search results matching tag: red cross

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (24)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (0)     Comments (73)   

Citicorp Center | NYC skyscraper saved by a student question

oritteropo says...

I suspect that's the worst case scenario counting everyone in the 10 block radius evacuation zone. They do say in the video that to get that figure they need to assume that the building failure would lead to the failure of some surrounding buildings (how many people would you assume would be at Bloomingdales?).

p.s. The estimate is from the Red Cross, and was quoted in the BBC two program The Works S2 ep 1 All Fall Down in 1996.

KrazyKat42 said:

Interesting vid. But I am skeptical of the 200k casualties thing.

Real Time with Bill Maher: New Rule – Tax the Churches

shinyblurry says...

"Doing these things as a prelude to proselytizing means they aren't altruistic..."

Altruism isn't the right word. When people help others to their hurt, that is called agape love, a word the Christian community has owned for 2000 years. You're right of course, that more than a few churches out there are always trying to figure out how to get more members, more money etc. But that isn't all the churches, or even nearly so. For instance the churches in this community dont care who goes where; they all work together and no one is taking the credit for it. This is just one counter example to the broad brush strokes you're painting here.

I think you need a little more nuance here too, newtboy; for instance, would you say it is wrong for atheists to do good deeds in the name of atheism? Or, for the red cross to air commercials showing their accomplishments so they could raise more money to expand their mission in the world?

"And yet, here you are calling attention to yourself (and them), so you proved your statement wrong by stating it publicly. Oops! ;-)"

I didn't mention what I do newtboy, but I have no problem calling attention to the righteous who glorify God through their lives.

"Churches are for profit institutions.."

The church according to the bible is a non-profit organization. Whether churches in America reflect that or not is another question entirely. I know for my church, and almost any other church, you can request to see how the church spends its money year by year. None of the churches I have dealings with are making "profits"

"Once again I would ask, why do you question your god's clear wish that I (and others) not believe in him..."

Jesus Christ died for our sins, yours and mine. God already demonstrated His love for us while we were sinners, now the only question is, will you reciprocate? The insanity of the question posed to Stephan Fry, ie what would you say to God, is exposed by the answer "How dare you!" by Stephan. It seems that people believe God is a man who needs to explain Himself, who has something to hide. Yet, Stephan and every other human being have a lot to hide; the brutal and ugly truth of how we have all lived our lives here.

It's easy for a man to say to people who know nothing about him that he will shake his fist at God when they meet. Yet, what will he do when all of his lawless deeds are exposed and the secrets he has kept from everyone are brought to light? All the fight will go out of him immediately, this I guarantee you. Yet, this in itself is still ridiculous, considering that even merely being in Gods presence is enough to make the most hardened sinner fall to his knees and weep uncontrollably. But people won't be weeping because God loves them on that day, they will be weeping and gnashing their teeth after being confronted by the fact that they have missed the boat for eternity.

"Shirley.."

My name isn't Sherlock..

"Doing 100 good deeds and one incredibly evil deed makes one evil. No church in history has ever reached that level of goodness. Churches are evil. I hope that clears things up."

I'm glad you understand what I have been trying to explain to the sift for years; a relative goodness is no goodness at all. If you set fire to someones home, and then built 27 orphanages, would people call you good? Why is it then that people think that all of our good deeds should cause God to forgive us for a single sin? This is the reason Jesus died for us, because we can't earn Gods forgiveness and our good deeds can't erase our bad ones. Could you ever go to court and say "your honor, although I commited this crime I have done over 1000 hours of community service in my lifetime, so please dismiss the case; will that ever happen? That wouldn't be justice, and if God threw out our case without true justice, He wouldn't be a just judge.

What would I say about churches who have done evil? These are institutions; the true church is the body of Christ, of which every born again believer is a member of. That is what is happening in my community, is that no one cares about the institution of the church; they are just being the church. The reward is simply this, to serve God honorably by living a sacrificial life predicated on sacrificial love.

newtboy said:

stuff

Military will refuse to obey unlawful orders from Pres Trump

Drachen_Jager says...

"The administration of George W. Bush attempted to portray the abuses as isolated incidents, not indicative of general U.S. policy. This was contradicted by humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch. After multiple investigations, these organizations stated that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were not isolated incidents, but were part of a wider pattern of torture and brutal treatment at American overseas detention centers, including those in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay. There was evidence that authorization for the torture had come from high up in the military hierarchy, with allegations being made that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had authorized some of the actions." - Wikipedia

bcglorf said:

Abu Ghraib wasn't exactly standard procedure as ordered by the President. In point of fact, those involved at Abu Ghraib were put on trial and tossed out of the military for the express reason that their actions there went AGAINST how the military was ordered to conduct itself.

It's dishonest in the extreme to point to Abu Ghraib as an example of guys just following orders when the reality is they were put on trial for FAILING to follow orders.

enoch (Member Profile)

Shootout in Parliament Building

Bruti79 says...

