Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
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?
6/25/2015 5:51:36 PM

Putin vows to further strengthen Russian military

Associated Press

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a meeting of the presidential council on science and education at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, June 24, 2015. (Sergei Karpukhin/Pool Photo via AP)


MOSCOW (AP) — Russia needs a mighty military to fend off threats near its borders, President Vladimir Putin said Thursday, in a stance that reflects soaring tensions with the West over the crisis in Ukraine.

The Russian leader, whose approval ratings reached an all-time high this month despite a bruising recession, said a "powerful army equipped with modern weapons is the guarantor of sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia."

Speaking at Thursday's Kremlin meeting with graduates of Russian military academies, Putin also vowed to continue a sweeping military modernization effort that envisions the purchase of large numbers of new weapons.

Despite the fact that oil-rich Russia is now in a recession, Putin's plan aims to spend 22 trillion rubles (over $400 billion) through 2020 to give the armed forces dozens of navy ships, hundreds of new planes and missiles and thousands of tanks and other weapons.

Putin added that Russia has no aggressive intentions and aims to "settle any disputes exclusively by political means with respect to international law and interests of other nations."

Relations between Russia and the West have sunk to post-Cold War lows after Moscow's 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula and its support for a pro-Russian insurgency in eastern Ukraine.

The United States and the European Union have responded with sanctions that have sharply limited Russia's access to Western capital markets and curtailed the transfer of military and energy technologies.

Russia retaliated by banning the import of agricultural products from the EU, U.S., Australia, Canada and Norway. The Cabinet formally extended the ban by one year after the EU agreed this week to keep its sanctions in place through January.

Coupled with plummeting prices for oil, Western sanctions helped drive the Russian economy into recession, resulting in a drop in incomes for the first time since Putin took the helm in 2000. But despite the economic woes, Putin's popularity has soared.

The president's approval rating reached an all-time high of 89 percent this month, according to a nationwide poll conducted by the Levada Center, a leading independent opinion research firm. The survey, based on interviews with 1,600 people, had a margin of error of no more than 3.4 percentage points.

Many observers attribute the solid support for Putin to blanket positive coverage of his activities by state television stations and other Kremlin-controlled media that have described the Ukrainian crisis as part of Western efforts to weaken Russia.

Levada head Lev Gudkov called the TV propaganda as the main factor behind Putin's popularity.

"This is a very aggressive and false propaganda," he said. "All alternative channels, therefore all alternative points of view, assessments are pushed out of the public sphere."

"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?
6/25/2015 6:46:34 PM



The Pentagon Just Legalized War Crimes and Killing Journalists
BY ON ·


(ANTIMEDIA) Just when it seemed the government’s policy language couldn’t get any more paradoxical, self-justifying, and replete with inconsistencies, the Pentagon issued its “Law of War Manual” earlier this month. The manual is meant to dictate legal conduct for service members from all branches during military operations. Though the enormous tome is drier than stale bread, there are plenty of alarming entries—from designating journalists as potential terrorists to allowing the use of internationally banned weapons—which more than warrant a thorough perusal.

This manual is the first comprehensive change made to Department of Defense’s laws of war policy since 1956 and has been in the making for 25 years. One change in terminology directly targets journalists, stating, “in general, journalists are civilians. However, journalists may be members of the armed forces […] or unprivileged belligerents.” Apparently, reporters have joined the ranks of al-Qaeda in this new “unprivileged belligerent” designation, which replaces the Bush-era term, “unlawful combatants.” What future repercussions this categorization could bring are left to the imagination, even though the cited reasoning—the possibility terrorists might impersonate journalists—seems legitimate. This confounding label led a civilian lawyer to say it was “an odd and provocative thing for them to write.”

On a purely surface level, a manual of laws governing the details of how a country behaves in conflict intimates that certain conduct—including that which would violate human rights—is simply unacceptable. Although this is technically, ostensibly true of the Department of Defense’s 1,180 page, single-spaced de facto user guide, its contents belie the United States’ standing as the most arrogantly bellicose government on the planet.

Use of depleted uranium by U.S. forces during the Iraq War and beyond is well-documented and categorically reprehensible—leaving thousands of Iraqi civilians to suffer the consequences well into the future. “What this has generated is, from 2004 up to this day, we are seeing a rate of congenital malformations in the city of Fallujah that has surpassed even that in the wake of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that nuclear bombs were dropped on at the end of World War II,” admonished Al-Jazeera journalist Dahr Jamail. He wasn’t exaggerating.

