The Global Community Tribunal

“We have to believe in free will. We’ve got no choice”

Isaac Singer

How do I approach an issue as contentious as this in a manner that it would make my readers think rather than react emotionally? Well, I don’t believe that it is really possible, but let me try.

The first point I wish to make is that organized religion is a form of evil enslavement. Once you become part of it you are no longer free, spiritually and otherwise. You are told what you may think and what not. You are told what you may learn and study and what not; what you may do and what not; what you may wear and what not; what you may dream and what not. Like an evil demon it takes possession and control of body and soul.

The Bible, the Torah and the Koran are being used as a kind of godly blueprint for human existence. But not a single word in any of these documents have been written by anyone else than a ordinary human being like you and me. No church or religion are in possession of any knowledge or wisdom originating from anything else than the mind of a human being. Not a single church or religion can guarantee you salvation or a life hereafter.

Note: Nothing said herein should be interpreted as if I allege that there is no God or that the specific God worshiped by any of these religions do not exist. I however contend that human involvement in organized religion and the power it establishes over them, has corrupted faith and poses a threat to humanity.

Once you become possessed by organized religion, a freedom charter or human rights manifesto loses all its value and meaning. What does liberty and freedom mean if you soul is held in bondage by dogma? What does equality mean if you yourself (not God only) make the most basic judgment between a reborn-Christian-on-his-way-to-Heaven and the lost-soul-on-his-way-to-Hell?

Christians look with disgust at the Taliban and veiled Muslim women (and visa versa) and think by themselves “God, thank you that we are not like them”.

Muslims target innocent women and children with explosives fixed to their bodies and then have the audacity to shout Allah’s name. If that be what Allah stands for, I do believe that He commands Hell and not Heaven and the Paradise promised to you for the brutal murders you commit, will be excrusiating hot.

Jews on the other hand make as if the world is infinitely in their debt for their suffering in the Holocaust. I do not deny the Holocaust and neither do I in any way wish to diminish the incidence. But what gave rise to this extra-ordinary hate and how could it escalate to such a degree that the Holocaust became not only possible but a reality? Have the world learnt anything from it? For Jews to continue with their present course of behaviour in Israel – with the moral support of Jews worldwide - how long do you think before hate has escalated to such heights, that the next and even worse Holocaust takes place? Will we again have to accept responsibility for the suffering you have caused yourself? Please think for yourself: You just do not treat people like shit and think that you’re going to get away with it.

Is what you are doing in Israel/Palestine that what Judaism requires from you? Be that the case the only difference between Islam and Judaism surely is that the God of the Jews provides His people with more resources, better weapons and more powerful allies.

Christians are most probably the worst of all. It does not matter how heinous the crime is, they will find a verse in the Bible that justifies it – even if it means searching through the books they share with Judaism. Is this what your Jesus has been crucified for? Is this the kind of salvation we need to survive on?

If members of these faiths believe that their gods do not only condone but in fact demand the human behavior we have experienced over time in Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Bosnia, Darfur, Rwanda, DRC, Liberia, etc, I submit that Humanity is in real trouble.

J.C.Grobler.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

When does a mass murder qualify to be classified as a genocide? I thought about this when the Turkish ‘relocation’ of Armenians came up in the US Senate. How many body bags does the world require? Need they all be of the same race, sex or religion? And finally, is any specific modus operandi or killing method required?

Take for instance the deaths of approximately 30 000 women and children – more or less one third of the Afrikaner nation - during the Anglo-Boer War (1899- 1901). They were all Afrikaans speaking. White. In line with the scourged-earth policy and after all the farms were burned down and stock killed, they were forcefully ‘relocated’ by the British to so-called ‘concentration camps’. There they died in mass but at their own accord of hunger, malnutrition and disease.

How does this compare with the 1, 5 million deaths out of a total Armenian population of 6 million (25%)?

Let’s rather take an example that we know is accepted as a true genocide, i.e. the Holocaust. The figures provided indicate that approximately 6 million Jews were killed during WW2. It is further indicated that 9, 5 million Jews – 60% of the total - lived in Europe during 1933. This takes the total Jewish population to more or less 14 million. Calculation therefore shows that 42% of the Jewish nation was eradicated by the Holocaust.