So the fact that the Red Cross had to go to the reserves and declare an emergency means that it's better for the First Nations people? How about all the missing indigenous women that have had little attempts to figure out what's happening to them, or where they could possibly be?

Have you been on any of the reservations in the past few years? Have you talked to anyone about the conditions? You think they'd really fight any kind of change to improve the health and social services on the reserves? Most of the water services are worse quality than Walkerton, when the water was filled with bacteria.

Is it better than the small pox blankets, murder, and "correctional schools" we sent them to? Yes, but it's still substandard living on a lot of the reserves. Is it all of them? No, some are doing quite well, but those are the minority.

Let's also look at the prison population in Canada, where around 30% is First Nations. There's something rotten in the Dominion of Canada when it comes to living standards and treatment of Aboriginals.

bcglorf said:

In the past tense, I'd agree but not today. For starters, First Nation people have 100% full Canadian citizenship and the only distinctions made based on a persons treaty status compared to a non-treaty neighbour in any Canadian city is additional rights and benefits that are potentially available to the treaty person. That is to say, First Nations people have all the full rights of everyone else in Canada, and in some situations bonuses as well.

That said, living conditions on Native Reserves in Canada are abysmal. The municipality I live in is just vastly better off than the nearby native reserves. Better access to education, policing, fire protection and health care. If that weren't bad enough, average family incomes in my municipality more than double those of neighbouring native reserve communities.

That abysmal divide in conditions though is NOT an example of we as Canadians treating First Nations terribly. If you take per capita taxes collected from community and take away per capita government dollars put back in, my community still gives more to the government than it gets back. The neighbouring reserves with far worse conditions receive far more money from the government than they pay it back. Systemically, the Canadian government is economically favouring the neighbouring reserves.

That begs the question why are conditions there so abysmal, and I can't claim to fully understand it myself. The components I DO know are at work though are many:
1.Reserves are NOT fit into government the same way as municipalities are. While my municipality is under Provincial jurisdiction, reserves are parallel with the provinces and fall directly under the federal government. The idea is reserves deserve greater autonomy to respect First Nations unique status and treaty obligations. In practice though, IMO they lose out. My community has education and health care handled by the province, which great benefits those kind of items. Reserves are responsible for those things on their own.
2. Reserves create segregation. The idea is again respecting treaty agreements and protecting First Nations culture from being overwhelmed and assimilated. In practice, that isolation is crippling the communities rather than helping them.
3. Historic abuses against previous generations of First Nations people at the hands of government get passed down to the next generation. This is amplified by the segregation on reserves.
4. Absence of accountability. The same transparency rules that apply to my municipality and all other municipalities nation wide do not apply on reserves. If my mayor spends millions of city dollars paying him or his family to do almost nothing it is more traceable than if a chief on a reserve did the same thing. Again, the idea is provide greater autonomy and not 'force' white beuracracy on First Nations, but the effect is to make it harder for them to hold their own leaders to account.

That's hardly a comprehensive list, but I think it highlights a lot of ways in which the current generation of Canadians running the country are very conscience of treating First Nations well and just failing at it through mutual mistakes. Any efforts to convert the failed reserve systems to municipality status will by fought the most by the very people living in the failed reserves. I wish knew how to move things forward to a better place, but the root is nothing as simple as 'treat First Nations better'.

Proud To Be -- The Best Super Bowl Ad you'll never see

Bruti79 says...

Fact, I have been on some amazing Haida reservations out west, I guess I've been on too many Ontario ones where it's bad. No support from the gov't, and ignored by everyone else. Hell, the Red Cross had to come in and help people out at one point.

Very true though, not all reserves are terrible.

Sagemind said:

That may true for some areas, but not all of them.
In fact, it depends on the Chief and how they lead their people.
Yes, they have social issues, and so do we off the reserves, but they are self governing and work every day to provide services for those in need. In my area, we have a great partnership with the First Nations. They are a vital part of our city.
The place where I see issues is when the government uses land, Such as with the NorthWestern Pipeline, and the First Nations are the first to stand up in defiance in defense of our environment -- I applaud them for that. Not to mention that the Gov. will change treaty laws at random to suit their needs. But that's Big Business, and they screw everyone, not just treaty law.

The Real News: Chris Hedges on The Pathology of the Rich

radx says...

People are starving in Greece, fascists are marching in the streets of Athens.

And given that SNAP participation went from ~26 million in January of '07 to ~39 million in January of '10 to ~47 million in January of '13, I'd say the US is getting there as well. The planned cuts to SNAP will only accelerate it further.

But everything's good in the UK though. People are not likely to starve, now that food banks are popping up everywhere and the Red Cross is distributing care packages for the first time since the end of WW2.

Besides, those likely to starve will freeze first anyway. They had ~31k of excess winter deaths last year, while this year's prognosis was going for ~35k, last I heard. Food or fuel, can't have both.

