We hold these Truths as self-evident...
Orwellian Peace-prize winner President Obama approved US cruise missile use in Yemen with no report he attempted peaceful resolution against alleged “terrorists.” The attacks killed 63, including 28 children. Below is a 2-minute news video.
Despite the obvious need, the US has no “Department of Peace.”
US policy does include obvious torture and Supreme Court refusal for prosecution against the US for torture. Despite the declassified evidence showing the US government lied to wage unlawful Wars of Aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq, American government-sponsored mass-murder continues.
Policy response: Gandhi and Martin Luther King advocated public understanding of the facts and non-cooperation with evil. I’m among hundreds who advocate:
- Understand the laws of war. These were legislated after WW2 and are crystal-clear that only self-defense, in a narrow legal meaning, can justify war. This investment of your time takes less than an hour and empowers you to legally stand for ending these Wars of Aggression.
- Communicate. Trust your unique, beautiful, and powerful self-expression to share powerful information as you feel appropriate. Understand that while many people are ready to embrace difficult facts, many are not. Anticipate your virtuous response to being attacked and give it in the spirit of competition, just as you do in other fields.
- Refuse and end all orders and acts associated with these unlawful wars and constant violation of treaties. Those involved with US military, government, and law enforcement have an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution. Unlawful acts only move forward with sufficient cooperation and public tolerance. Stop cooperating with the most vicious crime a nation can commit: war.
- Prosecute the war leaders for obvious violation of the letter and spirit of US war laws. You can only understand how these wars are specifically unlawful by investing the time to do so. Because the crimes are so broad and deep, I recommend Truth and Reconciliation (T&R) to exchange full truth and return of stolen US assets for non-prosecution. This is the most expeditious way to understand and end all unlawful and harmful acts. Those who reject T&R either by volunteering their name and/or responding when named are subject to prosecution after the window of T&R closes.
Please share this article with all who can benefit. If you appreciate my work, please subscribe by clicking under the article title (it’s free). Please use my archive of work to help build a brighter future.
Comments
Still sirring up the antiamerican hate Carl?
#1 - you can't even spell "stirring"
#2 - it's not Anti-American, it's anti-Obama and that is PRO-American, PRO-Truth and PRO-Life.
Can any clear thinking even partially human being not be repulsed by endless, wars of corruption
These wars are anti-American as they are not in support of defending our Constitutional rights or our homes...they are also illegal, murderous, based on lies, and pro-death for no necessary reason. They are corporate America's wars, not the American people's wars. Proof of this is that although most American people want them to end, they continue to go on due to corporations controlling our political system. Democracy is dying a painful death in America, and corporate fascism is moving in. Real patriots should be very afraid for their futures and the future of their children.
This is the kick off for ww3 right here.
I want to make it clear. On August 6, 2001, President George W. Bush was warned about the terrorist attacks that have caused this to become a major factor. The main reason for the attacks was nothing more than a retaliation against the missile strike that then President Clinton had done, which was in a similar manner that President Obama has done.
So with all facts stated, stating anything anti-Obama is more pro-Facism than pro-American. Because it shows that it is okay for the GOP to allow the war crimes that the Bush Administration has done, as well as ignore the damage that the GOP has done. All in favor of what the GOP wants, opposed to what the United States need.
And by the way, "Dear", the United States government works for the people. These politicians, regardless of opposing views, were hired to give what the people need. If they cannot do that because of their parties sides... Then they are not doing their job. And that is un-American, as in what you promoted as well.
Members of The Peace Alliance (thepeacealliance.org) are working for a U.S. Department of Peace, instead of just waiting for Congress to pass HR 808. The website lists many state chapters, including two in southern California. Also check out my Examiner.com article on the organization: Peace 101: What is the proposed U.S. Department of Peace and Nonviolence?
Debbie Jordan, Phoenix Progressive Examiner
animals.
Very good article. The only way a country can improve is to verify the validity of criticism levied by its citizens, and make the necessary changes. Otherwise, the result is stagnation and eventual deterioration.
Articles like this help to wake people up.
