By Derrick Broze
Over the weekend thousands of Germans protested the secrecy surrounding negotiations of the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
While speaking in Hannover, Germany, President Obama defended the controversial trade deal between the United States and the European Union known as the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The deal would affect about 800 million people across Europe and America. On Sunday, Obama spoke with German Chancellor Angela Merkel about the TTIP at a press conference before opening the Hannover Messe, the world’s largest industrial technology trade fair. The two politicians said that despite reservations regarding the effects of globalization, global trade has produced a number of benefits, including more jobs.
“When people visibly see a plant lost or jobs lost, the narrative drives a lot of suspicion about these trade deals,” Obama said. “If you look at the benefits for our economies, it is indisputable that they are made stronger.”
Although Merkel and Obama tout the supposed benefits of trade deals like the TTIP, an estimated40,000–90,000 people marched against the trade deal in Hannover on Saturday and Sunday. NBC News reports that the protests were organized by an “anti-free-trade alliance” made up of numerous groups, including trade unions, environmental activists and church groups. There has been massive opposition to the TTIP in Germany. In April 2015, thousands of Germans also took to the streets to oppose the TTIP.
In 2015, Reuters reported that, “a recent YouGov poll showed that 43 percent of Germans believe TTIP would be bad for the country, compared to 26 percent who see it as positive.” In a recentsurvey by Germany’s Bertelsmann Foundation, only 1 in 5 Germans said they were in favor of TTIP. Still, Merkel told the press that adopting the TTIP would help European economies grow. “We need to speed matters up now,” she said. Obama praised Merkel, calling her a “consistent and ready” leader.
Supporters of the TTIP believe the deal will make trade cheaper and easier, while boosting the economy. Opponents of the agreement have focused on dangers to environmental and consumer protections. During the press conference, Obama said it was necessary to enact the TTIP because 95% of markets are outside the U.S. President Obama said he was confident the TTIP would be finished by the end of the year, and that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which covers 12 pacific nations, would “start moving forward” after the U.S. presidential election. The TTIP is the European version of the TPP. The TPP has faced waves of resistance over the last several years for the same corporate influence that has tainted negotiations of the TTIP.
If the TPP and TTIP become law – and it seems inevitable – the free people of the world will once more have to contend with corporate-state power that limits freedoms and empowers the enemies of liberty. The situation may seem hopeless, especially in America where protests rarely number in the thousands, but where there is life, there is hope. Together we can spread awareness, reclaim the free hearts and minds of this world, and begin to build something that actually represents the people and reflects our desires.
(activistpost.com)
"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
By Brandon Turbeville
In yet another sign of obvious Western escalation in the war against Syria, U.S. President Barack Obama announced on Monday that an additional 250 American military personnel will be deployed to Syria under the guise of defeating ISIS.
In his speech at Hannover, Germany, Obama stated:
Just as I approved additional support for Iraqi forces against ISIL, I’ve decided to increase U.S. support for local forces fighting ISIL in Syria, a small number of special operations forces are already on the ground in Syria and their expertise has been critical as local forces have driven ISIL out of key areas.So given their success I’ve approved the deployment of up to 250 additional U.S. personnel in Syria including special forces to keep up this momentum.Obama made a point to state that the troops will not be “leading the fight on the ground” but will be engaged in “training” and providing “assistance” to local forces.
Just as I approved additional support for Iraqi forces against ISIL, I’ve decided to increase U.S. support for local forces fighting ISIL in Syria, a small number of special operations forces are already on the ground in Syria and their expertise has been critical as local forces have driven ISIL out of key areas.
So given their success I’ve approved the deployment of up to 250 additional U.S. personnel in Syria including special forces to keep up this momentum.
Obama made a point to state that the troops will not be “leading the fight on the ground” but will be engaged in “training” and providing “assistance” to local forces.
CNN reports that
The troops will be expanding the ongoing U.S. effort to bring more Syrian Arab fighters into units the U.S. supports in northern Syria that have largely been manned by the Kurds, an official told CNN earlier.The plan calls for the additional U.S. forces to “advise and assist” forces in the area whom the U.S. hopes may eventually grow strong enough to take back territory around Raqqa, Syria, where ISIS is based.These troops are not expected to engage in combat operations or to participate in target-to-kill teams but will be armed to defend themselves, one official said.. . . . .The official said the President was persuaded to take this additional step because of recent successes against ISIS.
The troops will be expanding the ongoing U.S. effort to bring more Syrian Arab fighters into units the U.S. supports in northern Syria that have largely been manned by the Kurds, an official told CNN earlier.
