A Syrian Medical Student on Learning to Heal Amid War ozy.com


http://www.ozy.com/pov/a-syrian-medical-student-on-learning-to-heal-amid-war/72656

A Syrian Medical Student on Learning to Heal Amid War

 

A Syrian man receives treatment at a community clinic turned hospital, thanks to 10 volunteer doctors.

SourceEmin Sansar/Getty

 

why you should care

Because life and medical training continue, even in war zones.

 

Years of fighting have undermined much of Syria’s infrastructure, and many parts, especially the Damascus suburb of Daraya, have been reduced to rubble. Syrian health care’s been caught in the crossfire, with dozens of hospitals across the 17-million-strong nation damaged and thousands of doctors fleeing the violence. …..

 

New vote on fox hunting | News | The Times & The Sunday Times


spiritandanimal.wordpress.com

Ministers are planning a fresh vote on repealing the fox hunting ban. A source close to Andrea Leadsom, the environment secretary, confirmed that she stood by David Cameron’s…

Source: New vote on fox hunting | News | The Times & The Sunday Times

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen

Günther Oettinger entsetzt mit rassistischen und homophoben Aussagen 29. Oktober 2016, 11:16 – derstandard.at/2000046675466/Guenther-Oettinger-entsetzt-mit-rassistischen-und-homophoben-Aussagen


 

Video zeigt ehemaligen Digitalkommissar bei Rede im kleinen Kreise

Erst gestern wurde bekanntgegeben, dass der EU-Digital-Kommissar Günther Oettinger Haushaltskommissar werden soll, nun holt ihn ein Video ein, in dem der Deutsche mit rassistischen und homophoben Aussagen entsetzt. Der Clip zeigt Oettinger bei einer Rede im kleinen Kreis. Aufgenommen wurde das Video offenbar am vergangenen Mittwoch beim EuropaAbend des Hamburger Unternehmerverbandes AGA. „Schlitzaugen“, die alle gleich aussehen Vor der Aufnahme des Videos soll der Kommissar etwa vom wachsenden Einfluss der „Schlitzaugen“ gesprochen haben. „Alle Anzug, Einreiher, dunkelbau und die Haare von links nach rechts mit schwarzer Schuhcreme gekämmt“, ist von Oettinger in dem Clip zu hören. Der Deutsche will so das Treffen mit chinesischen Ministern erlebt haben, die in der EU zu Besuch waren. sebas travellingDieses Video zeigt den ehemaligen EU-Digitalkommissar bei einer Rede im kleinen Kreise. Keine Frauenquote und somit keine Frauen Bei der Delegation war auch keine Frau dabei, da man es laut Oettinger ja mit völlig anderen Werten zu tun hat, wo es beispielsweise keine Frauenquote gibt und laut dem Kommissar „folgerichtig“ keine Frau mit dabei war. Danach geht der Kommissar noch auf den bayrischen Ministerpräsidenten Horst Seehofer los und bezeichnet ihn als „Populisten light“. Pflicht-Homoehe und Export der eigenen Werte Zuletzt ist von Oettinger noch zu hören, dass es den Menschen „hierzulande viel zu gut geht“, sodass Ideen wie ein früheres Pensionsalter mit 62 oder 63 Jahren diskutiert wird. Dies würde irgendwann dazu führen, dass eine „Pflicht-Homoehe“ eingeführt wird, so die Schlussfolgerung des 63-Jährigen. Das sei laut Oettinger aber keinesfalls deutsche Tagesordnung, vielmehr sollte man sich darauf konzentrieren, nicht nur die S-Klasse, sondern auch „unsere Werte und unser Menschenbild“ zu exportieren. (dk, 29.10.2016) – derstandard.at/2000046675466/Guenther-Oettinger-entsetzt-mit-rassistischen-und-homophoben-Aussagen

 

 

 

Günther Oettinger entsetzt mit rassistischen und homophoben Aussagen – Netzpolitik – derStandard.at › WebGünther Oettinger entsetzt mit rassistischen und homophoben Aussagen – Netzpolitik – derStandard.at › Web

 

Be thou our Vision — frcraig1


This week I read a language analysis of the third presidential debate from the Bloomberg report. In it, the author examined how each of the candidates expresses his or herself to the American people. The writer noted that Mr. Trump’s tendency is to express the issues we face in the negative often using words like […]

via Be thou our Vision — frcraig1

Juncker: EU-Kommissar für Digitales, der deutsche EU-Kommissar Günther Oettinger, soll in der Kommission das Haushaltsressort übernehmen