Any chance al-Jazeera has anything more than speculation and some spent shells on the ground that the U.S. is in any way involved? Just putting B-roll of the president talking isn't proof. Are you a journalist? Really. Your points may be valid, and your cause may be supported, but you do your cause no justice by using first, al-Jazeera as a "source", and second, using a misleading title yourself when you have nothing to back it up.
Patriots await the 'last war' because it is the only way to kill the Zionist Beast. The Evil Empire of Zion is ascendent.
Thank you for the comments, everyone.
Winoceros: You missed the ABC news link and failed to do any research yourself to confirm the multiple reports. You state prejudice against al-Jazeera without explanation. Are you racist against an independent Arabic news station, winoceros? You should do some research about al-Jazeera to have an informed opinion. If you have Arabic friends, talk with them. If you don’t, you should get some to broaden your worldview.
I see you have a selective belief system when it comes to the evil 'corporate media' - believing those reports that support your recursive thesis.
Snark:
You devil; you’re back! As usual, you intentionally miss the point of whether the information is true or not. As usual, you speak of “belief” rather than encouraging humanity to use their intelligence to verify events in measurable reality, as facts. Did you even check to see if the reporting is true?
As usual, I admonish you to look to your own future: aren’t you ashamed and resentful of pimping for your evil masters bombing the weak, innocent, and impoverished? Aren’t you ready to join those of us working to build a brighter future, snark? I recommend watching “Zeitgeist Addendum” for an overview of how our economy could be successfully engineered to provide a higher standard for everyone than currently by anyone. Buckminster Fuller was an early pioneer of this realistic vision of a competitively cooperative future.
I am curious, snark. What is your motivation? How are you helping to build a brighter future?
Left-leaning, pro-peace individual here.
However, the situation we find ourselves is unlike anything seen before in human history. We are divided upon degrees of religion, Islam itself being a peaceful religion, but Islamists taking a fascist, all or nothing stance against all other beings on earth, including softline Muslims too - the difference between Islamic and Islamist people have to be made; and on the other side, a broad majority of Christianity that seeks to turn the other cheek stands in front of hardcore groups of Christians who seek retaliatory annihilation of sections of the Muslim world without understanding the problem or seeing the irony in their stance.
So my point is that with a new stimuli, a new response is needed. Without ever condoning the deaths of innocent civilians, we are learning new rules of engagement with an enemy that seeks only the annihilation of the non-believers in a cataclysmic fight, and our weakness is...
...the very rules of engagement you laid out above. We are too slow to react, I mean by the time we'd got to Afghanistan, the training camps had gone. Off to Somalia or Yemen in all likelihood, and by the time their job is done, we will be moving in and they too will be gone.
We need to adapt faster and I believe the only way to achieve this properly will be with a unilateral task force from all countries with freedom to roam borders. But we all know how unlikely that is to ever happen when we can't even agree on a climate change agenda.
Until we change, the fascist elements of Islam - the Islamist will run rings around us and make us look slow. There are no easy solutions to this problem - I wish I knew of one that could work, but as I mention above, judging today's necessary actions by yesterday's notion of war and engagement will endanger the security of America and other westernised countries seen as "Kafir".
I wish I knew the answer,
Tom
P.S. By the way, if anyone hasn't read this, this book is a fantastic examination of the growth of Radical Islam by someone with decades of experience in the regions we are currently focusing on.
Just add a w w w at the beginning.
amazon.com/Al-Qaeda-True-Story-Radical-Islam/dp/1850436665
How am I supposed to tell if the reporting is true? YOU are the one who claims all the corporate media emits nothing but lying propaganda.
Of course, all you do is repeat the same stuff over and over and over as link bait.
Tom:
Left-leaning like Obama on unlawful wars and torture? The only pro-peace aspect of your comment is your empty rhetoric. No comment on a Department of Peace contributing to policy; especially when you say you’re looking for answers? You say you don’t condone the deaths of innocents, but you approve of doing so to “learn new rules of engagement.” You find rule under law a weakness while calling the “other” fascist, and then speak of others not seeing irony.