The plan calls for the additional U.S. forces to “advise and assist” forces in the area whom the U.S. hopes may eventually grow strong enough to take back territory around Raqqa, Syria, where ISIS is based.
These troops are not expected to engage in combat operations or to participate in target-to-kill teams but will be armed to defend themselves, one official said.
. . . . .
The official said the President was persuaded to take this additional step because of recent successes against ISIS.
What these statements mean, of course, is that the United States is deploying troops to better assist, train, and organize the terrorists on the ground who are fighting Assad and the Syrian military. After all, these “fighters that the U.S. supports” are nothing more than ISIS, al-Qaeda, FSA, Nusra, and other numerous groups and groupiscules that are ideologically identical to one another and whose only real tangible difference is the names they themselves.
Not only that, any talk of “recent successes against ISIS” is clearly not the successes of the United States, NATO, or the anti-Syria coalition. They are the successes of Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia. Indeed, the latter forces have achieved in weeks what the former could not achieve in over a year (ten years according to the U.S.), a true testament to what can be achieved when one actually targets the terrorist organization as opposed to supporting it.
Still, it is important to point out that, regardless of Obama’s recent announcement, U.S. Special Forces have been present in Syria for quite some time, with NATO member Special Forces known publicly even earlier.
In October, 2015, it was announced by the White House that 50 Special Forces troops would be sent to Syria. This announcement came days after it was reported that U.S. Special Forces commandos were working with Kurdish forces to “free prisoners of the Islamic State” in Syria. Later, the presence of U.S. Special Forces in Syria was tacitly acknowledged in 2015 when theU.S. took credit for the killing of Abu Sayyaf.
Reports circulated in October, 2014 that U.S. soldiers and Special Forces troops were fighting alongside Kurdish battalions in Kobane. An article by Christof Lehmann published in March 20, 2015 stated,
Evidence about the presence of U.S. special forces in the Syrian town Ayn al-Arab a.k.a. Kobani emerged. Troops are guiding U.S. airstrikes as part of U.S support for the Kurdish separatist group PYD and the long-established plan to establish a Kurdish corridor.A photo taken in Ayn al-Arab shows three U.S. soldiers. One of them “Peter” is carrying a Bushnell laser rangefinder, an instrument designed to mark targets for U.S. jets, reports Ceyhun Bozkurt for Aydinlik Daily.The photo substantiated previous BBC interviews with U.S. soldiers who are fighting alongside the Kurdish separatist group PYD in Syria.The photo of the three U.S. troopers also substantiates a statement by PYD spokesman Polat Can from October 14, 2014, reports Aydinlik Daily. Can admitted that a special unit in Kobani provides Kurdish fighters with the coordinates of targets which then would be relayed to “coalition forces”.
Evidence about the presence of U.S. special forces in the Syrian town Ayn al-Arab a.k.a. Kobani emerged. Troops are guiding U.S. airstrikes as part of U.S support for the Kurdish separatist group PYD and the long-established plan to establish a Kurdish corridor.
A photo taken in Ayn al-Arab shows three U.S. soldiers. One of them “Peter” is carrying a Bushnell laser rangefinder, an instrument designed to mark targets for U.S. jets, reports Ceyhun Bozkurt for Aydinlik Daily.
The photo substantiated previous BBC interviews with U.S. soldiers who are fighting alongside the Kurdish separatist group PYD in Syria.
The photo of the three U.S. troopers also substantiates a statement by PYD spokesman Polat Can from October 14, 2014, reports Aydinlik Daily. Can admitted that a special unit in Kobani provides Kurdish fighters with the coordinates of targets which then would be relayed to “coalition forces”.
The first public U.S. Special Forces raid in Syria took place in July, 2014 when Delta Force personnel allegedly attempted to rescue several Americans being held by ISIS near Raqqa. Allegedly, the soldiers stormed the facility but the terrorists had already moved the hostages. While the raid would provide evidence that U.S. Special Forces were operating in Syria in 2014, many researchers believe the story is simply fabricated by the White House to provide legitimacy to the stories of murdered hostages and thus the subsequent pro-war propaganda that ensued as well as to promote the gradual acceptance of U.S. troops on the ground in Syria.
