Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
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?
3/17/2016 2:08:28 PM

ISIS takes break from beheadings to throw Bible-burning party

ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED BY:

logo-fox-news

Having driven the last Christian out of Mosul, ISIS has now released a chilling video showing a bonfire consuming a huge pile of Bibles and other Christian literature.

The video, titled “Diwan of education destroys Christian instruction books in Mosul,” was made by ISIS’ “morality police,” the infamous Diwan Al-Hisbah, according to Christian Today. It comes as the US is deliberating over whether to label the terrorist group’s actions in Iraq as genocide, a term that has important ramifications under international law.












“It’s another example that ISIS means what they say,” David Curry, CEO of Open Doors USA, told FoxNews.com. “That’s what makes the debate so powerful. They want elimination and they are very serious.”

While ISIS has killed, enslaved and displaced hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Christians, the destruction of religious materials could also be part of a genocide determination.

The House voted unanimously Monday to approve a resolution branding ISIS’ actions as genocide, which the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide defines in part as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.”

‘This has always been genocide. The West has realized that they cannot deny it any longer.’
- David Curry, Open Doors USA

The State Department is under pressure to reach the same conclusion, which could obligate the US to take action.

The video first surfaced last week and shows ISIS militants piling hundreds of books with crosses printed on the cover into a large fire at an unknown location in the northern Iraqi city.

“This video is the first specifically showing the burning of Christian books,” officials for the Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor team for the Middle East Media Research Institute said in a statement to FoxNews.com.

“It is in line with ISIS’ treatment of Christians, which MEMRI regularly monitors in ISIS publications. There is not any particularly new or recent trend in regard to ISIS’s treatment of Christians, which has been consistent in its statements and actions since ISIS declared its caliphate in 2014.”

Modal Trigger
Iraqi Christians, who fled the violence in Mosul after ISIS took control of the city, carry a wooden cross during a weekly prayer in the autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq on March 4, 2016.
Photo: Getty Images

Mosul, long considered a haven for Iraq’s Christian population, was overrun by militants in 2014. After the takeover, ISIS demanded that Christians convert to Islam, pay a tax known as a jizya, or flee the city. Although Mosul was once considered a center of Christianity in the region, all Christians are believed to be gone from the city.

The Christian population of Iraq has dropped from 1.5 million to 275,000 since ISIS established its caliphate.

“The stated purpose [of ISIS] to eliminate and force the Christians and Yazidi people out of the region,” Curry said. “They are succeeding. The Christian population in the region has greatly diminished.”

If Secretary of State John Kerry determines the group’s actions amount to genocide, the UN could be forced to address the issue.

“This has always been genocide,” Curry told FoxNews.com. “The West has realized that they cannot deny it any longer.”

This article originally appeared on Fox News.


(New York Post)


"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?
3/17/2016 5:35:34 PM

US general says we could be screwed in a war against China or Russia

WASHINGTON — The Army’s top general says military forces on the ground face a high level of risk if the United States gets into a large-scale conflict against a power such as Russia or China.

Testifying Wednesday on Capitol Hill, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley says years of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, constrained budgets and troop cuts have had a cumulative effect on the service.

Milley says the Army is ready to fight the Islamic State group and other terrorist organizations.

But what Milley describes as a “great power war” against one or two of four countries – China, Russia, Iran and North Korea – would pose greater challenges.

Milley says the Army’s readiness is not at a level that is appropriate for what the American people expect to defend them.

(New York Post)

"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?
3/17/2016 6:09:55 PM

China says opposes unilateral sanctions on North Korea

Reuters


North Korean leader Kim Jong Un looks at a rocket warhead tip after a simulated test of atmospheric re-entry of a ballistic missile, at an unidentified location in this undated photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) in Pyongyang on March 15, 2016. REUTERS/KCNA

BEIJING (Reuters) - China expressed its opposition on Thursday to unilateral sanctions against North Korea saying they could raise tension, after the United States imposed new curbs on the isolated country in retaliation for its nuclear and rocket tests.

U.S. President Barack Obama on Wednesday imposed sweeping new sanctions on North Korea intended to further isolate its leadership after recent actions seen by the United States and its allies as provocative.

The new sanctions threaten to ban from the global financial system anyone who does business with broad swaths of North Korea's economy, including its financial, mining and transport sectors.

