Archive | December 15, 2016

Muslimah Conceives Using Frozen Pubescent Ovarian Tissue and Gives Birth*

Muslimah Conceives Using Frozen Pubescent Ovarian Tissue and Gives Birth*

A London woman is believed to be the first in the world to give birth with the help of ovarian tissue that was frozen before she reached puberty. The tissue was removed from her body ahead of chemotherapy treatment needed to treat a blood disorder.

Moaza Al Matrooshi gave birth to a healthy baby boy on Tuesday, but her path to motherhood wasn’t easy.

The 24-year-old was born with beta thalassaemia, an inherited blood disorder that is fatal if left untreated. She needed chemotherapy as a child, which damages the ovaries, before receiving a bone marrow transplant from her brother.

At the age of nine, long before most girls are faced with reproductive decisions, Al Matrooshi had her right ovary removed in an operation in Leeds, where the tissue was frozen.

The ovary remained frozen until last year, when surgeons in Denmark transplanted five slivers of the tissue back into her body. Four were stitched onto her failed left ovary, and one onto the side of her uterus, according to the BBC.

Although Al Matrooshi had gone through menopause as a result of her blood-disorder treatment, her hormone levels began returning to normal following the procedure, and she began ovulating with her fertility restored.

“Within three months of re-implanting her ovarian tissue, Moaza went from being menopausal to having regular periods again,” Dr. Sara Matthews, who was involved in the procedure, told the BBC.

“She basically became a normal woman in her 20s with normal ovary function.”

She underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) with the help of her husband Ahmed to maximize the chances of having a child. Three embryos were produced from eight collected eggs, two of which were implanted earlier this year.

The result was a bouncing baby boy, delivered at London’s Portland Hospital on Tuesday.

“We’ve been waiting so long for this result – a healthy baby,” Al Matrooshi said.

Doctors believe the breakthrough will give hope to other girls and young women who face infertility as a result of treatment for cancer, blood, or immune disorders.

“This is a huge step forward. We know that ovarian tissue transplantation works for older women, but we’ve never known if we could take tissue from a child, freeze it and make it work again,” Matthews said.

Source*

Related Topics:

U.K.’s Home Office wants to ID Pregnant Women*

Miracle of Pregnancy: Couple Told to Abort or Die*

Pregnant and Brain-dead, yet Forced to Incubate a Fetus*

Hope for Womanhood as Non-Muslims Sympathize with Attacked Pregnant Muslimah

The Growing Problem of Pregnancy Stroke

Abortion Survivor to Congress – ‘I was Born Alive after Being Burned in My Mother’s Womb’*

Yaz and Yasmin, the Birth Control Pills that can Kill*

Giving Birth to a Child Artificially

Reclaiming the Birthing Process

Mother’s Love brings Life back to her Son Two-Hours after Pronounced Dead!*

Christian Nurse Fired for Offering to Pray with Patients, Now Fighting for her Livelihood*

Christian Nurse Fired for Offering to Pray with Patients, Now Fighting for her Livelihood*

By Fr. Mark Hodges

Prime Minister Theresa May told Members of Parliament that Christians should be able to speak about their faith at work, but one senior intensive care nurse was fired for doing just that.

Sister Sarah Kuteh was switched from intensive care at Darent Valley Hospital, where she worked most of her 15 years on the job, to the hospital’s pre-op in November 2015. Part of her job is to ask about the belief of those about to undergo the surgeon’s knife.

The Christian mother of three was “sacked” eight months later for, among other things, simply offering to pray with patients about to be operated on.

Kuteh defended herself and her actions on Christian Concern’s Facebook page, explaining that the religion section of her patient questionnaire often led to voluntary discussions. Most patients were happy to discuss their faith, she says, and she was simply helping them find solace.

She says that if a patient wishes to state their religion (the questionnaire leaves it optional), she would listen while the patient shares, and then share about her own faith.

“I discuss my religion with the patient and how I have found Jesus Christ and how much peace I have — especially when patients come to me feeling really, really devastated.”

In an interview on Britain’s This Morning program, Kuteh said her immediate supervisor talked with her for two minutes in April, noting she had received a few complaints. Kuteh insisted that the patients, prompted by the hospital’s own questionnaire, voluntarily shared about their religion first.

She told This Morning’s Nick Ferrari that she never took the conversation any further if the patient shared that he or she didn’t want to.

After other complaints, including that Kuteh left a Bible with one patient, she was told not to share, and she stopped.

“She said not to — I said, ‘OK,'” Kuteh related on Facebook. Furthermore, the next day she got a letter stating that she could have religious discussions with a patient “if the patient asks for it.”

“I’d always ask the patient if they were comfortable — and most of them were,” Kuteh said. She noted that the complaints were indirect and never to Kuteh herself. The sentiments of any patient that asked not to talk about religion were respected.

Nevertheless, Kuteh was investigated for breaking hospital rules.

 “I wasn’t allowed to bring any witnesses at all, so I couldn’t really test the evidence,” she complained.

Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust fired Kuteh in August because of complaints from patients and because they say Kuteh did not follow her superiors’ direction to stop.

“I want to challenge the decision,” Kuteh said, because without her job she could become homeless. She is suing for unfair dismissal.

The employer defended Kuteh’s firing, telling the U.K’s MirrorOnline,

 “We have a duty to our patients to ensure that when they are at their most vulnerable, they are not exposed to the unsolicited beliefs and/or views of others, religious or otherwise.”

“How could telling anyone about Jesus Christ really be harmful to any patient?” Kuteh asked.