In 2012, an article published in the Daily Star by Deborah Sherwood revealed that SAS Special Forces and MI6 agents were operating inside Syria shortly after the destabilization campaign began in earnest. Sherwood writes,
Special Forces will help protect the refugees in Syria along the borders.Last week as the president ignored an international ceasefire, plans were being finalised to rescue thousands of Syrians.SAS troops and MI6 agents are in the country ready to help rebels if civil war breaks out as expected this weekend.They also have hi-tech satellite computers and radios that can instantly send back photos and details of refugees and Assad’s forces as the situation develops.Whitehall sources say it is vital they can see what is happening on the ground for themselves so Assad cannot deny atrocities or battles.And if civil war breaks out the crack troops are on hand to help with fighting, said the insider.. . . . .“Safe havens would be an invasion of Syria but a chance to save lives,” said a senior Whitehall source.“The SAS will throw an armed screen round these areas that can be set up within hours.“There are guys in the communications unit who are signallers that can go right up front and get involved in close-quarter fighting.”
Special Forces will help protect the refugees in Syria along the borders.
Last week as the president ignored an international ceasefire, plans were being finalised to rescue thousands of Syrians.
SAS troops and MI6 agents are in the country ready to help rebels if civil war breaks out as expected this weekend.
They also have hi-tech satellite computers and radios that can instantly send back photos and details of refugees and Assad’s forces as the situation develops.
Whitehall sources say it is vital they can see what is happening on the ground for themselves so Assad cannot deny atrocities or battles.
And if civil war breaks out the crack troops are on hand to help with fighting, said the insider.
“Safe havens would be an invasion of Syria but a chance to save lives,” said a senior Whitehall source.
“The SAS will throw an armed screen round these areas that can be set up within hours.
“There are guys in the communications unit who are signallers that can go right up front and get involved in close-quarter fighting.”
In addition, in March 2012, it was reported by Lebanon’s Daily Star that 13 French intelligence agents had been captured by the Syrian government, proving not only that Western Special Ops presence in Syria did, in fact, exist but also that it existed essentially from the start.
Thus, the presence of NATO Special Forces and U.S. Special Forces specifically are nothing new at all. Obama’s announcement is simply the advertisement of a policy that is gradually escalating in regards to Syria and, as a result, threatens to provoke a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia.
Exclusive: A spotlight has fallen on a shameful chapter in the history of Georgetown University’s Jesuits, the 1838 sale of 272 African-Americans into Deep South slavery, but moral lapses didn’t end there, says ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.
By Ray McGovern
Anti-war prophet Rev. Daniel Berrigan, S.J., was onto something with his “hunch” – in his 1987 autobiography, To Dwell in Peace – that “the fall of a great enterprise,” the Jesuit university, would end up “among those structures whose moral decline and political servitude signalize a larger falling away of the culture itself.”
Berrigan, a Jesuit himself, lamented “highly placed” churchmen and their approval of war, “uttered … with sublime confidence, from on high, from highly placed friendships, and White House connections. Thus compromised, the Christian tradition of nonviolence, as well as the secular boast of disinterested pursuit of truth — these are reduced to bombast, hauled out for formal occasions, believed by no one, practiced by no one.”
A photograph showing the whipping scars on the back of an African-American slave.
But that “moral decline” among Jesuit institutions of higher learning may have had deeper roots than even Berrigan understood. One of those deep roots is drawing national attention, an 1838 decision by the Jesuit leaders of the Jesuits’ Maryland Province and Georgetown College to improve the school’s financial health by selling 272 African-American men, women and children as slaves into the Deep South.
As New York Times writer Rachel L. Swarns described the scene in Sunday’s editions, “The human cargo was loaded on ships at a bustling wharf in the nation’s capital, destined for the plantations of the Deep South. Some slaves pleaded for rosaries as they were rounded up, praying for deliverance. But on this day, in the fall of 1838, no one was spared: not the 2-month-old baby and her mother, not the field hands, not the shoemaker and not Cornelius Hawkins, who was about 13 years old when he was forced onboard.”
Rev. Thomas Mulledy, S.J., the Provincial (head) of the Maryland Jesuits, sold the 272 enslaved African-Americans to Henry Johnson, the former governor of Louisiana, and Louisiana landowner Jesse Batey for $115,000, the equivalent of $3.3 million in today’s dollars, according to the Times account.
Documents show that $90,000 went to support the “formation” of Jesuits (the preparation of candidates spiritually, academically and practically for the ministries that they will be called on to offer the Church and the world); $17,000 to Georgetown College; and $8,000 to a pension fund for the archbishop of Baltimore.
There is now a campaign among Georgetown professors, students, alumni and genealogists to discover what happened to those 272 human beings and whether Georgetown can do anything to compensate their descendants.
