Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
Promote
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
4/27/2015 6:03:01 PM

‘US National Guard’s drills in public aimed at dealing with domestic ‘dissidents’’

Published time: April 24, 2015 16:22

Rick Scott of security contractor Camber Corp impersonates a hostile shooter during a training exercise at Quantico Middle High School in Quantico, Virginia (Reuters / James Lawler Duggan)

US Army field manuals admit that public drills are aimed at dealing with political dissidents that need to be “reeducated to gain a new appreciation of US policies,” Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars Editor at Large told RT’s In the Now.


RT:
The police in the US are accused more than ever now of militarization. A video has appeared online showing armed national guardsmen conducting exercises near a children's playground in Virginia. We contacted the infantry brigade - here's what they told us: coordination was made with the Staunton Police Department, these are freshers who are training on basic military subjects like drill and ceremonies, basic first aid, military courtesies and the guns they carry are replicas. What is wrong with it?

Paul Joseph Watson: What is wrong with that is the fact that they are doing it not on base but in public. And we have to put this in the context of a spate of videoswhich have emerged in the recent weeks with not only National Guard but US Army troops in some cases working with police conducting these public drills which in some cases, not in this case but others, are based around crowd control and civil unrest. And the line they always give us that it’s designed for overseas combat, foreign operations. But if you then read the US Army’s actual manuals that they release, it’s clear that it’s for dual purpose, it’s for “dissidents” on US soil. So the media regurgitate this claim that all these drills are just foreign operations. Yet they are doing it in public, in plain sight, while privately in their own field manuals admitting that it’s to take on “dissidents within the continental US.” That’s why people are concerned about it and a lot of our audience is National Guard or former or current US military. They are concerned about these public drills. They didn’t enlist to police the US people which is a lot of this seems to be geared towards.


RT: Why are we seeing such a rise in the methods riot police are using? How do you secure any kind of security in this state without these kinds of institutions to keep the peace so to say?

PJW: Keeping the peace is one thing, but when they identify, for example CNN reported a few days ago… demonstrators in Ferguson, Missouri are called “enemy forces”. No matter what you think about the motive behind those demonstrations - that’s of concern. When they identify people in New Hampshire, occupy activists, libertarians, ‘free staters’ as domestic threats and that’s why they are buying the armored vehicles and that’s why people are concerned. The police chief in New Hampshire said “We need to buy these armored vehicles to deal with domestic political activists,” not with genuine security threats, but with protestors and demonstrators. So that’s why this has caused such concern.


National Guard troops stand at a staging area located at a shopping center parking lot in Ferguson, Missouri (Reuters/Adrees Latif)

RT: But in Ferguson, Missouri we saw not just rioting, but looting and setting buildings on fire. How can it be dealt with without the National Guard involved?

PJW: I’m not against the National Guard providing security but you have to read their own manuals. For example Civil Disturbance Operations - this is US Army manual - which states that they will take on and “reeducate dissidents on US soil domestically,” as part of their wider training agenda for these civil disturbance operations. So this is not about dealing with violent threats, in their own manuals they say its political dissidents that need “to be reeducated to gain a new appreciation of US policies.” So this is clearly politically geared towards dealing with protestors both on the left and on the right, occupy activists as well as tea parties. And they admit that in their own manuals. So again this is not about just dealing with violent protest - nobody would be against that. It’s about political targeting of demonstrators.

RT: Why are we seeing such a rise in targeting of the so-called dissent in the United States? Is it the fear that the protests will worsen somehow?

PJW: That’s definitely the fear, that’s why they are buying all these bullets, as well as buying riot gear. The economist Robert Johnson at the Davos economic forum back in January said that the elite buying these secret hideaways in these remote places like New Zealand because they are expecting more events like Ferguson, Missouri because of the lack of faith in the political system, the lack of credence in the political system and wealth inequality. So they expect civil unrest in the US. That doesn’t mean they are about to impose martial law it just means they are preparing for it because of these factors- wealth inequality and a complete collapse in a faith in the political system - being prime amongst them.

RT: How much of accountability is there with these forces?

PJW: The positive thing about this is they handed it out surveys to US troops National Guard in the past stretching back ten years or more where they asked them “in an event of a national emergency will you fire on US citizens, in the event of mass confiscation program will you fire on US citizens?” And the vast majority of the US Army and National Guard have always said “no.” So that gives us hope if they are commanded to follow these orders they will refuse to do so. And again a lot of these videos are forwarded to us by our own listeners who are ex-military and even current military. So it shows that they don’t support in many cases what they are being ordered to do in terms of this potential domestic repression.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


(RT)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
4/27/2015 6:15:22 PM

Mass Death of Seabirds in Western U.S. Is 'Unprecedented'

Why are so many auklets, from California to Canada, starving?

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
4/28/2015 12:09:54 AM



YES, WE VATICAN

Pope Francis forces the issue on climate change


High-profile climate researchers, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and church officials will gather at the Vatican next week for a conference on climate change. It’s Pope Francis’s latest effort to raise the profile of the issue among churchgoers, and it’s sure to make some Catholics hot under the collar.