Source*

Related Topics:

U.K. Public School tried to Punish Teacher who Shared Biblical Marriage Views with Student*

U.K. Judge ‘being driven from the public service’ for Backing Natural Marriage*

U.S. Students form Protective Wall around Praying Muslim Classmates*

So ‘no one eats alone’ Muslim-owned Restaurant Offering Elderly and Homeless Free Meals on Christmas Day*

School Teacher Tells Students to Deny God Is Real or Receive Failing Grade*

U.K. Scientists Use Brain Stimulation to ‘Make You Stop Believing In God’*

Christians Are Going To Be Banned From Holding Many Jobs in America*

UK Bishop Warns Of ‘A Slide Towards Ever Greater State Control’ as Pressure Mounts On Christians*

Why a Christian Woman is Wearing Hijab For Lent*

Christian By Name and Religious By Nature

 

Key Temer Aid Resigns as Scandal Closes in*

Key Temer Aid Resigns as Scandal Closes in*

Embattled Brazilian President Michael Temer | Photo: Reuters

 

Key aide and lifelong friend, Jose Yunes, is the closest Temer ally to fall to corruption charges, and the seventh resignation in six months.

On Tuesday José Yunes, a key aide and lifelong friend to embattled Brazilian President Michel Temer, resigned in the wake of testimony that he had accepted a US$1.2 million dollar bribe on behalf of Temer.

Yunes, who was Temer’s lawyer before being appointed as a “special advisor” to the president after the parliamentary coup which brought Temer to power in July, was reportedly named during plea bargained testimony of a former executive of the Brazilian construction giant Odebrecht, the company at the heart of the “Car Wash” scandal.

The resignation of one of Temer’s closest confidants comes in the wake of allegations last week that the President himself received almost U.S$3 million in illegal campaign contributions. While he denies the allegation, Yunes said he was resigning to “preserve his dignity” and in the hopes that his resignation will help Temer pursue his austerity agenda.

That agenda hit a milestone on Tuesday as Brazil’s parliament passed a vicious 20-year ban on any social spending, a decision which the U.N. Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights called an “historic mistake.” Thousands of Brazilians have protested the measure, with dozens arrested, as Temer’s popularity has hit all-time lows, with only 10% approving of his plans to end social spending and cut state pensions. Almost 65% of Brazilians want Temer to resign immediately.

Yunes’ resignation comes as speculation increases that Minister of Civil Infrastructure Wellington Moreira Franco has also submitted a resignation letter after he was named in the Odebrecht plea bargain. Franco’s resignation could be a significant blow to Temer’s plans to privatize most of Brazil’s public infrastructure.

In July and August, Temer led a parliamentary coup against democratically-elected President Dilma Rousseff, whom he and others accused of corruption despite Rousseff having been cleared of all charges by an independent investigator. Soon after her impeachment, several coup leaders were recorded admitting that the move against Rousseff was an attempt to end the “Car Wash” investigation into political corruption

Source*

Related Topics:

Brazil Revolts as Michel Temer Forces Austerity, U.S. Dirty Tricks Exposed*

Brazil’s Coup Leader Temer Banned from Politics for 8 Years*

Brazil’s Coup President Michel Temer to Lift Ban on Foreign Ownership of Land*

Brazil Just Approved 20-Year Spending Freeze to Punish the Poor*

In Brazil, Major New Corruption Scandals Engulf the Faction that Impeached Dilma*

Court Rules in Favour of Brazilians Protest Against Temer inside Olympic Venues*

War Is a Racket*

War Is a Racket*

By Major General Smedley Butler

Smedley Darlington Butler

  • Born: West Chester, Pa., July 30, 1881
  • Educated: Haverford School
  • Married: Ethel C. Peters, of Philadelphia, June 30, 1905
  • Awarded two congressional medals of honor:
    1. capture of Vera Cruz, Mexico, 1914
    2. capture of Ft. Riviere, Haiti, 1917
  • Distinguished service medal, 1919
  • Major General – United States Marine Corps
  • Retired Oct. 1, 1931
  • On leave of absence to act as
    director of Dept. of Safety, Philadelphia, 1932
  • Lecturer — 1930’s
  • Republican Candidate for Senate, 1932
  • Died at Naval Hospital, Philadelphia, June 21, 1940
  • For more information about Major General Butler,
    contact the United States Marine Corps.

CHAPTER ONE

War Is a Racket

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few — the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.

Again they are choosing sides. France and Russia met and agreed to stand side by side. Italy and Austria hurried to make a similar agreement. Poland and Germany cast sheep’s eyes at each other, forgetting for the nonce [one unique occasion], and their dispute over the Polish Corridor.

The assassination of King Alexander of Jugoslavia [Yugoslavia] complicated matters. Jugoslavia and Hungary, long bitter enemies, were almost at each other’s throats. Italy was ready to jump in. But France was waiting. So was Czechoslovakia. All of them are looking ahead to war. Not the people — not those who fight and pay and die — only those who foment wars and remain safely at home to profit.

There are 40,000,000 men under arms in the world today, and our statesmen and diplomats have the temerity to say that war is not in the making.

Hell’s bells! Are these 40,000,000 men being trained to be dancers?

Not in Italy, to be sure. Premier Mussolini knows what they are being trained for. He, at least, is frank enough to speak out. Only the other day, Il Duce in “International Conciliation,” the publication of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said:

“And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. . . . War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it.”

Undoubtedly Mussolini means exactly what he says. His well-trained army, his great fleet of planes, and even his navy are ready for war — anxious for it, apparently. His recent stand at the side of Hungary in the latter’s dispute with Jugoslavia showed that. And the hurried mobilization of his troops on the Austrian border after the assassination of Dollfuss showed it too. There are others in Europe too whose sabre rattling presages war, sooner or later.

Herr Hitler, with his rearming Germany and his constant demands for more and more arms, is an equal if not greater menace to peace. France only recently increased the term of military service for its youth from a year to eighteen months.

Yes, all over, nations are camping in their arms. The mad dogs of Europe are on the loose. In the Orient the maneuvering is more adroit. Back in 1904, when Russia and Japan fought, we kicked out our old friends the Russians and backed Japan. Then our very generous international bankers were financing Japan. Now the trend is to poison us against the Japanese. What does the “open door” policy to China mean to us? Our trade with China is about $90,000,000 a year. Or the Philippine Islands? We have spent about $600,000,000 in the Philippines in thirty-five years and we (our bankers and industrialists and speculators) have private investments there of less than $200,000,000.

