American Medical Association sliding toward support of physician-assisted suicide… here come the death panels

Image: American Medical Association sliding toward support of physician-assisted suicide… here come the death panels

(Natural News)
Will the American Medical Association soon be in favor of physician-assisted suicide? In early June, the AMA decided not to reaffirm its position against assisted suicide – a decision which has shocked many. But indeed, the AMA has gone against its own Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, which recommended the AMA maintain its opposition of euthanasia for humans.

Advocates for assisted suicide have been very successful at opening doors for euthanasia in medicine. In some states, affiliate groups have already taken a more neutral stance on this issue, paving the way for legislators to approve the legalization of doctor-assisted suicide. While proponents of euthanasia say that their cause gives patients the right to a dignified death, the issue isn’t really that cut and dry. There are substantial concerns about the potential for abuse and coercion. Inevitably, this could give rise to an untold number of citizens quietly being put to death against their will – while no one will be the wiser.

Experts warn against assisted suicide

Matt Vallière, the Executive Director of Patients Rights Action Fund, told Life News that he, and other advocates for patients’ rights, are very concerned about the AMA’s sudden change of heart.

“The American Medical Association’s decision to not confirm their own Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs’ recommendation – namely that they maintain their opposition to assisted suicide – does not take into account that this bad public policy puts vulnerable patients at high risk for coercion, mistakes and even abuse. Although the AMA’s opposition position still stands for now, a referral back to CEJA is a lost opportunity and a failure to stand against a policy that has grave consequences for everyone, but especially persons living with illness, disabilities, or socio-economic disadvantage. Assisted suicide is not medical care,” Vallière stated.

Support our mission to keep you informed: Discover the extraordinary benefits of turmeric gummy bears and organic “turmeric gold” liquid extract, both laboratory tested for heavy metals, microbiology and safety. Naturally high in potent curcuminoids. Delicious formulations. All purchases support this website (as well as your good health). See availability here.

Further, he noted, the AMA’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs spent two years poring over research on assisted suicide before making their recommendation. The Council is an internationally respected panel of experts, and the AMA has basically ignored the panel’s statements on euthanasia in entirety, declaring that the issue needs “further study.”

In their conclusion, the Council stated, “Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.”

The dangers of euthanasia

The American College of Physicians (ACP) reaffirmed their stance against assisted suicide last year, noting that: “The power to prescribe assisted suicide carries a profound potential for misuse and abuse.” In their statement, the ACP noted that in a time when the cost of care is on everyone’s mind, the rising demand for euthanasia is alarming. And indeed it is; after all, killing off the “sick enough” would inevitably prove to be the best way to save money – how long will it take for that to become a platform?

As Dr. Bernat, hailing from Dartmouth Medical School, wrote in 1997, there are several issues with assisted suicide. In addition to harming patient-professional relationships and damaging the practice of palliative care, the legalization of euthanasia will lead to more death. Dr. Bernat surmises that once physician-assisted suicides are legal, it will only be a matter of time before two things happen: Voluntary euthanasia will become legal, and soon after that, involuntary euthanasia will follow.

Proponents of assisted suicide may scoff at that last contention – but look no further than the killing of a 29-year-old mentally ill woman in the Netherlands for proof that involuntary euthanasia is already reality. Can someone struggling with a mental illness make a rational choice in this situation, especially in a society that is basically telling them their life is not worth living?

In the Netherlands, infants who are disabled and unable to consent to assisted suicide are regularly euthanized under what’s known as the “Groningen Protocol.” Studies have shown that staggeringly few infant euthanasia cases are reported on – even though estimates indicate 20 Netherlands babies are intentionally killed by their doctors every year.

Studies from Belgium, where euthanasia is also legal, show that 30 percent of those euthanized are actually being killed without consent. Where do we draw the line?

Stay updated with the latest on medical controversies at

Sources for this article include:



Source Article from

Heavy-duty support: Peru fan puts on 24kg to guarantee World Cup seat

Some fans at the World Cup this summer have gone to pretty extraordinary lengths to watch their teams in Russia – although one Peru fan might just take the biscuit.