The Mau May styled killing and the torture that goes with it may provide sufficient qualification to the farm killings of white farmers in South Africa between 1994 and today. I must however presume that the ratio of 1400 murders against 40 000 farmers are much to low to qualify as a decent genocide.

Now, is it the percentage difference or the method used to kill which made the US Senate abandon the Armenian issue? If an additional 8% would make the difference, would they consider the deaths of the Boers in the British concentration camps? If not it would be wonderful if the US Senate would publish a set of basic specifications and requirements. It will be nice to know when we are victims of a genocide or just ‘an unfortunate incident’.

J.C.Grobler.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

They are at it again! - talking about peace and a solution to a problem that has none under present circumstances.

The saying goes that when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you need to do, is stop digging! This is a wisdom 101 but the Palestinians still do not grasp it. Firing rockets over the border into Israel gives Israel the moral high ground from where they will always dictate the terms of any negotiations.

In the middle you have the anti-Christ herself in the shape of Condi Rice, pretending to be objective and neutral with no inclination whatsoever to be part of any solution that will end the US ally – Israel’s – domination of the region. She is joined by Forty-Five-Minutes, the false prophet, Tony Blair, totally able and absolutely qualified to keep up this whole charade.

And then you have Israel, presenting them selves to the Christian world as the Hebrews of the Bible, entitled to the Promised Land God Himself has demarcated as Israel’s exclusive property. With the support of the only super power left, they have neither the inkling nor the intention of giving up their dominance and occupation as is corroborated by their construction of settlements in Palestinian territory.

Amongst Arab nations the Kurds have probably suffered the most under foreign oppression. They (or at least some of them) too dream of a land they can call their own. So (and let me whisper it into your Palestinian ear): The day the world agrees to the creation of an independent Kurdistan that day I will start believing in an independent Palestine. Until such time it shall remain a dream in old Palestinian eyes!

If I could make a suggestion that may save Palestinians a lot of heartache it is this: Do as white South Africans do! Pack up your stuff and emigrate - that is if you are not already a refugee! Get yourself another dream. While the Israelis have America and God on their side, Palestine is never going to happen.

Let those who have eyes to see, see and those who have ears to hear, listen …..!

J.C.Grobler

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

I have read and tremendously enjoyed the educated posting by Prof Francois Furstenberg under the title “Bush’s Dangerous Liaisons”. The post discusses the philosophy of the French Revolution and the similarities that can be found in the special brand of conservatism of the Bush administration. Although we could maybe return to the reasoning in this article some time in future, I would first like to deal with something else it reminded me of.

The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (La Déclaration dés droits de l’Homme et du citoyen) was the document that formed the very foundation of the French Revolution. It was adopted a mere six weeks after the storming of the Bastille and three weeks after the abolition of feudalism. It was a revolutionary document intended on ending the old era and ushering in the new, Age of Man. The motto of the French Revolution is well known to us all: Liberty, Equality and Fraternity” (“Liberté, egalité, fraternité”). In our age some of these principles have become the foundation of our democratic and human rights culture. What however bothered me since childhood and when dealing with the French Revolution at school is this: Why have the principles of liberty and equality withstood the test of time and progressed into modern society, but the principle of fraternity is never mentioned? You don’t hear it except in some or other conspiracy theory or in regard to certain secret societies and the Freemasons. You can go and read the Human rights manifesto of the United Nations and nowhere will you find this principle - one of the three most important principles developed in human history, reflected in it.

According to Paul Thibaud, a French philosopher, “Fraternity is as great an obligation to respect one’s fellow man as Liberty and Equality are perceived as rights. It is thus a moral imperative.”

Have we lost the plot? Might it be that we have misplaced one of the chief ingredient of the recipe for a society in equilibrium? Have we lost one of the three pillars on which a free and fair society ought to be built? Is this the reason why liberalism succeeded in awarding more rights to the criminal than to the victim? Is this the reason why I am arrested when I shoot a robber breaking into my house, threatening the life and property of me and my family? Is this the reason why some can demand the freedom to recklessly destroy the environment at the expense of others?

All citizens are to be guaranteed the rights of “liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression”. The Declaration argues that the need for law derives from the fact that “…the exercise of the natural rights of each man has only those borders which assure other members of the society the enjoyment of these same rights”. Wikipedia.

Human and civil rights have limits. It is not this unlimited rights without boundaries and responsibilities which are generally proclaimed.