Then, to save that China trade of about $90,000,000, or to protect these private investments of less than $200,000,000 in the Philippines, we would be all stirred up to hate Japan and go to war — a war that might well cost us tens of billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of lives of Americans, and many more hundreds of thousands of physically maimed and mentally unbalanced men.

Of course, for this loss, there would be a compensating profit — fortunes would be made. Millions and billions of dollars would be piled up. By a few. Munitions makers. Bankers. Ship builders. Manufacturers. Meat packers. Speculators. They would fare well.

Yes, they are getting ready for another war. Why shouldn’t they? It pays high dividends.

But what does it profit the men who are killed? What does it profit their mothers and sisters, their wives and their sweethearts? What does it profit their children?

What does it profit anyone except the very few to whom war means huge profits?

Yes, and what does it profit the nation?

Take our own case. Until 1898 we didn’t own a bit of territory outside the mainland of North America. At that time our national debt was a little more than $1,000,000,000. Then we became “internationally minded.” We forgot, or shunted aside, the advice of the Father of our country. We forgot George Washington’s warning about “entangling alliances.” We went to war. We acquired outside territory. At the end of the World War period, as a direct result of our fiddling in international affairs, our national debt had jumped to over $25,000,000,000. Our total favorable trade balance during the twenty-five-year period was about $24,000,000,000. Therefore, on a purely bookkeeping basis, we ran a little behind year for year, and that foreign trade might well have been ours without the wars.

It would have been far cheaper (not to say safer) for the average American who pays the bills to stay out of foreign entanglements. For a very few this racket, like bootlegging and other underworld rackets, brings fancy profits, but the cost of operations is always transferred to the people — who do not profit.

CHAPTER TWO

Who Makes the Profits?

The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some $52,000,000,000. Figure it out. That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven’t paid the debt yet. We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our children’s children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.

The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits — ah! that is another matter — twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent — the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear. Uncle Sam has the money. Let’s get it.

Of course, it isn’t put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and “we must all put our shoulders to the wheel,” but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket — and are safely pocketed. Let’s just take a few examples:

Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people — didn’t one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something? How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation. Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year. It wasn’t much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let’s look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.

Take one of our little steel companies that patriotically shunted aside the making of rails and girders and bridges to manufacture war materials. Well, their 1910-1914 yearly earnings averaged $6,000,000. Then came the war. And, like loyal citizens, Bethlehem Steel promptly turned to munitions making. Did their profits jump — or did they let Uncle Sam in for a bargain? Well, their 1914-1918 average was $49,000,000 a year!

Or, let’s take United States Steel. The normal earnings during the five-year period prior to the war were $105,000,000 a year. Not bad. Then along came the war and up went the profits. The average yearly profit for the period 1914-1918 was $240,000,000. Not bad.

There you have some of the steel and powder earnings. Let’s look at something else. A little copper, perhaps. That always does well in war times.

Anaconda, for instance. Average yearly earnings during the pre-war years 1910-1914 of $10,000,000. During the war years 1914-1918 profits leaped to $34,000,000 per year.

Or Utah Copper. Average of $5,000,000 per year during the 1910-1914 period. Jumped to an average of $21,000,000 yearly profits for the war period.

Let’s group these five, with three smaller companies. The total yearly average profits of the pre-war period 1910-1914 were $137,480,000. Then along came the war. The average yearly profits for this group skyrocketed to $408,300,000.

A little increase in profits of approximately 200 per cent.

Does war pay? It paid them. But they aren’t the only ones. There are still others. Let’s take leather.

For the three-year period before the war the total profits of Central Leather Company were $3,500,000. That was approximately $1,167,000 a year. Well, in 1916 Central Leather returned a profit of $15,000,000, a small increase of 1,100 per cent. That’s all. The General Chemical Company averaged a profit for the three years before the war of a little over $800,000 a year. Came the war, and the profits jumped to $12,000,000. a leap of 1,400 per cent.

International Nickel Company — and you can’t have a war without nickel — showed an increase in profits from a mere average of $4,000,000 a year to $73,000,000 yearly. Not bad? An increase of more than 1,700 per cent.

American Sugar Refining Company averaged $2,000,000 a year for the three years before the war. In 1916 a profit of $6,000,000 was recorded.

Listen to Senate Document No. 259. The Sixty-Fifth Congress, reporting on corporate earnings and government revenues. Considering the profits of 122 meat packers, 153 cotton manufacturers, 299 garment makers, 49 steel plants, and 340 coal producers during the war. Profits under 25 per cent were exceptional. For instance the coal companies made between 100 per cent and 7,856 per cent on their capital stock during the war. The Chicago packers doubled and tripled their earnings.

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public — even before a Senate investigatory body.

But here’s how some of the other patriotic industrialists and speculators chiseled their way into war profits.

Take the shoe people. They like war. It brings business with abnormal profits. They made huge profits on sales abroad to our allies. Perhaps, like the munitions manufacturers and armament makers, they also sold to the enemy. For a dollar is a dollar whether it comes from Germany or from France. But they did well by Uncle Sam too. For instance, they sold Uncle Sam 35,000,000 pairs of hobnailed service shoes. There were 4,000,000 soldiers. Eight pairs, and more, to a soldier. My regiment during the war had only one pair to a soldier. Some of these shoes probably are still in existence. They were good shoes. But when the war was over Uncle Sam has a matter of 25,000,000 pairs left over. Bought — and paid for. Profits recorded and pocketed.

There was still lots of leather left. So the leather people sold your Uncle Sam hundreds of thousands of McClellan saddles for the cavalry. But there wasn’t any American cavalry overseas! Somebody had to get rid of this leather, however. Somebody had to make a profit in it — so we had a lot of McClellan saddles. And we probably have those yet.