The fan from South America was apparently so concerned that he would miss out on a ticket due to the huge demand in his homeland, that he gained an extra 24kg (52lbs) to apply for the special seats provided by FIFA for larger fans.

“There was a guy who was worried he wouldn’t get a ticket for a Peru match, so he said he would try to put on 24kg so that he could apply for one of the special [easy-access extra-width] seats that are much easier to get,” said Peru fan Guillermo Espinoza, according to the Sun.

READ MORE: Peru fans storm tiny World Cup host city Saransk before Denmark clash (VIDEOS)

“You get a good view as well from those seats,” he added.

Peruvian fans have been a particularly prominent presence in Russia this summer, with thousands of them flocking to watch their team at its first World Cup in 36 years.  

They were out in force last week before the tournament had even started, filling central Moscow and unveiling a giant Peruvian shirt which fans could write messages of support on.

Peru officially sold just over 43,000 World Cup tickets to fans, but some estimates put their number in Russia at closer to 80,000.   

Yesterday the red-and-white-clad crowds took over the city of Saransk – the smallest World Cup destination – marching en masse to the stadium ahead of the team’s first group stage game against Denmark.

They suffered a narrow 1-0 defeat in that game, after midfielder Christian Cueva missed a first-half penalty which could have given the Peruvians the lead.

The defeat is unlikely to dampen the spirit of the Peruvian fans, who will take their World Cup party on to the next game against France in Ekaterinburg.

Source Article from

Republicans & Democrats Join Forces to Stop US Support of Genocide, Mass Starvation in Middle East


Republicans and Democrats are coming together to call for an end the horrific military action in Yemen that has mercilessly killed thousands of women and children and has left millions of innocent civilians at risk for starvation.

In a letter addressed to Defense Sec. James Mattis, Democratic Reps. Mark Pocan, Ro Khanna, Barbara Lee, and Ted Lieu; and Republican Reps. Justin Amash, Thomas Massie, and Walter Jones called for the United States to immediately end its support for the current military assault on a major port city in Yemen that is putting millions of lives at risk.

As Modern Diplomacy reported this week, the U.S.-Saudi-UAE plan is to destroy the Yemenese port city of Al Hudaydah, which is the only entry-way by which food reaches approximately seven million Shiites, members of the Houthi tribe, who occupy the western third of Yemen, and who had recently ruled all of Yemen. The U.S. provides the weapons and the training, and the United Arab Emirates supplies the pilots for this operation, which is financed mainly by the Saudis.

“We urge you to use all available means to avert a catastrophic military assault on Yemen’s major port city of Hodeida by the Saudi-led coalition, and to present Congress with immediate clarification regarding the full scope of U.S. military involvement in that conflict. We remind you that three years into the conflict, active U.S. participation in Saudi-led hostilities against Yemen’s Houthis has never been authorized by Congress, in violation of the Constitution.”

As the letter noted, the United States has spent three years launching drone strikes and aiding the war in Yemen, and while it seems to be acting to maintain the approval of close ally Saudi Arabia, all military action in the country has been illegal, because the U.S. has acted without congressional approval. The letter accused the Pentagon of intentionally keeping information from Congress, in order to appease Saudi Arabia:

“We are concerned that in the midst of a Senate effort to exercise its constitutional authority to end unauthorized hostilities—including U.S. targeting and refueling assistance for Saudi-led airstrikes against Yemen’s Houthis—the Pentagon may have concealed key information from members of Congress regarding the full extent of on-the-ground U.S. military participation in the Saudi coalition-led war.”

The letter cited Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, and noted that Congress alone has the power to declare and authorize war, and the War Powers Resolution allows any individual member of Congress to force a debate and floor vote to remove U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities.” 