An Earlier Alert
But there is also a sad back story to this telling slice of Jesuit history, in which I became personally involved after I first learned of this scandal two decades ago from Edward F. Beckett, a young Jesuit who had the courage to speak out and summon his superiors to conscience. Beckett published his research in “Listening to Our History: Inculturation and Jesuit Slaveholding” in the journal Studies in the Spirituality of Jesuits (28/5, November 1996).
Beckett and I became friends while working at the Fr. Horace McKenna Center where I volunteered at the overnight shelter for homeless men in the basement of St. Aloysius Church in the shadow of the U.S. Capitol. The Jesuits were quick to exult Rev. Horace McKenna, S.J., as “Apostle of the Poor” after he died, but – while alive – not so much. Fr. McKenna was known for being something of a pain; he once even wrote a letter to the Vatican complaining – using a sports analogy – that his superiors were “not throwing enough forward passes to the poor.”
During the Great Depression, Fr. McKenna set up a food distribution system and other assistance to struggling farmers, and advocated vigorously for racial integration in churches and schools. He expressed “passionate impatience” toward go-slow approaches which were favored by some of his fellow Jesuits and priests.
After I got to know Beckett as we worked nights with the men in the St. Aloysius Church shelter, he gave me a copy of his booklet relating the history of how – in the 1800s – the Maryland Jesuits rebuffed ethical calls from other religious leaders who were pushing for the abolition of slavery. Instead, the Jesuits were more interested in how much money they could get for selling slaves.
It was, you see, an economic issue since the Jesuits no longer needed the proceeds from slave labor on their plantations in southern Maryland because they had received permission from Rome to reverse their longstanding tradition of free education and start charging tuition to the wealthy sons of plantation owners to attend Georgetown.
So, no longer needing the slaves to work the fields, the Jesuits decided to sell them into the Deep South to turn a tidy profit and invest the money in the “moral education” of young Jesuits while also providing a pension to the Baltimore archbishop.
A Chance to Repent
After learning of this history two decades ago, I joined with a small group of activists to ask Maryland Provincial Rev. James R. Stormes, S.J., in effect, to seize a unique opportunity to confess and repent.
We thought our initiative was particularly well timed since President Bill Clinton had announced the appointment of a seven-member advisory board for his initiative on race to promote “a national dialogue on controversial issues surrounding race; to increase our understanding of the history of race relations and the common future people of all races share; to recruit leadership at all levels to help bridge racial divides, and to propose actions to address critical areas such as education, economic opportunity, housing, health care, crime and the administration of justice.”
John Hope Franklin, an eminent historian and educator, whose writings included the 1946 landmark study From Slavery to Freedom, was appointed chair, and Judith A. Winston was named Executive Director of this “One America Initiative,” with a senior staff of national civil rights leaders as senior staff.
As the initiative was getting off the ground, our small, diverse group met with Ms. Winston, herself a graduate of Georgetown University Law School, who was clearly delighted with what we proposed. We told her that we were not about blaming, but rather about acknowledging, apologizing, and reconciling, and said we were approaching then-Georgetown President Rev. Leo O’Donovan, S.J. and Maryland Provincial Stormes as follows:
“We have a vision of Georgetown’s most prominent alumnus standing up before the cameras at Georgetown University this spring (1998) and being able to say, in all sincerity, that he has never been prouder of his alma mater and the Jesuits who run it. He might tell a bit of the story of Georgetown’s origins and then, jointly with Fr. Stormes and Fr. O’Donovan, announce the establishment of a foundation to promote the education of the descendants of the Jesuits’ slaves. President Clinton could then cite this as precisely the kind of action he had hoped would spring forth from his Initiative on Race, and could call upon others to follow the courageous example of the Maryland Jesuits. We think this could be a welcome boost for the President’s Initiative.”
But our optimism was misplaced. Even though many of us had learned at Jesuit hands about acting in a just way and doing recompense for injustice, we were told that we had no “standing,” as what the Jesuits call “externs” or outsiders who have no right to hold them accountable. We still cannot figure out exactly why the Jesuit leaders were so offended by our initiative and they wouldn’t tell us. We were denied an audience with Stormes – and without Stormes’s nihil obstat, there was no hope for support from O’Donovan.
The final nail in the coffin for our own initiative (as well as Bill Clinton’s) came in early 1998 as his trysts with Monica Lewinsky and his lies about them deprived him of any pretense to moral leadership. The whole Initiative died an inconsequential death.