You don’t know any Muslims, do you, Tom. You throw them into an evil group we need to fear. Thank you for helping thoughtful readers polarize the choice before them. Your way of fear, demonization, attack, and empty talk of peace is the path our nation is on. I propose a path of declaring unlawful attacks as unlawful, stopping our cooperation, prosecution, Truth and Reconciliation to discover the entire truth, and then a policy that has never been tried by the US: cooperation, justice, dignity, and freedom. Choose carefully.
Snark: How are you supposed to tell if anything is true? You are responsible for learning critical thinking skills to apply in real life. Propaganda is successful when it’s truthful in areas the propagandists don’t care about. Lies of omission report factual elements that cause misleading comprehensive understanding. Propaganda also wins when factual elements are not repeated. You ignore my previous recommendation, without any pretense of politeness to consider it, but here’s more: one of the most eminent living US philosophers is Princeton’s Harry Frankfurt. He wrote two recent bestsellers: his 2005 title is “On Bullshi*” and the follow-up “On Truth.” If you’re sincere, I want to help.
Oh, and the “same stuff” of expanding unlawful mass-murderous war is too tiresome for you? If that is really true, I recommend stories on sports and entertainment. But be careful: sometimes entertainment mimics reality and you can’t escape the ideas I write about even there.
"You don’t know any Muslims, do you, Tom. You throw them into an evil group we need to fear. "
Talk about not being able to READ - you COMPLETELY missed his differentiation between Islamic and Islamist; not my preferred terms, but very clear the way he used them.
You have a fascinating /eyeball/jerking knee/keyboard fingers/ direct connection that apparently bypasses the rational thinking portion of the brain, Herman.
Oh, snark: Tom wrote: “Islam itself being a peaceful religion, but Islamists taking a fascist, all or nothing stance against all other beings on earth”
Tom is saying Islam is peaceful, but the humans practicing it are not.
Herman, posting the identical thing over and over is just link bait - and you know it.
And I honestly think I have a much better handle on 'the truth' and can sift through the media better by NOT starting with the assumption that they are all 'lying propagandists' but by looking at what evidence they present and what kind of track record they have.
Snarkletooth,
Not to get off track on Obama's murderous rampage but nobarack08.wordpress.com has answered your questions and soundly defeated your objections. Obama's COLB is a fake. Read and weep!!! Get rid of the usurper now!! Looks like we can add war crimes to the growing list of his criminal ventures.
Herman, are you THAT STUPID or DELIBERATELY LYING about Tom's intent?
"... the difference between Islamic and Islamist people have to be made..." IS PRETTY DAMN CLEAR!
What armchair pseudo-patriots like you cannot accept is that there ARE people out there who can only be stopped from doing evil things by killing them.
Some are fanatic Muslims, but that's not the majority of Muslims. And Muslims certainly do not hold the monopoly on fanaticism.
mitchie - response is one the original thread; it's not nice to hijack someone else's site.
Snark:
I think he’s saying the difference between a peaceful religion and un-peaceful practitioners has to be made. That fits with the context of his suggested actions of roaming borders rather than having lawful Muslims help stop unlawful Muslims.
But let’s talk about you: you’re advocating stopping people from doing evil things by killing them. Thank you for helping clarify another important choice: the unlawful “pre-emptive” attack that’s currently justifying much of what the US military does versus enforcement of laws upon evidence of conspiracy to commit a crime at the least. I also recently had a video clip of simple advice to stop Muslims from wanting to kill Americans: Americans should stop killing Muslims. How about you? Are you up for trying the unprecedented foreign policy for the US of cooperation under the law, justice, dignity, and freedom?
Snark: are you trying to hijack my site by telling Mitch what should be my policy decision to say??? That’s not nice. Mitch and anyone: you’re welcome to share useful information. That’s the point of a free press.
Thank you Carl. I like how the Obot trolls are now dictating what the 'rules of engagement are'. But what do you expect from someone advocating the killing of 28 children as a preemtive strike. I'm shure ol' snarkie could prove they were going to grow up and 'terrorize' us.