The so-called secondary sanctions will compel banks to freeze the assets of anyone who breaks the blockade, potentially squeezing out North Korea's business ties, including those with China.

Asked whether China was worried the sanctions could affect "normal" business links between Chinese banks and North Korea, Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said this was something China was "paying attention to".

"First, as I've said many times before, China always opposes any country imposing unilateral sanctions," Lu told a daily news briefing in Beijing.

"Second, under the present situation where the situation on the Korean Peninsula is complex and sensitive, we oppose any moves that may further worsen tensions there."

"Third, we have clearly stressed many times in meetings with the relevant county, any so-called unilateral sanctions imposed by any country should neither affect nor harm China's reasonable interests."

China is North Korea's sole major ally but it disapproves of its nuclear program and calls for the Korean peninsula to be free of nuclear weapons.

While China has signed up for tough new U.N. sanctions against North Korea, it has said repeatedly sanctions are not the answer and that only a resumption of talks can resolve the dispute over North Korea's weapons program.

The U.S. measures, which vastly expand a U.S. blockade of North Korea, prohibit the export of goods from the United States to North Korea.

U.S. officials had previously believed a blanket trade ban would be ineffective without a stronger commitment from China, North Korea's largest trading partner.

North Korea conducted a nuclear test on Jan. 6, and on Feb. 7 it launched a rocket that the United States and its allies said employed banned ballistic missile technology. China signed on to the new U.N. sanctions against North Korea this month.

But U.S. officials and experts have often questioned China's commitment to enforcing sanctions on North Korea. China fears that too-harsh measures will destabilize the North.

(Reporting By Ben Blanchard, Writing By Megha Rajagopalan; Editing by Nick Macfie, Robert Birsel)

"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?
3/18/2016 12:11:41 AM

NHS to harvest babies' organs: 'Ghoulish' proposal gives mothers pregnant with a damaged foetus an agonising choice - abort the dying child or give birth so body parts can be used for transplants


    • · Mothers of children with fatal defects will have the option to give birth
    • · Once the infant has been declared stillborn, doctors will remove its organs
    • · They will then be used to save the lives of other children who are currently being placed on · 7,000-strong waiting list
    • · The practice could raise ethical questions while alleviating organ shortage
    • · For more of the latest on the NHS proposal visit www.dailymail.co.uk/nhs



Women whose babies develop fatal defects in the early stages of pregnancy will be given advice on going ahead with the birth so the NHS can harvest their organs, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.


Most expectant mothers opt for termination after being told the devastating news their child has no chance of survival once born.


But now, amid a chronic shortage of donated organs, mums will be 'supported' to have the baby at nine months so that the child's vital organs can be taken for transplant.



Last night the proposal sparked an ethical debate – with one critic describing it as a 'ghoulish suggestion' that would undermine public confidence in organ donation.

The move was revealed at a medical conference where NHS transplant surgeons said they wanted to take more organs from babies nationally to address a dire shortage.

As part of this drive, midwives and other NHS workers are to be educated about the potential for using babies' organs in transplants.

In the past two years, only 11 babies under two months have become organ donors. But doctors believe they could raise that figure to around 100 a year.

Speaking of obtaining more organs from newborns, transplant surgeon Niaz Ahmad, of St James's University Hospital in Leeds, said: 'We are looking at rolling it out as a viable source of organ transplantation nationally.


'A number of staff in the NHS are not aware that these organs can be used. They need to be aware. These can be transplanted, they work, and they work long-term.'

One specific case medics are considering are babies diagnosed with a brain defect called anencephaly, which can be detected by routine scans as early as 12 weeks and which gives babies no chance of survival.

Under the new proposals, mothers would give birth in the normal way and once doctors had certified the infant dead, its vital organs would be removed. However, donation would not be raised when a woman was still deciding whether or not to have an abortion – and nobody would be compelled to donate their baby's organs.

In some cases, where donation has been agreed, babies could be certified brain dead but their bodies kept alive by artificial ventilation. Surgeons could then remove organs from these so-called 'heartbeat babies' when they are fresh, maximising what can be used and the chance of successful transplant.

More than 7,000 people are currently on the organ waiting list, and three of them die every day.