Since taking the helm of the church in 2013, Pope Francis has stated repeatedly that Christians have a moral obligation to lower carbon emissions. He has spoken frankly about how global warming hits poor, marginalized communities hardest. And he’s announced his intentions to issue, as early as June, a teaching document known as an encyclical which is set to merge the science and theology of climate change. He’s done these things in spite of angry rhetoric from conservative-leaning Catholics.

All this to say, dude has some guts. But are the pope’s actions doing more than just stirring up controversy in the church?

Here’s the thing. Leaders in the Catholic Church have spoken out about climate change before. In fact, previous popes and Catholic theologians have been talking about “honoring creation” (secular translation: not trashing the world) for centuries. Literally.

The best-known Catholic eco-crusader was the patron saint of animals and ecology and the father of barefoot bird-callers everywhere: Saint Francis of Assisi, famous for his work in the early 1200s. St. Francis was a bit of a radical, publicly protesting consumerism (in the buff, no less), campaigning for social justice, and writing extensively on caring for the environment. (The current pope, whose real name is Jorge Mario Bergoglio, takes his name from St. Francis.)

Jumping up to more recent times, Pope Benedict XVI, who held the office from 2005 to 2013, often spoke about the importance of making better use of natural resources, and how the deterioration of nature is connected with human culture.He never held a nude protest, but, hey, the guy still deserves a little credit for keeping the conversation going.

People on the lower rungs of the church hierarchy are speaking out about it, too. Sister Linda Haydock, the executive director of the Seattle-based Intercommunity Peace & Justice Center, has been trying to stir up interest in climate change in faith communities for years. Her organization’s mission is to address justice issues in the world and in the church. Among other things, it produces booklets that lay tough climate messages next to traditional, Catholic prayers.

A prayer from the IPJC booklet, "Climate Change: Our Call to Conversion."
A prayer from the IPJC booklet, “Climate Change: Our Call to Conversion.”
Climate Change: Our Call to Conversion

I spoke with Haydock about changes she’s noticed in how people are responding to climate action. “We haven’t had leadership like this before, even in a local or regional way, on why we need to understand the issue of the environment, and climate chance in particular,” she said. “It’s all coming together. People are more ready to hear some of the messages on the environment than they were before.”

William Skylstad, the Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Spokane, Wash., agrees. “We’ve never seen such a change in caring about the climate than we have recently,” he told me. “More and more religious people are really concerned about how we impact our environment and how we are careful about our environment.”

Last year, Skylstad worked with a group of religious and indigenous leaders tomodernize the Columbia River Treaty, which was originally signed in 1964 by the U.S. and Canada as an agreement to share the land for potential development and operation of dams. The call to “modernization” was really a call for restoration of the river, taking into consideration the indigenous tribes that live along the river, whose land has been damages by the dams.

The greening of the church has generated a backlash from some Catholics, of course. Some conservative Catholics say they’re miffed because: Francis is a mixing politics with religion, is a tree-hugging radical, and is probably ruining the economy, too. Or something. Here’s a taste of that viewpoint from Steve Moore, chief economist of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, via our friends at Fox News:

Pope Francis — and I say this as a Catholic — is a complete disaster when it comes to his public policy pronouncement. On the economy, and even more so on the environment, the pope has allied himself with the far left and has embraced an ideology that would make people poorer and less free.

But are these kind of complaints shutting down the pope? Uh, no. As loud as the far-right religious have been about their disapproval of the current climate-centric papacy, they’re in the minority. A Reuters poll found that Pope Francis’ call to see climate change as a moral obligation is actually leading more Christians to take action against climate change. Two-thirds of the respondents said that they believe world leaders are morally obligated to take action to reduce carbon emissions, and 72 percent said they were “personally morally obligated” to do what they can in their daily lives to reduce emissions.

Besides, Skylstad told me, disagreement between the religious is beside the point. As the pope focuses in on climate change, more of the world’s religious community is, too — and awareness is increasing because of it.

“I think you’re always going to find people who will disagree with certain elements,” Skylstad said. “For us, it’s an opportunity to educate and inform. Even if people might disagree, we’re looking at this like a long-form piece of education. You don’t put people in corners, you provide an opportunity for people to see things more accurately.”

So Pope Francis and countless others keep working for climate action, despite it being a controversial subject. The deniers can yell all they want. The pope and the global Catholic church, it seems, is refusing to give a damn.

Skylstad, an environment-reformer himself, put it best: “Talking about climate change makes some people nervous,” Skylstad said. “But that doesn’t mean we stop or don’t say anything about it.”

Preach.

(GRIST)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+0
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
4/28/2015 2:00:05 AM

Head of Iran's Guard lashes out over Saudi 'treachery'

Associated Press

Iran's Revolutionary guards commander Mohammad Ali Jafari speaks during a conference to mark the martyrs of terrorism in Tehran September 6, 2011. (REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl)


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard on Monday accused Saudi Arabia of treachery against the Islamic world and compared the kingdom to Israel, the official IRNA news agency reported.

"Today, the treacherous Saudis are following in Israel's footsteps," Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari was quoted as saying.