Juncker: Oettinger soll EU-Haushaltskommissar werden

28. Oktober 2016, 18:2032

Postings

Derzeit EU-Kommissar für Digitales der deutsche EU-Kommissar Günther Oettinger soll in der Kommission das Haushaltsressort übernehmen. Da EU-Vizepräsidentin und Haushaltskommissarin Kristalina Georgiewa das Amt wegen ihres Wechsels zur Weltbank niederlege, habe er Oettinger gebeten, Georgiewas Posten zu übernehmen, erklärte EU-Kommissionspräsident Jean-Claude Juncker am Freitag in Brüssel. Oettinger ist derzeit EU-Kommissar für Digitales. (APA, 28.10. 2016) – derstandard.at/2000046657177/Juncker-Oettinger-soll-EU-Haushaltskommissar-werden

Rede von EU-Kommissar Günther Oettinger am 26. Oktober 2016 in Hamburg: „I am ashamed by this German representative in the EU commission. When he left I took the chance to thank him for this refreshing piece of racism…“


Veröffentlicht am 28.10.2016

The evening of October 26th has been full of surprises. I went to a dinner party which included a speech by Günther Oettinger, European Commissioner for Digital Economy and Society. I disagree with pretty much everything he said and published about digital topics, especially about the ancillary copyright (Leistungsschutzrecht) for press publishers. As a publisher I am convinced that this is the worst idea anyone who cares about publishing could have.
Anyway, I wanted to hear what Oettinger had to say about the challenges of the digital revolution. You never know. First I was surprised about his ability to speak freely and be entertaining at the same time. But then his speech got an unexpected twist.
Suddenly he spoke about „chiselers and chinky eyes“ (Schlitzaugen – a snotty German word for Asien people) we should be afraid of. And his speech turned partly in to a racistic, homophobic and sexist piece of political polemic. I started to tape it and here are the „highlights“.
I am ashamed by this German representative in the EU commission. When he left I took the chance to thank him for this refreshing piece of racism. He didn’t understand what I meant. He doesn’t even know that he is saying offensive things. Behind him stood Gunther Bonz, president of the Federation of European Private Port Operators, trying to lecture me by saying: „There are not only do-gooders (Gutmenschen)“. I responded: „When this word becomes an insult, we are lost“.
It has been a disturbing evening. Some guests clearly disagreed with what Oettinger said, some very much agreed and enjoyed it, and many defended his insults as some kind of punchline to make a point. A guy at our table wanted to convince me, that an offensive speech can be the basis for a good discussion. Surprisingly when I became offensive and called him ugly and told him that his suit looked cheap, the quality of the discussion did not improve.
After this evening I had the impression that Günther Oettinger is an inhuman asshole. Much worse though was the reaction of the people. Few stood up against the mean stupidities Oettinger said and way to many agreed with him. This is not the world I wanna live in. I want my kids to become people that show respect and decency to everybody. Much more than this failure of an EU commissioner.

Veröffentlicht am 28.10.2016

The evening of October 26th has been full of surprises. I went to a dinner party which included a speech by Günther Oettinger, European Commissioner for Digital Economy and Society. I disagree with pretty much everything he said and published about digital topics, especially about the ancillary copyright (Leistungsschutzrecht) for press publishers. As a publisher I am convinced that this is the worst idea anyone who cares about publishing could have.
Anyway, I wanted to hear what Oettinger had to say about the challenges of the digital revolution. You never know. First I was surprised about his ability to speak freely and be entertaining at the same time. But then his speech got an unexpected twist.
Suddenly he spoke about „chiselers and chinky eyes“ (Schlitzaugen – a snotty German word for Asien people) we should be afraid of. And his speech turned partly in to a racistic, homophobic and sexist piece of political polemic. I started to tape it and here are the „highlights“.
I am ashamed by this German representative in the EU commission. When he left I took the chance to thank him for this refreshing piece of racism. He didn’t understand what I meant. He doesn’t even know that he is saying offensive things. Behind him stood Gunther Bonz, president of the Federation of European Private Port Operators, trying to lecture me by saying: „There are not only do-gooders (Gutmenschen)“. I responded: „When this word becomes an insult, we are lost“.
It has been a disturbing evening. Some guests clearly disagreed with what Oettinger said, some very much agreed and enjoyed it, and many defended his insults as some kind of punchline to make a point. A guy at our table wanted to convince me, that an offensive speech can be the basis for a good discussion. Surprisingly when I became offensive and called him ugly and told him that his suit looked cheap, the quality of the discussion did not improve.
After this evening I had the impression that Günther Oettinger is an inhuman asshole. Much worse though was the reaction of the people. Few stood up against the mean stupidities Oettinger said and way to many agreed with him. This is not the world I wanna live in. I want my kids to become people that show respect and decency to everybody. Much more than this failure of an EU commissioner.