A study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found cancer rates due to use of weaponized depleted uranium to be 40 times greater than before the U.S. invasion. Worldwide calls to ban such munitions have not yet been answered—though Belgium, all of Latin America, and Costa Rica have all instituted their own proscriptions in the meantime. As countless individuals reported deformities detailing babies born with missing limbs, two heads, no head, and other profoundly disturbing disfigurations, the fact that the Law of War Manual establishes depleted uranium as an acceptable tool of war puts the U.S. in a position to be rightly condemned.

It is no less than spectacularly ironic that the government touts itself as a champion of human and civil rights while simultaneously stipulating in writing that internationally-prohibited munitions are perfectly justifiable during war—as long as we’re using them, of course. And to make absolutely certain all bases are covered, the precise descriptions of the types of weapons understandably marked “Prohibited,” appear—in name—in the category immediately following: ”Lawful.”

If that weren’t egregious enough, also listed under the heading of “Lawful” are cluster munitions.

These internationally-banned bombs, however, are delineated in the manual as having “Specific Rules on Use”—notably, such weapons’ use may reflect U.S. obligations under international law” [emphasis added]. While this is technically apt, cluster bombs have been banned by the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions—which was agreed to by 116 countries around the world. The U.S. stands out in joining infamous human rights violator, Saudi Arabia, in its refusal to sign. These insidious munitions leave unexploded ordnance for months, or even decades, after the originating bomb was dropped. Children are often maimed or killed when they unwittingly mistake them for toys.

The appearance of cluster munitions at all presents a telling paradox since U.S. policy ostensibly only allows for export. Receiving countries must stipulate that the bombs “will only be used against military targets” with minimal harm to innocent civilians. After reports earlier this month that U.S.-supplied cluster bombs had been used to target Yemeni citizens, the DoD announced it would diligently investigate—and also claimed its export of the insidious weapons would cease as of 2018.

But, if we are to believe this apparent concern holds any truth whatsoever, then why list “cluster munitions” as lawful weapons for U.S. use? Yes, that is a facetiously rhetorical question.

Depleted uranium and cluster munitions are just two examples of many in the manual that actually generate a plethora of questions rather than provide the definitive answers one might expect from the Pentagon’s title. Also found among the listed “lawful” devices are mines, nuclear weapons, booby-traps, herbicides, non-blinding laser weapons, incendiary devices, and fragmentation weapons—and the weapons sections comprise a mere fraction of the voluminous, 6,169-footnoted, document.

Such deftly crafted and contrary language in the Law of War Manual would be head-scratchingly comical—were it not for the very shocking consequences for civilians around the world it ultimately justifies.

Some apologists will predictably point to the manual’s title as reason to declare that the U.S. government has admirable standards it upholds, even in times of war—but, rather fortunately, the number of people who knowbetter grows exponentially every day.

Source: ANTIMEDIA



"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?
6/26/2015 1:57:44 AM
Obama says climate change, not government, is responsible for terrorism

Thursday, June 25, 2015 by: J. D. Heyes


(NaturalNews) It was a stunning declaration, especially given the venue: President Obama used the occasion of graduation at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy recently to rail against "climate change deniers" and claim that man-caused global warming was a national security threat.

"I know there are still some folks back in Washington who refuse to admit that climate change is real," Obama told graduating cadets in New London, Connecticut. "Denying it, or refusing to deal with it endangers our national security. It undermines the readiness of our forces."

"Politicians who say they care about military readiness should care about this as well," he continued.

In making his strongest case yet for global warming -- despite the fact that more than 31,000 scientists, climatologists, physics majors and engineers dispute such claims -- the president also sought to shore up support for new Environmental Protection Agency rules aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Critics of the new rules say they will lead to closures of coal-fired power plants, which will strain America's already-taxed power grid and cost consumers billions more in higher electric bills.