Ultimately, the bipartisan group of lawmakers called for the U.S. military to fully disclose its involvement in Yemen, and to condemn Saudi Arabia for the atrocities it has committed in the poorest country in the Middle East:

“We call on you to immediately disclose the full extent of the U.S. military role in the Saudi-led war against Yemen’s Houthis, including the use of special operations forces; disclose any role that the Pentagon is currently performing, has been asked to perform, or is considering performing regarding an attack on the port of Hodeida; and issue a public declaration opposing this impending assault and restating the Administration’s position that Saudi Arabia and other parties to the conflict should accept an immediate ceasefire and move toward a political settlement to resolve the conflict.”

While the ongoing military action in Yemen was initiated under the Obama Administration, it has continued and even become worse under the direction of the Trump Administration. Pocan and Amash have previously addressed letters to Trump Administration, calling for an end to U.S. involvement in Yemen, and noting that everything the U.S. has done in the country up to this point has been illegal.

The results of three years of intervention from the United States and Saudi Arabia are staggering and have resulted in nothing short of genocide. The United Nations has estimated that “22 million Yemenis need humanitarian aid, and the number of and the number at risk of starvation could more than double to more than 18 million by year-end unless access improves.”

WHO, WFP and UNICEF released a statement in December 2017, calling the current situation in Yemen “the worst humanitarian crisis in the world,” and noting that after over 1,000 days of the war in Yemen, more than 75 percent of the population is not in need of urgent assistance.

“More than 1,000 days of families driven from their homes by brutal violence. 1,000 days without enough food to eat and safe water to drink. 1,000 days of bombed hospitals and damaged schools. 1,000 days of children recruited to fight. 1,000 days of disease and death … of unimaginable human suffering. The conflict in Yemen has created the worst humanitarian crisis in the world—a crisis which has engulfed the entire country. Some 75 percent of Yemen’s population are in need of humanitarian assistance, including 11.3 million children who cannot survive without it.”

The truth is that the current conflict in Yemen has nothing to do with saving the lives of civilians, and everything to do with the United States appeasing Saudi Arabia by carrying on a manufactured proxy war targeting Saudi Arabia’s bitter enemy, Iran.

The latest letter from members of Congress who are fed up with the ongoing illegal war that has resulted in a horrific genocide in Yemen is encouraging, but it is just the beginning of the imminent change that needs to happen immediately, as millions of innocent lives are at risk.

DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.

DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.

If you’d like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.

Source Article from

Italy Local Elections: Lega Party Surges as Voters Support Halting of African Invasion


Italian voters have rallied to Interior Minister Matteo Salvini’s Lega party in droves in Sunday’s national local elections, putting that party ahead even of its coalition partner in government. Preliminary results from the local elections—in which some seven million Italians could vote—showed that support for Salvini had sky-rocketed following his refusal to allow the African invasion ship the Aquarius to come ashore in that country.

According to initial results, the Lega vote increased dramatically almost everywhere in the country, helping the ruling coalition take control of cities such as Treviso, Brindisi and Vicenza, amongst others.

Significantly, Salvini’s coalition partner, the Five Star Movement, was the biggest loser, with its vote declining in many places, including Rome. The far left however also lost ground against the Lega.

Elections were held in 760 towns and cities, including 20 provincial capitals. Run-offs will be held on June 24 where no candidate reached 50 percent.

Candidates backed by the League won outright victories in Treviso and Vicenza in the north-east and were leading in numerous other cities where the incumbent mayor was from the centre-left.

“I’m very happy, for the mayors … and because we have reached the run-off in cities that have always been hard for us,” said Salvini, who is deputy prime minister in Italy’s new coalition government.

The Five Star Movement, which polled more votes than the Lega during the March national parliamentary elections, fared poorly in the local elections. It reached the run-off in just three of the provincial capitals and leads only in the Sicilian city of Ragusa where it already had the incumbent mayor.

The leftist Democratic party, centre-left, which held control of 15 of the 20 provincial capitals at stake and more than half of the 109 cities with more than 15,000 inhabitants, looks set to lose many of these at the June 24 run-off.