Those riots in London two years ago, they were a singular occurence. All the underlying issues have been addressed. Youth unemployment is #1 on David Cameron's list, I'm sure of it. Well, maybe #2. Privatisation of the NHS has priority after all.

I apologize for my sarcasm and my cynicism, but mass violence is not unimaginable anymore in the Old World and it's pissing me off. We are in the process of flushing an entire generation of people down the toilet. These current rates of youth unemployment are unsustainable in a democratic society. The banlieus of Paris, the boroughs of London... shit will hit the fan eventually, unless there's a radical change of policy from within the system.

The elections to the European Parliament in May next year will be an indicator. As of now, it looks as if a whole lot of (far) right wing parties will enter the stage.

Also, keep an eye on the island of bliss(ful ignorance) within Europe: Germany. We're heading straight for a grand coalition that would control ~80% of parliament, rendering all instruments at the opposition's disposal inert. Did I mention they also have the neccessary 2/3 majority to institute changes to our constitution? Fucking awesome!

Again, sorry for being a grumpy fuck, but everytime I open the paper, it's a bloody nightmare -- and that's before you take away the sugar coating.

VoodooV said:

well...things are different now. We're not physical slaves, but you can argue that we're economic slaves. Even poor people usually aren't starving. food is cheap, at least shitty food is. It's a sort of gilded cage. So it's harder to get to that tipping point of committing to a "revolution"

alien_concept (Member Profile)

radx says...

It's not like they had a lot of shame to begin with, but recently...

You mentioned the rather scandalous jumper remark. Between this and the food packages distributed by the Red Cross and the electricity/heating issue and the NHS/Lewisham proceedings and the privatisation of the Royal Mail for a pittance and the housing situation in the greater London area, I'm rather surprised you haven't paraded Dave's head around on a pike just yet.

Today's Guardian had a few pieces about cold food, damp homes, freezing pensioners and overcrowded food banks -- it was as depressing as it was infuriating.

The establisment has always been out of sync with what most people perceive to be reality, but Dave and his buddies seem to have cut all ties to the rest of the country.

alien_concept said:

Okay, I'm up to speed. This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. They're in the middle of rushing through the gagging laws which would effectively stop activists and protests. They have stopped all but a very few cases of legal aid, so if you're poor you're not now entitled to justice. Cameron and co. told people last week if they're truly faced with putting food on the table or heating the house up then "Put a jumper on." And on and on and on...

They're not bothered about hiding anything anymore, that's all

Russell Brand talks politics and revolution on Newsnight

radx says...

Depends on your definition of revolution, I suppose.

Look at Europe for a minute.

- The Greeks see the rise of Golden Dawn, an openly fascist party.
- Marine Le Pen's FN, an extreme right wing nationalist party, is polling at #1 in France.
- Italy got rid of Berlusconi, which for them is about as close to a revolution as you can get without massive bloodshed.
- The society in the UK has gone so unimaginably lopsided that the Red Cross is handing out food packets for the first time since the end of World War 2.
- Let's not even talk about the Hungarian government and its atrocious track record over the last years.

These are some pretty drastic changes, and rarely for the better.

Mammaltron said:

Revolution most certainly will not happen.

The UN Caused a Cholera Epidemic in Haiti

The UN Caused a Cholera Epidemic in Haiti

The UN Caused a Cholera Epidemic in Haiti

longde says...

When responsible people screw up, they make things right. Else, they really should not do anything in the first place. The UN and NGOs really have done more harm than good to Haiti and many have used the facade of doing good to enrich themselves: *related=http://videosift.com/video/How-did-the-Red-Cross-Spend-in-Haiti

bcglorf said:

I'm of two minds on this. Yeah, UN member nations screwed up. On the other hand, screwups can only be stopped with certainty if you opt to stop doing anything. So my other mind sees this and thinks, no good deed goes unpunished.

Matt Damon Goes On Strike!

chingalera says...

Trey Parker and Matt Stone speak with their satire the words sympathetic fans know to be true. The self-deceived embrace with emotional fervor causes with ulterior substance and authentic sell-outs invest in the causes and become spokesmen for their keepers.
Sean Penn
Bono

Anyone who aligns themselves with any cause sponsored by UNESCO, UNICEF, RED CROSS,WWF, United Nations....Beware of cunts. Check the list of all UN organizations- IMF is one of them. Might as well join a private club, elitist assholes all.

Romney Asked 14 Times if he'd De-fund FEMA

Zyrxil says...

>> ^Kofi:

As with times immediately after gun massacres "Now is a completely inappropriate time to be asking such questions or raising such issues".
Yah huh. Right.

Romney opened the door. If you're taking cheap shots at FEMA as wasted money when there isn't a disaster, you deserve to have those statements shoved down your throat when its necessity is demonstrated.



>> ^renatojj:
Governments are not the only organizations capable of preparing and dealing with disasters, and they're very far from being the best at it.

Yes, because the Red Cross did such an excellent job with all the donations they received for Haiti and 9/11.

QI - Marmots and the Plague



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon