the partners of homosexual Disney employees. The homosexual messaging from abc began seeping into Disney’s television and theatrical productions.

Eisner stated in 1998 that about 40 percent of Disney employees were queer. That’s according to a former executive director of the Human Rights Campaign, an activist group that lobbies for homosexual and other deviant practices to become legal, accepted, celebrated—and introduced to children.

Disney is famous for its unique, memorable characters, but there is a reason why some of its characters appear and act the way they do. For example, homosexual lyricist Howard Ashman convinced animators to pattern the Ursula villain from The Little Mermaid after a cross-dressing performer called Divine. Homosexual artist Andreas Deja drew comedic sidekick LeFou from Beauty and the Beast, villain Jafar from Aladdin, and villain Scar from The Lion King with effeminate characteristics, without making them overtly homosexual. This animation strategy is called “queer coding,” and it is used to desensitize the viewer to homosexuality and transgenderism.

The strategy these lyricists and animators used was spelled out clearly in a November 1987 article in Guide, a homosexual magazine, titled “The Overhauling of Straight America,” published two years before The Little Mermaid hit theaters.

“The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights,” wrote Marshall K. Kirk and Hunter Madsen. “To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion. Ideally, we would have straights register differences in sexual preference the way they register different tastes for ice cream or sports games: She likes strawberry, and I like vanilla; he follows baseball, and I follow football. No big deal.

“At least in the beginning, we are seeking public desensitization and nothing more. We do not need and cannot expect a full ‘appreciation’ or ‘understanding’ of homosexuality from the average American. You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won. And to get to that shoulder-shrug stage, gays as a class must cease to appear mysterious, alien, loathsome and contrary. A large-scale media campaign will be required in order to change the image of gays in America.”

Anyone who has ever hummed along to Howard Ashman’s song “Poor, Unfortunate Souls” while laughing at a sea-witch dressed up like a drag queen has already started to view homosexuality as “just another thing.” And that is just what animators wanted when they started drawing “queer coded” villains during the 1990s Disney renaissance.

But the era of the campy drag queens and effeminate sorcerers was just part of a decades-long media campaign. Now Disney has introduced an openly homosexual couple to its new telling of DuckTales. Having made homosexuality “just another thing,” sexual deviants are now pushing to “persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing.”

Some conservatives who laughed at “queer coded” villains are now outraged at openly homosexual couples like the one in this summer’s film Lightyear, a spin-off of Toy Story.

But companies like Disney are not backing down. The controversy over its support for teaching elementary kids homosexuality is not the start of the war. It has been waging a cover war since the ’80s. Now it’s just more overt and savage.

Tipping Point

Disney is not only “adding queerness” to its programing more aggressively, it is also using its immense wealth and political influence off-screen.

The state of Florida, where the Walt Disney World Resort and a number of other Disney interests are located, has passed the Parental Rights in Education Act. This forbids teachers from instructing children about sex and “gender identity” prior to fourth grade. Disney worked to defeat the bill before it was passed and, afterward, condemned the law, called for it to be repealed, and vowed to do what it could to make sure children in the third grade and younger will be exposed to homosexuality, transgenderism and more.

“Florida’s HB 1557, also known as the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill, should never have passed and should never have been signed into law,” Disney said in an official March 28 statement. “Our goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts, and we remain committed to supporting the national and state organizations working to achieve that. We are dedicated to standing up for the rights and safety of lgbtq+ members of the Disney family, as well as the lgbtq+ community in Florida and across the country.”

Disney executives then organized the “Reimagine Tomorrow Conversation Series,” where the company’s homosexual and transsexual employees suggested ways Disney could push a woke agenda. This is where the featured presenter, executive producer Latoya Raveneau, told her audience that her team was implementing a “not-at-all-secret gay agenda” by regularly “adding queerness” to Disney programming. It was corporate president Karey Burke who pledged to make at least 50 percent of Disney on-screen characters sexual deviants or racial minorities by the end of the year.

That’s right: The company that distributed Davy Crockett, Old Yeller, Pollyanna and films you or maybe your parents grew up on now wants your children to grow up on favorable depictions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and queers illustrated in vivid colors with happy music playing in the background. These won’t be the campy villains of the Howard Ashman era. They will be designed as role models.

