“A hundred times every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life depend on the labours of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving.” – Albert Einstein
“Perseverance is more prevailing than violence; and many things which can’t be overcome when they are together, yield themselves up when taken little by little.” – Plutarch
“Gratitude unlocks the fullness of life. It turns what we have into enough, and more. It turns denial into acceptance, chaos to order, confusion to clarity. It can turn a meal into a feast, a house into a home, a stranger into a friend.” – Melody Beattie
You may write me down in history With your bitter, twisted lies, You may trod me in the very dirt But still, like dust, I’ll rise. – Maya Angelou
We shall overcome one day in ourselves, with gratitude to our past, our present and our future. Gratitude to those who made our life and circumstances possible. Gratitude to our friends and opponents who made us what we are now or what we have been, – who shaped our response, – those who were “our teachers” in both the right and the wrong things.
We may overcome ourselves within the things we cherish, within the positives amidst negatives, – the last being different for all of us. Different for us as individuals, different for us as a class or group as well, whether we are part of a city, state or country.
The Freedom Fighters in the US shaped the future for equal rights among black and whites. This shaping of the future was not without violence and cruelty. Non-violent struggle did overcome racial segregation, like it did overcome apartheid in South Africa with similar forces in action elsewhere many years later. Again however, not without violence and cruelty. People beaten, shot, disappearing, often at young age, – by their opponents. But they did overcome, marching up to freedom. Freedom land as a way of achieving, not the final goal, but a way. A way with violence to be avoided, – where possible. At least by not provoking this violence. What we give we tend to receive. If we answer all violence with violence it makes us all blind and there are smarter ways, – ways being less destructive and more effective to bend sweltering injustice into a strapping justice of different sorts. It is the way of violence to be avoided within all reasonable dimensions.
Julian Bond, civil rights activist
Like the US was trying to control the status quo in the 196o ties, South Africa was trying to defend the rights of minorities by compromising the rights of majorities. Many countries are still doing the same. But the non-violence movement has been neither restricted to the US nor South Africa. And still we benefit from such a movement, and the movement needs to grow as it is the only way forward to overcome man made institutional and other dangers being difficult to control. If man made dangers can’t be controlled by reason anymore, we are at risk of being controlled by defeatist perceptions regarding those dangers, with the risk those perceptions take over at a cost of man made opportunities we have. The power of a non violence movement need to be able then to show greater leverage than the power of senseless massacres or decisions to go this direction.
Where the choice is made to make peaceful revolution impossible, the alternative however of a violent uprising is inevitable.
Peaceful change with the least possible violence is the way to overcome. A movement which should grow from Syria to North Korea, from oppressive regimes in South America to similar regimes in Asian countries. But the means by which the movement for change now tries to break through is by no means the same or fitting the Gandhi/Martin Luther King or Mandela legacy, – seems to evolve more dangerous even and perhaps more deadly. Often leaders now responsible for venom being injected to paralyze it’s people in fear, and not to speak out anymore.
Bloodshed and massacres do not seem to stop and the question is what sort of good may come out of all of this and what sort of “reason” people or countries may come up with , without making situations at various places more explosive. Whilst some people may feel gratitude for both the past, the present and the future, the question as well what sort of “gratitude” people may have at places in the most difficult circumstance one can imagine, – situations like we can only recognize from war’s we have been able to leave behind. The gratitude to live for some might be replaced by the gratitude to die for others, which is the worst of all gratitude as the last gratitude we should have is the gratitude to live. And this is the preferred gratitude we should be able to share and to contribute to, if at all possible.
The last is what we may think. But people are able to take this away from other people by the venom of hate, by the brutality of their violence, by the starvation of people. Some of them will “overcome” but not all of them. Some of them may see the new day but not all of them. Some of them may feel peace but others may have lost all peace, all gratitude, and don’t feel human anymore as their humanity has been compromised and violated on the altar of merciless torture and abuse.
It is this almost complex manifestation in nature as well, that life often comes at a cost of other life, – whilst as human beings by nature we have the gift by choice. The last in general to change the dynamics of hate and destruction into the dynamics of a reasonable peace. Not an ideal peace perhaps. However, combined with more justice, at least the most desired option within the reasoning of our human options. As long as we have such a desire and imagine the implications in the best possible ways, – we may attract positive outcomes if those ripples of hope are shared at the best possible frequencies of our human dimensions. With this shared gift we can change and “overcome”.
Liberation is only possible by ordinary people doing extra ordinary things by non-violence. The power of ordinary people can keep a dream alive, can move governments if so required, is able to resolve some of the dangers of war and all-out violence. Is even able to “move” people who lost their dreams as due to even an overload of prosperity. The other way around, – so to say, as people can “sleep in” through prosperity, being blind for what is going around. However, whilst the broader movement of non-violent action resisting what persists along the lines of injustice of various kind, the question is whether the non violent approach as a starting point is always possible to be continued under all circumstances as part of the process of liberation?
If we look at history the answer is simply: No! Without violence it was not possible to remove Hitler and his followers. Without violence it was not possible e.g during WW2 to protect the Jews in various countries like e.g. the Netherlands, where resistance groups had to target Gestapo Officers responsible for the transportation of Jews to concentration camps, and likewise had to target collaborators who worked with the Gestapo. Without the perseverance of Brittain and the support of the US Hitler’s “Third Reich” would have had free play. It is just an example. And there are far more and other examples as well. However non-violent action to bring required change is the most favorable and most honorable way to add to peaceful dynamics which may last. Perseverance is more prevailing than persistent violence
Let’s be grateful that despite tears, pain, hardship and even death, – history showed the growing seeds of forces turning against evil and overcome destructive powers. Therefore, still we can say “we shall overcome” even if we are not allowed to see the promised land, – we shall overcome.
Even with our confined days on this earth we have the choice to try to reduce destruction and improve life and the circumstances of those who needless suffer as due to the choices of evil powers, the last which should not to be tolerated in our times. Powers which are due to be eliminated as due to the risks they impose on humanity.
Time is slow for those in need. Time is slower for those who are desperate and time stands still almost when people lose their loved one’s in ongoing violence. Violence eg in Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Gaza and other areas…
Protecting of self-interest when under threat as a country is one thing. However, this should be reasonable and within proportions. Being the captives of perceived national security threats and not being able to reach out to the voices of crippled people under the brutal forces of any military powers or secret police at times, – is hard to tolerate in a world which has been faced with so much pathological violence before. And whilst time may be slow, here time is of the essence to resist this, as morbid powers are not allowed to take over.
History did teach us many lessons in what works and also things which do not work, and we can be grateful for this. However the highest appreciation is not utter words only but to live by those lessons, to live the gratitude for those lessons and to pay tribute to those in history who did contribute to more justice and gratitude and peace for our times and all times, – even when there are still areas on this planet where this is not felt at all.
Our obligation is not an obligation to pay lip service only.
We live in a world with increasing injustice, the last even within institutions, – a venom if not eradicated!
Though we are limited in our endeavours, we shall overcome one day, . as long as our dreams do last, . as long as our unaffected efforts do not rest, . as long as our mind conceives and believes, our gratitude does not cease, and we as people are able to fulfil, . in a way which lifts the burdens in and around us and makes us free.
Let us raise again in this dream, as to never forget, …as this is the reality of life where all men are created equal, – but most being surely more unequal through the far stretching differences and circumstances of life, – the last for certain not always by choice.
Therefore, – again, and more than ever before: resist in truth what is wrong, and persist in truth what is good whilst protecting live as worthy as possible.
We may have fallen with our feet trodden beneath the dust, but we shall rise up again. Reminding ourselves that our lives depend on the labour of others and that we have to give in the same measure as we received, taking things day by day and step by step, – knowing that endurance is more powerful than ferocity.
Knowing as well that there is a place and time for the fullness of real gratitude, and that amidst the corners of history’s shame we shall overcome one day, as the wall’s of hatred and prejudice have been broken then, – and mercy may prevail for our time and all times!
You can still make decisions . . .Decisions based on your driving desire and your will. Decisions resulting in deeds and deeds resulting in your destiny, – so to say.
