Paris Mourns Again & We Continue to Manufacture Arms for Extremists

Good vs. Evil. It's such a wonderful, black and white thing. I almost envy people who believe they're two opposite absolutes; it's such a simple concept to get your head around. But it never worked for me. It makes more sense to think there's a continuum from absolute ignorance to absolute consciousness of love. We're born with our consciousness being somewhere along that continuum, depending on our last life, and we use our emotions, experiences and intellect to shift along it, always being inextricably drawn towards the light.   

Since I was young I believed that nobody commits evil or hurts somebody else if they've had enough love. That everybody can be reached, no matter how depraved and/or cruel they are, and that the reason a person can't get through to somebody is because that person's understanding is lacking.   

I still mostly believe that but now I also understand that whatever people who maim, hurt and/or kill do or don't have by way of the essential experience of love, they have massive, twisted, distorted, rage and monumental entitlement to act it out, and self esteem is obliterated. It's a lethal combination. Sometimes they can be reached, sometimes you run great risk in trying and it's OK if you choose not to. And I realize now that maybe some people can't be reached in this lifetime of theirs.  

Yesterday, before I heard the news of the Paris tragedies, I watched a news clip about Mohammed Emwazi, allegedly killed by a drone strike. I was glad he was dead. The civilized part of me was overrun by a regret that he couldn't now be made to suffer in the way he inflicted suffering so viciously on others. But I wonder where his spirit is now. I wonder if it was always wrestling ferociously to escape the dark ignorance of Emwazi's consciousness that kept it from finding the light. I wonder if things have to get worse for it in the next couple of lifetimes before they get better, or if this was the nadir.

There’s so much of that horrible man's kind of entitlement, all over the world. It’s terrifying. It's also easy to focus on the extremists but let's not forget that the developed countries enable the violence with their massive arms industries. The top seven weapons exporters are USA $10bn+, Russia $5,9bn; China $1,9bn+, France $1,2bn+, Germany $1,1bn+, UK $1bn+, Israel $1bn+.

Oscar Arias Sanchez, President of Costa Rica, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1987, said in 1998; 

“When a country decides to invest in arms, rather than in education, housing, the environment, and health services for its people, it is depriving a whole generation of its right to prosperity and happiness. We have produced one firearm for every ten inhabitants of this planet, and yet we have not bothered to end hunger when such a feat is well within our reach. “Our international regulations allow almost three-quarters of all global arms sales to pour into the developing world with no binding international guidelines whatsoever. Our regulations do not hold countries accountable for what is done with the weapons they sell, even when the probable use of such weapons is obvious.”

So many weapons being sold by countries who then suffer devastating loss, as in the US, UK, France… Governments try to contain the evil, the violence, to protect the innocent. They really do.

But only up to the point of stopping the manufacture and export of arms. That one they won’t do. 

They won’t even talk about it. I don't ever hear analysts, journalists, TV anchors, politicians say “the primary reason for all the violence in the world is that we all make too many guns. We all need to stop. Now. Today. This week. This month. This year.” Well, whether we want to face it or not, it's the biggest and most operative part of the problem. 

It's co-dependency of the worst sort, making weapons so psychopaths can act out their inhumane urges. 

A Sober Barack Obama Wants Action Against Bashar-Al Assad's Use of Chemical Weapons

The war in Syria rages on, with media reporting contradictory stories that masquerade as the truth about what’s really happening. The war in the US rages on; a war of words, emotions and opinions that verge on ludicrous conspiracy theories. Did Bashar-Al Assad use nerve as in an attack on Damascus that left more than 1400 dead, over 400 of them children, or was it the rebels killing their own in a Machiavellian plot to make Assad look bad?

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said the attack was an offense and even a crime against humanity and that if the West did nothing Assad could take that as permission to repeat the offense. David Cameron wanted to do something but British MP’s voted him off the stage, although that was before the UN report was released.

Russia and China of course refuse to get involved, and Barack Obama has been fighting a losing battle with Congress and with many US citizens, to take some kind of action. He has repeatedly said that he would wait until he received the UN report and that he was not considering troops on the ground or any kind of action that would lead to long term involvement in Syria’s civil war, but the press continues to use the most dramatic headlines possible, and whatever it is that has underpinned opposition to Obama in the US since he first got elected is feeding off the drama.

It’s par for the course that conservatives in the US don’t listen to his actual words, and conveniently ignore the reality of his actions, just as it’s predictable that they will accuse him of having no backbone no matter what he does.