Despite a first-round victory in the northern city of Brescia, the Democratic Party is at risk even in its traditional Tuscan strongholds such as Pisa and Siena, and is excluded from the run-off in the Umbrian city of Terni.

It also lost badly to the coalition alliance in the Sicilian city of Catania, where its pro-invasion incumbent mayor had held four terms of office.



Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

300 Russian ‘Spartans’ get government support in conquering the Far East

The overall aid for the 314 settlers reached about $500,000 for various needs in farming, like the purchase of agricultural machinery, buying cattle or fodder, the government of Sakhalin Region said.

The Russian government is also seeking to build infrastructure in the areas where the land is given out. There are plans to allocate about $15 million in the next three years to build transport and energy infrastructure.

In the Sakhalin Region alone, more than 7,000 plots of land have been freely distributed to Russians willing to resettle. The program is much greater and also includes the Far East regions of Russia like Yakutia, Kamchatka, Chukotka, Primorye, Khabarovsk, Amur, Magadan, and the Jewish Autonomous Regions.

The land can be used for any lawful purpose, but the new owners cannot rent, sell, or give the land away for five years. Foreigners are also eligible to use the land, but the registration of full property rights is only possible after the recipient becomes a naturalized citizen.

The free land program in Russia’s Far East could be expanded to other regions as well. “Forty-three million hectares of farmland alone are not used for their intended purpose. These are huge, just huge land reserves,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said.

For more stories on economy & finance visit RT’s business section

Source Article from

Israel has Lost Support from Millennial Evangelicals


One of the most awful and bizarre ideologies popularized by the baby boomer generation has been this concept of Christian Zionism. Jews managed to convince millions of Christians that the formation of Israel in 1948 was the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and a sign that Jesus was returning. They used this insanity to falsely claim that they are God’s chosen people and that opposing them would be the equivalent of opposing God.

Even though millions of self-absorbed baby boomers bought into this madness, evangelical millennials are more skeptical. A new poll shows that they are less supportive of Israel than the baby boomers.

Wall Street Journal:

Older evangelicals have long played a powerful role in pushing the U.S. to support the Israeli government. Just last month, two evangelical pastors spoke at the opening of the new U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, a sign of the role evangelicals played in pushing President Donald Trump to make the move.

Millennial evangelicals, however, are less supportive of Israel and of the U.S.’s involvement in the conflict with the Palestinians. Only 58% of evangelicals ages 18 to 34 hold positive views of Israel, compared with 76% of evangelicals over 65, according to a December survey of more than 2,000 people from LifeWay Research, an evangelical polling organization.

Though the drop is modest—a majority still view Israel positively—it has caught the eye of Christian megachurch pastors, private groups in the U.S. and the Israeli government, all of which have begun working to win over young evangelicals.

The Jews are right to be concerned by this trend. Christian evangelicals represent the core group of Americans who have historically offered blind support of Israel. If they lose the evangelicals, they’re going to have some major political problems.

These are millions of well meaning people who have been misled by a variety of pied pipers and liars to support the Jews. John Hagee is one of the most notable of these figures, but there are many others like him.

It’s actually quite remarkable to see how the Jews were able to get so many Christians to support their insane Zionist project. After all, it was Jesus, the central figure of their religion, who actively opposed the Jews and was eventually killed by them. Jews even brag about how they killed Jesus and will often articulate their disdain for him and Christianity as a whole.

It’s becoming more and complicated to explain these things away as Jesus was as crystal clear as possible when he said in John 14:6: “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” So how can these people be God’s chosen people without Jesus? How can they even go to Heaven? People like John Hagee would say that they are exempt from the rules because “they are God’s chosen people!” Many baby boomers have been fooled into this idiocy but millennials are waking up!

Before America’s churches became kiked, there were pastors all over the country warning people about the Jews. The term “Judeo-Christian” would have been considered an oxymoron in prior generations. It was only popularized by the Jews starting in the 1940s to fool Christians into thinking that that they had common interests and values. This was further reinforced with all the Jewish lies about the Holocaust.