Disney no longer just wants people to view homosexuality as “just another thing.” They want to convert your children to their way of life.

1997 was a typical year for Disney: It released 18 feature films that year, including Hercules, drawn by openly homosexual animator Andreas Deja in a way that was reportedly influenced by his homosexuality. According to one Gallup poll, 21 percent of American adults born after that year now identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender—compared to only 5.6 percent of American adults overall. Despite the now-fading claims that sexual perversions are genetic, the evidence shows that homosexuality and transgenderism are more common among those raised on Disney’s “not-at-all-secret gay agenda.” Disney wants to teach children about queerness before they hit puberty—because sexual indoctrination at this age gets results.

Normalizing Pedophilia

Conservative media outlets have compared Disney’s behavior to “child grooming.” This is a grossly insufficient term for a despicable practice: when an adult builds trust and an emotional connection with a child for the purpose of then manipulating, exploiting, abusing and finally raping him or her.

Influencing, desensitizing, grooming, programming, removing the inhibitions of, and destroying the purity and innocence of children is a horrendous crime. Nothing about it is for children’s benefit—it is all for the sick satisfaction of the adults doing it. The Parental Rights in Education Act is a sincere attempt to protect elementary school students from such abuse. But truthfully, a law stating that teachers cannot sexually indoctrinate preteens is hardly a landmark victory for conservatives.

Still—in today’s America, even trying to protect children 8 years old and under from grooming in the classroom is contested, opposed and savagely attacked.

Children and teenagers need to be protected from this type of propaganda throughout elementary school, middle school, high school and college if they are to establish successful, happy families of their own.

Just as homosexuality and transgenderism have been mainstreamed and normalized, so now is pedophilia. Some “experts” insist attraction to children is genetic and immutable. There are apologists arguing that sexual relationships between adults and children can be healthy. To avoid stigma, terms like “adult-child relationships” and “minor attracted persons” are coming into use.

What these people are trying to legitimize is child molestation and rape.

Children who are thus victimized suffer consequences for life. Many are never able to build healthy relationships with the opposite sex.

Lax attitudes toward this evil result in criminal abuse and even literal sexual enslavement. It will lead to a world of broken families, drug addiction, violence, coldness, guilt, shame, confusion. It will produce broken children who grow up to perpetrate similar evils on the next generation of children.

Powerful entertainment executives are trying to make it easier and easier for child perversion and rape to become more familiar and easy. Pedophiles are choosing to create a demand for child pornography. They are choosing to indulge monstrous urges that destroy minds and shatter lives, including their own.

If this is not evil, nothing is evil! It is a deadly mistake to sympathize with or to try to understand it, let alone to tolerate it or encourage it. It must be stopped.

This Is Big

Many people consider morality a side issue, nowhere as important as the economy or national security or education. They think that how sex is used, even how it is introduced to children, is a squabble worth perhaps a few minutes of attention on the news before moving on to other things.

They are dead wrong.

If you think that the massive, coordinated, monstrous evil of sexually destroying children currently being perpetrated is just a weird quirk of current events or an unavoidable tragedy or a lamentable misfortune or all of the above, you need to be freed of such anemic thinking.

This single issue can destroy our society. In fact, it has almost finished destroying it.

Commentator Glenn Beck released a program called “Project Groomer” that includes a clip from Yuval Noah Harari, an Israeli intellectual and futurist who has spoken several times at the influential World Economic Forum conference in Davos, Switzerland, where globalists work together to reshape the world to their vision. He predicted that, as humanity reengineers bodies, brains and minds, there will be no gender in 50 years.

If elites at Disney and elsewhere have their way, he is exactly right. We are raising a generation of children who will actually not understand male, female, husband, wife, marriage or family. They will have no idea about right use of sex, about virtue, chastity or commitment. They will have no sense of morality, responsibility, duty or purpose. They will have no idea how to relate to others or how to rightly live!

Nothing could be more pleasing to the devil, who hates children, hates family, and hates mankind.