Breaking: Constitutional Challenge against CETA Trade Agreement Filed in Canada’s Federal Court


ceta

 

Breaking: Constitutional Challenge against CETA Trade Agreement Filed in Canada’s Federal Court

Lawyer Rocco Galati, on behalf of the Honourable Paul Hellyer, P.C., and others, launches a constitutional challenge against the CETA, in the Federal Court of Canada

The statement of claim challenging the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) was filed at the Federal Court of Canada on Friday October 21.

This development comes at a time when the EU country of Belgium refused to sign the free trade pact citing objections from the Belgian territory of Wallonia.

There has been a lot of pressure to see this agreement ratified, and those powerful entities pushing for its passage will likely not let Wallonia’s NO interrupt their ambitions.

This constitutional challenge is therefore highly important, and has implications for other such international agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which the Canadian government is pursuing. 

Media Release

CETA: Comprehensive Economic and Trade  Agreement

Lawyer Rocco Galati, on behalf of the Honourable Paul Hellyer, P.C., and others, launches a constitutional challenge against the CETA, in the Federal Court of Canada

October 21st, 2016 – Canada’s longest-serving member of the Queen’s privy Council, the Honourable Paul Hellyer, P.C., along with two co-plaintiffs, Ann Emmett and George Crowell, both prominent members of the Committee on Monetary  and Economic Reform (‘COMER”), launched a constitutional challenge against the much-maligned Canada-Europe Trade Agreement (“CETA”), at the Federal Court  of Canada today.

Their lawyer, constitutional lawyer Rocco Galati, filed the statement of claim on his clients’ behalf on October 21st, 2016

The Plaintiff’s central challenge is four-fold, namely that:

(1) the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to sign, execute and implement treaties without the express prior authority of Parliament through an Act of Parliament

(2) the vast majority of the CETA articles and their impact encroach on exclusive Provincial spheres of jurisdiction protected by the division of powers under the Constitution Act, 1867

(3) the CETA guts and extinguishes the constitutionally  protected Judiciary in Canada by creating foreign tribunals to determine property and legal issues in Canada without any judicial oversight or jurisdiction of the Canadian Courts over the disputes; and

(4) various articles of the CETA violate constitutional enshrined rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedomsand over-rides Charter guarantees that ground Canada’s ability to mount public programs on Health, Education, Social Services, and public utilities including the elimination of subsidies, monopolies, and state enterprises for public welfare. In short, the treaty places the rights of private foreign investors over those of the Canadian Constitution and Canadian citizens.

The Plaintiffs further argue that the federal government breached its right to vote under section 3 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms inseparable from the constitutional right of “no taxation without representation” because the CETA was not properly debated and authorized by Parliament.

In addition to seeking several declarations, to clarify the Constitutional authority of the Executive branch of government to do this, the Plaintiff’s also seek interim injunctions to prevent the federal government from signing, ratifying and implementing the CETA.

Video: SAY NO TO CETA, with Hon. Paul Hellyer

 

More details will be disclosed tomorrow, Tuesday October 25, in Toronto.

Hon, Paul Hellyer, former Minister of Defense is one of the plaintiffs and is visiting Western Canadian cities over the next two weeks outlining his concerns.

Calgary: October 24, 7:00PM – John Dutton Theatre Library  –  616 Macleod Trail SE

Edmonton: October 26, 7:00PM – Central Lions Recreation – 11113 113 Street

Victoria: October 28 – 7:00PM –  Camosun College  Lansdowne Campus  (Fisher 100) – 3100 Foul Bay Road

Vancouver: November 1 –  7:-00PM UBC Campus  (Buchanan A201) – 1866 Main Mall

 

 

 

Source: Breaking: Constitutional Challenge against CETA Trade Agreement Filed in Canada’s Federal Court

Syria and the Left: Time to Break the Silence     : Information Clearing House – ICH


October 21, 2016 „Information Clearing House“ – „Counterpunch„- The cold, hard reality of the war in Syria is that the violence, bloodshed, and chaos continues unabated while the Left, such as it is, continues on in a state of schizophrenic madness. Different points of view, conflicting ideological tendencies, and a misunderstanding of the reality of the conflict are all relevant issues to be interrogated, with civility and reasoned debate in short supply. But those issues are not the urgent task of this article; the Left does need to seriously self-reflect though about just how it responds to crises of imperialism and issues of war and peace.