I acknowledge the fact that most modern human rights manifestos include an article which provides for the balancing of rights with specific reference to the promulgation of statutes which may infringe on personal rights. In the South African Constitution section 36 stipulates: The rights in the Bill of Rights may be limited only in terms of law of general application to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom, taking into account all relevant factors. But it is silent on the question of how you balance the various, listed personal rights with one another. How do you balance the freedom of speech with the right to personal dignity? How do you balance the right of personal integrity of a women with the right of the unborn baby to life?

The moral imperative to respect one’s fellow man is totally neglected. The fundamental principle of brotherhood has been lost. With it we have dispensed with the glue – the common bond - that ought to keep everything together. That is why our society is falling apart.

It may be time to re-visit the French Revolution so that we can secure the whole package of “Liberté, Egalité, and Fraternité”. It may be time to re-establish the Jacobin Club and call on the Lafayette’s, the Jean Jacques Rousseau’s and the Montesquies’s of our time to help find something very valuable that we have lost along the road from the Bastille to Guatanamo Bay.

J.C.Grobler.

PS.  Except for your response, the writer hereof receives no gratification of whatever nature for the work that went into the preparation of this posting. Please therefore be as kind as to rate this post by just clicking on the indicator below.  If you have an opinion (and I sincerely hope you do), please share it with us by leaving a comment.  

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

Our vision was and still is to support Justice on a global level by providing the opportunity for evidence to be put before the global public of alleged transgressions of International Law; to discuss and explain the applicable law;  give a jury the opportunity to make a finding and then to mobilize public opinion to exercise pressure on formal governmental and judicial institutions to act on the tribunal’s  recommendations.

In addition to this (and following suggestions we have received from readers) we have announced the establishment of a Global Blacklist. The purpose is not only to provide the public the opportunity  to follow their conscience and to isolate those persons, institutions and companies whose behavior are counter productive to the human cause but to add an instrument of additional pressure to ensure compliance with International Law.

We are still committed to this vision. It must however be understood that, to legitimize and justify its existence and ensure its effectiveness, both these institutions are heavily dependent on substantive public support. Without this support both these institutions are meaningless and without any relevance.

From the beginning it was only reasonable to expect that it will take time and a lot of hard work to establish the required support  that will allow us, at some point in future,  to proclaim these institutions legitimately established. Since launching this venture on 3 September 2007 we have developed in leaps and strides. The response was extremely positive and overwhelming  and we thank all those who have supported us thus far.

It must further be added that reasonable expectation do not allow us to believe that  we will reach the necessary levels of public support and involvement in the normal course of business. To involve people of all ages, walks of life, nationalities and languages, will require an imaginative and inspiring initiative. But Humanity has proven in the past that we have the ability to adapt to  challenges when it comes to survival of our species and qualitative pre-existence. In this spirit we have already developed a concept to assist us in drafting the required degree of public involvement.  The necessary software is in the process of development and hopefully we will be able to launch round or about Xmas or New Year.

So please bear with us. All good things come with time. As did Winston Churchill years ago, we do proclaim that we will fight them in the courts. We will fight them in the public forums. Justice will prevail! 

In the meantime you are invited to enjoy the postings our administrator comes up with. Although my views do not necessarily always reflect that of our registered jurists (our profession is, at the best of times, a sour bunch!) and has little to do with the law, it hopefully makes for entertaining reading and food for thought.
 

J.C.Grobler

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

In a beautiful article written by Araun Shrivastava in The Peoples Voice under the heading “We have no right to steal our children’s future” and for which he must be congratulated, he makes the following remarks:

“At the end of World War II the nature of governance was fundamentally transformed. Fascism did not die. Fascism was actually reinvented: couched in the language of freedom and democracy of rightists and centrists, and of anti-imperialism and freedom from exploitation of the Leftists….

Powerful corporations engineered the election, selection and nomination of the complicit politicians to power, not only in Britain and the US, but virtually in every country that mattered. And every country mattered to the Anglo-American ruling cabal not for establishing democracy, freedom and peace but to control their resources. Today, the US has over 750 airbases around the world; it controls the government of 192 countries. And a small group of super rich European families control the US Government and its military might. The world was slowly enslaved.”

The reality of this situation dawned on the world the day Iraq was invaded by Coalition forces. Although we protest the atrocity of the event, it is the realization that a monster, that has been posing as the defender of democracy, liberty, human rights and prosperity for all, has all along been a hostile demon that has now come alive.