The Apostle Paul cautions us not be ignorant of Satan’s devices lest he get an advantage over us (2 Corinthians 2:11). The Apostle Peter warned, “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” (1 Peter 5:8). Lions advance toward their prey carefully by hiding in the grass—until it is too late. That is why Peter has to warn us to be vigilant. You have to see the lion while it is still hiding in the grass to have any chance of escaping.

It is easy for Christians and conservatives to look at the filth in society today and think they are doing just fine by comparison. Polls shows 70 percent of Americans say they are less likely to support Disney for embracing an lgbtq+ agenda.

Satan is fine with that. He can retreat a step or two, return to the grass and lay low for a while, and make conservatives feel they have won a great victory.

But look at the big picture. This world is rapidly embracing this perversion. Society has changed utterly just in the last decade or so—not even one lifetime.

People simply do not understand the true nature of evil. They think we can coexist with it. That is exactly why society is being overwhelmed by evil. That is why, when Florida’s governor made it illegal to teach perverted sex to 3-, 4- and 5-year-olds, he was branded an extremist, and other states boycotted Florida. That is why America’s assistant secretary for health is a transgender and was made a four-star admiral in the U.S. Navy. That is why the numbers of people identifying as lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender is skyrocketing. And that is why the media celebrate this trend as a heartwarming success.

Conservatives, meanwhile, are steadily retreating. A decade ago, the culture war was over homosexual “marriage.” Now most conservatives have accepted such “marriage” as the law of the land so they can focus on battling transgenderism. Next they will surrender that to focus on “adult-child relationships.”

Society is changing so fast it is nearly impossible to maintain the appropriate level of godly indignation and anger over the depravity. That takes real effort, and that becomes more difficult to sustain over time.

We tend to get tired of fighting, but Satan never does.

And the way the radical left fights these battles shows you how the devil thinks. You don’t agree with transgenderism? Too bad—they will teach it to your kindergartner and not even tell you! Push back, and they will insult you, shout at you, bully you online, threaten you.

Satan forces people to obey his will.

And he is pushing this toxic brew of iniquity because he wants to destroy human beings.

This is why God tells us to hate evil as He does (e.g. Psalm 97:10; Proverb 8:13).

Parents, take seriously your God-given responsibility to be your child’s educator. Know what he or she is being taught in school and what he or she is watching and reading. Take every step necessary to defend them. Train him in the way you know he should go (Proverbs 22:6). Your child is worth fighting for!




source:

https://www.thetrumpet.com/25679-disney-and-the-fight-for-our-children.







BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

You can find us on Twitter



Germans Voted for Change, Got Paralysis


Friedrich Merz (right), leader of Germany’s conservative Christian Democratic Union, reacts after the first exit polls in the German general elections were announced on February 23.

Germans Voted for Change, Got Paralysis

 By Richard Palmer • February 24, 2025


Germans gave a clear message in their election yesterday: We want change. With 84 percent turnout, the highest since the end of the Cold War, they clearly felt strongly about it.

But the elections won’t give them change. The Christian Democratic Union (cdu), led by Friedrich Merz, won the election with 28.5 percent of the vote. But it has one coalition option, which gives no room for decisive leadership.

“Friedrich Merz won it, but it will become a nightmare for him [to] govern,” wrote EuroIntelligence.

Merz may be able to further the nation’s break from America—but his election won’t bring the stability Germany craves.

Coalition Math

Ahead of the vote, only 17 percent of Germans said they were satisfied with the outgoing coalition government. The Social Democrats (spd), who used to lead the ruling coalition, received their worst results since the 19th century, winning just 16.4 percent of the vote. The Free Democrats, one of their coalition partners, did so badly they won’t be in this next parliament at all. Parties must win a minimum of 5 percent of the vote to get seats.

It’s not just people demanding change. Germany’s economy has shrunk for two years in a row. Industrial production is down 15 percent compared to pre-covid levels. Germany’s largest companies in Fortune 500 Europe announced over 60,000 job cuts.

Yet despite the vote for something new, the elections seem to give Germany more of the same.

There is only one viable coalition: a “grand” left-right coalition between the cdu and the spd.

