Thursday, July 16, 2026

We're clueless what our world and lives will be like a year from now.

 

LOL!!!

A bipartisan Congressional working group Committee with 24 members believe it can urgently control AI development in US.  Yet in the context of US national security, competing with nations like China, when it has no regulations, is insane.  With 'President Trump's talk this evening don't expect any  sane answers.  

The strategy of leaders on both sides is not to control tools but to win outcomes.  This is doing the same thing over and over again...expecting a different 'good' result.  I’m sorry.  I need to stop laughing and crying before I can continue.  


Thanks for understanding. 😉

The first thing!  No one can control all outcomes.   Be it military spending, debt, Truth decay, the evolution of war/weapons, or political polarization.

AI’s exponential growth of power will continue to accelerate.  No one has any idea what will happen early next year as AGI itself becomes self-aware and uncontrollable.  Meanwhile, advances in democratic government policies are nearly impossible to agree on.  And even if it was, it doesn’t mean other countries will do the same.

Living in a democracy as they operate now is foolish. And trying to control a technology that is infinitely more intelligent and possibly wiser than what we see from Congress or American voters is -- how shall I say this?  Mission impossible.

Consider the idea or intent - of a linear thinking mind - outsmarting the exponential growth of technology already 1000 times faster and smarter than we are.  This best represents the insanity of humanity.    We can’t even unite on the basic self-evident truths!  Like all people are created equal and endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights.   Rights based on “the Laws of Nature and of Nature‘s God”.  WTF? What’s so complicated about taking care of nature and each other?

How do we not have an answer for this?  It’s called the overlook effect. That is what you see from a spacecraft circling the planet -- the most beautiful thing visible.  What you can see is a mostly blue planet with some gray areas and some green Gardens of Eden.   Gardens we’ve been consistently abusing and consuming for the wealth of a few dozen people.  Meanwhile, billions struggle to make a life for themselves. This is simply unsustainable and collectively insane.

Americans just celebrated the 250th anniversary of the so called “Declaration of Independence.  That is not its original name.  The word “Independence’ is not in its title or anywhere in its text. 

Is packed with ideals that should’ve happened 250 years ago - or more. Humankind has always known what to do to make this planet work sustainably. Take care of nature (God’s creation or the evolution of nature...  And take care of each other – the Golden Rule.  What is so complicated about this?  Other than getting trapped in our mind’s flawed concepts like politics, religion, economics, race... in the real world where everything is connected, interdependent and vulnerable?  Vulnerable to a number of threats that we continue to ignore as they grow.

From biological weapons and other forms of WMD, to an economic meltdown, or any number of environmental limits that are overshot or increasingly unstable. The rise and conflicts over the last 25 years. Plus, the newest threat I recently learned from a Scientific American article - Mirror Molecules (probably should be renamed Mirror Monsters).

With a basic understanding of biology anyone can understand this. DNA and RNA, the basic blueprints of life, spiral in only one direction, clockwise.  Now imagine an identical molecule winding the other way - like a mirror image.

If science can create this it could get into the environment and infect a plant or animal’s immune system. And that animal will not be able to respond to it.  Then that molecule will consume tissue without stopping until all the nutrients within that animal run out.  Then starts on other life forms.

What most people don’t understand is the similarities between biology and cyber technology - is that both are continually evolving.  And unlike regular kinetic weapons that are used up when they’re used, these tiny elements reproduce for free when they’re used – endlessly.  And likely untraceable to the source of origin or the human or AI creator.

With humans united with AI, we have the capacity to create either heaven on earth or a global hell scape.

Unfortunately, our so-called human intelligence may have the capacity for deep thinking and wisdom, but most minds would rather argue over mental constructs like religion, politics, and economics, that have no basis in our DNA, than work to solve problems impeding our survival and thriving.   What the basic DNA of every social species does...enabling them to survive and thrive through coordination and cooperation, with limited competition along the way. Now competition as human life’s primary driver.

Our urgent task.  We need to figure out very quickly how we’re going to transform our own minds - and the minds of those empower - that have created the foundation for our current Hellscape on earth.

The next election needs the wisdom of engineers who know how to build things using unambiguous words to improve public health and safety.  Not ambiguous words like peace, democracy, terrorism, or independence.

The good news?  A global plan already exists.  It affordable and achievable by the year 2030 but is nowhere near meeting any of its 17 broad goals.  And most people are clueless about the 169 subgoals within them for achieving at the community level globally... It’s not a mater of money. In fact, achieving them would save trillions of dollars and billions of lives.   Progressive movements and organizations just lack the wisdom and wiliness to unite and make it happen.   This is insane.

 

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

2026 Report on the SDGs.

 U.N. on Sustainable Development Goals: World Needs to Scale Them Faster  

(Thank you to Steven Jay - Executive Producer and Co-Founder, of Mobilized News for this post.  https://mobilizednews.com/)

The solutions exist. The problem is that the world has not organized, financed or distributed them at the scale required.   July 14, 2026 Creative Director Special Announcements

https://mobilizednews.com/u-n-on-sustainable-development-goals-world-needs-to-scale-them-faster/

The Sustainable Development Goals Are Working. The World Is Not Scaling Them Fast Enough.

A new United Nations assessment finds measurable global progress—but conflict, debt, climate disruption and declining development support threaten to reverse the gains.

READ THE REPORT:   https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2026/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2026.pdf

The world has made real progress since adopting the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015.

Billions of people have gained better access to clean water, electricity, health care and digital connectivity. Proven policies, technologies and community programs have improved lives across countries and sectors.

But with less than five years remaining before the 2030 deadline, progress remains too slow, too uneven and too vulnerable to disruption.

The central message of the Sustainable Development Goals Report 2026 is clear:  The solutions exist. The problem is that the world has not organized, financed or distributed them at the scale required.

The Core Signal:  The Sustainable Development Goals have produced meaningful results—but global crises are advancing faster than many of the systems designed to address them.

Escalating conflicts, climate change, slowing economic growth, rising debt burdens and declining official development assistance are placing growing pressure on governments and communities.

Without a decisive effort to expand what is already working, the promise of the 2030 Agenda could move further out of reach.

What Has Changed?   Since 2015, SDG-related investments and policies have helped expand:

Clean drinking water and sanitation

Electricity and energy access

Essential health services

Digital and communications infrastructure

Education and public-service delivery

Data collection and development planning

These gains demonstrate that coordinated action can improve quality of life at scale.

But progress has not been shared equally.

Many countries and communities continue to face limited financing, weak infrastructure, technological barriers and insufficient institutional capacity. In some regions, conflict, displacement, extreme weather and economic instability are eroding earlier advances.

Why It Matters:  The Sustainable Development Goals are often presented as 17 separate priorities.  In reality, they function as one interconnected system.

A community cannot improve health without clean water, nutritious food, reliable electricity and functioning public services.

Economic opportunity depends on education, transportation, connectivity and access to finance.

Climate resilience depends on housing, energy, land use, food systems, governance and public participation.

When one system fails, pressure spreads into the others.

When systems are coordinated, progress can multiply.

FIVE Pressure Points:   The report identifies several forces slowing or reversing progress.

Conflict:   Wars and political instability destroy infrastructure, displace populations and redirect public resources away from health, education and development.

Debt:  Many governments are spending more on debt repayment while struggling to finance essential services and long-term resilience.