It is well known that the sum of your decisions largely define your future and “destiny”, by choice..
Let’s take courage from this principle of life, so to say. Courage at the beginning of a New Year again. Courage perhaps for the years ahead. Courage that at some extend and perhaps at some large extend we can take control, or still take control, as we have the gift of a free choice in most of the things we undertake. We have even the choice to buy into this principle or not, make the decision to use our freedom as good as possible within the given circumstances or not.
It sounds so simple “lets take courage” but in the broader context we are made to act and not acted upon. We are not made to stand aside but we are made to take part. We are not made to stay in idle hope but we are made to carry the spirit forward in the firm belief that life is worthwhile living, in the knowledge that this world is far from perfect. All this is based on our deeds, our decisions, – our will and our desires.
Our decisions need to be based on the simple fact that it is better to love than to hate, regardless that loving does not mean allowing anyone else to abuse us.
If we do so we may have peace at heart!
Nelson Mandela could have said: ” For those living in countries like South Africa in the past – under oppression – any one may ask what he or she may contribute to the reduction of tyranny and improve eventually, where possible, the process of reconciliation with the power of forgiveness”.
Doing so means you have peace at heart like Mandela had a particular way of maintaining peace at heart.
No reconciliation however is able to undo the torture of women and children, and the culprits of those acts against humanity should face the justice systems of their own countries as this is a required peace time effort.
If we can’t e.g resolve those problems in peacetime, civilisation is not by any means able to resolve such problems at war-time.
The question is what we are going to do about it and what our own personal response will be for our own future, amidst all the choices we have in our own circumstances in 2014. Good is to improve life where possible, – bad is to destroy life where this in the spirit of both reason and compassion can be, or should be, avoided. At times this can be an agonising question without peace, – but it may provide us peace.
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth are not the means by which we need to live, and on all sides of the religious spectrum we are never told to do so. Those “who live by the sword will be killed by the sword”.
It’s a matter of peace or conflict.
As Martin Luther King ,Jr once said: “Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation.”
The crux lies in the method!
We live however in a world where simple escalating events may lead to massive drama’s all around, – a world where peace in no way is secured.
War’s have been fought over various decades, influence shifted across the borders of various nations and the balance of power will be neither the domain only of super powers nor the prerogative of economic powers when we see countries arise with the potential of military and nuclear power meeting us again, – eventually by surprise perhaps. The last destroying historical efforts of civilised nations to stay above the potential of mass destruction, – based on the reasoning that a large new war is not a rational alternative anymore. Often this reasoning has been forged in the crucible of historical hardship, being different for most of the nations on this world, – however being unique in both the shared will to survive and to prosper. The last does apply for most nations but not for all perhaps. The Russian provocation on Cuba with the US in October 1962 brought the world only hours away from a very likely and totally uncontrolled all-out nuclear war, more or less prevented -so to say – at “the last minute”.
In our peaceful efforts we need to keep this at heart.
Both love forgiving and gratitude in the will to live and to manifest itself in all our energies brightens the world, – like the sun brightens the sky. Nothing in this world is impossible and e.g. Nelson Mandela made sure to remind us of this! And as President Kennedy once said: “The only certainty we have is that nothing is certain”.
Today in the international arena of politics we are faced with the increasing prospect that relatively less influential nations and leaders may use their possession of nuclear warheads by narrow-minded decisions, – aiming to inflict as large as possible destruction for reasons nobody understands. It will put peace at the biggest test…
Everything is a matter of perception and perceptions do rule the world, either in the leaders of people and governments, or in the people themselves. Whether those perceptions are right or wrong, bizarre perhaps at times – if we make decisions feuded by prejudice, and as such preventing that we work together with the most crucial different perceptions of our times, – we are taking away the opportunities of people coming together and making the impossible possible.
Decision , decisions..but we have to face them at any level, – wherever we live in 2014!
So the courage to decide and try to maintain peace in general is important, at any place and at any time, – but the courage to love as well. The compassion of doing the things being both right and good at every point of testing. This will define your future in the smaller areas and our future in the larger domain of living together, – living together on this small planet. It will define our future within this larger domain if the majority of voices on this world speak and act upon this language in the same or similar frequency
The courage to live life in such a way as well as if every day could be the last one.
The courage to strive for peace.
This is a question of courage and character, a question of encouragement or discouragement, – the question or ask to be a sparkling light as we have the privilege of a free choice to show ourselves this way, – this way with peace.
As once said, peace does not mean to be at a place with no noise. Peace does not mean to live without trouble or hard work, but it means to live at a place where our energies are focussed. It means we can be calm at heart when there is violence, calm at heart when there is injustice or hardship, – but work against it with “Peace at Heart”. Peace at heart when we realise that the world lives in us and we do live in the world. The last with our own response, – with our own last choice to make decisions with peace at heart. Nobody can take this ability away from us if our desires go this direction.
This is the kind of peace I wish everybody for 2014! A peace with neither limit nor ceiling, wherever we may live and whatever our circumstances may show. This is the kind of peace within the domain of our own choices, our own decisions, – the decisions within the smaller areas of our life or the bigger ones at a larger stage. As long we are able to make decisions based on those desires, our mission on earth is not finished and still, – still we are able to acquire the glory of the world, as once was stated some 5000 years ago.
“Turn your face toward the sun and the shadows will fall behind you.”, – again this is what I wish for all of you. That the shadows fall behind you in 2014 and that so your desires reach the frequency of peace and compassion!
“I am what I am because of what we all are” – Ubuntu.
“A time of crisis is not just a time of anxiety and worry. It gives a chance, an opportunity, to choose well or badly.” – Desmond Tutu
If we consider the will to live in and around us on this planet as part of a cosmic manifestation which started with extreme forces in the universe some multi billion years ago perhaps, one of the things we may wonder is that we owe to the sun. Sounds strange perhaps. Without sun there would be no life on this planet. However the sun never asks what we can do in return, never asks for a favour. It is pure energy and light.
Love in the will to live and to manifest in all our energies brightens the world, – like the sun brightens the sky.
Love is one of the major substances of nature, human life, and the universe. As human beings we can love far more than we ever did before. Love does not ask for favours. What this love – of a different kind – creates is positive energy which will one way or the other flow back to us, – resolve problems and divisions and many more.
As part of our creative abilities and being receptive to what is going on around us we can make the choice to look for the things we love, – what we love in other people, in events and circumstances.
Before we go to bed and fall asleep we may consider and feel what we love in all those little things and this on its own will lift our spirit. And obviously as proactive human beings we have to try to go for the things we love and like to do, – without wasting energy on pointless obstacles, if we are able to turn away from this.
If at bed time we are too exhausted and fail to have the energy to wonder about what we love or to realise what our gratitude requires, we can easily skip a few days, – as long as we try to make a habit to do this before bedtime at least once a week.
We can make the impossible possible for what we really love as we have our imagination and endless opportunities to dream things which were never before, with the conviction that it will happen (that it actually already happened). Not always but often we can make things true of what we so strongly believe.
The gift to play with our mind in the positive may have been lost for some who may say this belongs to childhood. But if we keep control over our mind, our mind and heart will never be our enemy. If we train our mind to feel love and give love on top of our gratitude to all those people who may have had an impact on our inner and outer life, – the implications can be life changing.
A “thank you” for the gifts we receive(d) under almost all circumstances and to others, may help us to give in the same measure as we did receive in both the past and the present. Neither the present nor the past can prevent both our gratitude and love for what we want and believe for the future, – as long as we don’t harm.
Whilst life is not without struggle or defeat in our perceptions, – through gratitude felt by our heart we may find compensation in the “trials” of life.
The more we give in terms of love and gratitude, the more we will receive as well, – as love is really the major part of our substance. Major part of nature and the universe as well and if we we don’t see things with our own restricted human eyes, – somehow it will reflect back to us from various directions. Our links with the universe are of an unseen nature, which does not mean that those links do not exist. Through the energy of love in which we take part as products of this universe, we may give in abundance and may receive in abundance. The more we give this way, the more we receive the other way in ways we don’t need to understand.