But the latest is that he’s being compared to GW Bush on the eve of the Iraq war, which is so far from the truth that if it wasn’t tragic it would be laughable. Bush’s intention was clear from the start. Justification for the Iraq war, where there was none, was fabricated on the flimsiest of excuses. Well, patent lies, actually. The US military industrial complex profited immensely as people on both sides got slaughtered. By the time the truth was obvious to Americans it was too late. Not for the military industrial complex of course.

Barack Obama has no intention of creating a war as GW Bush did. He has no intention of indiscriminately involving the US in Syria’s complex civil war. He has openly refused to do so up to this point, and gotten little recognition for it.

But he once said, when criticized for attempting to work with Congress, that he knows perfectly well how to draw a line in the sand, and that when he does he doesn’t back down. He spoke to the press on Friday, having seen the UN assessment which categorically states that Assad used sarin in the Damascus attack. The following is taken from the text of Obama's speech, transcribed by Federal News Service:  

“…This kind of attack threatens our national security interests by violating well-established international norms against the use of chemical weapons, by further threatening friends and allies of ours in the region like Israel and Turkey and Jordan, and it increases the risk that chemical weapons will be used in the future and fall into the hands of terrorists who might use them against us. So I have said before, and I meant what I said, that the world has an obligation to make sure that we maintain the norm against the use of chemical weapons.”

“…But again, I repeat, we’re not considering any open-ended commitment. We’re not considering any boots-on-the-ground approach. What we will do is consider options that meet the narrow concern around chemical weapons, understanding that there is not going to be a solely military solution to the underlying conflict and tragedy that’s taking place in Syria [my italics]. And I will continue to consult closely with Congress. In addition to the release of the unclassified documents, we are providing a classified briefing to congressional staffs today, and we’ll offer that same classified briefing to members of Congress as well as our international partners. And I will continue to provide updates to the American people as we get more information.”

For this he’s recently been accused of trying to save face. I guess when you don’t want to see the truth of a man you won’t see it no matter what. Obama hasn’t said yet what action the US should take. But he’s being blasted from all sides as if he had openly and aggressively declared war and said let’s kill the bastards. Frankly, the idea that nerve gas can be used indiscriminately by a lunatic like Assad and get away with it unnerves me. But what’s more unnerving is how many people in the West are quite happy to let him get away with it because it’s not on their doorstep. Yet. And maybe because it’s about Middle Easterns.

A lot of the comments left on recent New York Times articles about Obama’s desire to take some kind of action have been of the nature “let the Syrians kill each other, they’re all violent criminals anyway”.

So much for global humanity. The callousness of conservative Americans is nauseating. They’ve forgotten – as they forget anything that contradicts their current fantastical theory, whatever it is – that the original rebels didn’t initially commit the atrocities; they just fought for their freedom. It was when they got utterly desperate and particularly when foreign, fundamentalist elements came in to support them, that atrocities started being committed on both sides.

What conservatives in the West are too short-sighted to see is that if Assad has stockpiles of chemical weapons and he uses them and nobody in the West takes him to task, a precedent has been set. And if – or maybe I should say when - fundamentalists get hold of them, hallo international terror all over again but on a much bigger and more horrifying scale than ever before. If Obama doesn’t take action now – moderate action, as he’s proposing - what will they say then? If they’re alive to say anything at all.

The Outrage Over NSA Surveillance - Should American Pay for their Own Security?

The haves in Western society have gotten used to being able to have their cake and eat it, and to not have to pay for the consequences of their actions, and even for their freedom. Somebody else pays, but that doesn’t trouble us too much.

In times of recession the have-less slip down the ladder dangerously close to the have-nots, but in boom times so far enough have recovered enough to keep the system going, despite that they’re paying too high a price. Working for wages that don’t reflect their contribution so that corporations and their shareholders can profit. Spending beyond their means so that banks can make a profit.

And then everybody kind of becomes unaccountable. The have-nots of course pay for everything and over time that group gets bigger and bigger. But a lot of people look the other way. It won’t happen to me. Even if it did happen once, it won’t happen again. It seems to be human nature. Until you’re down and you just can’t get up again. Then you realize, I have the power to change this. And then the whole world changes for you.

But those people are in the minority. Just as it happens at an individual level, it does with societies. The majority believe that what they do in their lives from moment to moment and the choices they make have nothing to do with the trouble that their country gets into. Of course they’re right in some ways. Leaders fabricate wars to oust inconvenient rulers or parties or squander budgets. Politicians steal the money and/or do what the wealthy and powerful want them to do. Bankers bankrupt entire economies and get away with it: correction, are rewarded for it.