By chance I found myself sitting next to Judith Winston on a plane a few years ago. She saw my name, recognized me, and recalled our ill-fated common effort. Neither of us could do much more than simply shake our heads.
Jesuit Universities
Perhaps even more sadly, the behavior of those Jesuit leaders in 1838 was not entirely an aberration. As Fr. Berrigan noted in this autobiography, Jesuit institutions have often traded ethics for clout, preferring to hobnob with the great and powerful rather than act as moral critics of social wrongs, such as slavery, war and — in recent times — even assassinations and torture.
Among its graduates, Georgetown University churned out CIA Director George Tenet, who offered “slam dunk” deceptions to justify the invasion of Iraq, and Vice President Dick Cheney’s torture-excusing lawyer David Addington, who graduated summa cum laude.
Nor is Georgetown alone as a Jesuit institution in this dubious position of training people to engage in jesuitical arguments to justify the unjustifiable. My alma mater, Fordham, which has forever been trying to be “just like Georgetown,” produced CIA Director John Brennan, an ardent, public supporter of the kidnapping/”rendering” of suspected terrorists to “friendly” Arab intelligence services for interrogation.
Brennan also defended the use of U.S. secret prisons abroad, as well as “enhanced interrogation techniques” (also known as torture).
But Brennan was a big shot in the White House and Fordham’s Trustees were susceptible to the “celebrity virus.” So, Fordham President, Rev. Joseph M. McShane, S.J., invited Brennan to give the university commencement address on May 19, 2012, and to be awarded — of all things — a Doctorate of Humane Letters,honoris causa.
Several graduating seniors, who were aware of and cared about what Brennan represents, did their best, in vain, to get him dis-invited. They saw scandal in the reality that the violent policies Brennan advocated remain in stark contrast to the principles that Fordham University was supposed to stand for as a Catholic Jesuit University.
Controversy on campus grew, catalyzed by two protest petitions created by Fordham students and multiple articles in the school newspaper, The Ram. Eventually, Fordham senior and organizer, Scott McDonald, requested a meeting with university president McShane to discuss why Fordham’s trustees could not be trusted to invite someone more representative of Fordham’s core values.
McDonald met with McShane, Vice President Jeffrey Gray and university secretary Margaret Ball, but McShane dismissed Scott’s qualms about torture: “We don’t live in a black and white world; we live in a gray world.”
Then McShane announced that what was said at the meeting was “off the record…not to leave this room.” But McDonald had not agreed to that. He left the meeting wondering if the moral theologians at Fordham would agree that torture had now become a “gray area.”
We who attended Jesuit institutions decades ago were taught that there was a moral category called “intrinsic evil” – actions that were always wrong, such as torture, rape and slavery. At Fordham, at least, torture seems to have slipped out of that category.
Now that the issue of the 272 slaves has again surfaced, Georgetown University needs to acknowledge its institutional guilt, apologize and find some way to make restitution to the descendants of those African-Americans.
Though clearly whatever is done will fall into the category of way-too-little and way-too-late, confession of this earlier sin might finally put the brakes on the steady moral decline of what once was an important social as well as religious institution – the Jesuit university.
Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He graduated from Fordham Prep (just 41 years after Horace McKenna did), earned B.A. and M.A. degrees from Fordham University, and finds it difficult to un-learn what he learned there. (consortiumnews.com)
By Catherine J. Frompovich
By now, it’s probably safe to assume that most of the world’s population has heard about the fraudulent vaccine research that’s been an apparent ongoing scientific ‘end run play’ in the USA since the clandestine Simpsonwood Meeting in June of 2000 to prove that vaccines do not cause, nor are they to be correlated with causing, autism [1,2,3] despite a CDC whistleblower, epidemiologist William Thompson, PhD, [4] stating for the record that CDC scientists actually discarded MMR vaccine research and data indicating the negative impact of vaccines on very young black boys, including autism [5].
If that weren’t enough, there are other vaccines that cause dramatic health adverse reactions all over the world, which U.S. health consumers deliberately are not permitted to know due to Big Pharma’s obvious media control and censorship. However, the vaccine safety advocacy group SaneVax [6] has been tracking, reporting on vaccines ‘science’, and also telling the tragic personal stories of damaged vaccinees regarding the three HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccines Gardasil®, Cervarix®, and Gardasil 9®.