The last only if we don’t give to receive, which is a subtle but important difference of our mindset. It does simply not work when you give to receive! I will reflect later on an early childhood experience.
Faith indeed is somehow trusting and believing and loving the things we don’t see, – and at some stage seeing the things we believed.
It requires a mindset of a different kind and love of a different kind.
It requires as well to say “thank you” for the things we received, – like Einstein did at least 50 times a day when he was asked what his major achievement was. He did thank the people who played a role in his life, people who had an impact on him and his circumstances. Perhaps this was one of the reasons that the universe provided him with the wisdom and the knowledge of the kind he received. It was Dr Albert Schweitzer as well who learnt to show his gratitude and his act to travel to Lambarene and start one of the first mission hospitals in Gabon was an act of love, – tough love. This mission started in the last century.
Let us never forget that Jesus said “thank you” before he performed a miracle.
There is more going on than we can see or hear in the interactions between our planet and the universe, but if we harness us with the power of love with abundance and the right energy, we will receive with abundance and we may enjoy this, – even though the world as it is is far from perfect.
Just anecdotal, I learnt my first lessons the funny way when I was close to eight years old only, – spending the summer holidays in Haamstede (Zeeland) with my parents my brothers and some friends. It was a place close to the sea, dunes and forest with a large gliding airport. I loved playing with a kite as kids do. My kite often crashed and the lifespan of that kite was often not longer than a week as the stronger the wind the stronger the crashes. On the 16th of July it was the birthday of grandma and I did send her a nice card with a biblical text which was suitable for her as she was a very Christian woman in her 80ties. This was a gesture without expectation as it was her birthday, – would have been different perhaps if it was my birthday at the age of eight. It was a very pleasant surprise to receive a few days later an envelope with lets say some $25,-. I forgot to say “thank you” to grandma (she lived some distance away ) and bought straight away a new kite, – which crashed various times as well. This kite was done within 10 days (lasted a bit longer) but there was no pocket-money left. My dad gave not any further pocket-money and the local little “Foodland” refused to give me a loan kite. Well, – I decided to send grandma a new card with this time a better text of similar nature. A few days later an envelope came in with $10,=. At this age I did not understand why the moneys were reduced, but anyhow, again I forgot to say a genuine “thank you” and bought straight on a new kite which obviously was of less quality. My slightly older brother started unfortunately to send cards to grandma as well. My new kite did not last longer than 3 days this time, which was bad luck and a new card with the right text did not receive any response. My brother did not receive anything and felt perhaps unfairly treated. Grandma was aware obviously what was starting to happen but she took everything in her later life with a loving smile.
Experiences of “right and wrong” or half “right and wrong”, giving and taking etc do start at early childhood in every human being. As long as people learn and are able to take the next step.
Some do from this point of view better than others. Most important is that a level will be reached of compassion, both love and gratitude, – the last for what we received through the labour of others. Both in the spirit and the material things they provided for us. Both from people who already died and are still alive.
When I became a little older and in contact with people, – through circumstances and being engrossed at some lengths in the greater human spirits of our time, I became to realise that what we give in love may live on, – and that the force of love and gratitude in life can make the impossible possible.
Nothing in this world is impossible as some did show the way they gave to humanity.
Let’s be grateful for every human spirit who kept our inner life alight, for any situation which helped us further, for any joy which left us in the positive, and for the One external force in God which protects us, whatever we have to face, – in death or being alive, but foremost during our lifetime amidst the expressions of life in and around us.
Love and gratitude are the most important ingredients for a life in abundance.
is an edited version on
Review JFK Assassination 2011: An issue for both Democrats and Republicans. on June 9, 2011, – with more available information now.
Today 50 years ago was the State funeral of President John F. Kennedy, – the 35th US President.
After 50 years we remember President John Fitzgerald Kennedy for the things he left in both the memories of many, – and history. Assessing him we have to recognise some errors but his large accomplishments were undeniable, – likewise his enthusiasm, his youth and his forward-looking approach in easing the tensions with the Soviet Union and Peace in general.
He played a unique role in his short time as US President.
It is fair to say he saved the world from a nuclear disaster dealing in his own way with the Cuba crisis in 1962, – ignoring the suggested hard-line approach.
He was an inspiration for a whole generation in his time and 50 years afterwards vivid memories have been shared all over the United States.
What happened in Dallas in terms of major crime with ongoing criminally negligent investigations in the past, can’t be allowed to happen again.
Whilst this was allowed to happen without real reliable investigation and many things being left not aimed to be disclosed, – it may happen again in different identities.
This is one of the reasons the JFK assassination can’t be put to rest as yet.
With the JFK assassination the US made a significant historical change with e.g. immediately afterwards an increase in the war activities in Vietnam and more bombs being dropped over there than during the second world war in Europe. After the JFK assassination a highly controversial Lyndon Johnson took over as US President with close connection with the notorious FBI Chief Herbert Hoover and various others. If the JFK assassination would not have taken place LBJ would have been replaced as Vice-President as due to his own history of corruption. Hence the full background dynamics being important to be revealed, – including the forces behind this assassination. The Vietnam war became a massive drama and created significant unrest in the US.
When Robert F Kennedy in 1968 decided to run for the US Presidency as part of the movement against the war in Vietnam and as part of a growing need for social justice he was assassinated in June by likely the same undercurrents in US society who wanted to continue the war in Vietnam.
Boris Yaro’s photograph of Robert F. Kennedy lying wounded on the floor immediately after the shooting. Kneeling beside him is 17-year-old Juan Romero, who was shaking Kennedy’s hand when Sirhan Sirhan fired the shots.
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The FBI did contribute then to various unrest and violence outside the Democratic Convention in Chicago, with brutal force against anti Vietnam war demonstrations, adding as such to a climate of major social unrest after the murders of both Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy.
All this helped to get the notorious Richard Nixon to become US President who worked with the military establishment to favour and carry out massive bombardments with chemical warfare in North Vietnam.
After it proved that he ordered the Watergate burglary he had to step down to avoid both impeachment and further criminal prosecution. His first Vice President Spiro Agnew had to step down as due to fraudulent activities and a new Vice – President was nominated before Nixon had to resign from office.
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This new Vice-President was Gerald Ford. Ford was called in Congress once “The CIA Man”. The last was not a surprise. Gerald Ford has been closely connected with the Warren Commission and leaked all confidential information to Herbert Hoover. The mission of the Warren Commission was to satisfy the public with an investigation into the JFK assassination, but to mislead all US citizens about the truth regarding CIA involvement. Most of the participants of this Warren Commission were very compliant and if there was any doubt, Gerald Ford made sure that Herbert Hoover from the FBI was informed as Hoover had ways to change people’s mind. Hoover had secret files about almost anybody.
FBI and CIA were not always friendly with each other, but agreed however on the assassination of JFK together with the new President (LBJ) that the truth should be concealed at any cost, which happened up until now.
Various witnesses disappeared at the time or were killed, evidence disappeared or was tampered and/or did not reach the Warren Commission.
When Gerald Ford took over from Richard Nixon he knew that further investigations in the Watergate scandal would open a can of worms leading to CIA connections being closely associated with the JFK assassination (some of the Watergate burglars were connected with the JFK assassination), – hence Richard Nixon got a full pardon.
Any further investigation would incriminate both Nixon and Ford and so the change of events after the 22nd of November in Dallas continued to scar various governments.
It went on to President Herbert Walker Bush, who has been Vice-President under President Reagan and President after the Reagan administration. Bush senior (a lot younger then) was present during a CIA briefing the day after the assassination in Dallas. Being later on CIA Director he had full insight in related state secrets. The war in Vietnam finished at the end of April 1975, but all Administrations after JFK – apart from the Carter Administration – had dark secrets with the CIA. Never disclosed in full to Congress.
The background powers (due to be reduced under the Kennedy Administration) increased in strength and influence after the JFK assassination.
The first Iraq war under Bush senior was justified as there was a UN mandate and Iraq did invade Kuwait. Bush stopped this war when the UN mandate was completed.