Germany rejected the spd by the largest margin in well over 100 years—yet thanks to coalition math, it comes straight back into government.

This is the equivalent of a coalition between Republicans and Democrats in the United States. How much decisive change can they agree on? Even then, they have a majority of just 13 in a 630-seat house. A handful of rebels can destabilize anything the government wants to do.

Major change requires a two-thirds majority. Even if all the mainstream parties band together, they cannot achieve that.

A coalition with the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)—who came in second place, doubling their vote from last time—would at least offer decisive change. But some AfD leaders glorify Nazis, and the cdu ruled out working with them.

A left-right coalition has another threat. A new far-left party, the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (bsw) won 4.97 percent of the vote. If it can find just 0.03 percent more, it can enter parliament. That redistribution of seats would make a cdu-sdp coalition impossible.

The bsw is looking at challenging the election in the courts. Over the next few months, a court could rule an election rerun, and the coalition could fall.

Even with only one real coalition option, it could still be months before Germany has a government. Merz’s ambitious time scale is to have a government in place by Easter in seven weeks. That’s if all goes smoothly.

“The process will take weeks—probably months—leaving a vacuum in Europe’s most important country during a continent-wide crisis,” wrote journalist Andrew Neil.

“The Germans voted for change because they wanted to reverse the country’s economic decline, get a grip on its borders after too much uncontrolled immigration, rearm to deal with a revanchist Russia to its east and end the green energy obsession, which has resulted in soaring household fuel bills and decimated its once world-famous heavy industry,” wrote Neil. “Merz, who at 69 has never held ministerial office, is unlikely to be in a position to implement the radical reforms required to do any of that. Nor has he ever shown much interest in the [European Union], so that’s unlikely to get the leadership needed either.”

‘Independence From the U.S.A.’

With such an unstable coalition, Merz may only make progress on his highest priorities. He outlined this in his victory speech: “My absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the U.S.A.”

That’s a stunning statement for a German leader to make.

On Friday, just ahead of the vote, Merz raised the subject of Germany borrowing nuclear bombs from France and Britain. “We need to have discussions with both the British and the French—the two European nuclear powers—about whether nuclear sharing, or at least nuclear security from the [United Kingdom] and France, could also apply to us,” he said.

Politico noted that this “would be a huge shift in position” and “a major strategic shift for Germany.”

Both of these are themes that French President Emmanuel Macron has brought up repeatedly. “A clear trend is taking place: President Macron demands what Germany wants,” wrote Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry in 2020, after one such outburst. “I don’t believe Macron would ever say what he said unless Germany approved of it. He acts as a sort of puppet to Germany!”

“Imagine if a German chancellor gave a speech like Mr. Macron did, demanding that all Europe support Brussels’ dictates,” he wrote. “Germany wouldn’t dare make such a proposal right now! But it is definitely in Germany’s interest—and Macron is the one pushing for it!”

When France talked about a European nuclear umbrella last year, Mr. Flurry wrote: “As is often the case, the French president is saying things that Germany dares not say.”

Now Germany dares.

German politics are unstable and indecisive, but Merz already seems set to be a different leader than outgoing chancellor Olaf Scholz. He wants to radically transform Germany’s military, break with America, and push Europe to be a strong, united military power. How much of that he can do with his divided coalition remains to be seen, but he’s clearly in favor of a bold military transformation.

“Germany doesn’t want to give up America’s nuclear bombs,” wrote Mr. Flurry. “But Macron’s support for Europeanizing France’s bombs gives Germany more negotiating power with America. Germany can in effect say, We don’t need your nuclear bombs; we can have France’s or develop our own bombs with French support.

“This means the U.S. has lost power over Germany’s security. What then is left for America to do other than try to uphold good relations with Germany on the latter’s terms?” This is the thinking behind Merz’s statements.

Coalition Chaos

Herbert W. Armstrong warned for years of the rise of a strong leader and a revival of the Nazi spirit in Germany.