Climate disruption:  Heat, floods, droughts, storms and ecosystem loss are increasing food insecurity, damaging infrastructure and worsening public-health risks.

Slower economic growth:  Weak growth reduces public revenue, limits investment and increases pressure on households and small businesses.

Declining development assistance:  Reduced international support leaves lower-income countries with fewer resources to implement proven solutions.

These FIVE pressures do not operate independently. They reinforce one another. 

Debt limits climate investment. Climate disasters increase debt. Conflict weakens public institutions. Weak institutions reduce the capacity to respond.

The Real Gap:  The world does not primarily suffer from a shortage of ideas.  It suffers from a failure to connect knowledge, financing, technology and implementation. Many successful approaches remain isolated within individual cities, agencies, organizations or pilot programs.

They are documented but not distributed. Funded temporarily but not institutionalized. Proven locally but not adapted elsewhere.

The next phase of sustainable development must focus less on creating additional declarations and more on building the systems that allow effective solutions to travel.

What Must Happen Next:  The report calls for the Sustainable Development Goals to return to the center of global decision-making.  Priority actions include:

Increasing investment in sustainable development

Strengthening international cooperation

Expanding access to technology and reliable data

Accelerating the clean-energy transition

Advancing gender equality

Renewing commitments to peace and conflict prevention

Strengthening public institutions and implementation capacity

Supporting countries facing unsustainable debt burdens

These priorities must be translated into coordinated action across national, regional and local systems.

What's Working:  The report confirms that progress is possible when governments, communities, institutions and businesses align around clear goals.  Access to electricity, water, health services and digital tools has expanded because knowledge, technology, policy and investment were brought together.

The lesson is not that the SDGs have failed.  The lesson is that fragmented implementation has prevented successful approaches from reaching everyone who needs them.  The task now is to identify what works, understand the conditions that made it work and build the capacity to replicate or adapt it.

From Global Goals to Local Capability: The Sustainable Development Goals will not be achieved through international institutions alone.  Most implementation happens where people live.  Cities, towns, schools, hospitals, businesses, cooperatives and community organizations can translate the global framework into practical local priorities.

Communities can begin by asking

Which systems are under the greatest pressure?

Which needs are not being met?

Which local solutions are already producing results?

What resources, partnerships or policy changes would help them expand?

How can progress be measured and shared openly?

Local governments can align budgets and procurement with community priorities.

Businesses can connect investment decisions to measurable social and environmental outcomes.

Schools and universities can serve as centers for research, public learning and local problem-solving.

Media organizations can move beyond reporting problems by showing how solutions work, where they are operating and what is required to replicate them.

The Mobilized Take:  The SDGs remain valuable because they show that health, prosperity, peace and environmental stability cannot be separated.  But goals alone do not change systems. Progress depends on the ability to connect: 

Knowledge → Resources → People → Projects → Policy → Implementation

The remaining years before 2030 should not become another cycle of conferences, declarations and isolated initiatives. They should become a period of accelerated coordination.  The world already has many of the tools required to improve quality of life. What is missing is the infrastructure for cooperation, distribution, adaptation and accountability.

As UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned, the direction chosen now will determine whether the progress of the past decade holds—or begins to unravel.  

Signals → Systems → Risks → Solutions → Capability

Signal: The Sustainable Development Goals have delivered measurable progress, but global advancement remains insufficient and uneven.

Systems: Health, energy, water, food, education, finance, technology, peace and climate resilience are interdependent.

Risks: Conflict, debt, climate disruption and declining development support could reverse earlier gains.

Solutions: Expand proven programs, strengthen cooperation, accelerate clean energy, improve access to technology and restore sustainable development to the center of decision-making.

Capability: Give communities and institutions the financing, knowledge, tools, partnerships and authority to act where they are now.

The next four years will determine more than whether the world meets a set of targets. They will determine whether humanity builds systems capable of protecting progress—and extending it to everyone.  

What Communities Can Do Now:  Start with local needs. Identify which systems—food, water, energy, health, housing, transportation or digital access—are under the greatest pressure.

Map what already works. Find local projects, cooperatives, public programs and community groups producing measurable results.

Connect the gaps. Determine what successful efforts need to grow: financing, volunteers, technical support, policy changes, facilities or stronger partnerships.

Create a shared action plan. Set practical 30-day, 90-day and one-year priorities with clear responsibilities and public progress updates.

Use local purchasing power. Encourage schools, hospitals, businesses and local governments to buy from responsible local producers and service providers.

Build community resilience. Develop neighborhood energy, food, health, communications and emergency-support networks that can continue operating during disruption.

Share what works. Document results, lessons and reusable methods so other communities can adapt successful solutions instead of starting from zero.

The goal: Turn global commitments into visible local improvements—and give people the capability to shape healthier, more resilient communities where they are now.

Or prepare for the global consequences. 


Thank you to Steven Jay and Mobilized News  https://mobilizednews.com/

Saturday, July 11, 2026

Global Mental Perspective is attainable and urgently needed. ASAP.

 Today's Rotary Action Group on Mental Health Initiatives (RAGMHI) zoom meeting reported on its accelerated growth at last month's Rotary International conference in Taipei.  RI hosted all of its 26 RAGs (Rotary Action Groups) in which participants within them need not need be a Rotary member.  Nearly 20 of these RAGs focus on a specific health issue committed to expanding the work of serving others in need globally. Most needs are obviously in the poorest nations.  But Rotary leaders and members within this Mental Health group - two vital things became urgently clear.  Global chaos is accelerating, increasing stress on each of RI's seven pillars (Disease prevention and treatment; Peacebuilding and conflict prevention; Water, sanitation, and hygiene; Maternal and child health; Basic education and literacy; Community economic development; and Environmental Protection).   Interest in this mental health group's growth over the last few years is clear evidence that more people are recognizing the value of mental health in every aspect of our lives.  

"There can be no health without mental health." Rawle Andrews Jr., Esq. Executive Director American Psychiatric Association Foundation. July 2023

Even within those doing humanitarian work the mental health stresses are growing. 

As more 'forever wars', violent extremists, genocides, refugees, extreme weather conditions, corruption, declining species, new/reemerging/evolving/& human engineered pathogens, unsustainable government debt related to reactionary policies, due to a lack of wise investments in prevention, and now declines in their funding -even those committed to 'service above self' are struggling mentally.  This is seriously unhealth.  And it has a specific name - moral injury.  

“Mental health is the ongoing process of dedication to reality at all costs.”  – M. Scott Peck, The Road Less Traveled [1978]

The printed December 2022 issue of Scientific American under the title “Moral Injury Is an Invisible Epidemic That Affects Millions” by Elizabeth Svoboda, it explores how moral injury affected not only military veterans but also healthcare workers, teachers, and others during the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing that moral injury arises when people are forced into situations that violate their deepest moral values. A concise definition: Moral injury is the deep psychological, emotional, and spiritual distress that can occur when people witness, participate in, or feel unable to prevent actions that violate their core moral values or sense of right and wrong. Unlike fear-based trauma like PTSD, moral injury is often characterized by guilt, shame, betrayal, loss of trust, and a struggle to find meaning or reconnect with others.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many healthcare workers experienced moral injury—the anguish of being forced to make impossible decisions, lacking the resources to provide the care they believed patients deserved, or witnessing preventable suffering. The article highlighted this distress that often stemmed not from personal weakness but from systemic failures that placed people in ethically impossible situations.  While PTSD is often driven by fear after life-threatening events, whereas moral injury centers on violations of one’s ethical beliefs and values.