"Saudi Arabia is shamelessly and disgracefully bombing and mass killing a nation that is fighting against the arrogant system," or world powers, he said. He was apparently referring to Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition has been waging a monthlong air campaign against Iran-supported rebels, known as Houthis.

Iran has provided the Houthis with political and humanitarian support but denies arming them. The Houthis seized the capital, Sanaa, last year, and Yemen's internationally recognized president has fled the country.

Iranian leaders have repeatedly criticized the airstrikes and said the Saudi-led campaign is doomed to fail. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei went so far as to call the airstrikes in Yemen "genocide."

Jafari said the Saudi monarchy is facing collapse and called on his government to adopt a tougher stance toward Riyadh.

Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran are longtime regional rivals. They back opposite sides in Syria's civil war and are fiercely divided on a host of regional issues.

The head of Iran's navy said warships would remain in international waters near Yemen as part of a 90-day assignment through July 10. Adm. Habibollah Sayyari told state TV they will then be replaced by another fleet.

Iran dispatched the destroyer Alborz and logistics ship Bushehr to the waters off Yemen last month. It says the ships are patrolling the strategic Bab al-Mandab strait on an anti-piracy mission.

Last week the Pentagon said a nine-ship Iranian convoy heading for Yemen had reversed course.

The turning point appeared to be the U.S. Navy's announcement last Monday that the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt had departed its usual position in the Persian Gulf and was to join other U.S. forces conducting maritime security operations in the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Aden off Yemen's coast.

Iranian officials have never acknowledged sending a convoy.

Related video:

War in Yemen

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
4/28/2015 2:09:06 AM

Novelists boycott NY gala in Charlie Hebdo protest

AFP

Peter Carey, a two-times Booker Prize winner, said the freedom of expression award stepped beyond the PEN group's traditional role of protecting freedom of expression against government oppression, the Times reported (AFP Photo/Carl Court)


New York (AFP) - Six prominent novelists are boycotting a New York literary gala next week to protest against French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo being honored with a freedom of expression award.

Australia's Peter Carey, Canada's Michael Ondaatje, British-born Taiye Selasi, and Americans Teju Cole, Rachel Kushner and Francine Prose have withdrawn from the May 5 PEN American Center gala.

They informed PEN over the weekend of their decision not to attend the glittering annual event, which is also a key fund-raiser, a month after the Charlie Hebdo award was first announced.

"They've all been in touch with us to say they didn't feel comfortable attending," PEN executive director Suzanne Nossel said.

Carey, a two-times Booker Prize winner, told The New York Times that the award stepped beyond PEN's traditional role of protecting freedom of expression against government oppression.

"A hideous crime was committed, but was it a freedom-of-speech issue for PEN America to be self-righteous about?" the newspaper quoted him as saying in an email interview.

"All this is complicated by PEN's seeming blindness to the cultural arrogance of the French nation, which does not recognize its moral obligation to a large and disempowered segment of their population."

On January 7, two brothers claiming to avenge the magazine's depiction of the Prophet Mohammed -- offensive to Muslims -- stormed the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris, killing 12 people.

Gerard Biard, Charlie Hebdo's editor in chief, and essayist Jean-Baptiste Thoret, who escaped the attack by arriving late to work, will accept the PEN/Toni and James C. Goodale Freedom of Expression Courage Award on behalf of their colleagues.

- Heated exchange -

The killings sparked debate about freedom of expression and the central role that secularism plays in French public life in contrast to the primacy of religious freedom in the United States.

The Times said Kushner was withdrawing out of discomfort with what she called the magazine's "cultural intolerance" and promotion of "a kind of forced secular view."

"In recent years the magazine has gone specifically for racist and Islamophobic provocations," Nigerian-American novelist Cole wrote in a New Yorker article shortly after the attacks in January.

Nossel said more than 800 writers, publishers, editors and supporters were expected to attend the gala, but that no one else apart from the six had communicated their intention not to come.

"We respect their views," Nossel said. "There's been a lot of heated exchange about this on social media this morning and that can be healthy but from our perspective we're a big tent and there's a lot of room at PEN for differences of opinion."

Nossel said PEN had anticipated "some degree of controversy" when the organization decided to award the prize in late January but was taken aback by the "intensity" of Monday's debate.

"We welcome the dialogue and the debate and we recognize that people need to follow their conscience, but there has been no question in our mind in terms of going forward," she said.

PEN wrote on its website that it did not believe Charlie Hebdo's intent was to "ostracize or insult Muslims, but rather to reject forcefully the efforts of a small minority of radical extremists to place broad categories of speech off limits."

British writer Salman Rushdie, who went into hiding after a 1989 fatwa called for his death over his book "The Satanic Verses," said his old friends, Carey and Ondaatje were "horribly wrong."

"If PEN as a free speech organization can't defend and celebrate people who have been murdered for drawing pictures, then frankly the organization is not worth the name," he told the Times.


Major novelists protest Charlie Hebdo award


Six writers, including Booker winner Peter Carey, withdraw from a gala honoring the magazine.
'Blindness to the cultural arrogance'

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1


facebook
Like us on Facebook!