In 1945, he forecast the rise of a new European military superpower, which would start as “a European Union.” European nations are becoming “distrustful of America and thinking more and more about uniting themselves into a united states of Europe,” he wrote in March 1950. To do that though, they needed a “new supreme leader—the successor of Adolf Hitler—to rise up and assert himself and take command.”

In the Good News magazine in May 1953, Mr. Armstrong wrote, “[I]t is probable that none but a German can provide the dynamic, inspired leadership required to organize such a political military federation.”

Even in the final year of his life in 1985, he was writing, “There is yet another leader to arise in Europe!”

Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry continued that same warning the first year the magazine was established—and every year since.

“If a real crisis develops, will the Germans call for a new führer?” he asked in the December 1991 issue. “Your Bible says that is going to happen!”

The Nazi spirit that these men warned of is here. The far-right AfD came in second place with “only” 20 percent of the vote. “We have the right to be proud of the achievements of the German soldiers in two world wars,” one of its leaders has said. Another called German attempts to commemorate and apologize for World War ii a “stupid coping policy.”

Among men ages 18 to 24, the AfD was the most popular political party, with 27 percent of the vote. For young women, Die Linke, successor to the East German Communist party, took the first spot, with 35 percent.

Clearly Germany’s youth are deeply unhappy with Germany’s direction—and they are willing to consider communism or Nazism as a way out.

“In the buildup, many Germans spoke of a Schicksalswahl—an election of fate,” wrote historian Katja Hoyer. “They weren’t exaggerating. The future of German politics seems balanced on a knife edge.”

This unstable coalition, coupled with a radical desire for change from voters, matches exactly the conditions Mr. Flurry warned would precede the rise of a strong leader.

“How this man is prophesied to come to power is utterly fascinating and frightening,” he wrote in 2002.

He continued:

He will appear on the scene in the “last end” (Daniel 8:19). Notice how he comes to power: “And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries” (Daniel 11:21). Let’s not forget, this is a prophecy for the time we are living in right now.

This man doesn’t come to power the honorable way—by being voted into office. He takes it dishonorably! He will work behind the scenes and come to power by flatteries—not votes!

He warned that “some leader is going to hijack the European Union! The person who leads Germany will also lead Europe.”

“Hitler also did some behind-the-scenes manipulating to come to power,” he wrote. “That method has worked well in German history.”

Mr. Flurry soon focused on the potential for German coalition maneuvering for that strongman to come in “dishonorably” and without votes.

In a 2009 Key of David program, he said this leader could “perhaps take advantage of a weak coalition.” In 2013, he warned: “They’re not going to give him the office; he’s going to come in and win it by flatteries. Some kind of a political coalition is established, and he comes out as the winner.” In 2015, he said, “I think this strong leader will come in probably through a coalition government of some kind because it says he comes in by flatteries and not by votes.”

This has been a consistent forecast. Germany has been stuck with weak coalitions for years. It is desperate for something new. As crises intensify, how desperate will it grow for a strong leader? U.S. Vice President JD Vance warned recently that German democracy is at risk of dying. He’s right.

In 2019, Mr. Flurry warned: “Current conditions in Europe, including the refugee crisis and the turmoil in German politics, provide probably one of the greatest opportunities ever for a new leader to come into power ‘by flatteries.’ … Expect political and social crises in Germany and Europe, and public resentment and anger, to grow even deeper. Then watch for a strongman to take advantage and make his way to power through flatteries!”

These elections aren’t the end of Germany’s leadership crisis. Instead they are yet more evidence that democracy can’t bring Germany the leadership it needs. Watch for them to lead to the rise of this strong German leader. To learn more about why, and even who this leader may be, read Mr. Flurry’s article “After Trump’s Victory, Watch Germany.”



source:

https://www.thetrumpet.com/31053-germans-voted-for-change-got-paralysis.


Germans Voted for Change, Got Paralysis







BECAUSE WE LIKE THE TRUTH

You can find us on Twitter


POPULAR POSTS OF ALL TIME

Blog Archive

Το εύδαιμον το ελεύθερον, το δ’ ελεύθερον το εύψυχον. – Ευτυχισμένοι είναι οι ελεύθεροι και ελεύθεροι είναι οι γενναίοι. // // Happy are the free and free are the brave.