Mitch is winging about an argument we had on a completely different site; I responded to him there. He be the hijacker, not me - though considering you still are trying to misinterpret what Tom wrote, I'm not surprised you're confused.
As for killing people, I've never advocated killing innocents; I've been slammed by other idiots who don't understand that it's all to easy to create more fanatics that way.
But when someone has shot your wife, you don't ask him not to shoot your kids because you promise not to shoot him - you kill the SOB fast before he kills again.
If, for example, you think Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would suddenly become all sweetness and light and could be set free simply because you said you won't kill any more Muslims, you're delusional.
The only way to stop people who are willing to strap bombs to kids and send them on suicide missions for political reasons is to kill them.
Alright mitch-bitch - you libelous scum - show ANYWHERE I was 'advocating the killing of 28 children as a preemtive strike' you lying sack of excrement.
Pretty ridiculous claim from a 'kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out' warmonger like you.
I'm done, Herman - you and your delusions and your neo-nazi followers can continue your rants without me.
Carl, it's quite shocking how much my comments have been misinterpreted and also the unbridled and unnecessarily aggressive response.
1. There are Islamic people, and there are Islamists. Islamic people following the Koran in it's true form are peaceful and seek no conflict; Islamists seek a cataclysmic war against non-believers - "kafir". At no point have I demonized or cast them as an evil group as a whole, a vile allegation. Islamists are an active minority.
2. I grew up in London in predominantly asian neighborhoods. I have also traveled extensively in Asia. I would never seek to polarize forceful opinion against a race or creed. A misguided allegation.
3. Operating within the law and is not a weakness in itself. Applying a 70 year old mindset used to defeat Hitler IS. We need to address those who seek to destroy us as Kafir, yet they respect no border and no international law. I am looking for answers to address this, the true nub of the problem.
continued...
...and the problem remains that if we were to set up a unilateral force without respect for borders to combat terrorism, what does it become or at least seem like it's becoming? A f@#$ing crusade, that's what.
We are in an untenable position. Our rules of engagement are currently flawed and outdated, yet if we pre-emptively destroy terrorist camps and groups, from anyone's standpoint it's persecution as there is always collateral damage.
But it leads me to the most disturbing misconception you've raised: reconciliation. With whom precisely do you wish to reconcile?
Radical Islamists have no spokesperson and Al Qaeda is not an organization we can contact and negotiate with... no country speaks for Islamists specifically. I have no answers for you, but the wheels on their cataclysmic war are already in motion for Radical Islamists based on the West's actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. All that can be done now is damage limitation.
I implore you to read the book I linked to.
Tom, the current counter-insurgency doctrine certainly says what you are saying; how well it can actually be implemented is still very much a work in progress.
Have to agree with Snark; there are some people who will keep on committing evil acts until someone kills them.
Sorry, Carl, but killing a terrorist bent on killing my family qualifies as self-defense in my book - I don't see any rational reason to wait for him to commit the act.
Here is the quote from snark that I refered to:
"What armchair pseudo-patriots like you cannot accept is that there ARE people out there who can only be stopped from doing evil things by killing them."
By the video you could see that these people who lived in tin covered huts held up with sticks were obviously preparing a sophisticated attack on the US. (sarcasm)
But for arguments sake let's just say they were going to attack. One has to ask themselves why we refuse to protect our borders but are willing to bomb a poor village half way around the world.
Cont: I apologize for misunderstanding your communication; I’m glad you see Muslims as diverse. When our virtue shines, we can isolate individuals and groups who choose violence with the cooperation of law-abiding Muslims. We can’t do this until we recognize ourselves as invading terrorists, tell the truth, apologize, get out, provide genuine assistance, and exercise self-defense within the law.