In 1959, Carl Jung was interviews in a BBC Face to Face TV series.  In it he said, “One thing is sure, a great change of our psychological attitude is imminent. That is certain.” And why? “Because we need more — we need more psychology. We need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself. He is the great danger, and we are pitifully unaware of it. We know nothing of man, far too little. His psyche should be studied, because we are the origin of all coming evil." 

Too often, we see ourselves separate from others and nature.  Albert Einstein defined this as a "delusion".  Because we are connected, interdependent, and extremely vulnerable to most things in the known universe.  But on our goldilocks planet life is a blessed miracle, but our minds have now become our greatest problem.  Originally, the mind evolved as an amazing problem solving tool. And our tribes grew within a natural world by founding ways to protect ourselves and those close to us. The mind created concepts like religion, politics, and/or economics to bond us into larger tribes. But it also invented weapons to defend those concepts.  And with the invention of nuclear weapons we needed to grasp the reality that our minds needed to outgrow our defense of concepts, and unite as the social species that was originally encoded into our DNA. Our capacity to collectively, cooperate and coordinate with compassion for all life that supports our 'health' and sustainability as a species. Health of mind, body, spirit, family, community, environment, government, economy… 

This will take a transformation of modern thinking...and using our intelligence (with AI) for solving our global problems with wisdom instead of the reactionary thinking that enabled our species to get this far.  Most minds have the capacity for systemic thinking, but our education, economic, and political systems have failed in prioritizing this use of our minds.  Instead we defend our selective and varying mental identities (religious, national, race, ethnic..) to the death of our body and spirit  - by the hundreds of millions - with little regard for the nature that provides us with everything we need to survive, thrive, and flourish.  

Earth has had the capacity for doing this for as long as our species has existed.  And many trends in our way of living have simply become unsustainable. This is literally the insanity of humanity on an dead-end track with only one way to stop.  A change in our mindset and selfish spirit. 

This is not a new concept. And it keeps popping up.  Unfortunately, our minds favor staying the same,  defending what we believe, and feeling good about it.  Instead of being good and doing what's right.  

“We are called to be the architects of tomorrow.  Not its victims.”  R. Buckminster Fuller

“An Alternative Global Perspective” is available and needed.  The first thing to grasp is that there are "Truths" that we should all hold "to be self-evident".  Like gravity. Math. A child should not die before their parent.  We are free to keep our personal religious and political truths. But failing to abide by "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" things will not end well and suffering is predictable.  The troubles now growing in the Middle East started with one religion using the Bible as a real-estate manual. And the injustices one all sides have the potential to turn life on earth into back into the star dust all of us and this planet was created from. 

“Everything is connected, everything is interdependent, so everything is vulnerable.... And that’s why this has to be a more than whole of government, a more than whole of nation [effort]. It really has to be a global effort....” Jen Easterly. CISA director.  Oct. 29, 2021. [the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Agency is our nation’s newest federal agency established by the Trump Administration in 2018]. It was hacked early in 2025.  And the word "everything" is autological. It means every cell and strand of DNA in your body and every computer code we or AI can engineer.  

Below is an Oct, 10, 2022 email exchange between myself and a colleague I’d only known by email.

“I loved the call today.  But not your health situation with Lyme disease and the cerebral effects of a viral infection.  I’m guessing you don’t want everyone to know about it...if that is your wish. I did promise you this old printed artifact from my files, “An Alternative Global Perspective”.  I don’t expect you to read it...just to know this has been an ongoing need for decades.   I’ve been a part of it. And given several professional opportunities to contribute ideas.  But only in the last 25 years have I started to understand why it has been so difficult.  And it’s mostly been the cognitive resistance of my liberal colleagues to changing their own minds (or organizational priorities) due to the fact that funding their own efforts/priorities/missions relied on perpetuating the existing political systems...and failing to think about the whole...as Konkankoh eloquently expressed.  No need to respond to this email. You have bigger fish to fry... Cw

ERIC - ED116993 - An Attainable Global Perspective., 1975-Nov

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED116993

An Attainable Global Perspective.  Hanvey, Robert G.

A more complete understanding of global perspective is provided in this essay through an examination of the modes of thought, sensitivities, intellectual skills, and explanatory capacities which contribute to the formation of a global perspective. With an emphasis on both a formal and informal educational level, the essay is divided into five sections which examine the requirements for an attainable global perspective. Section 1, Perspective Consciousness, underscores the need to recognize the concept that everyone's perspective is shaped by subtle influences and that others may have different perspectives. Section 2, State of the Planet Awareness, examines the problems and solutions for increasing the ability of individuals to intelligently interpret information about world conditions. Section 3, Cross Cultural Awareness, describes the different degrees of cross-cultural awareness and the necessity to reach a stage beyond empathy where one has the capacity to imagine oneself in a role within the context of a foreign culture. Section 4, Knowledge of Global Dynamics, analyzes the world as an interdependent system where the issue of growth may be the predominant contemporary problem. Section 5, Awareness of Human Choices, emphasizes that increased global perspective will require difficult value decisions about the solutions to our world problems. (Author/DE)

Descriptors: Conceptual SchemesCross Cultural StudiesCultural AwarenessDecision MakingElementary Secondary EducationFutures (of Society)Global ApproachSchool RoleSocial StudiesTeaching MethodsValuesWorld AffairsWorld Problems


Center for War/Peace Studies, 218 East 18th Street, New York, New York 10003 ($1.00)

Publication Type: Books

Education Level: N/A

Audience: N/A

Language: N/A

Sponsor: National Endowment for the Humanities (NFAH), Washington, DC.

Authoring Institution: New York Friends Group, Inc., New York. Center for War/Peace Studies.; Denver Univ., CO. Center for Teaching International Relations.

An Attainable Global Perspective Robert G. Hanvey 

CONTENTS Introduction Dimension 

1: Perspective Consciousness Dimension 

2: "State of the Planet" Awareness Dimension 

3: Cross-cultural Awareness Dimension 

4: Knowledge of Global Dynamics Dimension 

5: Awareness of Human Choices 

This essay is a beginning effort to define some elements of what we call a global perspective to flesh out some of the things- we will need to know and understand, if we are to cope with the challenges of an increasingly interdependent world. The views are those of the author, published here to begin the discussion, debate, and analysis which will be necessary for a widespread and more complete understanding of what global perspectives are and how they can become part of the school curriculum.