However, what is urgently needed at this moment is a clear and unequivocal position on the future of this war, and the lives of all Syrians – political allegiances notwithstanding – as the escalation of the war approaches. There is little doubt that Hillary Clinton will win the crown of ringmaster of the political circus that is the US election. And, as she eases her freshly osculated behind into the leather captain’s chair in the Oval Office, it is only a matter of time before she ratchets up US military involvement in Syria, with a full US war, and attempted regime change, becoming all but a certainty.

And where will the Left be then? This question is not merely rhetorical as the Left has found itself in the usual circular firing squad predicament over the war in Syria. And though the issue continues to be debated, what should be beyond dispute is what the position on intervention into the war should be.

And as I brace for the predictable barrage of hate mail and name-calling from both sides of this debate – I’m mostly inured to that sort of thing after years of it – I want to make one point that should be obvious, and yet has become somehow controversial: opposing the war is the duty of all true anti-war activists.

But what does it mean to oppose the war? Does it mean that we should be opposing just Russian and Syrian bombs being dropped? Does it mean that only US-Saudi-Turkey-Israeli supplied weapons are doing the killing? Sadly, these too are not rhetorical questions as so many on the Left, including many self-described anti-imperialists, have positioned themselves as hawks in a war that has utterly devastated the country. It seems that many, myself included up to a point, have gotten so enveloped in the embrace of partisanship in this war that we have forgotten that our responsibility is to the people of Syria and to peace and justice.

Some on the pro-Assad side of the argument will correctly note that the role of the anti-war activist in the West is, above all, to oppose the imperialism of the West itself. And indeed, that is a primary responsibility. Others on the Left will argue that the responsibility of activists is to support liberation struggles of fellow revolutionaries. And while the revolutionary content of the rebel side in Syria has been sidelined by a hodgepodge of Saudi and Qatari-financed jihadists – the uprising began as a response to the Syrian government’s neoliberal policies and brutality, among other things – this cannot be taken to mean that countless innocent men, women, and children have not been maimed and killed by Syrian and Russian weapons, jets, and fighters.

Be that as it may, the question now before us is this: where do you stand on direct US intervention?

In the long and convoluted history of this war there have been precious few moments of clear and unmistakable moral judgment. If anything, the portrait of the war in Syria is colored in shades of gray, with little black and white to be found.

If you’re supportive of the anti-Assad forces, then it’s quite likely you’ve chosen to ignore the mountains of evidence that there is no “revolution” in Syria but rather a vicious contra-style war being fomented by US-NATO and its toadies in the Gulf, Turkey, and Israel. If you’re supportive of Assad then it’s a certainty that you’ve chosen to ignore or downplay the horrific violence of the bombings, the brutality of the torture chambers, and other unspeakable atrocities (I admit that I have often strayed too far into the latter) out of a desire to uphold the nominally anti-imperialist position.

And where has this left Syria? Where has it brought the Left? We’re no closer to an end to this horrific war, nor are we any closer to a resolution to the cancerous spread of terrorism in the region. Maybe just a few more US-supplied weapons and US-funded fighters will do the trick? Maybe a few more Russian and Syrian bombs will solve the crisis? Well, if you’ve been paying attention, neither one of those has brought Syria any closer to peace. And isn’t that what we’re allegedly supposed to be upholding?

And how about the refugees? I’ve seen the fascist talking points spouted by many fake “anti-imperialists” who with one breath proclaim their commitment to peace and justice, and with another demonize and scapegoat Syrian refugees whose politics don’t align with the pro-Assad position. Words like “traitors,” “cowards,” and “terrorists,” are shamefully applied to ordinary Syrians fleeing to Europe and elsewhere in hopes of saving their families. Indeed, it is precisely this narrative that is at the core of the white supremacist, fascist ideology that underlies a significant amount of the support base for Assad and his allies (see David Duke, David Icke, Alexander Dugin, Brother Nathanel, Alex Jones, Mimi al-Laham, Ken O’Keefe, and on and on and on). I’m sorry to say it, but it’s true, and too many of the pro-Assad camp have willfully ignored this fundamental point.