President Clinton took over as US President from Herbert Walker Bush but the power of the CIA during the Reagan/Bush years had grown so much that he could not speak up against the Iran Contra scandal, when he was Governor in Arkansan. Under Federal Management one of the airports in Arkansas was used for getting drugs into the country, whilst the profits and military support went to the contra’s in the dirty war in Nicaragua. Bill Clinton was aware then what was happening and did neither share concern at Congressional level on behalf of the Democratic Party and his conscious, nor did he respond to – or support – a public request for independent investigations in Arkansas then. And so Clinton – like some of his predecessors – was already compromised before even entering the White House.
When George W Bush became President the background powers in the US had more or less free play as Dick Cheney the Vice-President (who served under earlier Administrations) and the Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld (who served as well under earlier Administrations) were joint allies, – both in the stand down of security during 9/11, the controlled demolitions, and the cover up with a heavily delayed establishment of the “9/11 Commission”. The last having the Government mission to allow an investigation, but to mislead the public as well. However as the Warren Commission did after the JFK assassination, also “the 9/11 Commission’s” conclusions left many unanswered questions whilst 2 wars for the wrong reasons were started with many abuses of human rights.
At present both George Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney can’t enter Switzerland without the risk of being arrested and standing trial for what they have to answer for in line with Swiss law. However not in the US. In the US they get protection as no further investigations have been supported despite many high ranking officials like ex FBI Division Chief Ted Gunderson and e.g. Major General Albert Stubblebine (the last being ex Commanding General of the US Army Intelligence) reflected on 9/11 being an internal job, – facilitated by the CIA to provide the US President an excuse to go to war.
It goes that far that if the past Administration would have be denied protection by President Obama, the current President would have found himself on a collision course with the CIA and the Pentagon from the beginning of his Administration, – with the 22nd of November 1963 not unlikely due to be repeated.
President Obama did chose to leave the past behind and concentrate on the future whilst more pressing problems were at stake in 2009, including a terrible financial situation of the United States. Apart from this an “Imperfect Union” , widespread divisions and significant security issues pending. He balanced well amidst all this with a stable forward looking view on his anticipated policies for the future.
History changed however forever after the assassination of JFK, as the background powers in the US were allowed to grow at exceptional levels without too much resistance. People being President were already compromised at times before they even became President and had to work with both the CIA and the Pentagon, not rarely on the conditions of those Agencies or Organisations.
President Obama did not only take over the budget deficit from his predecessor, he took also over a CIA and Pentagon being more strongly established than President Truman ever contemplated when he warned for those excessive powers. Only in the right hands those powers can work for the real benefit of the US, but in the wrong hands they may inflict disaster at world level. Hence President Obama had to balance wisely, with courtesy, diplomacy and using his level of influence for the benefit indeed of a better Union. It proved to be difficult enough with the right wing part of the Republican party being as obstructive as it could be.
With the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy the US Government was in retrospect in a wider sense responsible for perverting the course of justice in a major crime against both the US and the deepest foundations of the Constitution, – which determines where the balance of power should be.
They could walk away from it. Never being convicted, as they were able to be protected by the law they compromised. The FBI Chief Hoover made sure protection was in place for those who worked with him. This was possible in the United States of America. It will be still possible in the US as the US has no sufficient accountability systems on board within this domain to prevent those things, – if they would ever occur again in a variety of scenario’s.
Both the CIA and the FBI have a lot of good people doing their job with conviction and integrity and there have been many people at the highest levels of the CIA and the Military Establishment asking for renewed investigations in e.g. the 9/11 drama, – as things simply did not add up and this incident with all its mysterious demolitions and the Pentagon being more likely attacked by a missile etc went too far. The background powers were even now prepared to allow and escalate a terror attack on US ground, whilst with premeditated controlled demolitions of some WTC buildings a drama was created to mislead public opinion afterwards and allow the US to go to war in an area ready for a US war after the CIA “work up” during the Clinton Administration since 1992.
It is clear that when the order to kill comes from “higher levels”, those who are responsible are often able to walk away, as long as they stick to the conduct of silence.
This is the reason we have to go back to the JFK assassination, back to the facts as they were and learn from it, – because this assassination was an “internal Pearl Harbour” against both the US Constitution, the law and everything where the US is supposed to stand for. The enemy was within the systems of Government and not outside.
This is an issue for both US Republicans and Democrats to resolve as part of effective legislation perhaps, but finally as well as part of a realistic historical view on US Government dynamics during and after the JFK assassination.
The freedom of information act in the US did show various new information on lots of issues in the US, including e.g. more documents about the assassination of President John F Kennedy on the 22nd of November 1963 in Dallas.
Enough material is available now to change the perception on JFK’s death and the circumstances leading to it, – however much of the available information has been in part redacted, changed over time, and some most secret documents not being released as yet.
FBI files created by former FBI Chief J Edgar Hoover do contain information with various degree of reliability as his files were at times used to compromise his own opponents or the opponents of those persons he had a good working relation with.
Despite many publications already over the last 50 years, it would seem that some recent records have not been put together as yet, – and the aim of this article is to give a fresh review on what actually happened in Dallas, including the dynamics leading to it.
It is not that important for the purpose of this article who fired the real shots from the various directions.
More important however are the forces behind the assassination of this popular President, who was perceived as a danger by different groups and people at the same time. As will be illustrated, this created as such an opportunity to help to develop a monster plot with the help of fugitive undercurrents, which existed at the core of America’s democracy. Hence what is known about it and still on classified files are not likely to be released, not even in 2017.
The US – in retrospect – allowed JFK to be killed without any full and proper investigations after the assassination, with most justice systems deliberately failing at the same time, and officials including media misleading the public. It did affect the heart of the US as a democracy 50 years ago, but events in US politics continued to affect the heart of the US as a democracy, in various ways for decades after the 22nd of November 1963.
Today with all modern (adapted) technology being available, together with the option by choice to reopen the investigations based on non revealed ARRB files (transcripts, memoranda, hearings etc) after the final (not conclusive) ARRB Report (which is filed in 1998 at the JFK Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park,Maryland), – renewed investigation is an option for a democracy which does respect itself in terms of lasting justice.
Based on well documented wiretaps of mobsters before and after the JFK assassination, the House Assassination Committee concluded 16 years after the Dallas crimes: “There is solid evidence….that Hoffa, Marcello and Trafficante – 3 of the most important targets for criminal prosecution by the Kennedy Administration – had discussions with their subordinates about murdering President Kennedy.”
For certain the mob was a beneficiary for the assassination, but there were more. The organised crime drive in particular from the Attorney general Robert Kennedy prompted certainly a plan to strike back. In the first instance it would be an assassination on Robert Kennedy but the plan shifted later to the President.
The information about the JFK assassination till so far provides really more direction, – on how high-ranking American Government officials (including President Lyndon B. Johnson) dealt with matters after that fateful day in Dallas in 1963. However there is more to this to be discussed.
WHAT HAPPENED IN THE EARLY DAYS OF JFK’s PRESIDENCY?
Three days after the Bay of Pig crisis at the early start of his Presidency, – Kennedy ( being insufficient informed by both the CIA and the Pentagon Generals) started a Cuban Study Group (leaded by General Maxwell Taylor) to “direct special attention to the lessons which can be learnt from those events in Cuba.” It sounds trivial but “The Cuba study group” was a significant creation of the Kennedy Presidency and whilst receiving little notice at the time, it was the source of utter CIA discontent after Allen Dulles as head of the CIA was fired by the President, – following his failures within the CIA to advise him in line with correct procedure about the pending Bay of Pig invasion in Cuba, including its viability. The Bay of Pig invasion in Cuba was a profound disaster for various reasons. Kennedy took responsibility for this.
Both the Kennedy’s and the CIA/Pentagon started a collision course as due to profound different perceptions on the military future of the US, – besides various personal animosities which played at a different level than the animosities with the mob. The introduction of Robert Kennedy in various security meetings as requested by the President, and RFK’s high level of assertiveness with some controversial Generals did not go always very well.