The US has discarded all the decency and civility it had to display whilst there was any semblance of a balance of power. Except for keeping up the charade towards its own constituency, the US government has dispensed will al the niceties. It has shoved the rest of the world aside and is pursuing a new quest-for-resource imperialism with defiance, arrogance and brutal force. In the process it is paying scant respect for the very same international laws they enforced when it suited them. Protected by its super power status and the fact that it has not subscribed to the International Court of Justice, the US is on the rampage and has developed into a very real and serious threat to world peace. I haste to say that the threat of Osama bin Laden and Al Quada are nothing in comparison to the danger George W Bush and America pose to the rest of the world. Terrorism can be contained whilst the US is as unopposed and rampant as the wild fires of California. It threatens to consume and destroy everything in it path.

The anti-war movement has done nothing to change the aggressive spirit of Washington. The problem is just escalating and we now have Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Syria and Turkey all involved.

America has become a rogue state and the enemy of peace, freedom and human rights. Where in the past it at least conducted its international crimes covertly or by proxy, it now exhibits no scruples in the atrocities it is openly involved in. Its founding fathers are turning around in their graves as their Constitution is trampled into the mud. Our fear for the Soviet Union has been replaced by our fear and distrust for the United States of America. Where once it represented freedom, equality and prosperity it is now associated with arrogant aggression and wholesale slaughter of innocent people.

This brings me to the point I wish to make. In the Cat’s Blog the following quote can be found:

“Is it a perfect resistance? No. How could a resistance be pretty when the occupation is so brutal and ugly. The senseless violence inflicted upon the Iraqi people by the occupation results in a violent response. It was no different when the Algerians fought the French to a standstill in the early Sixties of the last century. When a leader of the Algerian resistance was asked why they often bombed cafes and killed civilians, he replied: ‘Give us planes and helicopters and then we will only target French troops” - Tariq Al.

The Iraqi resistance, the Taliban and the so-called anti-war or peace movement are all fighting the same battle. They are opposing the will of the US-that-became-the-Devil. The only difference is that the first mentioned are resisting with blood and life whilst the rest of us are following the road of safety and convenience.

Most Americans, being good and decent people, do not even realize what is happening and that they have become part of a global horror story. They think in terms of ‘left’ and ‘right’, ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’, ‘democrat’ and ‘Republican’. All issues are immediately categorized and labeled within in one of these two opposing moulds. In this scenario anti-war is leftist and liberal and is dealt with accordingly. ‘You always take them with a pinch of salt. They are a lot of sneeky bastards which you can not always trust with the best interests of the USA.’

To press the Iraq issue in isolation is the wrong approach. Americans should be shown the broader picture. They should be made to understand that the whole world has not suddenly changed and become American or Bush haters and ‘Arab lovers’. We are still the same peace loving people who would like to continue with our lives in dignity and with the understanding that all humanity shares this condition with us. They should be shown the holistic picture of a world under threat of US domination.

We should also focus on the military, which is the tool being used to establish this world domination.

George W Bush and Dick Cheney are not just freeks who have appeared on the scene, soon to disappear in thin air. No. I think they are the same symptoms all great super powers before them showed. If that be the case, nothing much is going to change under future presidents, who ever they may be. We are in for the longhaul and things are still going to become much worse. What has been an anti-war movement up to now need to be up-graded to a full scale resistance.

In the Cat’s Blog you’ll also find the following statement: ”What is called the “anti-war movement” doesn’t even consider to use the word “resistance” while we are presented, day after day, with the compassionate side of patriotism. As US peace movement’ spokesperson (by the way, by whom and when she was elected?) Phyllis Bennis recently wrote, “I don’t think we gain strength by making sympathy with resistance fighters a demand of our movement.”

But that sympathy is always granted to the mass murderers, our troops.

I guess our boys and girls in Iraq and Afghanistan must feel comforted by so much sympathy. It probably helps them to better carry on the carnage.”

It is for this reason that I am convinced that the drive to stop the Iraq War and prevent an Iran/Syria war need to be taken to the US military directly. It is they who execute the orders. It is they who commit the war crimes on the behest of their supreme commander and his evil mentor. We need to confront these young men and women with the facts. They must know what the law is. They must know that, by executing the orders to invade, assault, kill and destroy, they are committing war crimes. From the moment it became known that the pretence for war was false, they were no longer war hero’s. They are war criminals and many soldiers like them were hanged and shot in history for committing precisely the same acts.