Tornadoes and snowfall are national security threats, not Russia or China

"Climate change is contributing to extreme weather, wildfires, and drought, and that rising temperatures can lead to more smog and more allergens in the air we breathe, meaning more kids are exposed to the triggers that can cause asthma attacks," the White House said in its report, titled "The National Security Implications of Climate Change."[PDF]

"We also need to decrease the harmful carbon pollution that causes climate change. That is why, this summer, the EPA will put in place commonsense standards to reduce carbon pollution from power plants, the largest source in the United States," the report said.

It further claimed:

The implications of climate change on national security are not all beyond U.S. borders – they pose risks here at home. According to the Third National Climate Assessment, sea level rise, coupled with storm surge, will continue to increase the risk of major coastal impacts on transportation infrastructure, including both temporary and permanent flooding of airports, ports and harbors, roads, rail lines, tunnels, and bridges. Extreme weather events are also affecting energy production and delivery facilities, causing supply disruptions of varying lengths and magnitudes and affecting other infrastructure that depends on energy supply. Increasing risk of flooding affects human safety and health, property, infrastructure, economies, and ecology in many basins across the United States.

The report lists 34 adversities of "global warming," painting a sort of doomsday scenario of the cumulative effects that will impact political, security, economic and health issues.

In his speech to Coast Guard graduates, Obama also claimed: "The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security. We should act like it."

Global temps "not cooperating" with climate hoaxers

Personnel at the Pentagon work for and answer to the president; if he wants the Defense Department to reflect his views on this or any issue, it will. After all, what does the Defense Department truly know about "climate change?"

Quite simply, there is no hard, substantive, replicable, scientific evidence of "man-caused global warming/climate change." It just doesn't exist outside computer models, which have long been incorrect in their forecasts because the input data forming the model -- the "guesstimates" -- have also been incorrect.

"The President's speech was so farcical in its claims that it hardly merits a response," the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) said in a statement.

"Contrary to the President's claims, it seems ISIS may in fact trump ICE as a bigger concern," CFACT continued. "Actually believing Obama's climate claims, undermines our nation's ability to distinguish real threats from politically contrived nonsense. UN climate treaties and EPA climate regulations will not prevent wars, conflicts or impact the creation of a terrorist group."

As several different websites have noted, the president's global warming claims have all been debunked.

"It is obvious that the climate establishment is seeking new talking points on 'global warming' to change the subject from the simple fact that global temperatures are not cooperating with their claims," said Marc Morano, publisher of Climate Depot.

The real national security threats to the U.S. come from other governments and non-state actors like ISIS, not summer storms and winter snowfalls.

Sources:

http://www.usatoday.com

www.whitehouse.gov

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com

http://www.climatedepot.com

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/050192_Obama_climate_change_global_warming.html#ixzz3e84FLHuy


"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?
6/26/2015 3:37:20 AM

Putin calls Obama to discuss Ukraine, IS group: White House

AFP

Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on June 23, 2015 (AFP Photo/Sergei Karpukhin)

Washington (AFP) - Russian President Vladimir Putin called his US counterpart Barack Obama on Thursday to discuss the conflict in Ukraine, the Islamic State group's advances and a deal on Iran's nuclear program.

The crisis in Ukraine has triggered the worst standoff between Russia and the West since the Cold War, and the US said earlier this week it would deploy heavy weapons in central and eastern Europe for the first time.

The US announcement followed promises by NATO on Monday to step up its military presence in eastern Europe, against the backdrop of the conflict in Ukraine.

Putin, who has consistently denied backing the pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine, initiated the phone call with Obama, according to the White House.

"President Obama reiterated the need for Russia to fulfill its commitments under the Minsk agreements, including the removal of all Russian troops and equipment from Ukrainian territory," it said in a statement.

The crisis in Ukraine has killed 6,500 people in a little over a year and a peace deal struck in Minsk, Belarus has unravelled.

Obama and Putin also discussed Syria, where the self-proclaimed Islamic State group has made rapid gains, as well as historic negotiations between world powers and Iran over its disputed nuclear program.

"The leaders discussed the increasingly dangerous situation in Syria, and underscored the importance of continued P5+1 unity in ongoing negotiations to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon," the White House said.




White House: Putin initiates call with Obama


The world leaders discuss various topics, including the Islamic State's dangerous advances in Syria.
Need for Russia to fulfill its commitments

"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?
6/26/2015 10:12:08 AM

Giant earthquakes are shaking Greenland — and scientists just figured out the disturbing reason why

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

+1


facebook
Like us on Facebook!