Also somebody had a lot of mosquito netting. They sold your Uncle Sam 20,000,000 mosquito nets for the use of the soldiers overseas. I suppose the boys were expected to put it over them as they tried to sleep in muddy trenches — one hand scratching cooties on their backs and the other making passes at scurrying rats. Well, not one of these mosquito nets ever got to France!

Anyhow, these thoughtful manufacturers wanted to make sure that no soldier would be without his mosquito net, so 40,000,000 additional yards of mosquito netting were sold to Uncle Sam.

There were pretty good profits in mosquito netting in those days, even if there were no mosquitoes in France. I suppose, if the war had lasted just a little longer, the enterprising mosquito netting manufacturers would have sold your Uncle Sam a couple of consignments of mosquitoes to plant in France so that more mosquito netting would be in order.

Airplane and engine manufacturers felt they, too, should get their just profits out of this war. Why not? Everybody else was getting theirs. So $1,000,000,000 — count them if you live long enough — was spent by Uncle Sam in building airplane engines that never left the ground! Not one plane, or motor, out of the billion dollars worth ordered, ever got into a battle in France. Just the same the manufacturers made their little profit of 30, 100, or perhaps 300 per cent.

Undershirts for soldiers cost 14¢ [cents] to make and uncle Sam paid 30¢ to 40¢ each for them — a nice little profit for the undershirt manufacturer. And the stocking manufacturer and the uniform manufacturers and the cap manufacturers and the steel helmet manufacturers — all got theirs.

Why, when the war was over some 4,000,000 sets of equipment — knapsacks and the things that go to fill them — crammed warehouses on this side. Now they are being scrapped because the regulations have changed the contents. But the manufacturers collected their wartime profits on them — and they will do it all over again the next time.

There were lots of brilliant ideas for profit making during the war.

One very versatile patriot sold Uncle Sam twelve dozen 48-inch wrenches. Oh, they were very nice wrenches. The only trouble was that there was only one nut ever made that was large enough for these wrenches. That is the one that holds the turbines at Niagara Falls. Well, after Uncle Sam had bought them and the manufacturer had pocketed the profit, the wrenches were put on freight cars and shunted all around the United States in an effort to find a use for them. When the Armistice was signed it was indeed a sad blow to the wrench manufacturer. He was just about to make some nuts to fit the wrenches. Then he planned to sell these, too, to your Uncle Sam.

Still another had the brilliant idea that colonels shouldn’t ride in automobiles, nor should they even ride on horseback. One has probably seen a picture of Andy Jackson riding in a buckboard. Well, some 6,000 buckboards were sold to Uncle Sam for the use of colonels! Not one of them was used. But the buckboard manufacturer got his war profit.

The shipbuilders felt they should come in on some of it, too. They built a lot of ships that made a lot of profit. More than $3,000,000,000 worth. Some of the ships were all right. But $635,000,000 worth of them were made of wood and wouldn’t float! The seams opened up — and they sank. We paid for them, though. And somebody pocketed the profits.

It has been estimated by statisticians and economists and researchers that the war cost your Uncle Sam $52,000,000,000. Of this sum, $39,000,000,000 was expended in the actual war itself. This expenditure yielded $16,000,000,000 in profits. That is how the 21,000 billionaires and millionaires got that way. This $16,000,000,000 profits is not to be sneezed at. It is quite a tidy sum. And it went to a very few.

The Senate (Nye) committee probe of the munitions industry and its wartime profits, despite its sensational disclosures, hardly has scratched the surface.

Even so, it has had some effect. The State Department has been studying “for some time” methods of keeping out of war. The War Department suddenly decides it has a wonderful plan to spring. The Administration names a committee — with the War and Navy Departments ably represented under the chairmanship of a Wall Street speculator — to limit profits in war time. To what extent isn’t suggested. Hmmm. Possibly the profits of 300 and 600 and 1,600 per cent of those who turned blood into gold in the World War would be limited to some smaller figure.

Apparently, however, the plan does not call for any limitation of losses — that is, the losses of those who fight the war. As far as I have been able to ascertain there is nothing in the scheme to limit a soldier to the loss of but one eye, or one arm, or to limit his wounds to one or two or three. Or to limit the loss of life.

There is nothing in this scheme, apparently, that says not more than 12 per cent of a regiment shall be wounded in battle, or that not more than 7 per cent in a division shall be killed.

Of course, the committee cannot be bothered with such trifling matters.

CHAPTER THREE

Who Pays the Bills?

Who provides the profits — these nice little profits of 20, 100, 300, 1,500 and 1,800 per cent? We all pay them — in taxation. We paid the bankers their profits when we bought Liberty Bonds at $100.00 and sold them back at $84 or $86 to the bankers. These bankers collected $100 plus. It was a simple manipulation. The bankers control the security marts. It was easy for them to depress the price of these bonds. Then all of us — the people — got frightened and sold the bonds at $84 or $86. The bankers bought them. Then these same bankers stimulated a boom and government bonds went to par — and above. Then the bankers collected their profits.

But the soldier pays the biggest part of the bill.

If you don’t believe this, visit the American cemeteries on the battlefields abroad. Or visit any of the veteran’s hospitals in the United States. On a tour of the country, in the midst of which I am at the time of this writing, I have visited eighteen government hospitals for veterans. In them are a total of about 50,000 destroyed men — men who were the pick of the nation eighteen years ago. The very able chief surgeon at the government hospital; at Milwaukee, where there are 3,800 of the living dead, told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed at home.

Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and classrooms and put into the ranks. There they were remolded; they were made over; they were made to “about face”; to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and, through mass psychology, they were entirely changed. We used them for a couple of years and trained them to think nothing at all of killing or of being killed.

Then, suddenly, we discharged them and told them to make another “about face”! This time they had to do their own readjustment, sans [without] mass psychology, sans officers’ aid and advice and sans nation-wide propaganda. We didn’t need them anymore. So we scattered them about without any “three-minute” or “Liberty Loan” speeches or parades. Many, too many, of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed, mentally, because they could not make that final “about face” alone.