To these soldiers we say: The fact that you are not yet indicted and convicted of war crimes, do not make you lesser of a criminal than those that were tried and punished for their crimes. The fact that you are praised and commended by an equally criminal supreme commander, should be of little or no comfort to you. Your medal is soaked in the spilt blood of many thousands of Iraqis. The deaths, injury and sorrow you have caused to people who have done you no harm, should weigh heavy on your conscience. If ever there were such thing as carma or natural justice it will haunt and eventually destroy you! When you go home you will detect the changed expression in the eyes of relatives and neighbors – expressions that say “You were once a promising youth of our neighborhood. One of us. But things have changed. The world classifies you as a war criminal.” When you wish to visit another country you will have to fill in on your visa application that you were involved in an illegal war and that you are a war criminal awaiting indictment and trial. You are a disgrace to humanity and all the values of pride, honor, chivalry and bravery that have made our race great.

We need to communicate with the US military. We should not allow a single one of these young men and women to go into battle without knowing what the law says. They must know that they have the right to disobey illegal orders. We must help them to get the support of the courts. If they refuse to fight Bush’s illegal wars, we will again have peace and be safe.

In the final analysis no American should arrive abroad without receiving a loud and clear message that, unless the USA change course, we no longer wish to be associated with them. If need be, we can do business with India, China or Russia. At least we then know with whom we are dealing with.

J.C.Grobler.

PS. This is a blog. It is designed to facilitate interaction and communication. If you have an opinion (and I sincerely hope you do), please share it by leaving a comment. It will really be a nice thing to do!

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

In About.com: US Military the writer states as follows: “Military discipline and effectiveness is built on the foundation of obedience to orders. Recruits are taught to obey, immediately and without question, orders from their superiors, right from day-one of boot camp.

Military members who fail to obey the lawful orders of their superiors risk serious consequences. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for a military member to WILLFULLY disobey a superior commissioned officer. Article 91 makes it a crime to WILLFULLY disobey a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 makes it a crime to disobey any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be “willful” under this article). In fact, under Article 90, during times of war, a military member who willfully disobeys a superior commissioned officer can be sentenced to death.

Seems like pretty good motivation to obey any order you’re given, right? Nope. These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders — if the order was illegal.

In similar vain and in an answer to a question on All Experts: Military Law it is noted as follows:

“A military order must have a military connection and must not contravene existing law, such as the Constitution, treaties, and statutes. An illegal order is just that - illegal, and does not require that it be obeyed. As the law either has no valid military purpose or contravenes existing law, obeying the order may expose the person to prosecution….. Historically, this is known as the “Nuremburg defense” because Nazi officials tried to defend their conduct during WWII as simply following orders. The Military Tribunal at Nuremburg rejected this defense, as have all other legal systems confronted with it. The American military legal system does not recognize the “following orders” as a defense to criminal charges”.

On commondreams.org under the heading “A soldier’s right to disobey illegal orders” the following note appears:

“There is a common tendency among lawyers and military commanders to sneer at international law. But the Constitution is unambiguous. Article VI states: “All treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby……There is no exception for the military, no wall between domestic and international law.”

For a soldier the difference between being heroic and being a murderer is contained within the legality of the order he or she is following. If your orders are legal, you are a national hero and military tradition requires that you be awarded a medal for your bravery. If your orders are illegal and you knowingly kill people, you are a war criminal and, if justice prevails, you deserve a rope around your neck.

The soldiers being part of the invading force into Iraq were convinced through lies and fraud of their supreme commander that the invasion was legal. They were on their way to destroy WMD which posed a real and imminent threat to their countries of origin. Executing orders falling within the framework of the Geneve Conventions and International Law in general, were therefore legal. But once they found out that George Bush, their supreme commander and his accomplices, had lied to and defrauded everybody – when they found out that there were no WMD; there were no real and imminent threat to the US, UK, etc this invading force’s position changed dramatically. Their marching orders were illegal and their further assault on the people of Iraq were a war crime. They needed to turn around and depart, apologizing for the ‘inconvenience’ caused to the Iraqis and offering to pay restitution.