JFK ignored during the Cuban missile crisis (which brought the world close to nuclear disaster), – military advise to attack Cuba and with restraint and a last-minute deal with the Soviets on US missiles in Turkey, – he avoided an all out nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union. The Pentagon advised to attack Cuba, indicating this was the best course of action, however in retrospect nuclear missiles were already installed in Cuba and Russian commanders were under the instruction to fire those nuclear missiles in case of a US attack on Cuba. The Pentagon’s advise at the time was that there were only missile installations and no missiles as yet, – this illustrating how the intelligence worked at the time. JFK’s reservations about his military advisers increased and vice versa.
Again against Military & CIA advise JFK wanted to ease the tensions with the Soviet Union to avoid war. He knew the dangers of war and being ready though to go to war if there was really no other rational option anymore, war was for him really the last resort, – whilst war actually seemed to be the priority choice of some hard-liners within the Pentagon. Some of those hardliners proposed a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviets, which got JFK really more worried about the Pentagon than a surprise attack from the Soviet leader at the time.
JFK’s “Peace speech” reflected his ability to humanize the Soviet Union, whilst his “Berlin speech” showed his profound dismay with the political system. Both JFK’s Peace speech and his speech about “Secret Organisations” in the US did indicate the direction this President wanted to follow, – besides the politics of transparency. This stunned both the CIA and the Pentagon
Fidel Castro in Cuba (a close ally of the Soviets) remained however a significant obstacle (already since the Eisenhower Administration), and a secret joint mission of both the CIA and the Mafia (the last with connections in Cuba) were close of being executed at the end of 1963. The mission was to kill Castro. Robert Kennedy was involved in those plans, but tried however to stop Mafia involvement on the 7th of May 1962 during a briefing from CIA officials.
The Church Committee in 1975 reported that after this CIA briefing and discussion with Robert Kennedy, – the CIA with William Harvey continued to work closely with at least Rosselli to arrange the assassination of Castro. This is significant as it is clear as with other Presidents there was no full control over the CIA. The mob including Sam Giancana John Rosselli and Trafficantes had certain cooperative roles with the CIA (those roles being established for quite some time already) – long before the Kennedy Administration.
President Kennedy was aware of the potential use of Giancana, whilst having an affair with his mistress (Exner). The last did not put him in an easy position with the FBI Director Hoover, who was aware of this. This apart from the fact that Kennedy’s affair with Exner was taking a high risk to be compromised.
JFK planned for the future to recognise Cuba, assuming if “they would buy toasters and dishwashers” – at some stage they would throw Castro out themselves. Obviously he did not accept nuclear missiles in Cuba directed at any city in the US, – but he preferred to ease at least some of the tensions about Cuba in his second term in office, if he would win the 1964 elections.
He preferred a pragmatic approach and not increasing tensions, – again against hard-liners within the CIA and the Pentagon who started to perceive JFK as a security risk for the US, – especially as President Kennedy had little desire to escalate matters in Vietnam..
Under the Eisenhower Administration the CIA had already directives to coöperate with the mafia to overthrow Castro and under the Kennedy administration the CIA developed plans to gun down Castro in Cuba with the help of the Mafia. The Mafia had a strong interest in a Cuba without Castro for different reasons. The Church Committee discovered some aid plots involving the CIA from 1960 to 1965 to assassinate Fidel Castro.
In 1960 President elect John F Kennedy was told by the CIA’s deputy Director, Richard Bisell, about the plot to kill Castro. This included mob help from Giancana, who has been asked by Frank Sinatra to help the Kennedy campaign in Illinois during the 1960 elections. Joseph Kennedy,sr would possibly seem to have asked the mob to help somehow as well but did not make any deals. Reportedly Frank Sinatra actually made a deal (without Joseph Kennedy being directly involved), assuming that he did do the right thing for the Kennedy’s. He did indicate even that JFK (once elected) would leave the mob as much as possible alone. However this did not happen.
Meanwhile the mob felt utterly betrayed by both the President and his brother (the Attorney General), – as they anticipated protection once JFK was elected President. Once in office, Robert Kennedy in his function of Attorney General (on behalf of his brother) started the most intensive crusade against organised crime in US history. The Kennedy’s had even before the 1960 elections involvement in vigorously anti- crime dealings as documented in the hearings with Jimmy Hoffa – the boss of the Teamsters – when JFK was Senator of Massachusetts. As matters evolved in the White House, they (the mob and Jimmy Hoffa) increasingly hated both the Kennedy brothers, and with Jimmy Hoffa (an old RFK enemy) they waited for the right timing for revenge. Giancana cursed Kennedy indicating that he went out of his way to help him to win the election, whilst his brother (“Bobby”) was targeting the mob. The last with great embarrassment for Giancana personally in respect to the other Mafia families.
On the one hand it seemed to the mob that the Kennedy Administration (with the President even having an affair with Giancana’s mistress, hearing Mafia secrets perhaps) were tolerating perhaps CIA mob connections to assassinate Castro, – whilst on the other hand being tough on organised crime. They really could not take this.
With Robert Kennedy in the final analysis trying to stop those long existing connections, – this may have really infuriated both the CIA and the mob again, who felt both let down by the Kennedy’s anyway. Exner (Giancana’s mistress) once said: “They hated Bobby!”
Frank Ragano (Tampa mob lawyer) once reflected on a chilling conversation between his clients Trafficante, Jimmy Hoffa and Carlos Marcello. The three of them have been under scrutiny as a result of Robert Kennedy’s organised crime drive and had strong motives for revenge and survival. They considered what would happen if anything would happen to Bobby and they agreed that the President would go after his enemies with added determination. The other option was “if something would happen to the President”, – Hoffa asked. “Lyndon Johnson would get rid of Bobby”, – one of Hoffa’s lawyers reflected.
OTHER BENEFICIARIES OF JFK ‘s ASSASSINATION?
Obviously Robert Kennedy was in a profound state of shock after the death of his brother. He had not only to deal with his own grief, the grief of the Kennedy family, – but he became aware that he has been on a collision course for which he felt he was in part to blame.
When Robert was assassinated in 1968 he went to his grave likely believing that there was a real connection between his organised crime drive and his brother’s assassination, – which proved not to be true. The forces were far more stronger and complex than the Mafia on its own. During the Kennedy Administration the spirit of the “cold war environment” was that within the CIA anything was allowed to overthrow Castro and to oppose the Soviets. Within this context a further collusion of interest evolved between more beneficiary’s of President Kennedy’s death. With close connections between the CIA and those in Cuba feeling hostile to Castro – ( the CIA, the mob and anti Castro people feeling betrayed by Kennedy due to him aborting the Bay of Pig invasion with no further support from the air) – further dynamics were evolving, with both the CIA and the FBI (Hoover) developing increasing resentments against JFK. The CIA and FBI not always friendly with each other recognised some common ground on JFK and his brother. Those groups had already positive connections with Vice – President Lyndon Johnson. However also with former vice -President Nixon. ( As a matter of interest Jack Ruby who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged assassin of JFK, – has been working for Richard Nixon since 1947). The question was how the CIA and the Military would be involved. – or was it the other way around? The last is an interesting question and the final answer will be somehow documented in the record still being on file.
JFK’s intentions to ease the tensions with the Soviet Union and a leaked memo that he was prepared to withdraw from Vietnam – on top of earlier evidence in which he showed to follow a line of action independent from his military advisers (in close consultation with his brother RFK), – seemed to turn the tide really against him. In the public arena his speeches reflected directions of peace and opposition against activities of so-called “secret societies”. What Truman said in private about the CIA and the military, – Kennedy brought in public what both the CIA and secret organisations (e.g “Skull and Bones”) never wanted to hear. What was going to happen if this President was going to be re elected again in 1964, with such strong ties with his influential brother???