But none of it could happen if every citizen actively participated in elections, which means finding out everything there is to find about candidates before they’re elected. Then communicating with them on everything they do. Protesting every single time they step out of line.

Some do it more than others, but the majority of us wait until something really disastrous happens then we wait for the next election and we vote differently, unless we allow ourselves to get seduced by bland election promises or we’re blinded by our prejudices. We’d rather hold onto them than properly inform ourselves.

And when an unjust war is started on the pretext of protecting our freedom, we accept it and look away from the fact that somebody else is paying for that real or imagined freedom. The soldiers, for one. Innocent civilians for another, just wanting to live their lives in peace, learn their own lessons in their own way, being smashed to pieces. Maybe dying, maybe surviving to live the rest of their lives in hell, their family, town and country destroyed.

Americans are being given the choice of actually paying the price themselves for their own security now, with the Obama Administration’s intelligence gathering. Isn’t it better than making others pay? Creating a fake war on a false pretext and bombing the hell out of a country? Conning US soldiers who get physically and mentally maimed or destroyed into believing they did something noble? Conning parents into believing they're sacrificing their children for something great, so that they'll  encourage the rest of the children to give themselves up like so much fodder? Illegally holding 'suspects' and illegally torturing them, treating them like animals?

For the war in Iraq the US military sent its missionaries into poor urban areas and targeted young men who had no jobs, no resources, no opportunities. Congressmen and Senators didn't send their own sons to fight. In fact they made sure their sons didn't fight. That’s not the worst kind of intrusion into privacy?

With this latest intelligence gathering story, the real intrusion on privacy would be if content were being mined which it isn't. And a much greater threat to individuals is when violent response, most of it inappropriate, fosters more hatred and more terrorism. When the superwealthy and giant corporations get away with not contributing adequately to society. When wages are too low so profits can be high and shareholders and CEOs can make a fortune. When a Republican governor squanders $24 million to further his personal agenda and says he didn't know what it cost and he didn't care. Shortly after he had cut $10 million from after-care programs in poor schools, $12 million from hospital charity, and refused to spend $25 million on early voting.

In comparison to the alternatives, intelligence gathering is a peaceful and non-violent method of dealing with the terrorist threat. It would be great if there was no threat. But there is one and something has to be done. The question is simply, who’s going to pay for the security? The people who receive it, or those who don't?

Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Mayors Against Illegal Guns

It’s easy to think of the ultra wealthy as megalomaniac thugs driven by greed; utterly unconcerned about the good of society as a whole. It even brings a measure of satisfaction, especially if you’re one of the have-nots. Generalizations rarely apply to any individual, though, because what’s seen as megalomania and greed can also be huge lust for life and ultra powerful creativity.

It just isn’t black and white. Many celebrities, whether they’re politicians, business tycoons or A-list actors, spread their wealth in philanthropic ways. Some of them, like Oprah and Bill Gates, advertize it, making much of the huge money they contribute to society. In reality, it’s chump change to them which diminishes the heroism a little, but at least they’re doing something. Other celebrities, like Matt Damon, just go about their philanthropic business, using their celebrity status to promote projects but not to boost their egos.

Some celebrities do it all and stay in the news because their philanthropy is really newsworthy. Like New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the 7th wealthiest man in the US, and founder of Bloomberg L.P., who took up the cause of gun control, not just in his own state but around the country.

He leads Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan, national coalition of mayors which he co-founded in 2006 with Boston Mayor Thomas Menino. It started with 15 members and now has 1.4 million grassroots supporters and 950 mayors (Democrats, Republicans and Independents) from small towns and major cities in 45 states. The coalition’s campaign, originally focused on demanding a plan, has developed into its current initiative, Demand Action, that calls on Congress to legislate on requiring background checks for all gun sales, making gun trafficking a federal offense and limiting assault weapons and magazines.  

The NRA is fighting back as hard as it can against Mayor Bloomberg and the coalition. The Huffington Post reported CEO Wayne LaPierre saying the campaign is insane and based on a “dishonest premise” – namely that criminals will not submit to the background checks and that the system of tracking will be abused. Fine rationale, that. Might as well dispense with law and order altogether.

