This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Subscribe to TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/sxaw6h
Subscribe to COMING SOON: http://bit.ly/H2vZUn
Like us on FACEBOOK: http://goo.gl/dHs73
The Babadook Official Trailer #1 (2014) – Essie Davis Horror Movie HD

Amelia (Essie Davis) is a widow who lost her husband in a heart-breaking stroke of shit luck: he was killed in a car accident while driving to the delivery of their first son. Now six years old, young Sam (Noah Wiseman) has begun to develop behavioral problems and incestuous tendencies, and their neighbors have become increasingly distant as a result. When Amelia discovers a ominously-covered, never-before-seen pop-up book called The Babadook on Sam’s shelf, she decides to immediately debut it as a bedtime story.

The Movieclips Trailers channel is your destination for the hottest new trailers the second they drop. Whether it’s the latest studio release, an indie horror flick, an evocative documentary, or that new RomCom you’ve been waiting for, the Movieclips team is here day and night to make sure all the best new movie trailers are here for you the moment they’re released.

In addition to being the #1 Movie Trailers Channel on YouTube, we deliver amazing and engaging original videos each week. Watch our exclusive Ultimate Trailers, Showdowns, Instant Trailer Reviews, Monthly MashUps, Movie News, and so much more to keep you in the know.

Here at Movieclips, we love movies as much as you!

“the babadook” babadook horror thriller “Jennifer Kent” “Essie Davis” “Noah Wiseman” “Daniel Henshall” “boogey man” bedtime story “bedtime story” ominous scary “children’s book” sundance “sundance film festival” evil monster ghost creepy “closet monster” vchan

#PowerTrippers!

#ControlFreaks!

THAT’S ALL ISIS IS

GOD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

DO IT HARPER!!! TIME FOR ISIS TO MEET ALLAH!!!

https://twitter.com/search?q=isis%20beheading&src=tyah

Single Minded Fools That Are Nothing But Sheep!

To Control People With Fear Is Not a LEADER!

IS A COWARD!

Now I know I’m Probably Gonna Get Beheaded for Saying This But…..

FUCK IT! I”M ALREADY DEAD!

SO I HAD A DREAM….

A Dream Of a Place…

A World…

A Utopia…

A Place Where Classes Didn’t Exist

Where Everyone was Equal

But That Place Would Implode…

Because The Reality of The Matter Is There Has To Be a Core…

A Centre then there has to be divisions

What Makes Us Human is Our Uniqueness

Our Individuality…

Without that We Don’t Exist as a Person

So Tell Me This…

How Can So Many Follow an Insanity?

ISIS beheading and Canada’s Stand On It…

TAKE ONE!!!!

version française | préférences linguistiques

Axsl –This afternoon, Mr. Harper introduced a motion calling on Parliament to support Canada’s going to war in Iraq.In response, I gave a speech making it clear that the Liberal Party of Canada cannot and will not support this Prime Minister’s motion.Given the significance of this issue, I felt it was important for you to have a copy of my speech:

* * *

Remarks by Liberal Party of Canada Leader Justin Trudeau

Check against delivery

3 October 2014

With this motion, the Prime Minister has finally said in Canada what he said in New York City more than a week ago. He is intent on taking Canada to war in Iraq.

ISIL is a threat both to the region and to global security.

ISIL murders ethnic and religious minorities across Iraq and Syria.

They murder innocent civilians, humanitarian workers, and journalists.

These awful acts have been fully documented – often by the perpetrators themselves.

This is why the Liberal Party supported a 30-day, non-combat role on good faith and on which we were briefed.

This time, instead of briefings, there has only been overheated rhetoric.

Liberals will take the following core principles into the debate next week.

One: That Canada does have a role to play to confront humanitarian crises and security threats in the world.

Two: That when a government considers deploying our men and women in uniform, there must be a clear mission overall and a clear role for Canada within that mission.