JFK’s direction was clearly against the hardliners within both the CIA and the Pentagon. Whilst both the Pentagon and the CIA were strongly in favour to increase the war efforts in Vietnam, President Kennedy – supporting those efforts initially (as he did with the Bay of Pigs, based on wrong advise), – became increasingly aware that this was not the desired direction for the future. When a secret document leaked that he wanted to withdraw from Vietnam he added only to increasing animosity with some Pentagon Generals, – besides the CIA. The mob was quite willing to coöperate with both the CIA and others to do “the job” in Dallas (they had good coöperation with the CIA anyway about Cuba) and 3 different assassination scenario’s seemed to have been in place that day if the attempt on Daley Plaza would fail. The CIA and the mob were in agreement “to sort JFK out”, each for different reasons. Alan Dulles, despite being fired as CIA boss, still had close connections with some hardliners within the CIA and there was still real animosity. A profound difference in perception on the strategic military direction of the US was at the heart of this animosity, despite the fact that Kennedy was able to deal with the Pentagon more favourably than at the beginning of his Presidency. After all, the outcome of the Cuba crisis gave him some credit from at least a few within the Pentagon. The views on the future remained however most antagonistic. It was at a time as well that JFK was not too keen to have Johnson as his running-mate for the 1964 elections as due to past corruption scandals of LBJ and various other things to be leaked to LIFE magazine by RFK.
The fact that the President had such a close bond with his brother ( the Attorney general), even where it came to military operations, indicated for the Pentagon that this President (despite being prepared to listen) would do it his own way. The CIA had similar perceptions.
Under President Truman the insidious power of the CIA became quite clear and both Truman and President Eisenhower warned for this as part of Constitutional fears for criminal peace time operations (the CIA often being side tracked from its original assignment). The CIA evolved into an operational and at times a policy making arm of the Government. Kennedy being aware and warned for those dangers by his predecessors, wanted to change this situation eventually, – being supported by his brother. JFK reportedly planned to dismantle the CIA and the Federal Reserve whilst being ready to expose their illicit operations, – the last being most significant, but most dangerous!
Robert Kennedy not being convinced that CIA protection for the President would be always effective had contemplated on facilitating a private guard, – disconnected from the CIA, as the tensions were clearly felt. Some dangers were felt, however not that obvious as yet.
Beyond all those issues, JFK was really able to reach outside the traditional and existing cold war perceptions of the US establishment, looking at the bigger picture to survive on this planet with a more global perspective, – whilst the CIA & the Pentagon under no circumstances wanted to buy into this, if required at all costs.
The question is how would above groups could work together. There was one more (but most significant!) beneficiary of the assassination of the President. Robert Kennedy opposed Lyndon Johnson for various reasons and both the Kennedy’s wanted to replace Lyndon Johnson as Vice President. As mentioned. In the 1960 LBJ was just a practical choice for JFK in the run up to the 1960 elections. The relationship between LBJ and the Kennedy brothers was at times strained and in particular the Vice President’s relationship with Robert Kennedy were at times close to “explosive”. Lyndon Johnson had profound fears for going to jail about a potential exposure of the Bobby Baker scandal and Robert Kennedy fed extremely damaging information to LIFE magazine to show Lyndon Johnson’s corruption that would blow him “out of the water, once and for all”.
The Kennedy’s and LIFE magazine were – before JFK’s Dallas trip – only days away from politically executing Lyndon Johnson, – with his history of corruptions whilst running the Senate as a Majority leader, with LBJ still having an adviser with close Mafia connections in place. The Vice Presidential ticket in 1964 was most likely to go to either Gerry Sanford of North Carolina or George Smathers of Florida. LBJ was most aware of this!
Bobby Baker was Lyndon Johnson’s secretary and political adviser from the early 50ties until 1962, – however at the time with close connections with mobster Giancana in various business entities, – as discovered by Robert Kennedy. Robert Kennedy also found out that that Baker was also involved in procuring women for President Kennedy, the last having a well documented interest for females (at times most risky liaisons), – with an added risk for further black-mail from the FBI Director Hoover.
Whilst working for LBJ in the White House, Baker continued to have close connections with Giancana and an associate of Jimmy Hoffa, – together with Clint Murchison. Not the best people to connect with if your boss is US Vice-President. It is clear how close the mob was to both Baker and via Baker, – to LBJ. LBJ received a pay off of $100000,= cash in a suitcase as due to his role in securing Fort Worth TFX contract (witnessed by Don B. Reynolds), which was needless to say both corrupt and highly controversial in his place.
After LBJ became President one of the first things was to contract B.Everett Jordan to prevent this information being published and a smear campaign was organised to damage Reynolds, – strongly assisted by FBI Chief Hoover who had developed a file about him. It is clear in retrospect that LBJ was under massive threat before the Kennedy assassination of his corruption being exposed by RFK. As Jimmy Hoffa’s lawyer noted in a conversation mentioned earlier, the problem would not be solved by taking Robert Kennedy out of the picture.
LBJ was for Government Agencies an ideal candidate for a Kennedy succession if Government Agencies together with the mob could settle “the matter” on the 22 nd of November 1963 in Dallas at 12.30 pm. The timing was right as it would not be in LBJ’s interest to have the Bobby Baker scandal and his corruption leaked to the press. The last would indeed blow the light out of his political career. For the Vice President’s protection he needed not to be fully aware of all the in’s and out’s but his full help with the cover up afterwards was enough. LBJ had already “dirty hands”, as reportedly he has murdered a number of people in Texas (eg Henry Marchall in June 1961 ) to cover up his corruption scandals and at the background it would seem he set the scene at Dealy Plaza with others.
LBJ and Hoover had dinner at Murchison’s mansion shortly before the assassination. After this meeting LBJ told his mistress Madelyn Brown that the Kennedy’s “will never embarrass me again”. Some close associates of LBJ in 2006 (many years later) reflected similar suspicion’s of LBJ’s involvement in the JFK assassination.
In the 1980ties Billie Sol Estes – a close associate of LBJ – (just released from prison in 1983) , began confessing the murder on Henry Marshall on the orders of LBJ. The authorities never re investigated the Henry Marchall case, but it was clear that there was a risk that Henry Marchall would have “blown the whistle” at a most inconvenient moment in LBJ’s political career. Reportedly LBJ had a personal “hitman”. Reportedly as well he was ready now for “the clean up” of the Kennedy Administration with the required background support from various areas. Obviously organised crime was required to cover up the operation and both the FBI and the CIA were more than helpful with this and vice versa. Many witnesses (some 72) disappeared or were found dead after poisoning or “an accident”. LBJ was already a heavily corrupted man when he became President, and the truth about the Kennedy assassination would not serve any of his interests, neither the interests of the people he worked with in both the CIA and the FBI.
There are more stunning links.
George Herbert Bush (later President) worked for the CIA in 1963 and was pictured on Dealy Plaza as one of the “crime spotters”. Richard Nixon joined Hoover on the night of the 22st of November 1963, – the day before Kennedy arrived in Dallas. There is FBI evidence that former President George H. Bush was the recipient of a full CIA briefing on the day after the assassination of JFK, in his younger years. FBI Director Hoover wrote a memo referring to the Bush,sr briefing, and the night before JFK was assassinated both Hoover met with others at the Dallas house of Texas oil baron Collin J “Clint” Murchison,jr as far as reports of the retired army brigadier General William Penn Jones concerned. Hoover like LBJ were most aware of what was going to happen, – likewise Richard Nixon. Never ever would Nixon later on as President allow further Watergate investigations as E Howard Hunt with a few other CIA man were both involved in the Watergate burglary and the JFK assassination.
All this information is on file and available on internet research. As earlier reflected some of the finer details are not disclosed as yet and are not due to be disclosed as they are still considered to be top secret.
Edgar J Hoover (the FBI Chief) was a close friend and neighbour of Vice – President Lyndon Johnson, – besides being a respected friend of Richard Nixon. Traditionally Hoover gathered as much as possible controversial information about any potentially threatening incumbant President and in this case he had a file on the Kennedy’s to maintain his extremely powerful position within the FBI. He was despised by both Kennedy’s and Hoover hated in particular Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General (his boss at the time) , – but for certain JFK as well. His file could potentially destroy the Kennedy Presidency hence the Kennedy’s had to put up with him. No President was able to remove Hoover as Hoover proved to be a master in creating controversial material. Besides this Hoover was on the verge of war with the Kennedy’s about their support for the equal rights movement after the lessons from the “Freedom Riders” from Nashville in 1961 in Alabama. Police inflicted repugnant violence in the police state of Alabama, with the FBI supporting the Ku Klux Clan. Whilst the Attorney General Robert Kennedy queried perhaps the wisdom of the Freedom Riders for their endeavours at that particular time, – supported however by his brother the US President – he did sent Federal Troops in to protect those people. It proved that Hoover ignored his boss and no FBI protection was provided at all, despite promises.