On the other side though, the unwillingness of the “Syrian revolution” camp to face up to the fact that they have unwittingly made themselves into the left flank of US interventionism and imperialism is cause for public shaming as well. Were this the 1980s one wonders whether they’d be saying the same things about the “revolutionary” contras in Central America who, like the so-called rebels in Syria, were also backed with US weapons, money, and training. How about the mujahideen in Afghanistan? Has the collective memory of the Left gotten so short? And what about those foreign fighters fleeing Syria? Are they revolutionaries when they go back to Libya and engage in human trafficking for profit? Or to Chechnya to smuggle Afghan heroin? Or to Saudi Arabia or anywhere else?

Undoubtedly there are people on both sides of this debate who, if they’re still reading (doubtful), are frothing at the mouth with rage as they prepare to send their hate mail or attack this article and me on social media. All of that is perfectly fine by me as my feelings are of little consequence in this war that has killed hundreds of thousands, and displaced millions.

But the conversation I’m hoping to spur here is not about the past, but about the future.

And so I put out the call, here and now, to all people of the Left and all those who wrap themselves in the shroud of revolution and anti-imperialism: where do you stand on intervention?

To the anti-Assad camp, I ask: What will you be doing when Hillary’s fire burns and cauldron bubbles? Will you continue to ignore the material reality of this war in favor of the chimera of a revolution betrayed? Put simply: will you be supporting US imperialism in the name of the “revolution”?

To the pro-Assad Syria fetishists, I ask: Will you continue to pretend that the only crimes and atrocities being committed are those veiled behind Old Glory? Are you comfortable in the knowledge that this war will continue on indefinitely so long as all outside actors continue to use Syria as merely a square on their respective geopolitical chessboards? Will you continue to delude yourselves by refusing to accept the plainly obvious truth that no state or group has the best interests of Syrians at heart? Will you allow yourselves to be the useful idiots of carefully calculated political maneuvering?

I ask these questions as someone who took a firmly pro-Assad position from the very beginning, someone who felt (as I, and many others, still do) that Syria, like Libya, was a victim of US-NATO-GCC-Israel imperialism and that, as such, it should be defended. And while I still uphold that resistance, I also have enough humility to know that, in doing so, I abandoned other core beliefs such as defense of ALL oppressed people, including the ones with politics I reject.

I ask these questions as someone who takes the very notion of anti-imperialism seriously, and who is dismayed by the disgusting cooptation of that word by fascists, chauvinists, white supremacists, and neocolonial degenerates who use it for political expediency. This cannot be allowed to stand.

The direct US war in Syria is coming. Russia’s war in Syria is already active. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Israel have been fomenting war in Syria from the beginning, all in support of the Empire’s strategic goals. And hundreds of thousands of bodies have been buried in the sand and soil.

How many more bodies are we comfortable burying? How much longer before peace is once again on the table? How many more years before we realize that this war will never end on a battlefield?

Either way, I’ll see anyone who wants to join me on the front lines of protest when the Queen of Chaos launches her war. That’s where I’ve been many times before, and will be for years to come.

And that’s where the Left ought to be.

Eric Draitser is the founder of StopImperialism.org and host of CounterPunch Radio. He is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City. You can reach him at ericdraitser@gmail.com.

Source: Syria and the Left: Time to Break the Silence     : Information Clearing House – ICH

BOOM! Wikileaks Confirms Hillary Sold Weapons To ISIS Although Hillary Clinton has repeatedly denied that she sold weapons to the Islamic Stats while serving as Secretary of State, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange claims he has proof to the contrary. Thepoliticalinsider.com reported: In Obama’s second term, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorized the shipment of American-made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood, and friendly to the Libyan rebels, in an effort to topple the Libyan/Gaddafi government, and then ship those arms to Syria in order to fund Al Qaeda, and topple Assad in Syria. Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called “Friends of Syria” (aka Al Qaeda/ISIS) to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria. Under oath Hillary Clinton denied she knew about the weapons shipments during public testimony in early 2013 after the Benghazi terrorist attack. In an interview with Democracy Now, Wikileaks’ Julian Assange is now stating that 1,700 emails contained in the Clinton cache directly connect Hillary to Libya to Syria, and directly to Al Qaeda and ISIS. Read His Full Testimony @ (Link: www.thepoliticalinsider.com)