In the government hospital in Marion, Indiana, 1,800 of these boys are in pens! Five hundred of them in a barracks with steel bars and wires all around outside the buildings and on the porches. These already have been mentally destroyed. These boys don’t even look like human beings. Oh, the looks on their faces! Physically, they are in good shape; mentally, they are gone.

There are thousands and thousands of these cases, and more and more are coming in all the time. The tremendous excitement of the war, the sudden cutting off of that excitement — the young boys couldn’t stand it.

That’s a part of the bill. So much for the dead — they have paid their part of the war profits. So much for the mentally and physically wounded — they are paying now their share of the war profits. But the others paid, too — they paid with heartbreaks when they tore themselves away from their firesides and their families to don the uniform of Uncle Sam — on which a profit had been made. They paid another part in the training camps where they were regimented and drilled while others took their jobs and their places in the lives of their communities. The paid for it in the trenches where they shot and were shot; where they were hungry for days at a time; where they slept in the mud and the cold and in the rain — with the moans and shrieks of the dying for a horrible lullaby.

But don’t forget — the soldier paid part of the dollars and cents bill too.

Up to and including the Spanish-American War, we had a prize system, and soldiers and sailors fought for money. During the Civil War they were paid bonuses, in many instances, before they went into service. The government, or states, paid as high as $1,200 for an enlistment. In the Spanish-American War they gave prize money. When we captured any vessels, the soldiers all got their share — at least, they were supposed to. Then it was found that we could reduce the cost of wars by taking all the prize money and keeping it, but conscripting [drafting] the soldier anyway. Then soldiers couldn’t bargain for their labor, Everyone else could bargain, but the soldier couldn’t.

Napoleon once said,

“All men are enamored of decorations . . . they positively hunger for them.”

So by developing the Napoleonic system — the medal business — the government learned it could get soldiers for less money, because the boys liked to be decorated. Until the Civil War there were no medals. Then the Congressional Medal of Honor was handed out. It made enlistments easier. After the Civil War no new medals were issued until the Spanish-American War.

In the World War, we used propaganda to make the boys accept conscription. They were made to feel ashamed if they didn’t join the army.

So vicious was this war propaganda that even God was brought into it. With few exceptions our clergymen joined in the clamor to kill, kill, kill. To kill the Germans. God is on our side . . . it is His will that the Germans be killed.

And in Germany, the good pastors called upon the Germans to kill the allies . . . to please the same God. That was a part of the general propaganda, built up to make people war conscious and murder conscious.

Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the “war to end all wars.” This was the “war to make the world safe for democracy.” No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits. No one told these American soldiers that they might be shot down by bullets made by their own brothers here. No one told them that the ships on which they were going to cross might be torpedoed by submarines built with United States patents. They were just told it was to be a “glorious adventure.”

Thus, having stuffed patriotism down their throats, it was decided to make them help pay for the war, too. So, we gave them the large salary of $30 a month.

All they had to do for this munificent sum was to leave their dear ones behind, give up their jobs, lie in swampy trenches, eat canned willy (when they could get it) and kill and kill and kill . . . and be killed.

But wait!

Half of that wage (just a little more than a riveter in a shipyard or a laborer in a munitions factory safe at home made in a day) was promptly taken from him to support his dependents, so that they would not become a charge upon his community. Then we made him pay what amounted to accident insurance — something the employer pays for in an enlightened state — and that cost him $6 a month. He had less than $9 a month left.

Then, the most crowning insolence of all — he was virtually blackjacked into paying for his own ammunition, clothing, and food by being made to buy Liberty Bonds. Most soldiers got no money at all on pay days.

We made them buy Liberty Bonds at $100 and then we bought them back — when they came back from the war and couldn’t find work — at $84 and $86. And the soldiers bought about $2,000,000,000 worth of these bonds!

Yes, the soldier pays the greater part of the bill. His family pays too. They pay it in the same heart-break that he does. As he suffers, they suffer. At nights, as he lay in the trenches and watched shrapnel burst about him, they lay home in their beds and tossed sleeplessly — his father, his mother, his wife, his sisters, his brothers, his sons, and his daughters.

When he returned home minus an eye, or minus a leg or with his mind broken, they suffered too — as much as and even sometimes more than he. Yes, and they, too, contributed their dollars to the profits of the munitions makers and bankers and shipbuilders and the manufacturers and the speculators made. They, too, bought Liberty Bonds and contributed to the profit of the bankers after the Armistice in the hocus-pocus of manipulated Liberty Bond prices.

And even now the families of the wounded men and of the mentally broken and those who never were able to readjust themselves are still suffering and still paying.

CHAPTER FOUR

How to Smash This Racket!

WELL, it’s a racket, all right.

A few profit — and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can’t end it by disarmament conferences. You can’t eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can’t wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.

The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the nations manhood can be conscripted. One month before the Government can conscript the young men of the nation — it must conscript capital and industry and labor. Let the officers and the directors and the high-powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators, be conscripted — to get $30 a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get.

Let the workers in these plants get the same wages — all the workers, all presidents, all executives, all directors, all managers, all bankers — yes, and all generals and all admirals and all officers and all politicians and all government office holders — everyone in the nation be restricted to a total monthly income not to exceed that paid to the soldier in the trenches!

Let all these kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors pay half of their monthly $30 wage to their families and pay war risk insurance and buy Liberty Bonds.

Why shouldn’t they?

They aren’t running any risk of being killed or of having their bodies mangled or their minds shattered. They aren’t sleeping in muddy trenches. They aren’t hungry. The soldiers are!

Give capital and industry and labor thirty days to think it over and you will find, by that time, there will be no war. That will smash the war racket — that and nothing else.