************

“Archery, fencing, spear fighting, all of the martial arts, tea ceremony, flower arranging ... in all of these, correct breathing, correct balance, and correct stillness help to remake the individual. The basic aim is always the same: by tirelessly practicing a given skill, the student finally sheds the ego with its fears, worldly ambitions, and reliance on objective scrutiny - sheds it so completely that he becomes the instrument of a deeper power, from which mastery falls instinctively, without further effort on his part, like a ripe fruit.” — Karlfried Graf Durckheim*

“The man, who, being really on the Way, falls upon hard times in the world will not, as a consequence, turn to that friend who offers him refuge and comfort and encourages his old self to survive. Rather, he will seek out someone who will faithfully and inexorably help him to risk himself, so that he may endure the suffering and pass courageously through it. Only to the extent that man exposes himself over and over again to annihilation, can that which is indestructible arise within him. In this lies the dignity of daring. Thus, the aim of practice is not to develop an attitude which allows a man to acquire a state of harmony and peace wherein nothing can ever trouble him.  On the contrary, practice should teach him to let himself be assaulted, perturbed, moved, insulted, broken, and battered – that is to say, it should enable him to dare to let go his futile hankerings after harmony, surcease from pain, and a comfortable life in order that he may discover, in doing battle with the forces that oppose him, that which waits him beyond the world of opposites.   The first necessity is that we should have the courage to face life, and to encounter all that is most perilous in the world.  When this is possible, medication itself becomes the means by which we accept and welcome the demons which arise from the unconscious — a process very different from the practice of concentration on some object as protection against such forces.  Only if we venture repeatedly through the zones of annihilation can our contact with the Divine Being, which is beyond annihilation, become firm and stable.  The more a man learns while heartedly to control the world that threatens him with isolation, the more are the depths of the Ground of Being revealed and the possibilities of new life and Becoming Opened.”  Karlfried Graf Durckheim*

* Karlfried Graf Dürckheim: a German diplomat, psychotherapist, and Zen master who served as a cultural envoy in Japan before and during WWII, promoting Nazi ideology while studying Zen under teachers like D.T. Suzuki and Awa Kenzō. Imprisoned after the war, he experienced a spiritual transformation and returned to Germany to develop “Initiation Therapy,” blending Zen practice, Christian mysticism, and depth psychology into a holistic path of self-realization.  Born Oct 24, 1896 (Munich).  Died Dec 28, 1988 (Todtmoos Germany)

////

In reading this long blog...if the UN 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) doesn't jump to your mind...you are not thinking systemically.  They were globally approved in 2015 and remain affordable and achievable by 2030 if there is the political will.  These are a comprehensive and holistic plan that works synergistically for sustainably maximizing human and environmental health, our freedoms, prosperity, peace and security - all vital for coming generations to thrive and flourish.  They are the modern day equivalent of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights intended to prevent another war, genocide or use of WMD.   The SDGs are basically buying them. 

In June 2023, Bank of America Chair & CEO, Brian Moynihan spoke on the state of the economy, the U.S. financial system, and capitalism.  He said, ‘the SDGs will cost approximately’ “$6 trillion annually”. “Governments are too debt burdened” and “charity is insufficient”. “Business leaders” “like the oil companies” and others must step up and prioritize a balancing of ‘short-term gains’ with ‘long term interests’. ‘Profits must be good for business and society all the way down to the community level’. “Capitalism” “requires a greater purpose than making more profit.” Neither capitalism or profit making is sustainable without these SDG goals being achieved.'  C-span covered this interview hosted by the City Club of Cleveland. Program ID: 529044-1 https://www.c-span.org/video/?529044-1/bank-america-ceo-remarks-city-club-cleveland  

“A great part of that order which reigns among mankind is not the effect of government. It had its origin in the principles of society and the natural constitution of man. It existed prior to government, and would exist if the formality of government was abolished. The mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has upon man, and all parts of a civilized community upon each other, create that great chain of connection which holds it together. The landholder, the farmer, the manufacturer, the merchant, the tradesman, and every occupation, prospers by the aid which each receives from the other, and from the whole. Common interest regulates their concerns, and forms their laws; and the laws which common usage ordains, have a greater influence than the laws of government. In fine, society performs for itself almost everything which is ascribed to government.   Thomas Paine, Rights of Man [1791]

What's needed now is a Movement of Movements to overpower the rigged systems we have put up with. But "...all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."  1776 Declaration of 'separation' from Great Britain.  Because the word independence was never in the original title or text of that profound document.  


Friday, July 3, 2026

I've failed. Progressive Movements and organizations remain divided.

The dozens of progressive organizations I've worked in, volunteered with, or tried to inspire to take leadership in creating - or simply endorsing Project 250 (an idea that is about 250 years overdue) tomorrow.  After the 4th, it will become Project MoM- a global Movement of Movements. Over the last two years - less than a dozen have.  

  1. Rotary District 7610 Action Group for Environmental Sustainability:  David Feld  mdavidfeld@gmail.com 11-2024
  2. Greenbelt Rotary Club:  Greenbelt Maryland, USA  https://greenbeltrotary.org/  12-2024
  3. Rockville Rotary Club:  Rockville Maryland, USA  https://www.rockvillerotary.org/  1-1-2025
  4. Ojulu Island Saviors Foundation:  Kampala,, Uganda.  https://ojuluislandsavioursfoundation.org/  Odongo Moses Ojulu 1-19-25
  5. Mobilized News Network:  NYC, USA  https://mobilizednews.com/about/  Steven Jay  1-26-25
  6. Kehosa Africa Foundation:   Kenya https://Facebook.com/KehosaAfricaFoundation  Armstrong Ongera, MD 2-3-25
  7. StartUpAfrica:  Kenya https://www.startupafrica.org Armstrong Ongera, MD  2-3-25
  8. Maryland United for Peace and Justice:  Baltimore, MD  USA  2-1-25
  9. Peacebuilding Connections  https://www.peacebuildingconnections.org   2-10-25
  10. Buhknom Development Foundation, Nigeria  https://bdfgivinghope.org.ng  3-3-25
  11. Friends of Foreigners in Togo:  Togo, Africa  https://togofriends.org/  3-4-25

Project 250 intended to use the 250th anniversary of the 1776 Declaration to inspire and unite progressives movements and organizations around the "Truths" that we should all hold "to be self-evident".  Unfortunately, most remained addicted to their specific 'issue bubble'.  

Below is a partial list of organizations that missed this opportunity intended to unite the three progressive movements (Peace, Environment, and economic/social Justice) plus the thousands of organizations within each to prioritize achieving the UN 17 Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.  There are hundreds more in my database - I've collected and communicated with over the last few decades as former Chair of the United Nations Association Council of Organizations. 

Action Network

Association of World Citizens

Alliance for Peace Building

Bahai  

Carter School for Peace and Conflict Resolution, George Mason University.

Charter for Compassion

Citizens for United Earth

Citizens for Global Solutions

Compassionate Citizen Foundation

Coalition for our Children

Deeptime Network

Earth Charter

Generations United

Global Health Council

Global Compassion Coalition

Global Action Plan for the Earth

Human Rights Foundation

I Am Humanity

Indivisible

Institute for World Problems

Medical Society Consortium

Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network 

MoveOn

United for Peace and Justice

One Community

ONE World 

Pachamama Alliance

Planetary Health Alliance 

ProHuman 

RESULTS

Rotary International

SmartSettle

Source of Synergy Foundation 

Sunrise Movement

The Hunger Project

United Earth 

United for Peace

United Nations Association

United Nations Foundation

US Global Leadership Coalition: 