CHILLING ECHOES OF 'NEVER LET ME GO' BODY PARTS SCHOOL

Clones: Andrew Garfield, Keira Knightley and Carey Mulligan in the film

Clones: Andrew Garfield, Keira Knightley and Carey Mulligan in the film


The proposal to harvest babies' organs has parallels with the sinister plot of the acclaimed 2005 novel Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro.

The book was made into a film of the same name starring Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley and Andrew Garfield.

The story centres around students at a fictional boarding school called Hailsham who, it emerges, are actually clones, created and reared to provide vital organ donations to prolong the lives of others.

At the school, they are strongly encouraged to look after their health and smoking is regarded as taboo.

Towards the end of the book, when they are still relatively young, they go through cycles of 'donations', and once their organs are harvested, they die, or 'complete'.

The student clones are portrayed as understanding and accepting of this without question, and they are largely preoccupied with trying to live their short lives to the full and attempting to find ways to prolong them.


Many sick children die before a suitable organ becomes available, and the UK has to rely on baby organs being flown in from abroad.

Kidneys and liver cells from donor babies cannot be transplanted to other babies but could be used to help young adult patients.

At the moment, doctors will not raise the issue of donation with expectant mothers first, but wait for the women to approach the NHS transplant service themselves. However, that could change. Mr Ahmad told The Mail on Sunday: 'There is a real potential for using these organs [and] we are going to discuss whether it is an option, somehow, to tell women in this situation, that organ donation is an option.'

At the moment, about 230 babies with anencephaly – where most of the brain fails to develop – are aborted every year in Britain. Only a dozen are born alive. Raising the issue of organ donation with parents was discussed at the annual meeting of the British Transplantation Society in Glasgow.

A committee has been set up by NHS Blood and Transplant, tasked with boosting organ donation from newborns and very young babies. A lead nurse has also been appointed to co-ordinate efforts to educate NHS staff about talking to parents about such a sensitive issue.

Ethically controversial, but increasingly practical

Taking organs from newborns has always been ethically problematic.

Guidelines prevented most organ retrieval from babies under two months, but last year rules changed, enabling doctors to take organs from newborns with much greater ease, with the parents' consent.

In 2014, Teddy Houlston became what was then Britain's youngest organ donor after dying just 100 minutes after birth. Teddy's parents were told their baby would be born with virtually no brain after their 12-week scan, but decided against abortion.

His two kidneys and heart valves helped save an adult's life.

Doctors have been sounded out about their attitudes to the 'ethically controversial, yet increasingly practical issue' of harvesting organs from babies with anencephaly.

Dr Joe Brierley, a specialist at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London, surveyed medics working with newborn babies and found three-quarters thought it 'acceptable to carry out donation from anencephalic infants'. However, one in five thought it might jeopardise how the public viewed organ donation.

Dr Brierley said: 'We are seeing more women saying, 'I don't think it is right to terminate.' It is then a case of them having conversations with NHS staff about the options.'

NHS Blood and Transplant said: 'Under no circumstances would our staff or anybody else within the NHS pressure women to continue with a pregnancy solely for the possibility of organ donation.'

I welcome anything that improves number of donors

ARGUMENT FOR by Dr Joe Brierley, consultant, Great Ormond Street Hospital

Given that three people a day die waiting for an organ transplant, I welcome anything that improves the number of donors.

Helping the families of those dying in intensive care to have the best information to make this decision is vital. With anencephaly, such discussions occur with a woman who has been told her pregnancy may result in stillbirth, or – if the baby is born alive – it will die as a newborn.

Whilst provision of such information is the cornerstone of good care, my view is that this should not be used to persuade a woman not to undergo termination.

However, if a decision is made to continue the pregnancy for other reasons, then all palliative care options – including donation – ought to be discussed.

People often don't realise amid the tragedy of a child's death that organ donation can happen. Often due to size issues, children's organs can only help other youngsters – but sometimes the smallest children's organs can also help an adult. In my experience, the overwhelming generosity of people in such sad times saves lives and can offer comfort to families going through bereavement.

Of course organ donation is not for everyone, and the role of professionals is to support people in whatever choice they make. And even if a baby is born, there are still reasons donation might not be possible.

There have been 11 organ donors under 60 days old in the last two years – the courage of their families should inspire us all to discuss and consider organ donation.

It could save lives... but at what cost to our humanity?