Tom:
Reconciliation must begin in our good-faith attempt to live our ideals, not continue as the invading horde of terrorists we’ve become. National security is a function of cooperation under law, justice, dignity and freedom. What do we do? My best suggestion is the four areas above and (I’ll amend this) to finally cooperate to fulfill the UN Millennium Goals to end global poverty with just 0.7% of GNI. The short form: stop killing Muslims and cooperate with them to end their poverty. We need to have enough trust in the design of human beings/God to let go of our collective fear and control of people we’ve arguably driven into terrorism. I wrote an article of what the US would be like if they invaded us. The Chinese would call our counter-attacks terrorism, yes? more…
Cont: Gentlemen: if China invaded us, we’d be working together to get them out with any means available and they would call us terrorists that hate them for their freedoms. You perfectly represent the political philosophy that needs to be understood as unlawful and refused, and/or you need a “Scrooge conversion” to miraculously see yourself clearly as did Scrooge. I doubt a spirit sending a written message to Scrooge would have been enough; I doubt my words to you will even draw your glance to the mirror.
Cont: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was water-boarded, what, 188 times in a month for the evidence you allege??? Water-boarding is the clearest example of US torture, as every case law decision in this country and all others found it as torture. The US kidnapped his kids after John Yoo stated it was legal to crush a boy’s testicles before his father to elicit a “confession.”
You guys are speaking for monstrous acts that are unlawful. Argue all you want with bogus analogies of protecting your family; I invite all to invest the hour to understand the laws of war to see that you two are either seriously misguided or actual psychopaths with a veneer of alleged acceptable behavior thinly covering your fear and war mongering policy of international murder and poverty in the name of self-defense. More…
Snark and wow: you correctly understand self-defense when an individual attacks in front of you, but fail to recognize the US invasions as obviously different and not self-defense under the legal definitions of “armed attack” and national “self-defense.” Afghanistan: you as snark city claim a resident of Afghan city did a terrorist act. You refuse to provide evidence to Afghan city of his guilt in this or any previous alleged crime, refuse the state government’s jurisdiction to cooperate under the law to understand who did the terrorism and lawfully apprehend suspects, and four weeks later bomb Afghan city and then occupy their city. Obvious mass murder and NOT self-defense, yes?
Iraq is worse. That’s shooting a guy who’s being inspected for possessing a weapon and saying it’s self-defense because you had evidence he both had the weapon and was about to use it. The evidence, when presented, turns out to be obvious fabrication. More…
I've repeatedly differentiated between Iraq and Afghanistan; at this point, I have to assume you conflate them to deliberately misrepresent where I stand.
Hate to break it to you, but KSM confessed to plenty BEFORE he was ever subjected to 'enhanced interrogation techniques.' I would expect anything from those to be excluded at trial - and a conviction still be the outcome.
And sorry, but when an illegitimate 'government' chooses to harbor the people who planned and executed an attack that killed more than 3,000 people, I consider it perfectly within our legal rights and MORAL OBLIGATION to take action to prevent it happening again.
(9/11 truthers can kiss my ass - I saw plenty of the evidence while still in Spec Ops.)
Afghanistan should have been done in a year; Bush et al screwed up. Now, the choice is to walk away and leave it to devolve to a situation even worse than existed there on Sept. 10, 2001, or try to fix what we helped break.
We're leaving Iraq - finally.
Cont: 9/11 Truthers are happy to present the evidence, reject “secret evidence,” and demand justice under the light of disclosure. Bush did perfectly well; this is a war not designed to end. You speak of him as a screw-up; people like me point to his acts as obviously criminal. THAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT YOU REPRESENT AND PEOPLE LIKE ME.
You live in fear of human beings, wow. You fear without your style of control, which is a hell-on-earth tyranny this nation was founded to rise above and you reject, people will devolve. You reject cooperation under law, dignity, justice and freedom.
Wow:
Nah, I gave two different analogies to two different unlawful wars. Oh, great wow, you must know so much to what KSM confessed beyond the obviously compromised government sources that lied and rejected limited government under law for these wars. Why do you profess to what we know of KSM’s statements as true, without a hint of question??? And to predict a conviction; you must be a sage! What you represent, wow, is the same aggressive warfare that killed ~200 million in the 20th century. Thank you for helping thoughtful readers choose between that murderous past and a spoken-of but untried future of genuine respect of unalienable rights for ALL humanity. More…
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!