(At the time of RFK’s death later on in 1968, RFK was the representative for social change in the US, for the last even more hated as well by Hoover.)
As one can see, the decision to take President John Fitzgerald Kennedy out of the picture evolved into a joint effort of various high-ranking groups and persons collaborating at the same time. Similar the disappearing of many witnesses was the effort of the same collaborating persons and groups as well, – after the Dallas crime took place. Those who gave the orders are still protected by US law, not to be release documents incriminating the highest US officials.
Never ever was the world allowed to know what happened, – but as one can see the assassination was a Coupe d’ Etat, with a cover up of massive proportions – to be even continued under President Nixon , President Ford and Presidents following. LBJ in retrospect blamed Castro from Cuba organising the crime, whilst admitting in 1971 that he never believed in Oswald acting alone. Before he died in the 70ties, – LBJ claimed that the JFK assassination was likely retaliation from Castro on a potential assassination in which both the CIA and the mob would be involved, and that Robert Kennedy has been involved in this anti Castro plot. In 1969 he claimed indirectly in an interview with Walter Cronkey that there could have been international connections. President Gerald Ford however (member at the time of the Warren Commission) – just before he died in 2006 – reflected in his memoirs that the CIA was involved, which leaves besides all the other things only one conclusion about LBJ’s inconsistent reflections, and him as a person.
Robert Kennedy in agony at times about various questions he had, – asked Johnson at some stage: “Why did you kill my brother?”- Robert Kennedy knew the secrets of the Kennedy Administration, he had suspicions on both the CIA and the Mafia as well. However he was not sure as yet. After resigning as Attorney General in the Johnson Administration (FBI Chief Hoover totally ignored him), RFK became elected and was “allowed” to be the Senator for New York where he would be of no harm to the LBJ Administration.
RFK accepted the outcome of the Warren Communion as he had little choice, being both aware of the background powers and the potential of further (anti) Kennedy smear campaigns. Besides this he was profoundly and for quite some time in despair about the death of his brother.
Robert Kennedy however was under close watch, in particular when he decided to run for the Presidential elections in 1968, – opposing both the sitting President Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam war. If he would prove to win California in the primaries he would most likely get the Democratic nomination and being elected US President after Johnson, defeating Nixon in his second efforts against a Kennedy. For certain RFK would have decided to withdraw from Vietnam and change the CIA, being aware of the dangers of the CIA. Besides this he would have endeavoured a different direction for the United States, as his grief had made him more compassionate for the less privileged groups in and outside the US.
With Bobby Kennedy being nationally an increasing popular Presidential candidate he did sign in a way his own death sentence. Both the FBI Chief Hoover and the same undercurrents in the CIA with mob connections involved in the murder of his brother, did not allow a second Kennedy to be President, – and for certain not Robert Francis Kennedy! President Johnson felt again profoundly under threat of Robert Kennedy. It was beyond any doubt that no RFK could be allowed in the White House, by all “ruling parties” (including Nixon at the background, supported by Hoover). Besides a different direction for the US, for certain RFK would be able to unravel the Coup d’Etat as it took place in Dallas the 22nd of November 1963. This would neither be in Hoovers interest, nor in the interest of the CIA, nor in the interest of Nixon or LBJ or any other party involved in the JFK assassination less than 5 years before. It will be interesting to know which reflections are stored in the secret US files incriminating those people who gave the orders. For certain the CIA connection has been established already, but it is unclear where the instructions came from.
A smartly constructed CIA conspiracy ended Robert Kennedy’s race for the White House in Los Angeles, June 1968. Various bullets were fired. Martin Luther King,jr was just assassinated a couple of months before by likely the same undercurrents with FBI involvement as well. Hoover hated MLK, including the movement against the war in Vietnam. All this created massive unrest at all corners of the US, – besides sadness after 2 assassinations in a row. Within this climate of unrest it was not that difficult for Nixon to be elected after Robert Kennedy’s assassination in 1968 and President Nixon intensified the war in Vietnam. FBI Chief Hoover was a close ally of the Nixon Administration, – feeding Nixon with all sorts of wired taped material of conversations between people which could provoke potential damage if used. Henry Kissinger, who reportedly served as a dual agent for both Germany and Russia during the second world war, became Secretary of State under the Nixon Administration. When Nixon had to resign over the Watergate scandal, Gerald Ford took over as the 38th President of the US. The first thing he did – and I repeat saying this – was a Presidential Pardon for Richard Nixon, as such avoiding further investigation into the Watergate affair and preventing further revelations about further connection in the Kennedy assassination as well. The New York Times stated that Nixon’s pardon was ” a profoundly unwise, divisive, and unjust act”. In one stroke it had destroyed the new President’s “credibility as a man of judgement, candour and competence.”
Regarding Gerald Ford’s involvement in the Warren Commission in 1963-1964, – Ford said far later that the CIA destroyed or kept from investigations critical secrets about the 1963 Dallas assassination of President Kennedy. He said as well that the aim was to prevent “certain classified and potentially damaging operations in danger of being exposed.” It was the CIA’s purpose “to hide or destroy some information which can easily being interpreted as collusion in JFK’s assassination.” In other words some information has been destroyed. Before Gerald Ford died he published his memoirs in which he stated that the CIA was involved and he knew.
It is more than likely that the US military establishment including the CIA, the FBI, various of the highest Government Officials and some politicians were involved in the JFK assassination. It is not entirely clear who gave the orders and how they were executed in detail.
An FBI memo released in 2008 -again- reflected that Gerald Ford secretly provided the FBI with information about 2 members of the Warren Commission who doubted both the FBI and the Warren Commission’s conclusions about the assassination. The position of the FBI was that there was only one gun man firing from the Texas Book depository. It proved in 1978 that Ford in 1963 volunteered to advise the FBI about the full contents of all the deliberations in the Warren Commission, provided that his comments with the FBI was kept confidential. This condition was agreed with Edgar Hoover. It proved as well that Ford had strong ties with both the FBI and Hoover. The later President Ford as a member of the Warren Commission in 1963/1964, had full insight in the deliberate failures of the Warren Commission and played a most controversial role with the FBI whilst assisting the cover up and supporting the Warren Commission’s findings. Ford at the time had close connections with the CIA as well and was likely fully aware – later on – that there was far more to Watergate which could incriminate again highest Government officials if e.g Howard Hunt (one of the Watergate burglars) would be put in a position to break the “code of silence”. Hunt made revelations on his deathbed on his and LBJ’s involvement in the JFK assassination and if Gerald Ford would not have given Richard Nixon a Presidential Pardon, Ford as past member of the Warren Commission could be subject for impeachment as well.
Before his poisoning death Frank Sturgess told the San Fransisco Chronicle in May 1977: ” The reason we burglarized Watergate was because Nixon was interested in stopping news leaking related to the photo’s of our role in the assassination of President John F Kennedy.” Additional assassination photo’s would seem to have been available, besides assassination footage taken from a helicopter which would proof that the story about Oswald was fabricated to support the lone – gunman and magic bullet theory. When Nixon stepped down many years later as US President over the Watergate scandal to avoid impeachment and further investigations, it was (this needs to be repeated) President Gerald Ford – who has been a controversial member of the Warren Commission in 1963- who gave Nixon a “general pardon” avoiding as such any further investigations. Gerald Ford has been publicly praised as well for his courage to leave “Watergate” behind, whilst this was clearly not an act of courage. It was again a “cover-up” and just a reflection how the “system” worked in those days, how in a row people could get the top job in the White House whilst being corrupted beforehand. This was possible in the United States of America, this is still possible in the US and only few people know.