In response to the growing number of adolescents becoming seriously ill after receiving HPV vaccines worldwide, in late April 2016, SaneVax released an open letter challenging the European Union’s EMA (European Medicines Agency) official statement regarding HPV vaccine safety. One feature of that SaneVax challenge is a set of questions composed with the assistance of various European experts addressing the three HPV vaccines science, safety, efficacy, toxicity, benefit versus risk ratio, foreign DNA in the vaccines, and other issues. Here is the link to those questions.
One clear problem about the Gardasil vaccine, few knew, was the Australian government’s not knowing about the misrepresentation on the “Gardasil Product Information Safety Trail Data” regarding “product information stating erroneously that saline had been used in one controlled safety trial for under 16-year olds.” That ‘misspeak’ rightfully was brought to the Australian Government’s Department of Health attention; subsequently they acknowledged it along with a correction request made to the vaccine maker, Merck, Sharpe and Dohme Australia, according to the Department of Health’s September 3, 2015 letter to Dr Deirdre Little.
Isn’t it interesting how scientific facts either get lost or messy like spaghetti?
One of the SaneVax questions asked, as part of a seven-page query, is most disturbing:
As far as we know health professionals have not been warned to look for the risk of leukaemia among vaccinated adolescents as suggested in the assessment report referred to below (*). What actions (if any) have been undertaken to determine whether or not HPV vaccines could cause or trigger this condition in certain pre-disposed individuals?
Nevertheless, a powerful feature of the SaneVax challenge includes 15 pages of co-signers to the open letter (of which I am one) from concerned persons in numerous countries, who back SaneVax in the questions they’ve asked. That strategic action indicates the scope of concern about the damage HPV vaccines do to those who receive them, especially without prior fully informed consent, e.g., the vaccine package insert adverse reactions and contraindications information. How can the EMA disregard what’s going on with HPV vaccines?
In the open letter to the EMA, SaneVax points out a recent study regarding “Adverse events following HPV vaccination, Alberta 2006-2014”http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26921782 that
Despite the fact that this study uncovered information indicating 1 in 10 Gardasil users were either admitted to a hospital or an emergency room within 42 days of injection, the conclusion was ‘Rates of AEFI after HPV immunization in Alberta are low and consistent with types of events seen elsewhere.’
Rather squirrelly scientific interpretations and reporting, I’d say!
The science and medical literature regarding HPV vaccines, as with ALL vaccines, are skewed in favor of vaccines per se, their Big Pharma manufacturers and what’s called “consensus science,” rather than the actual FACTS of “science-based medicine.” This article highlights those ‘scientific liberties’ or ‘editorial privileges’ plus SaneVax’s most impressive and laudable undertaking to prod the EU’s EMA to “come clean” and be transparently accountable to healthcare consumers.
References:
[1] https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/08/22/breaking-cdc-whistleblower-thompson-in-grave-danger-now/[2] http://www.activistpost.com/2016/04/why-vaxxed-was-shot-down-at-tribeca-up-close-and-personal.html[3]http://www.naturalnews.com/053790_MMR_research_data_William_Thompson_vaccine_safety_science.html[4] http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/obama-grants-immunity-to-cdc-whistleblower-on-measles-vaccine-link-to-autism/[5] http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4546421/rep-bill-posey-calling-investigation-cdcs-mmr-reasearch-fraud[6] http://sanevax.org/
Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.
According to an aggregation of surveys done by the British newspaper, more than 33,000 civilians were killed or injured by explosives in 2015, up by over 50 percent since records began in 2011.
In the last year alone, the number of civilian deaths caused by explosive weapons increased dramatically in Turkey, which has suffered violent outbursts sparked by the war in nearby Syria. Deaths from bombings in Turkey rose by a staggering 7,682 percent between 2014 and 2015, as the security situation since 2011 has deteriorated, while in Yemen it rose by 1,204 percent.
Significant increases were reported in areas where Islamist groups such as Islamic State (ISIS) or affiliates of Al-Qaeda are active, such as Egypt (142 percent),Libya (85 percent) and Syria (39 percent). Nigeria, which is fighting an insurgency of Islamist group Boko Haram, also saw a spike in bomb-related deaths, which are up by 22 percent.
The number of suicide attacks specifically since 2014 stayed about the same at 253. But they were more deadly, with the number of civilian deaths from suicide attacks rising to 9,205 over the same period—an increase of 68 percent.
Suicide attacks were the cause of over half of the 16,180 civilian deaths or injuries from bombs. Suicide bombings occurred in 21 countries in 2015, the highest figure recorded for the spread of the deadly trend. Among the new entries was France, which suffered its first such attacks in November when suicide shootings and bombings across Paris killed 130.