We The World

Wellbeing Economy Alliance

World Citizens

World Beyond War

Having offered over a dozen prime reasons for any progressive organization to lead -or simply endorse - this bold project (simply as an idea - not an organization) at no cost. They would have been listed and linked to other organizations in their community to work together in advocacy efforts recognizing the boldness in June 2023, when Bank of America Chair & CEO, Brian Moynihan spoke on the state of the economy, the U.S. financial system, and capitalism. He said, ‘the SDGs will cost approximately’ “$6 trillion annually”. “Governments are too debt burdened” and “charity is insufficient”. “Business leaders” “like the oil companies” and others must step up and prioritize a balancing of ‘short-term gains’ with ‘long term interests’. ‘Profits must be good for business and society all the way down to the community level’. “Capitalism” “requires a greater purpose than making more profit.” Neither capitalism or profit making is sustainable without these SDG goals being achieved.' C-span covered this interview hosted by the City Club of Cleveland. Program ID: 529044-1 https://www.c-span.org/video/?529044-1/bank-america-ceo-remarks-city-club-cleveland

I'd responded their questions and offered free online supportive documents.  Yet few saw the profound benefit to their own organization's growth, recognition globally, and connecting with others in local communities globally.  I took this personally, believing it was the messenger and not the message being the problem.  In some cases it probably was me.  My passion and persistence can be annoying.  But I'm also certain the progressive mindset is the greater barrier.  Their disrespect for most of the Declaration's singers being white slave owners could be an issue.  But the profound wisdom within that document (flawless except for the one brief phrase “merciless Indian Savages”) remains globally applicable and simply genius.   

So now, faith in myself and most active and powerful progressives leaders has withered.  And with this, any hope that most global conditions and troubling trends will getting systemically better before getting far worse.  According to ChatGPT there are over 100 destructive trends we face (see previous blogpost).  Each potentially cascading into the others sparking a global catastrophe.  With, at least 1/3rd of these being unsustainable period! 

I expect most of humanity will have a great celebration with the death or lawful removal from office of our current criminal President. And at least some temporary relief from the insanity when MAGA loses the House and/or the Senate in the midterms.  But progressives are endlessly hopeful that democracy can save us.  It can't.  Not without our legal system becoming a actual Justice system.  And the protection of human rights globally -to diminish the array of globally disruptive forces (wars, pandemics, violent extremists, violent weather conditions, or a crimpling economic recession/depression) that have fueled the MAGA movement and other populist movements in other democracies...simply because political borders and powerful militaries can't stop them.  Fundamentally, both our nation's politically polarization and increasing global chaos are caused by both our US Constitution and the UN Charter founded on the delusion of independence - in our irreversible interdependent reality.  Prepare your self mental and physically for the hard times that are coming.  

Below is a ChatGPT's list of 'why' progressive 'peace' organizations have failed in achieving it, plus the number of new conflicts since Sept 11, 2001 (a number higher than after World War II). 

My question to ChatGPT July 3, 2026 "Why have Progressive Peace movements always failed?" 

ChatGPT"s answer:  This has been studied by historians, political scientists, peace researchers, military strategists, and practitioners for decades. While there is no single answer, there is considerable agreement on why peace movements have often struggled to achieve lasting change.  [The comments in brackets are mine]

Here are some of the principal reasons they have fallen short, with examples and perspectives from a range of voices.


  1. Peace is defined negatively rather than positively: Many movements define peace simply as the absence of war rather than the presence of conditions that allow people and societies to flourish. Norwegian peace scholar Johan Galtung distinguished between “negative peace” (absence of violence) and “positive peace” (justice, equity, and functioning institutions).  [In this era of Truth decay and the evolution of weapons and war the possibility of redefining it as ‘positive Peace’ given all the different contexts and meanings of this ambiguous would be futile and a waste limited time, energy and resources...that should be invested in preventing conflicts.]

 

  1. Root causes receive less attention than immediate crises:  Wars often emerge from combinations of poverty, inequality, corruption, environmental stress, poor governance, discrimination, and fear. Stopping a war without addressing these conditions often leaves the drivers of future conflict intact. [Genocides take even more lives, and sanctions used to achieve a cease fire or end a conflict can kill nearly as much, and often backfires.]

 

  1. National interests outweigh global interests:  Most governments are accountable primarily to their own citizens. International institutions have limited authority to enforce peace when major powers disagree.  [World law via a world federation or something similar has been tried for over 100 years.  Now it is needed more than ever.  But those in power will not give it up.]

 

  1. Peace movements are often fragmented:  Environmental organizations, public health advocates, human rights groups, anti-poverty campaigns, democracy advocates, and anti-war organizations frequently pursue parallel goals without sustained coordination. [Even various Peace organizations fail to unite...and continue to compete with each other for money, members, media, and sway with policy makers.  For the past few decades I’ve worked with some that united.... but bringing them all together has never happened.]

 

  1. Security institutions are designed to respond, not prevent:  Governments devote vastly more resources to military preparedness and crisis response than to conflict prevention, mediation, education, or community resilience. [This reactionary response is insane.  Systemic issues must be prioritized.  The cost savings would resolve the debt issues of most nations.]

 

  1. Economic incentives favor conflict:  Defense industries, competition over natural resources, sanctions, illicit arms markets, and geopolitical rivalries create incentives that can work against peaceful resolution.  [Changing this would require political will that few policy makers are open to...and too few voters would rise to the occasion to make it happen.]

 

  1. Human psychology evolved for smaller groups:  Humans readily distinguish between “us” and “them.” While this capacity strengthened cooperation within groups, it can also fuel polarization, nationalism, sectarianism, and dehumanization. [This is a mental health issue that even peace experts fail to acknowledge.  And they must - given the evolution of war and WMD.]

 

  1. Technology advances faster than ethics and governance:  Nuclear weapons, cyberwarfare, autonomous systems, drones, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence have expanded the means of conflict more rapidly than international norms have adapted. [Failure of governments, peace organizations, and the human mind adapting to this insanity is another mental health problem...not accepting reality]

 

  1. Justice is difficult to achieve after violence:  Unresolved grievances, trauma, displacement, and cycles of revenge can persist for generations.  [again, another mental source of conflict that requires humans changing their minds, forgiveness, and ...being involved in politics ...seeking comfort instead of command of their discipline]

 

  1. Peace movements often mobilize only during crises: Public attention rises during wars but frequently fades afterward, making sustained institution-building difficult.  [Progressives are lazy, focused on love and are not interested in prevention...just feeling good about what they do regardless of how ineffective they are.]

 

  1. Political polarization undermines common purpose:   Many peace initiatives become identified with particular political ideologies, reducing their ability to build broad coalitions. [again, their failure to unite in systemic actions doesn’t fit their chosen identity]

 

  1. Success is difficult to measure:  Prevented wars leave little visible evidence, making prevention harder to sustain politically than responding to dramatic crises. [BS!  By prioritizing the 169 sub-goals within the 17 SDGs—measuring would lead to success.

 

Perspectives worth remembering

Dwight D. Eisenhower warned: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched… signifies… a theft from those who hunger.”

Albert Einstein observed: “Problems cannot be solved with the same thinking that created them.”

Martin Luther King Jr. wrote:  “True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice.”

Dag Hammarskjöld said: “The United Nations was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell.”

 From the military perspective,

Carl von Clausewitz famously noted: “War is the continuation of politics by other means.”

 Many contemporary strategists would add that preventing conflict requires shaping the political, economic, and social conditions long before violence erupts.