Since that time much of the ‘evidence’ provided by the Bush administration to justify the invasion has been proven a hoax. The facts are in the public domain. Although George W Bush and his accomplices can hide self assured behind US security, the world believes them to be war criminals. History will categorize them with people like Adolf Hitler, Stalin, etc. We all know this war is illegal. All US and UK military personnel know that the war is illegal.

Let us therefore concentrate on what the legal position is now that everything is in the open. Every soldier in Iraq now knows that the invasion was illegal. Every soldier that is ordered to go, knows that he/she is sent on an illegal mission.

Principle 1V of the Nuremberg Principles clearly state that “The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

In International Law the planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances and/or the participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of those acts can only be excused if the aggressor was forced to exercise the right of self-defense or the right of collective defense. This is what all the palawa of WMD was about. Bush had to convince the world that he was legally entitled to invade Iraq pre-emptively and in self defense. Having no real evidence available he, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Colin Powel reverted to lies and defrauding not only the international community but also to all the soldiers who needed to believe that their marching orders were legal.

The whole story about saving Iraq from Sadam Hussein was and still is a lot of nonsense in terms of International Law. The law does not provide for countries to invade one another just because we deem their respective governments evil. (If that was the case, we would all have been in America by now!)

But most of us believed them. The US Senate believed them. The fine, brave young men and women in uniform believed them and that made their participation in the initial invasion legal. But once they found out – or had reason to believe, that the invasion was illegal, their legal status changed dramatically. From that moment on every soldier had to know that their orders were illegal. They new it and those soldiers in Iraq at the moment know it.

‘So what’ you say. “The US is not subject to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. I can not be indicted in that court.” That is true. The United States of America harbors and protects war criminals. They did that after World War 2 and they are persisting with it to this very day. But amongst the people you live and those outside your ‘safety den’ everyone sees you as a war criminal. Your only legacy to your children and the world will be that of a war criminal who mass murdered Iraqis but succeeded in escaping justice.

Visiting the world outside of the US may in future might become a risk to you. Your international status is that of an escaped war criminal. Once a criminal tribunal has been set up to adjudicate over war crimes committed in Iraq, your name and your number will be up. You should have heard how Nazi criminals were hunted down and brought to justice after the War. Even after Kosovo this happened. This is your haunted future too. At this stage you might feel safe. This would be realistic under the present conditions. But take into account how quick things change on the international front. And always be reminded that I have warned you that, when the stakes are down, Bush, Blair, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the like will betray you! You will stand alone as did those prosecuted for crimes at Abu Ghraib! They will betray you as the Nazi Göring and his mates tried to betray those under their command. They will betray you as the Apartheid government betrayed the foot soldiers who executed their orders.

In the final instance you have your conscience to deal with. I do accept that you and all your comrades are honest, well-meaning, law-abiding people. You have a promising future ahead of you. Don’t do this to yourself, your children and other loved ones. Rather let history remember you as a person with integrity, pride and dignity – a soldier who was prepared to stand-up against wrong and do what is right.

You are entitled to disobey illegal orders. You can refuse a call-up order on this grounds and I’m convinced that your courts should protect you. In fact, I would think that you would have a civil claim against your government for what they have done to you.

Do what is right – not what is expected of you!.

J.C.Grobler.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

In The San Fransisco Chronicle Sam Zuckerman has written an article on Michael Arrington of TechCrunch under the heading “Yes, some blogs are profitable – very profitable”.

A short excerpt reads: “When I started the blog, it was just a hobby,” Arrington said. But, after a while, “It was pretty clear that I could make more money blogging than from anything else.” More quickly than most anyone imagined, blogging is growing up. From the blogosphere’s anarchistic roots, a professional cadre is emerging that is creating an industry whose top-performing businesses now earn serious money. The industry is expanding at warp speed. Blog-based media could just be poised to elbow aside traditional print and broadcast outlets to become one of the dominant sources of news, information and opinion, many observers believe.”

The value and impact of blogs were highlighted during the recent unrest in Myanmar. While the traditional media was incapable of penetrating the security of the military dictatorship, bloggers were able to get news out to the world.

In a posting some time ago I wrote about a ‘bloggers army’. In it I expressed the view that bloggers and the medium we control, have enormous potential power. It can be put to good use. In this sense Arrington only confirms this view.