They’re tilting at windmills. A report released by the coalition in early March showed results from 21 statewide polls and 41 congressional district polls conducted among likely voters. An average of 86% in the former and 89% in the latter supported background checks on all gun sales.

That Mayor Bloomberg uses some of his money and power to actively promote gun control says a lot about him. He and his coalition are active everywhere, building support for federal regulations to reduce gun violence, employing lobbyists. The New York Times reported on Sunday that Bloomberg recently spent $13.3 million, which included $2.3 million on defeating candidates for an Illinois House seat who were against gun control.

$13.3 million sounds like a lot of money, but it isn’t to Bloomberg – in fact it’s only .05% of his worth. And it’s not as if that’s a static figure, as it would be if he’d just won the lottery. It’s being topped up every second of every day. Still, what he’s doing is truly impressive.

And let’s never forget that anybody who fights this openly for gun control does so knowing they’re putting their own life in danger. Two letters containing the deadly poison Ricin were sent to Bloomberg and the coalition. Another recently sent to the White House and suspected of being from the same source is reported to be under investigation. 

Looking at what Bloomberg and the coalition are doing it’s easy to segue into imagining what could be achieved if the top 10 wealthiest people in US and corporations like Google, Facebook and Apple joined forces on this. Especially if they went all out and committed billions instead of millions. It's hard to understand why they don’t. It’s in everybody’s interests to diminish the power of the NRA and gun manufacturers and create a stable society where people buy gadgets and products instead of guns. A child could understand that.

Public Domain Photos: Mayor Michael Bloomberg

President Obama Calls for an End to War and Closure of Guantanamo

How long is it since a US president openly promoted peace instead of war? War has become part of the American psyche, almost. The right wing political machine, with its super-powerful media, has long stirred up paranoia and terror so that false premises would be overlooked when used as justification for war.  

The military industrial complex has achieved its object, and Eisenhower’s prediction has come to pass. The whole world is drunk on war and America has heavily contributed to feeding the addiction.

But on Thursday President Obama, speaking at the National Defense University, said the terrorist threat no longer requires America to be at war. He acknowledged that torture has been used on prisoners, that Guantanamo flouts international law, and expressed regret that civilians have been killed by drones.  

“This war, like all wars, must end. That’s what history advises. It’s what our democracy demands.” He spoke rationally, as he always does, about how the terror threat has been reduced so that it is now where it was pre 9/11. There’s no more rationale for war.

President Obama has worked so solidly and tirelessly to restore America to a country that has a chance of surviving and flourishing again, and to one that the world can respect. He's been trashed from every direction and on trumped up, irrational charges. Everything he does is cast in an evil light. Right wing politicians and media prey on paranoia in the electorate. Dust storms of irrational fear and mindless hostility are stirred up.  

He’s come up against obstacle after obstacle in a Congress whose only aim is to destroy him in the eyes of the electorate and unseat him and the Democratic Party. And maintain the current status quo that is strangling the middle class. 

But he's never let it thrust him off course. He’s kept his head even though he’s been in the eye of the storm that’s been driven to a large degree, I suspect, by racism, for 5 years. It’s nothing short of heroic. 

That he speaks out now about the need to stop war in the face of the military industrial complex's power is incredible. It shows what a courageous man he is. When America stops creating wars on false premises for the aggrandizement of that shadowy group, and leads the way with policies that promote a healthy middle class it affects the whole world. World peace becomes a possibility not a dumb dream.  

All the money spent on war can be used for furthering the prosperity of the American middle class, helping the poor out of the gutter, renovating infrastructure that's falling apart all over the place. Creating a renaissance. Instead of a war machine that justifies maiming, torturing and killing foreigners and Americans and puts fortunes in the pockets of those who profit from manufacturing weapons of destruction.  

Imagine if Obama had everybody working with him? This country could truly be a shining light in the world. All that beautiful creativity and entitlement could be put to good use. If any country could change the world on its own, it’s America. 

That Obama has continued along his path to this point and with such clear and rational purpose, is the greatest inspiration in my life and I’m sure of the lives of many. Whether he achieves his objective this time isn’t what makes him a hero. It’s that he works towards it unfailingly despite obstacles. He teaches all of us in the world how not to give up. How not to let those who try to bring you down get the better of you. How not to give in to despair. 

In a lot of ways, he remains an unsung hero. He ought to get the next Nobel Peace Prize. I can’t think of anybody else in the world who deserves it more than he does. He doesn't only lead America, he leads the world. Not because the US is a super-power but because he's a great man.