Maybe I am a little too optimistic. Capital still has some say. So capital won’t permit the taking of the profit out of war until the people — those who do the suffering and still pay the price — make up their minds that those they elect to office shall do their bidding, and not that of the profiteers.

Another step necessary in this fight to smash the war racket is the limited plebiscite to determine whether a war should be declared. A plebiscite not of all the voters but merely of those who would be called upon to do the fighting and dying. There wouldn’t be very much sense in having a 76-year-old president of a munitions factory or the flat-footed head of an international banking firm or the cross-eyed manager of a uniform manufacturing plant — all of whom see visions of tremendous profits in the event of war — voting on whether the nation should go to war or not. They never would be called upon to shoulder arms — to sleep in a trench and to be shot. Only those who would be called upon to risk their lives for their country should have the privilege of voting to determine whether the nation should go to war.

There is ample precedent for restricting the voting to those affected. Many of our states have restrictions on those permitted to vote. In most, it is necessary to be able to read and write before you may vote. In some, you must own property. It would be a simple matter each year for the men coming of military age to register in their communities as they did in the draft during the World War and be examined physically. Those who could pass and who would therefore be called upon to bear arms in the event of war would be eligible to vote in a limited plebiscite. They should be the ones to have the power to decide — and not a Congress few of whose members are within the age limit and fewer still of whom are in physical condition to bear arms. Only those who must suffer should have the right to vote.

A third step in this business of smashing the war racket is to make certain that our military forces are truly forces for defense only.

At each session of Congress the question of further naval appropriations comes up. The swivel-chair admirals of Washington (and there are always a lot of them) are very adroit lobbyists. And they are smart. They don’t shout that “We need a lot of battleships to war on this nation or that nation.” Oh no. First of all, they let it be known that America is menaced by a great naval power. Almost any day, these admirals will tell you, the great fleet of this supposed enemy will strike suddenly and annihilate 125,000,000 people. Just like that. Then they begin to cry for a larger navy. For what? To fight the enemy? Oh my, no. Oh, no. For defense purposes only.

Then, incidentally, they announce maneuvers in the Pacific. For defense. Uh, huh.

The Pacific is a great big ocean. We have a tremendous coastline on the Pacific. Will the maneuvers be off the coast, two or three hundred miles? Oh, no. The maneuvers will be two thousand, yes, perhaps even thirty-five hundred miles, off the coast.

The Japanese, a proud people, of course will be pleased beyond expression to see the united States fleet so close to Nippon’s shores. Even as pleased as would be the residents of California were they to dimly discern through the morning mist, the Japanese fleet playing at war games off Los Angeles.

The ships of our navy, it can be seen, should be specifically limited, by law, to within 200 miles of our coastline. Had that been the law in 1898 the Maine would never have gone to Havana Harbor. She never would have been blown up. There would have been no war with Spain with its attendant loss of life. Two hundred miles is ample, in the opinion of experts, for defense purposes. Our nation cannot start an offensive war if its ships can’t go further than 200 miles from the coastline. Planes might be permitted to go as far as 500 miles from the coast for purposes of reconnaissance. And the army should never leave the territorial limits of our nation.

To summarize: Three steps must be taken to smash the war racket.

  1. We must take the profit out of war.
  2. We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war.
  3. We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.

 

CHAPTER FIVE

To Hell with War!

I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war.

Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had “kept us out of war” and on the implied promise that he would “keep us out of war.” Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.

In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.

Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?

Money.

An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and his group:

“There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you (American bankers, American munitions makers, American manufacturers, American speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars.

If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and Italy, cannot pay back this money . . . and Germany won’t.

So . . . “

Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a “war to make the world safe for democracy” and a “war to end all wars.”

Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy.

And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars.

Yes, we have had disarmament conferences and limitations of arms conferences. They don’t mean a thing. One has just failed; the results of another have been nullified. We send our professional soldiers and our sailors and our politicians and our diplomats to these conferences. And what happens?

The professional soldiers and sailors don’t want to disarm. No admiral wants to be without a ship. No general wants to be without a command. Both mean men without jobs. They are not for disarmament. They cannot be for limitations of arms. And at all these conferences, lurking in the background but all-powerful, just the same, are the sinister agents of those who profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not disarm or seriously limit armaments.

The chief aim of any power at any of these conferences has not been to achieve disarmament to prevent war but rather to get more armament for itself and less for any potential foe.

There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane. Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.

The next war, according to experts, will be fought not with battleships, not by artillery, not with rifles and not with machine guns. It will be fought with deadly chemicals and gases.

Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. Yes, ships will continue to be built, for the shipbuilders must make their profits. And guns still will be manufactured and powder and rifles will be made, for the munitions makers must make their huge profits. And the soldiers, of course, must wear uniforms, for the manufacturer must make their war profits too.

But victory or defeat will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists.

If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of building greater prosperity for all peoples. By putting them to this useful job, we can all make more money out of peace than we can out of war — even the munitions makers.

So…I say,

TO HELL WITH WAR!

Source*

Related Topics:

Charlie Chaplin’s Final Speech in the Great Dictator*

Neuroscience has been a Tool of War from the Start*

Obama Just Expanded the Global War on Terror to Somalia*

Rouhani urges Muslims to Unite against ‘great plot’*

The International Criminal Court is investigating U.S. War Crimes, with a Huge Catch*

U.S. has Killed over 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II*

On Gaza, Gaza, Defense Minister Says ‘Next War Will Be The Last’*

The Oil-Gas War Over Syria*

Queen Elizabeth Warns Of ‘Holy War To End All Wars’ *

Britain’s Seven Covert Wars*

The Anguish, Bloodshed and Forgotten Heroes in the Ignored War on Yemen*

British Parliament Confirms Libya War Was Based On Lies …*

Declassified Docs Detail U.S. Role in Dirty War Horrors of Argentina *

NATO Just Attempted to Invade Moldova, but were Thwarted by People’s Resistance*

U.S. Army Captain Files Lawsuit against Obama over ‘Illegal’ War in Iraq and Syria*