 Why addressing root causes matters:  The 17 Sustainable Development Goals provide a useful framework because they recognize that peace is interconnected with health, education, clean water, food security, economic opportunity, environmental sustainability, human rights, and effective institutions. Goal 16, Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, is essential, but it is difficult to achieve in isolation. Communities burdened by hunger, disease, extreme inequality, corruption, environmental degradation, or exclusion are generally more vulnerable to instability and conflict. [and nearly ten times the number of people die from hunger, disease, human rights violations...than from conflicts and genocides combined]

 From a systems perspective, durable peace is less a standalone objective than an emergent outcome of societies that meet people’s basic needs, protect rights, resolve disputes fairly, and build trust across communities. Progress on goals such as good health, quality education, reduced inequalities, climate resilience, and accountable governance can reduce many of the conditions that increase the risk of violence. This does not mean the SDGs guarantee peace, nor that every conflict stems from unmet development goals, but it does suggest that prevention is broader than diplomacy or military deterrence alone.

Strengthening the foundations of healthy, resilient communities can make peaceful resolution more likely and violent conflict less likely over time.

 One theme that has emerged in both peace research and public health is that prevention often receives less attention than response. Investments in early warning, resilient institutions, public health, education, and inclusive governance may not attract the visibility of crisis interventions, yet they can reduce the likelihood that crises escalate into violence. This preventive approach is increasingly reflected in research on human security and resilience, even as governments continue to debate how best to balance immediate security needs with long-term investments in the conditions that support lasting peace.

 Key opportunities for action 

If we begin with the premise that the destructive power of humanity has advanced much faster than our political institutions and our capacity for global cooperation, then a peace movement focused primarily on protests against individual wars is unlikely, by itself, to keep pace with modern risks. A systems-oriented movement would likely prioritize building resilience and reducing the conditions under which conflicts become more likely and more destructive.

Here are five areas that many scholars across security studies, public health, governance, and peace research would likely view as foundational:


  1. Prevention through human and planetary security:  Shift the primary question from “How do we stop wars?” to “How do we reduce the conditions that make wars, instability, and societal collapse more likely?” This includes health, food and water security, resilient infrastructure, environmental stewardship, education, and disaster preparedness. The concept of human security, introduced by the United Nations Development Programme in 1994, broadened security beyond military threats to include economic, health, environmental, food, personal, community, and political security.

 

  1. Governance that matches global interdependence:  Many of today’s greatest risks—pandemics, climate change, cyberattacks, nuclear weapons, AI, financial contagion, and biodiversity loss—cross borders. A serious peace movement might therefore focus less on creating a world government and more on strengthening international cooperation, accountability, and institutions that can address problems no nation can solve alone.

 

  1. Transforming education and public understanding:  Technology has evolved rapidly, but civic education, systems thinking, media literacy, and conflict-resolution skills have not kept pace. A long-term peace movement could invest heavily in helping people understand interconnected systems, evaluate information critically, and appreciate both local responsibilities and global interdependence.

 

  1. Building resilient communities before crises occur: Communities with trusted institutions, strong social networks, public health capacity, emergency preparedness, and inclusive local leadership are generally better able to withstand shocks without descending into violence or instability. This emphasizes prevention rather than reaction.

 

  1. Managing emerging technologies responsibly:  Nuclear weapons remain an existential concern, but they are now joined by cyberwarfare, autonomous weapons, biotechnology, space systems, and artificial intelligence. A forward-looking peace movement would likely devote substantial effort to developing international norms, transparency, and risk-reduction measures for these technologies before crises arise.


Several quotations capture aspects of this broader perspective:

  • Albert Einstein: “The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking.”
  • Martin Luther King Jr.: “We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”
  • John F. Kennedy: “Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future.”

One observation that connects these themes is that many traditional peace movements have been event-centered—organized around ending a particular war or opposing a particular weapon. A movement designed for the twenty-first century might instead be system-centered. Its success would be measured not only by fewer wars, but also by healthier populations, stronger institutions, greater resilience to global shocks, and a reduced likelihood that disputes escalate into violence.

That perspective also aligns with a broader interpretation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Rather than treating Goal 16 (“Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions”) as the sole “peace goal,” the goals can be viewed as an interconnected prevention framework. Progress in health, education, water, food, climate resilience, reduced inequality, and effective governance does not eliminate conflict, but it can reduce many of the structural conditions that increase the risk of violence. In that sense, lasting peace may be less a separate destination than an outcome of societies that are healthy, just, resilient, and capable of cooperating across borders.

Priorities and education for peace:  If the objective is to prepare peacebuilders rather than simply peace advocates, the curriculum would need to go well beyond the history of wars or techniques of negotiation. It would help people understand the systems that generate conflict and the capacities needed to prevent it. Here are five core topics.

1. Systems Thinking and Global Interdependence:   Why teach it? 
Nearly every major challenge—pandemics, climate change, financial crises, migration, cyberattacks, resource scarcity, and armed conflict—is interconnected. Understanding feedback loops, unintended consequences, and long-term effects helps people identify root causes rather than treating symptoms.

Students would learn:

  • Systems thinking and complexity
  • Human dependence on natural systems
  • Global supply chains and shared vulnerabilities
  • Long-term thinking and resilience

“Everything is connected, everything is interdependent, and everything is vulnerable.” — a phrase used by leaders in critical infrastructure and security that reflects the growing recognition of interconnected risks.

2. Human Security, Public Health, and Prevention:   Why teach it?
Many conflicts are intensified by unmet basic needs, weak institutions, disasters, or health crises. Prevention is often more effective and less costly than responding after violence erupts.

Students would learn:

  • Public health principles
  • Food, water, and energy security
  • Disaster preparedness
  • Early warning and risk reduction
  • Community resilience

This shifts the question from “How do we stop wars?” to “How do we build societies where wars become less likely?”

 

3. Human Psychology, Identity, and Conflict:   Why teach it?
Conflict often grows from fear, identity, misinformation, trauma, and polarization as much as from material interests.

Students would learn:

  • Cognitive biases
  • Tribalism and group identity
  • Trauma and reconciliation
  • Empathy and perspective-taking
  • Conflict resolution and negotiation

Understanding how people think is essential to reducing unnecessary conflict.

4. Ethical Governance and Global Cooperation:   Why teach it?
Modern threats routinely cross national borders. Peacebuilders need to understand how local, national, and international institutions function, where they succeed, and where they face limitations.

Students would learn:

  • Constitutional principles
  • International law
  • Human rights
  • Democratic accountability
  • International cooperation
  • Principles of good governance

The emphasis would be on strengthening institutions that can resolve disputes peacefully while respecting human dignity.

5. The Future of Civilization:  Why teach it?
Technology is advancing rapidly while governance and ethical frameworks often lag behind. Peacebuilders should anticipate future risks, not just respond to present ones.

Students would learn:

  • Artificial intelligence
  • Biotechnology
  • Cybersecurity
  • Nuclear risk
  • Climate resilience
  • Emerging technologies
  • Foresight and scenario planning

Students would ask not only “What kind of future is likely?” but also “What kind of future should we build?”

An overarching principle:  A twenty-first-century peace curriculum would not treat peace as a standalone subject. It would treat peace as an emergent property of healthy, resilient, just, and well-governed societies.

Rather than asking, “How do we end the next war?” students would be trained to ask:

  • What conditions make conflict more or less likely?
  • How can communities become more resilient before crises occur?
  • What institutions are needed to manage global interdependence?
  • How do we align technological progress with ethical responsibility?
  • How do we leave future generations with greater security and opportunity than we inherited?