Three: That the case for deploying our Forces must be made openly and transparently, based on clear and reliable, dispassionately presented facts.

And four: That Canada’s role must reflect the broad scope of Canadian capabilities. And how best we can help.

Unlike the Prime Minister, Liberals believe Canada can make a more helpful contribution to the international effort to combat ISIL than aging war planes.

I think Canadians have a lot more to offer than that. We can be resourceful, and there are significant, substantial, non-combat roles that Canada can play.

And some we can play better than many – or perhaps any — of our allies.

Whether they are strategic airlift, training, or medical support.

We have the capabilities to meaningfully assist – in a non-combat role – a well-defined international mission.

The fact remains: the Prime Minister has not been upfront with Canadians about his plans.

The Prime Minister and the government have given us no reason to believe that once in combat they will be able to limit our role.

Their overheated and moralistic rhetoric is being used to justify more than just air strikes.

It is an attempt to justify a war.

For Canadians it’s all too familiar, particularly from this Prime Minister.

The 2003 Iraq war was waged on false pretenses and flawed intelligence.

It was a mission that destabilized the region, sowed further conflict, cost our allies three trillion dollars, and cost thousands of people their lives.

The world is still dealing with the consequences of that mistake.

Let us never forget how that mission was sold to the public.

Back in 2003, this Prime Minister called President Bush’s Iraq war a matter of “freedom, democracy and civilization itself.”

We know the Iraq fiasco haunts the choices we have to make today. But we cannot make the wrong decision now because the wrong decision was made then.

Canada has asked a lot of our men and women in uniform over the last decade. And too often they have returned home only to be let down.

If we are to ask more of them now, our deliberations in this house should be honest and forthright to show ourselves worthy of the valour and strength we know our Forces always show in the field.

We owe them that.

We think there is a role for Canada to be involved in the fight against ISIL.

But there is a clear line between non-combat and combat.

It is much easier to cross that line than to cross back.

It always is easier to get into a war than to get out of one.

The Prime Minister has a sacred responsibility to be honest and truthful with people, especially about matters of life and death. At the end of every decision to enter combat is a brave Canadian in harm’s way. We owe them clarity. We owe them a plan.

Most of all, we owe them the truth.

The Prime Minister has offered none of those.

The Liberal Party of Canada cannot and will not support this Prime Minister’s motion to go to war in Iraq.

* * *

Axsl, this is only the beginning of what should become a national dialogue on the issue and I wanted to make sure you had the opportunity to be a part of it.

Thank you,

Justin Trudeau

This email was sent to: OHURAMARSocial@GMAIL.COM

Top / All

and PM HARPER ANSWERED BACK!

Asked and answered: Trudeau’s Iraq questions and Harper’s answers

David Akin – October 3rd, 2014

On Wednesday, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party distributed a list of what it called the “Prime Minister’s Unanswered Questions On Iraq.” Let’s look at those questions and see if any were answered by Prime Minister Stephen Harper today in the House of Commons. (Short answer: Answers were provided for most)

Liberal questions are in red. Harper’s answers are in blue and in quotation marks. The answers in blue but not in quotation marks are lifted directly from a “backgrounder” distributed by the PMO after his speech.

1. What military support has the Prime Minister specifically offered to the United States?

On September 19, 2014, Canada received a direct request for additional military support against ISIL from the U.S. Government.

In response to these requests, the Government will provide Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel, aircraft and other equipment which will:

· Support and conduct air strikes against terrorist group ISIL, and its allies in Iraq;
· Provide advice to assist Iraqi Forces in combatting terrorist group ISIL, and its allies in Iraq;
· Provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; and,
· Provide planning and liaison personnel to work with the U.S. and other Allies.