Preparing for War or a Huge Profit? Oil Supertankers Forming “World’s Biggest Traffic Jam”*

Putin: Illuminati Plans to Use Islam To Spark World War III*

The “Islamophobia” Industry Feeds War Abroad, Grows Police State at Home*

Clinton’s Emails Reveals a Sunni-Shiite War Would be Good for Israel and the West*

Judge Anna von Reitz: We Are Determined There Will NOT Be a Third World War, We Want the Criminals Recognized as Criminals

U.S. Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson on Perpetual War to Maintain the Empire*

British Soldiers Throw War Medals to the Floor*

Israel’s Undeclared Final War Killed 2,600 Palestinians in October Alone*

The Captain Defied His Orders and Stopped America from Starting World War III*

 

FBI Resume Clinton Foundation Investigation*

FBI Resume Clinton Foundation Investigation*

The FBI have resumed their criminal investigation into the Clinton Foundation, following the election of Donald Trump.

Agents at FBI headquarters have confirmed that their New York field office are to continue the probe into issues of corruption and money laundering connected to the Clintons.

Dailycaller.com reports:

“There were no instructions to shut it down, to discontinue or to stand down on the investigation, but to continue its work,” the former official told the Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview.

He said he received this information about a week ago and that the order originated from the bureau’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. well after the November 8 election.  He did not know who at FBI Headquarters issued the order.

The same source broke the news to The DCNF that the FBI was conducting a multi-city probe of the foundation in as many as five cities: New York, Little Rock, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles and Miami. The source did not know the status of the bureau’s work in the four other cities.

After the election, President-elect Donald Trump indicated that prosecuting rival Hillary Clinton or her foundation would not be a priority.

In an interview with the New York Times on November 21, he said, “I don’t want to hurt the Clintons, I really don’t.”

But he didn’t rule out a continuing probe of the foundation, saying, “we’ll have people that do things,” on the foundation, which the Times wrote was, “perhaps a reference to the F.B.I. or Republicans who might continue to press for prosecutions in the email or foundation cases.”

It’s rare for a president to stop an FBI investigation.  Halting an ongoing probe by the FBI, which is an independent law enforcement agency, can be fraught with many political risks for presidents and can expose them to charges of interfering or politicizing law enforcement activities.

The Clinton Foundation originally started in Little Rock, Arkansas as the main non-profit entity to build and maintain the presidential library for former President Bill Clinton.

As its activities exploded in the United States and overseas, its operations migrated to New York City.

In 2015, the foundation reported it had 528 full-time employees, most of them working in offices located on Wall Street.

Its net assets in 2015 were $347 million according to its Form 990 tax filing with the Internal Revenue Service.

The charity moved in 2011 from Harlem to Wall Street where they shared offices with the investment giant Goldman Sachs, according to WikiLeaks.

The move to Wall Street doubled the foundation’s rent, from $1.8 million to $4 million, according to the charity’s Form 990.

The spark for the FBI investigation appeared to be secret recordings of suspects in Los Angeles involved in money laundering activities who mentioned the Clinton Foundation.    The disclosure triggered an investigation in that city beginning last February, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Other FBI bureaus also opened probes of the foundation in other cities.

On numerous occasions bureau agents also conferred with Peter Schweizer, who chronicled the money flows into the charity from influential and wealthy people and foreign governments and wrote about it in his book titled, “Clinton Cash.”

FBI Director James Comey has been criticized by both Democrats and Republicans for his decisions on probing Hillary Clinton over her use of a private email server for government business.  He ended an investigation in July of this year of her email but then resurrected it just 10 days before the election when her emails showed up in a laptop owned by former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner.

Weiner, who is married to Clinton aide Huma Abedin, is reportedly being investigated on child pornography grounds when he allegedly “sexted” with underage girls.

Senior Justice Department officials reportedly were openly skeptical of the Clinton Foundation case and repeatedly tried to shut down the bureau’s probe.  But the department was not able to shut down the FBI activities.

Source*

Related Topics:

IRS Launches Investigation of Clinton Foundation*

DHS Caught Hacking Georgia Secretary of State Office during the Election (NOT RUSSIA)*

Wikileaks Hits Home: FBI Reopens Clinton Files*

Assassination of Top U.S. Democratic Party Official Leads to FBI Capture of Clinton “Hit Team”*

U.S. Taxpayers Funded Clinton’s Private Email Servers through ‘Former Presidents Act’*

Donations to Clinton Foundation Dry-up as Killary no Longer has a ‘product to sell’*

FBI Leak: Hillary Clinton Foundation Guilty of Treason*

The Clintons and their Bankster Friends, 1992-2016*

Clinton Receives Massive Funding from American-Jewish Oligarch*

DHS Caught Hacking Georgia Secretary of State Office during the Election (NOT RUSSIA)*

DHS Caught Hacking Georgia Secretary of State Office during the Election (NOT RUSSIA)*

The insanely corrupt DHS has ties of it hacking the Georgian Secretary of States office during the election. With all of the anti-Russia propaganda going around GLOBALLY, here is evidence that the DHS was involved in attacking our own government.

Related Topics:

U.K. Ambassador “I’ve met the person who leaked them [Podesta emails]…not Russian and it’s an insider”*

Killary Clinton Loses 18,422 Votes in Day 3 of Wisconsin Recount*

Trump Allies Move to Stop U.S. Election Recount*

Guccifer 2.0 Angry about his DNC Hack being Blamed on Russians*

Official Who Served DNC Election Fraud Papers Found Dead*

Rothschilds, Trump, Killary and the Rigged U.S. Presidential Election*

Vote All You Want, the Secret Government Won’t Change*

Out of the Mouths of Babes_ A 3rd Grader Just Exposed Trump*

With Fighting Over, Aleppo Residents Speak of Terrorists’ Barbarism*

With Fighting Over, Aleppo Residents Speak of Terrorists’ Barbarism*

 

The Syrian army has declared victory in the war-torn city of Aleppo after ousting militants from most of their remaining bastions of resistance. Speaking to Sputnik, eyewitnesses and freelance journalists spoke of threats by militants to beat or kill civilians who might try and flee the besieged eastern portion of the city.