Such an education would prepare people not only to oppose violence but to become architects of societies that reduce the likelihood of violence in the first place. That perspective is consistent with viewing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals not as separate objectives, but as interconnected components of a long-term framework for prevention, resilience, and human flourishing.

[In other words, the SDGs are a comprehensive, holistic, synergistic, achievable, and cost saving plan that could achieve much of what enforcing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights could have done.] 

But progressives movements and organizations are to simple minded and identify addicted to change their minds and serve humanity and nature as a collective project.

 

 


Sunday, June 28, 2026

Terrorism! The insanity of emotion killing of those you don't know.

 "If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant;

if what is said is not what is meant, then what must be done remains undone;

if this remains undone, morals and art will deteriorate;

if justice goes astray,  the people will stand about in helpless confusion.

Hence there must be no arbitrariness in what is said. This matters above everything."

-- Confucius    [Kung Fu-tse] (551-479 B.C.)

"When they put bombs in cars and kill people, they're uncivilized killers. When we put bombs on missiles and kill people, we're upholding civilized values. When they kill, they're terrorists. When we kill, we're striking against terror". Norman Solomon

“If the U.S. government is entitled to summarily kill suspected drug traffickers abroad, there is no reason why the same prerogative would not eventually be invoked on the home front.”   – James Bovard,  "The Demented Origin of the War on Drugs and War on Terrorism Nexus" [2026]

On August 21, 1831, Nat Turner, an enslaved American, led about 70 of his enslaved and free Black neighbors in a rebellion to awaken his white neighbors to the inherent brutality of slaveholding and the dangers it presented to their own safety. Their goal, Turner later told an interviewer, was “to carry terror and devastation wherever we went.” Turner and his friends traveled from house to house in their neighborhood in Southampton County, Virginia, freeing enslaved people and murdering about 60 of the white men, women, and children they encountered. 

Terrorism is a mental health dysfunction: At its core, terrorism, war, genocide, conflict, and hate can all be seen as manifestations of a collective mental health dysfunction—rooted in fear, insecurity, dehumanization, unhealed trauma, and real or imagined injustices.  When individuals and societies fail to manage emotions such as fear, anger, rage, and shame, these emotions can be projected outward, leading to aggression, scapegoating, and cycles of violence. Essentially, large-scale violence reflects psychological breakdowns—amplified by power, ideology, technology, and group identity—rather than purely political or economic forces.  Terrorism is difficult to define, even the various law enforcement branches of the U.S. government cannot agree on one definition. The old adage, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" is appropriate still today.  Cw  February 15, 2017

Terrorism - The Definitional Problem Alex Schmid, 2004  40 pages. Case Western/Intl Law. 

The Definition of Terrorism, Duncan Gaswaga 2013 22 pages. Case Western Reserve University School of Law. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=ijel#:~:text=In%20some%20quarters%2C%20the%20difficulty,for%20what%20ends)%20is%20legitimate.

Some DEFINITIONS OF TERRORISM:

“Terrorism is the premeditated, deliberate, systematic murder, mayhem, and threatening of the innocent to create fear and intimidation in order to gain a political or tactical advantage, usually to influence an audience.”   — James M. Poland, Author - "Understanding Terrorism"

“Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. — FBI”   (The FBI acknowledges there is “no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism…”)

Terrorism: “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.”  CIA in Title 22 of U.S. Code 

“Terrorism is the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” — U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)


Terrorism is “dangerous to human life or potentially destructive of critical infrastructure or key resources,” violates the criminal laws of the United States, and appears intended to “intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.”  Department of Homeland Security founding document. 


"There will be no Homeland Security until we realize that the entire planet is our homeland. Every sentient being in the world must feel secure." - John Perkins


“Terrorism is all criminal acts directed against a State and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or the general public”. — League of Nations, 1937

“Terrorism is all criminal acts directed against citizens by a State intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or a political party”.  Cw 2025

“Terrorism is any act or threat of violence, whatever its motives or purposes, that occurs in the advancement of an individual or collective criminal agenda and seeking to sow panic among people, causing fear by harming them, or placing their lives, liberty or security in danger, or seeking to cause damage to the environment or to public or private installations or property or to occupying or seizing them, or seeking to jeopardize a national resources.” — Council of Arab Ministers of the Interior and Justice, 1998


"Terrorism is the war of the poor. War is the terrorism of the rich." -  Leon Uris - (1924-2003) American novelist - Source: Trinity, a Novel of Ireland, 1976

“A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn't have an air force:” Unknown

"The war against terrorism is terrorism." - Woody Harrelson

"No one has the right to ignite a war and lead an occupation and armies to conquer people, invading them and make them suffer all kinds of torture, murder, expulsion, displacement, bombing and terrorism by different lethal prohibited weapons and then come and speak as the savior of the people or a defender of their rights." - Muqtada al Sadr  (the fundamentalist Shiite cleric who has opposed U.S. and British operations in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.  Considered by many to be one of the most influential religious and popular figures in Iraq, despite not holding any official title)


In early 2006 the World Council of Churches, more than 350 Protestant, Anglican and Orthodox Churches, met in Brazil and sharply denounced the US led war in Iraq of “raining down terror”. 


"We shouldn't be here," said one Marine infantryman bluntly. "There was no reason for invading this country in the first place. We just came here and [angered people] and killed a lot of innocent people," said the marine, who has seen regular combat in Ramadi. "I don't enjoy killing women and children, it's not my thing." – Marine Infantryman, Christian Science Monitor [September 21, 2004]


"We never see the smoke and the fire, we never smell the blood, we never see the terror in the eyes of the children, whose nightmares will now feature screaming missiles from unseen terrorists, will be known only as Americans." : Martin Kelly

"What our leaders and pundits never let slip is that the terrorists -- whatever else they might be -- might also be rational human beings ; which is to say that in their own minds they have a rational justification for their actions. Most terrorists are people deeply concerned by what they see as social, political, or religious injustice and hypocrisy, and the immediate grounds for their terrorism is often retaliation for an action of the United States " -  William Blum


"Let the laws be clear, uniform and precise; to interpret laws is almost always to corrupt them." -- Voltaire  [François Marie Arouet] (1694-1778) French Enlightenment writer, historian, and philosopher 


“No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush says…millions of American people…support your revolution.”  Harry Belafonte, singer activist, to US critic and socialist Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela. (Jan. 23, 2006 US News World Report.) 


While President George W. Bush saw "terrorism", and especially "suicide-terrorism" as evil, which can be cured by killing terrorists everywhere in the world, Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia understood that terrorism is the result of people, who see themselves as victims of injustice, and, are unable to find justice by any other means, taking law in their own hands and seeking to redress the injustice by whatever means available to them. 