We live in a time when humanity is in dire need of neutral and objective news and information. We are not getting this from the traditional mass media. We are being let down by the very media we are keeping alive. In fact, news management and application have become a fine art used to induce certain views and perspectives. It is conditioning the mind of Man and preventing rational thinking and logic.

Zuckerman goes on to write: “ A blog, of course, is an Internet writing format featuring regular posts by one or more authors that mix text, images, video, links to other sites, and comments from readers. The vast majority are still the personal creations of those souls eager to share their thoughts and feelings with the world at large.

But out of that morass, an elite of professionally produced blogs has risen thanks to their quality of writing, originality of thought and usefulness of information. An unknown number of those have quickly become bona fide businesses.

Of the millions of blogs on the Web, “most are diaries by teenagers and the like, but they get no traffic, The sites that are attracting traffic are professional blogs.”

I think it is extremely important that the teenage bloggers that he refers to should be motivated to do more with their blogs than just keep diaries and personal notes. These youngsters are still searching for purpose and ways to be make some meaningful contribution. They have enormous potential. They should be embraced and not side-lined. It would be stupid to narrow the base of this medium by concentrating only on the small number of so-called professionals. Let’s much rather help these young people to be part of a constructive and purposeful medium through which humanity can communicate without biased interference.

Further in this report mention is made that Lisa Stone, co-founder and CEO of BlogHer, an online company operating a women’s blogging network, remarked that professional blogs “are at a fork in the road”. I think this refers more to blogging in general than to professional blogs. I may be wrong but I do believe that if we keep on focusing on the professional bloggers we are soon going to find our self precisely where we were when only stagnent, non-responsive, advertisement-laden, websites were available. We are going to loose the openness and personal character to closed networks like Facebook, etc.

Although money is important, it is not the only value that blogging offers. The youths involvement is rather inverted and extremely isolated. This is an opportunity to develop their intellect and a positive feeling of belonging to and being a meaningful part of the world.

J.C.Grobler.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

I think it is becoming clear that neither activism nor glossy fundraising campaigns are going to save the day for us. We are at an epochal point in history where nothing less than a new world order, introduced by a global revolution, will do the trick. We are at the cross-over from the Era of Abundance and Growth to the Age of Depletion and Regression.

Although I still might need to point to the first manifestations of this new age – that is if you are one of those ostrich type hiding your head in the sand to escape reality – within 10 to 20 years it will become part of your miserable, everyday existence. I am not going to repeat a summary of the present scenario and try and proof the truth of what I’m saying. Maybe 50-years back it might have been necessary for me to try and convince you. Today you ought to be able to think for yourself.

We have reached the pinnacle of human development and – if we can still refer to it as such – human civilization. The parabolical curve has reached the top where it is hovering on the edge of an abyss. We have come through a period of exponential growth in every sphere of human existence and endeavour. In the process we have lost sight of what we are and where we are. We have squandered the opportunities we had to prevent the next phase – the Age of Depletion and Regression. At this stage the best we can do, is to soften the blow and level out the fall.

Unfortunately, leaving our comfort zones and implementing political strategies to prevent this calamity will no longer do the job. We need a revolution, a new world order – a new kind of humanity. Our problems is not the one dimensional, environmental problem we would like to make it out to be. It includes all aspects of human existence of which over-population is not the least. If global warming, for instance, was the only crisis we had to deal with, we could have tried to cruise to a point in the near future when oil, gas and charcoal shall be depleted. If nothing else, it would mean the end of greenhouse gases. But will that then be the end of all our problems? No, most certainly not.

The new world order will not be the product of a ‘carefully planned and executed re-positioning in the marketplace’ or a ‘slight shift in the focus of our policies’. No, a global revolution that demolishes our total frame of reference, our present value systems and our false self-image.

A new value system in which nature and the environment supersedes mankind in importance – in which the ecological health of the adjacent pond or creak is more important than your wife or your child’s life or happiness. Not human life but environment is the prime consideration, not ‘growth’ but sustaining a drastic reduced human population. If this means the extinction of large numbers of people, so be it. The Law of Nature prescribes that it is now a matter of killing-off 4 billion so that the remainder can live.

Not growth and economic prosperity at whatever costs, but only to the extent that it has no impact on the environment. If this means the closure of large industries because they can not make the mark, so be it. If it means the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, causing those affected to perish, that is the reality that you and I have brought over them.