On Monday night, Syrians began celebrating the liberation of Aleppo, as government forces continued the effort to mop up the few remaining pockets of militant resistance. Syrian President Bashar Assad confirmed that the importance of the Syrian army’s victory cannot be overestimated, saying last week that triumph in the battle for Syria’s second city would be a “huge step” toward ending the crisis in the country.

Speaking to Sputnik Arabic about suspected crimes against civilians committed by the militants, one Aleppo resident confirmed that “most inhabitants of eastern Aleppo are saying that the terrorists threatened to kill or cripple them if they tried to escape territories under their control.” The eyewitness added that he personally witnessed militants viciously beat civilians trying to escape to the western portion of the city.

Over the past month, as the Syrian army came close to total victory, an estimated 130,000 civilians that had been trapped in its eastern portion began flooding out en masse, fear of their captors unable to hold them back.
A pro-government activist told Sputnik Arabic that the people coming out of eastern Aleppo are completely exhausted. Most of the civilians were women, children and the elderly, he said, adding that the government is doing everything it can to help them rest and recover from their ordeal.

Speaking to Radio Sputnik, Alaa Ebrahim, a freelance Syrian journalist who returned to Aleppo on Sunday and has since managed to speak with numerous civilians, and even militants who surrendered to the Syrian army, explained that the situation in the city is now “extremely complicated.”

Ebrahim explained for example that “there have been reports that some of the rebels have confiscated some of these civilians’ ID papers, and as a result these civilians are reluctant to leave, in fear of being detained by the Syrian government.”

“There have also been reports that some of the rebel commanders have used some of the ID cards they confiscated to sneak out of eastern Aleppo without being detected by the checkpoints of the Syrian army on the outskirts of eastern Aleppo,” he added.

The journalist said that the Syrian government has established makeshift shelters for many of the 130,000 civilians who evacuated from the city on the city’s outskirts over the past three weeks, with many others now staying with relatives in the government-administered portions of Aleppo.

Asked what civilians on the ground are saying about their liberation, Ebrahim admitted that “to be very transparent about it, people who have crossed into the government-controlled parts of Aleppo – you don’t expect them to criticize the government, as you wouldn’t expect them to criticize the rebels when they were living in rebel areas.”

Syrian residents of the Old City of Aleppo stand in a bus at a crossing point during their evacuation to a distinct government-controlled area of the city early on December 7, 2016 © AFP 2016/ Youssef KARWASHAN

In general, however, the journalist said that he “heard many accounts of people suffering because the ongoing fighting…suffering because most of the aid that went into eastern Aleppo in recent months had been taken by the fighters, and then distributed only to [their] families.”

“The civilians who had nothing to do with the [militants] did not get access to any aid as a result,” Ebrahim stressed.

“I have seen many cases of starvation, many cases of abuse –many cases of people being exploited because they had no money, no access to any services in eastern Aleppo. After they crossed to the other side, they were able to actually try and restore their lives in one way or another.”

Asked about whether the civilians he had spoken to could confirm allegations made by Western governments and media that the Syria and Russia were engaged in atrocities in Aleppo, Ebrahim said that he had actually “asked these civilians about these atrocities” specifically, including reports of executions, abuse and detention.

“Many of the people I spoke with said that they did not have any clue about these incidents; they did not witness anything that would remotely prove these reports,” he emphasized.

“Actually, I interviewed several families who were able to stay in their houses even as the Syrian army advanced through their areas and pushed the rebels out, Ebrahim noted.

“The residents I spoke with told me that many of the rebel fighters and their families, many of the activists who had been promoting the cause of the opposition and working against the Syrian government – they had fears that they would be prosecuted, detained, or perhaps executed. But up until now, I haven’t seen any documented case of such a thing happening.

“Bearing in mind that many people are saying that this could happen, or would happen, and the opposition saying that it is happening, there is absolutely no proof on the ground that this is actually taking place,” the journalist concluded.

Redeployment for Further Operations

With the battle for eastern Aleppo coming to a close, elements of the Syrian army are now planning to redeploy to begin liberating militant-held settlements to the west of the city. A military source told Sputnik Arabic that the army has begun planning to capture numerous settlements in the western portion of Aleppo province, including Dar Aza, Jabal Kabtan and Tel al-Karama, and the town of al-Atareb. The source added that the army must first complete the liberation of two residential blocks in the city of Aleppo proper – Sukkari and Salah ad-Din, both of which are still in militant hands.

The source also confirmed that locals have been approaching army personnel and asking them to liquidate the terrorists remaining entrenched in civilian areas, complaining that they have been brutalized by them.

Ultimately, Ebrahim noted that the victory in Aleppo gives Damascus “a decisive upper hand in fighting across the country. The country could head from here into allocating large forces to other frontlines across the country, and substantial gains could be made in upcoming days because of the victory that the Syrian government is about to achieve in Aleppo.”
Source*

Related Topics:

Russian Air Force Purges ISIS Forces near Palmyra*

Syrian Army Takes Control of 93% of Aleppo’s Territory*

In Aleppo 4 Al-Qaeda Chiefs arrested; 1,000 Terrorists Surrender, and 50,000 Civilians Freed*

Syrian Soldier Breaks Down In Tears Upon Reunification With His Family in Aleppo*

Syrian Air Strikes on Turkish Military in Northern Aleppo*

Russia and China Veto Phony Aleppo Ceasefire U.N. Security Council Resolution*

Syrian Catholics Denounce Western Media Biased Reporting on Aleppo*

U.S. Claim of Killing 50,000 ISIS Terrorists ‘Fairytale’ says Ex Diplomat*

U.S. Opposed to Sovereignty of Muslim Nations*