In 2013 Tom Ridge, former Governor of PA and DHS director said “The war against terrorism is really a war against a belief system that justifies killing innocent people to achieve a political end.”  But the US justifies war as a remedy to terrorism.  War is a system that accepts the killing of innocent people as collateral damage to achieve it’s political ends.  In October 2013 an unarmed, mentally ill woman named Miriam Carey was surrounded by police who fired 17 shots at her in front of her 1 year old daughter…it was an act of war…not police work.  Fear of terrorism allowed our nation’s finest police to shoot an unarmed woman under the suspension she was driving a WMD to murder the President. She believed Obama was bugging her apartment. It appears the Secret Service’s only real option was to go into ‘threat elimination” mode.  Police forces have become heavily militarized, and routinely use “overwhelming force”.  Is this really a police operation or a special forces operation? \


"What our leaders and pundits never let slip is that the terrorists -- whatever else they might be -- might also be rational human beings ; which is to say that in their own minds they have a rational justification for their actions. Most terrorists are people deeply concerned by what they see as social, political, or religious injustice and hypocrisy, and the immediate grounds for their terrorism is often retaliation for an action of the United States .."  William Blum


Ex-US Officialsce Fa'Material Support' Probe for Terror Links High-ups in US political establishment expose hypocrisy by ignoring federal law they championed - Common Dreams staff. March 16, 2012  

A Treasury Department investigation has been initiated against nearly two dozen former high-ranking US officials, many who continue to hold elite positions of power in media and policy circles or private industry, for their active support and financial ties to an Iranian dissident group, the People's Mujahedin of Iran (or MEK), that is listed by the State Department as a 'terror organization'.

Those under investigation represent a bipartisan group including former Democratic governors Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania and Howard Dean of Vermont; former Republican Homeland Security Advisor to George W. Bush, Fran Townsend, Bush's Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, and former UN ambassador John Bolton; former Republican Mayor of New York, Rudolph Guiliani; and ex-FBI Director Louis Freeh and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Hugh Shelton, among others.

Due to a ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010 that affirmed a DOJ interpretation of the 'material support' statute, The MEK's listing as a terror organization makes it illegal to coordinate with, provide assistance to, or take payment from the group.

"What is particularly repellent about all of this," Glenn Greenwald recently wrote about the situation, "Is not the supreme hypocrisy and self-interested provincialism" of these former officials. That's par for the course. The real problem, he argues ... is that there are large numbers of people — almost always Muslims — who have been prosecuted and are now in prison for providing “material support” to terrorist groups for doing far less than Fran Townsend and her fellow cast of bipartisan ex-officials have done with and on behalf of MEK. In fact, the U.S. Government has been (under the administration in which Townsend worked) and still is (under the administration Rendell supports) continuously prosecuting Muslims for providing “material support” for Terrorist groups based on their pure speech, all while Fran Townsend, Ed Rendell and company have said nothing or, worse, supported the legal interpretations that justified these prosecutions.

* * *

MSNBC  reports  today:

The investigation, being conducted by the Treasury Department, is focused on whether the former officials may have received funding, directly or indirectly, from the People's Mujahedin of Iran, or MEK, thereby violating longstanding federal law barring financial dealings with terrorist groups. The sources, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity, said that speaking fees given to the former officials total hundreds of thousands of dollars.

"This is about finding out where the money is coming from," an Obama administration official familiar with the probe said. "This has been a source of enormous concern for a long time now. You have to ask the question, whether this is a prima facie case of material support for terrorism."

Freeh and Shelton are among 40 former senior U.S. government officials who have participated in a public lobbying campaign – including appearing at overseas conferences and speaking at public rallies – aimed at persuading the U.S. government to remove the MEK from the terror list.

* * *

Greenwald, who has followed the story closely,  wrote  earlier this week:

[The Supreme Court ruling in  Holder v. Humanitarian Law  (pdf)] was one of the most severe erosions of free speech rights in decades because, as Justice Breyer (joined by Ginsberg and Sotomayor) pointed out in dissent, “all the activities” at issue, which the DOJ’s interpretation would criminalize, “involve the communication and advocacy of political ideas and lawful means of achieving political ends.” The dissent added that the DOJ’s broad interpretation of the statute “gravely and without adequate justification injure[s] interests of the kind the First Amendment protects.” As Georgetown Law Professor David Cole, who represented the plaintiffs,  explained, this was literally “the first time ever” that “the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment permits the criminalization of pure speech advocating lawful, nonviolent activity.” Thus, “the court rule[d] that speech advocating only lawful, nonviolent activity can be made a crime, and that any coordination with a blacklisted group can land a citizen in prison for 15 years.” Then-Solicitor-General Elena Kagan argued the winning Obama DOJ position before the Court.

Whatever one’s views are on this ruling, it is now binding law. To advocate on behalf of a  designated Terrorist group  constitutes the felony of “providing material support” if that advocacy is coordinated with the group.

And he notes the hypocrisy, referencing a previous post where he highlighted the many muslims who have been charged under the statute:

A Staten Island satellite TV salesman in 2009 was  sentenced to five years  in federal prison merely for including a Hezbollah TV channel as part of the satellite package he sold to customers;

a Massachusetts resident, Tarek Mehanna, is  being prosecuted now  ”for posting pro-jihadist material on the internet”;

a 24-year-old Pakistani legal resident living in Virginia, Jubair Ahmad, was  indicted last September  for uploading a 5-minute video to YouTube that was highly critical of U.S. actions in the Muslim world, an allegedly criminal act simply because prosecutors claim he discussed the video in advance with the son of a leader of  a designated Terrorist organization  (Lashkar-e-Tayyiba);

a Saudi Arabian graduate student, Sami Omar al-Hussayen,  was  prosecuted  simply for maintaining a website with links “to groups that praised suicide bombings in Chechnya and in Israel” and “jihadist” sites that solicited donations for extremist groups (he was ultimately acquitted);  and,

 last July,  a 22-year-old former Penn State student and son of an instructor at the school, Emerson Winfield Begolly,  was indicted for — in  the FBI’s words  — “repeatedly using the Internet to  promote violent jihad  against Americans”  by posting comments on a “jihadist” Internet forum including “a comment online that  praised  the shootings” at a Marine Corps base, action which former Obama lawyer Marty Lederman  said  ”does not at first glance appear to be different from the sort of advocacy of unlawful conduct that is entitled to substantial First Amendment protection.”

Now, he writes, "we have the most well-connected national security and military officials in Washington doing far more than all of that right out in the open — they’re receiving large payments from a Terrorist group, meeting with its leaders, attending their meetings, and then advocating for them in very public forums; Howard Dean, after getting paid by the group,actually called  for MEK’s leader to be recognized as the legitimate President of Iran   – and so far none have been prosecuted or even indicted. The Treasury Department investigation must at least scare them."

* * *

Talking Points Memo  adds:

TPM reached out to nearly two dozen high-profile speakers from past pro-MEK events, many of whom have acknowledged being paid, and who have advocated for taking the Iranian opposition group Mujahideen-e Khalq taken off the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. Most didn’t respond. Those who did, like former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, had no comment. And those we managed to get on the phone didn’t have much to say either.

“I don’t plan to comment on any of that,” former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean told TPM. “It’s unfortunate because there’s been a lot of misinformation in the mainstream media out there. When the blogs start repeating Iranian propaganda, we’ve got a problem.”

It’s never been entirely clear who actually pays for the speeches, which are typically arranged through speaking agencies. Rendell  told  the  New York Timeshe was under the impression that his speaking fees came from Iranian-American supporters of the MEK and not the group itself. That is in line with what TPM  was told  by an organizer of an August 2011 rally outside the State Department. “Some of them are paid, some of them aren’t,” Hamid Azimi told TPM, adding that people wouldn’t even be asking about the payments if MEK wasn’t on the list.

It is illegal for Americans to do business with designated terrorist groups or, thanks to a recent Supreme Court decision, advocate for positions in coordination with such organizations. The Treasury Department isn’t commenting on the probe.