But younger evangelicals are seeing the Jews do some very evil things and it is causing them to question all the lies that they’ve been told about them. It must be hard to reconcile all you’ve been told about the Jews being God’s chosen people when they are shooting and gassing Palestinian protesters in an open air concentration camp. Christians are also having a harder time explaining how Jews can still be God’s chosen people even today even though they killed Jesus Christ and not only that but they still REJECT Him to this day as the Messiah and mock Him and Mother Mary in their Talmud.

Time and time again the Jews have proven that they are a tribe whose behavior is driven by a great evil. It’s an absurdity to believe that they are the chosen people of god and it’s good to see that some of these younger evangelicals are finally recognizing this.


Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

Gun control support fades three months after Florida massacre: Reuters/Ipsos poll

By Daniel Trotta

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The Parkland, Florida, school massacre has had little lasting impact on U.S. views on gun control, three months after the shooting deaths of 17 people propelled a national movement by some student survivors, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Wednesday.

While U.S. public support for more gun control measures has grown slowly but steadily over the years, it typically spikes immediately after the mass shootings that have become part of the U.S. landscape, then falls back to pre-massacre levels within a few months.

The poll found that 69 percent of American adults supported strong or moderate regulations or restrictions for firearms, down from 75 percent in late March, when the first poll was conducted following the Valentine’s Day shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. The new poll numbers are virtually unchanged from pre-Parkland levels.

The latest poll was conducted before the May 18 shooting in Texas, at Santa Fe High School near Houston, that killed 10 people.

Whether Parkland would defy the trend has been closely watched ahead of the November mid-term congressional elections, especially since student survivors have attempted to turn public sentiment into a political movement on gun issues.

David Hogg, one of the student leaders from Parkland, said he would measure the movement’s success not by an opinion poll but by how many members of the U.S. Congress supported by the National Rifle Association are voted out of office in November.

“We can have all the public support that we want but if people do not get out and vote, we’re not going to have an impact,” Hogg said.

President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans who control both houses of Congress all favor gun ownership rights. Strong supporters of gun rights expect they will continue to prevail in November.

“The Democrats are way overplaying their hand,” said Larry Ward, president of Political Media Inc, a conservative public relations and consulting company. “If you think you’re going to run on gun control and win in this country, you’re out of your mind.”

One poll respondent said he believes in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, but favored moderate restrictions such as waiting periods and background checks for gun purchases.

Daniel Fisher, 46, an artist from Indianapolis, said the gun lobby does not care about individual rights but instead about the profits of gun manufacturers.

“Lives don’t matter. People don’t matter. Money matters to them,” Fisher said, saying it was “unfortunate” that the public quickly moves on to the next crisis.

Even the Dec. 14, 2012, massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, which killed 20 first-graders and six adult staff, failed to lastingly move public opinion.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found that support for strong or moderate firearms restrictions jumped by about 11 percentage points in the two weeks after the Sandy Hook shooting, rising to 70 percent at the end of 2012. But it fell back to the pre-shooting level three months later.

However, while dramatic gains for gun control have faded quickly, the baseline for gun control has gradually crept up since the Sandy Hook massacre, rising from the high 50s to the high 60s since 2012.

Meanwhile, those favoring “no or very few” restrictions have fallen from 10 percent in the middle of 2012 to 5 percent today.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English throughout the United States. The May 5-17 poll has a credibility interval, a measure of the poll’s precision, of about 2 percentage points.

Former Marjory Stoneman Douglas student Nikolas Cruz is accused of killing 17 people with an AR-15 style rifle on Feb. 14, leading to a series of demonstrations that included students walking out of classrooms across the country and a large demonstration in Washington. Florida prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Cruz, 19.

(Reporting by Daniel Trotta; Additional reporting by Chris Kahn; Editing by Leslie Adler and Bill Berkrot)

Source Article from