This is reality. I may be wrong in the sense that we are dealing here with a phenomena which would have occurred notwithstanding anything we have done or failed to do. It might be the manifestations of a recurring, macro Cycle of Life. Babies and celestial stars are born, grow-up, age and then die. Eco-systems originate, develop and are destroyed only for new ones to develop in their place. The same with Man: He is born, develops up to a crescendo and thereafter rapidly regresses to the very point from which he had departed – to create space for ‘a next generation’? May this possibly be the explanation for Von Danniken’s ‘god’s’ or ancient mythology as explained by Zecharia Sitchin? (This is however a long story for another time).

This alternative however offers no escape. We remain in charge of our own destiny. We are left with the most fearsome of choices and solutions.

J.C.Grobler.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This

The article on The Cat’s Blog written by Gabriele Zamparini under the heading Iraq is still the issue – Part 1: Waiting for the partition makes good reading. In this article the writer refers to the article of Scott Ritter ‘Iraq Will Have to Wait’.

The message contained in these two articles is that the anti-war movement needs to shift its attention and strategy to preventing a war in Iran rather than ending the Iraq War. Referring to various, suspicious messages, based on fictitious facts, that have been sent into the world by US officials in an effort to build up the public sentiment in favor of an Iran attack. Allegations that Iran is feeding and supporting US enemies in Iraq are rampant. It is however alleged that the contrary is in fact true. Ritter says: ” But fiction often mirrors reality… The United States is waging a proxy war against Iran, inside Iran. This mirror imaging of its own terror campaign against Iran to manufacture the perception of a similar effort being waged by Iran inside Iraq against the U.S. has been very effective at negating any Iranian effort to draw attention to the escalation of war-like activities inside its borders. After all, who would believe the Iranians? They are only trying to divert attention away from their own actions inside Iraq, or so the story goes.”

Even in regard to the main theme of the US total onslaught, i.e. the issue of Iran developing nuclear weapon capability, Ritter states that the US has suffered severe set-backs. This is however countered by “Don’t believe the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran does have a nuclear weapons program! For weeks now, the cornerstone for the justification of American military intervention in Iran has been crumbling away, the layers and layers of fear-based fiction crafted by the Bush administration meticulously peeled away by Dr. Mohamed El Baradei and his team of inspectors from the IAEA. After treading water for years in a sea of political intrigue, El Baradei and his experts have finally assembled enough data to enable them to close the books on the Iranian nuclear program, noting that all substantive questions have been answered and that contrary to the speculative assessments put forward by the Bush administration it appears that Iran’s nuclear program is, in fact, dedicated to permitted energy-related activities. ”

This reminded me of a report I read some years ago in the Onion. On or about 9 March 2005 George W Bush announced his Iraq exit strategy by saying:”I’m pleased to announce that the Department of Defense and I have formulated a plan for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq,” Bush announced Monday morning. “We’ll just go through Iran.” The article further reports that Bush said the U.S. Army, which deposed Iran’s longtime enemy Saddam Hussein, should be welcomed with open arms by the Islamic-fundamentalist state. Bush further added “And Iran’s so nearby,” Bush said. “It’s only a hop, skip, and a jump to the east.” To this General George Cassey, the commander of the coalition forces in Iraq (and another of Bush’s virtual soldiers) added “The fact is, we’ve accomplished our goals in Iraq (sic!)…. “Now, it’s time to bring our men and women home - via Iran. The plan also includes a minor stopover for refueling and provisional replenishment in Syria.”

I was inclined to think that Bush would not become involved in an aggressive confrontation with Iran due to the fact that his tenure is drawing to a close. I further tried to convince myself that he would think of his legacy and make some effort not to be remembered as the Butcher of the Mid-East. But it is impossible to know what mad men think and how their minds work. It may just be possible that we wake up tomorrow with the news that the US has attacked or invaded Iran.

What Bush, every single member of his staff as well as senior military officers must keep in mind is that, some time in future, they may be held criminally liable for whatever their part may be in such assault. Remember Abu Ghraib and who paid the price for illegal orders?! You still have the opportunity to investigate the truth of the facts being dished up and you should not later rely on a defense of ‘lawful order’. That can never exist under present circumstances. You are to commit a crime against the peace. Taking into account the untrustworthiness of the present US regime you and every reasonable person ought to question the credibility of the reasons for such assault.

J.C.Grobler.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Share This