Specifically, during the mission of up to 6 months, Canada will:

· Provide one CC150 Polaris, two CP140 Auroras and one dedicated airlift aircraft to enhance the refueling, air surveillance and transportation capacity of coalition members engaging in airstrikes against terrorist group ISIL, and its allies in Iraq, including approximately 280 aircrew and other personnel; and,
· Provide up to six CF188 Hornet fighter aircraft as part of a strike force to support Iraqi forces in the fight against terrorist group ISIL, and its allies in Iraq, including approximately 320 aircrew and other personnel.

2. What is the Canadian objective in any new military action? What is the plan to reach that objective?

“Let me be clear on the objectives of this intervention. We intend to significantly degrade the capabilities of ISIL, specifically, its ability to either engage in military movements of scale, or to operate bases in the open.

Cette mission arrêtera la propagation de l’État islamique dans la région et diminuera de beaucoup sa capacité de mener des attaques terroristes à l’extérieur de la région. Pour être clair, disons que cette intervention ne permettra pas d’éliminer cette intervention terroriste ni de garantir automatiquement que notre forme de gouvernance puisse prendre sa place en Irak ou en Syrie. Elle permettra toutefois de donner la possibilité à d’autres de le faire.

But again to be clear, while ISIL will not be eliminated, the risks presented from the territory in which it operates will be significantly reduced to those of other similar un-governed spaces in the broader region.:

3. Has the United States specifically asked that Canada deploy CF-18 fighter jets? How many CF-18s have been asked for by the U.S.? How long of a commitment has been requested?

Not answered by Harper and not answered in the backgrounder. But here is what U.S. Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters at the Pentagon today:

“We’re obviously grateful for the contributions of any nation that is willing to come forward and contribute to the coalition. The Canadians have been obviously supporting in other ways, so we’re grateful for that. Our position on all along has not been specifically to demand or ask a nation to do anything in particular – that it’s up to them, their government, their people to determine the scope of their participation, and we continue to look forward to working with Canada as we go forward.”

4. Is the government considering combat options other than deploying CF-18s?

“There will, however, be no ground combat mission, which is explicitly ruled out in the resolution.”

5. Is Canada considering combat options in Syria as well as Iraq?

“We will strike ISIL where, and only where, Canada has the clear support of the government of that country. At present, this is only true in Iraq. If it were to become the case in Syria, then we will participate in air strikes against ISIL in that country also.

Le gouvernement du Canada ne cache le dégoût que nous inspirent les actions du régime Assad. Cependant, ce que nous faisons, c’est participer à une opération antiterroriste contre l’État islamique et ses alliés. Nous ne voulons faire la guerre à aucun gouvernement dans la région.”

6. What is the timeline for a debate and vote in Parliament on a combat mission?

The text of the motion that will be debated and voted upon on Monday Oct. 6 is here. So Monday is the answer.

7. Will the incremental cost of a combat mission reduce the amount of humanitarian aid that the government would provide?

“The military measures we are taking do not in any way preclude humanitarian actions. There is no either-or here.

Horrifiés par les souffrances humaines, nous fournissons déjà des abris d’urgence et des soins médicaux d’urgence à des milliers de civils en Irak, en soutenant des organisations humanitaires présentes sur le terrain ainsi qu’une assistance substantielle au gouvernement de l’Irak.

This is in addition to large scale financial assistance already being furnished to the significant number of countries in the region that have been impacted by the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria.”

8. Is the current mission being funded out of existing budgets or from a supplemental allotment?

Not answered.

9. Are the 69 Canadian Armed Forces personnel deployed to Iraq presently in that country? Has the number of personnel grown? Who provides orders to the current mission?

The PM has said earlier in the week during Question Period that while 69 advisors have been authorized to be in Iraq, our Allies have only asked that about 30 or so be there. On the second question, the backgrounder says that 600 aircrew and other personnel will be in theatre as a result of the aircraft deployments. On that last point, here is a point from the Backgrounder: All CAF personnel and air assets will remain under Canadian military command, but could receive day-to-day mission tasks from coalition commanders.

10. What was the objective of the initial 30-day mission, and what have we accomplished?

Not directly answered today.