ARGUMENT AGAINST by Dr Trevor Stammers, Director for Bioethics St Mary's University


It would be frankly abhorrent if transplant doctors were to ask women whose unborn children have been diagnosed with severe defects to let their baby go to term for the sole reason that its body can be raided for its organs.

Mothers electing to carry babies with such severe defects to term – because they would love the child as it is for as long as it should live – have, up till now, often been pressured to abort anyway.

They have been regarded as foolish to continue the pregnancy. It is concerning that mothers will now be encouraged to go to term with the express intention of the child's organs being taken. What happens if they change their mind once they see their newborn son or daughter?

It is a ghoulish suggestion that can only undermine public confidence in transplantation – one the greatest medical advances of my lifetime.

The concept reduces the baby to nothing more than a utilitarian means to an end – a collection of spare parts – rather than respecting life for its own sake.

Yes, I know those organs can potentially save the lives of others, but at what cost to our humanity?

The integrity of transplant medicine has already been compromised by using organs from euthanised adults.

Raiding the bodies of children born only for their organs will further tarnish the profession – and could well lead to a broader decrease in the rates of organ donation.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3478477/NHS-harvest-babies-organs-Bombshell-new-proposal-mums-pregnant-damaged-babies.html#ixzz43CwUOtYZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


"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?
3/18/2016 12:33:44 AM

Following The Money: Who’s Really In Control ?

Galactic Free Press's picture

“As difficult as it was for me, I’ve come to an inescapable and profoundly disturbing conclusion. I believe that an elite group of people and the corporations they run have gained control over not just our energy, food supply, education, and healthcare, but over virtually every aspect of our lives; and they do it by controlling the world of finance. Not by creating more value, but by actually controlling the source of money.”

– Foster Gamble

The video below is a short clip taken from the Thrive documentary, a film that lifts the veil on what’s really going on in our world by “following the money upstream.” Created by Foster Gamble, the heir to the Proctor & Gamble Corporation, it represents his efforts to reveal the hidden truths of our world to the masses. Gamble was groomed for the establishment and chose a different path once he saw how corrupt an institution he would be entering, and he and his wife Kimberly Carter Gamble have done a tremendous job of opening people’s eyes to what is happening on Wall Street and around the world.

It’s no secret that the global consolidation of power lies in the hands of very few — a small group of people and the corporations they run, all held together by the world of finance — or that this few controls every aspect of our lives.

“A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves, consisting of many, and various, and powerful interests, combined into one mass, and held together by the cohesive power of the bast surplus in the banks.” – John C. Calhoun, 7th Vice President of the United States

It’s unusual to see politicians who garner such respect and attention offer this information as fact, but it does happen, even in today’s political climate. Current presidential candidate Bernie Sanders certainly did so in a recent debate:

No matter who is elected to be president, that person will not be able to address the enormous problems facing the working families of our country. They will not be able to succeed because the power of corporate America, the power of Wall Street, the power of campaign donors is so great that no president alone can stand up to them. That is the truth. People may be uncomfortable about hearing it, but that is the reality.

How can anybody really claim that we are living in a democracy when presidents don’t even have enough power to change anything significant? If we want change, we must figure out a way to curtail the power of corporations and prevent them from destroying our world. And keeping our eyes glued to our television screens, waiting to see who will become the next president of the United States, is not the way to do it. The entire political system seems to be full of buffoonery to capture our attention, and ultimately, to distract us.

I often wonder if the whole thing is pure spectacle, pure entertainment meant to keep us from asking questions and waking up to what’s going on right under our noses. I personally believe, as President Roosevelt himself emphasized, that “presidents are selected, not elected.”

In his farewell address to the nation, president Eisenhower offered these words of caution, and what he warned us about seems to have taken place:

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. . . . Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defence with our peaceful message and goals. (source)

This is a great breakdown of where the power lies. All you have to do is follow the money.




Arjun Walia

I joined the CE team in 2010 shortly after finishing university and have been grateful for the fact that I have been able to do this ever since :) There are many things happening on the planet that don't resonate with me, and I wanted to do what I could to play a role in creating change. It's been great making changes in my own life and creating awareness and I look forward to more projects that move beyond awareness and into action and implementation. So stay tuned :) arjun@collective-evolution.com

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2016/03/16/following-the-money-whos-really-in-control/


Category:

Collective Evolution

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

+1


facebook
Like us on Facebook!