Both JFK and RFK did not get the chance to change the “currents” towards more justice within the political systems of the US, hence the significance of their deaths, including the corrupting powers which followed. Powers working closely together with the massive war machinery of the Pentagon at the background and CIA covert operations of immense proportions. People like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld appearing in various Bush Administrations. The Bush (Skull & Bones) and CIA links have been always very close. It may be questioned which oath was more important, the oath to Skull and Bones or the oath to the Constitution. George W Bush called the Constitution once a piece of paper only. What he inflicted or at the end was responsible for will be for decades top secret.
To come back to the original theme:
FBI Chief Hoover died in 1972 whilst President Nixon was in power. Gerald Ford took over the Vice Presidency from Spiro Agnew (who took bribes) in 1973, – one year after Hoover died in office. Hoover was fully aware of the Nixon dealings. Gerald Ford had no Presidential ambitions when he became US Vice President under Nixon, but with his CIA background and past relationships with Hoover, – any secrets would be secured if he had to take over from Nixon.
What happened at Dealey Plaza in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963 was actually as follows:
An alleged change in the motorcade route was instructed at the last minute by LBJ and the CIA. When the Kennedy motorcade turned into Elmstreet, closing in on Dealey Plaza, CIA protection officers to protect the President’s car were called back. As far as video footage concerned one of them reacted utterly surprised but they had to follow orders. Kennedy’s car reduced speed and was not protected at all, – whilst LBJ’s car had full CIA protection. The famous Zapruder footage of which fragments were confiscated by the FBI, revealed years later that the President’s head and upper torso moved profoundly backwards after the last fatal shot, indicating that one bullet was fired from the front – right area, – Jackie Kennedy’s head turned just nearly in front of JFK’s face on impact of the fatal last bullet. She would have been killed if the bullet came from behind. After the first bullet the Presidential car reduced its anyway reduced speed further, allowing (?coincidence) the last bullet being to be fool proof. The exploding impact of this last bullet was of such nature that it opened almost completely the right upper site of JFK’s scalp, – leaving blood and brain material on the first (following) FBI police motor on the left hand site. Kennedy died on the spot after this last bullet and for him there was no further physical agony anymore. More than 3 shots were fired and at least 1 came from the back. Arriving at the Parkland Hospital, the President’s car was carefully and immediately cleaned by the FBI when the President was rushed into the emergency treatment room. Cleaning a crime scene by the FBI was most unusual for usual FBI protocol, but with Hoover in the background anything was possible. The autopsy report was falsified and the brains of the President appeared to be missing later on.
THE WARREN COMMISSION
The Warren Commission presents its report to President Johnson (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The Warren Commission was established on the 29th of November 1963 by President LBJ and he selected a group of so-called “wise man” to investigate the assassination of JFK. The 808 page final report was presented on the 24th of September 1964 and was made public 3 days later. The conclusion was that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the killing of Kennedy and wounding the Texas Governor John Connally, besides the fact that Jack Ruby acted alone in the murder of Oswald. (There are reports Nixon ordered his employee Jack Ruby to kill Oswald, but this is subject to further prove.)
The Warren Commission which has the nickname of “The Alan Dulles Commission” (because he controlled it) proved to be an utterly failure, – like many years later the “9/11 Commission” proved to be a failure. The 3 hardcore cover up participants of the Warren Commission were the 3 Council on Foreign Relation members: Alan Dulles (Former CIA Chief and fired by JFK), John McCloy ( “Chairman of the American establishment” – mixing at the highest levels of intelligence and business, besides being close to the Kennedy hating Texas business élite) and Gerald Ford (later US President). Gerald Ford was -as reflected earlier- secretly reporting the contents of the Warren Commission deliberations to Hoover and the FBI and Newsweek called -I repeat- Gerald Ford in 1970 “The CIA man in Congress”. Ford served later on under President Nixon as Vice-President and Nixon reportedly called “The Warren Commission” the biggest hoax in US history. I will repeat the last one later on in context.
The Warren Commission report is indeed an illustration of many inconsistencies, exclusions of evidence, changing stories or changes made to witness testimonies, oversights and errors. Some witnesses to either the events connected to the JFK assassination or to the assassination itself were intimidated or threatened. A suspicious large number of people connected with the investigations of the JFK assassination died. There was a pattern of deaths around the various government investigations, both during and after the Warren Commission sessions, – besides both around the times the New Orléans District Attorney Jim Garrison started his own investigation. The pattern continued whilst the Senate Intelligence Committee looked into the potential involvement of US Intelligence Agencies in the 1970ties and when the House Select Committee on assassinations was starting up its investigations later on. All those deaths for certain were desired by those not willing to be confronted to become the truth of the JFK assassination to become public, as it would shake up the entire Government and the image in the world.
Though quite a number of classified documents were released during the mid to late 1990ties, some significant records are not scheduled to be released until 2017. This was initially 2029 and not unlikely part of it will remain that way. A Government hiding those things for sure has to hide something.
Never ever lost the US a President who compromised himself with either clandestine CIA operations or CIA inflicted terror as long as the cover up systems were in place. In 1963 the US however lost a President who despite some personal flaws had the courage to decide a more independent direction from the 2 most powerful Agencies in the US, – for the benefit of the US and the world. He was entitled to do so based on fair his fair judgement on the operations of those Agencies in those days. Needless to say that if Nixon would have been President and not JFK during the Cuba crisis, the US would have most likely attacked Cuba and the world would have been lost within the fires of nuclear destruction.
POSSIBLE CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
-The last words have not been spoken about this but a few comments are justified, just to summarise a few issues:
1.>>The JFK assassination with all the cover up’s and elimination of witnesses etc, the dark operations of both CIA & FBI, the links with the mob at high levels, US Presidents being involved in an enduring cover up with LBJ reportedly even directly involved in the assassination preparation, – do show the fragility of the US as a democracy.
The systems of Government with the background powers of both the CIA and Pentagon have despite warnings from earlier Presidents never changed and still put the US potentially at risk, as illustrated e.g. during the last Bush Administration. Will touch base on the last later.
2.>>>As long as systems of US Government continue to have connections with furtive undercurrents, – real democracy in the US could be potentially in danger. Secret operations do not only take place outside the US, – but within the US as well.
3.>>>The independence of a US President can be taken away by both the impact of the CIA and the Pentagon. Full oversight is not always possible. All CIA and military activities of any kind need to be fully authorised by the US President, – being disclosed as well to Congress. Any activities not being disclosed to both President and Congress (the last perhaps with a delay of 3 months) need to be considered as a breach of law and/or Constitution. The same applies for the FBI.
4.>>>When a President should be impeached it is up to the House of Representatives and the Senate to decide as such. Under no circumstances in the US “a Coupe d’Etat” as happened in 1963 should be allowed, – neither by the CIA nor by any other Government Agency and/or related or unrelated.
5.>>>Members of secret societies may have or will have at some stage a profound conflict of interest if serving in any Government – or related body. Representatives of any Government institution or related body, should neither by law nor in the normal practice of duty have connections with either secret societies or the mafia and/or related crime organisations. If connections proven such people have to resign from office. The point is that an oath to secret societies seems to supersede the oath to the Constitution, – as e.g. reflected during the Bush Administration.
In case the President is maintaining such relationships, the normal rules for Congress and the House of Representatives are due to prepare impeachment procedures considering the nature and seriousness of the offense.
5.>>>In the “unforeseen case” a President would be assassinated, neither the course of justice nor the hearing of witnesses (without intimidation) should be compromised in any circumstances.
OF NOTE REGARDING THE JFK ASSASSINATION:
Also here the last words are not spoken.
1.>>>There has been a sinister cover up by various groups and highest ranking government officials to cover the truth re the JFK assassination in Dallas. Former CIA agent and Watergate figure E. Howard Hunt before his death in 2007 (in his autobiography) implicated LBJ in the JFK assassination. Hunt claimed that LBJ organised the assassination at the background with the help of the CIA, who has been angered by Kennedy’s actions as President. It has been claimed that Nixon thought that LBJ ordered the assassination, but again this is subject to evidence.
LBJ mistress (Madelyn Brown) did also implicate LBJ with the assassination of JFK. In 1997 she claimed that LBJ along with Hunt started to plan an assassination as early as 1960. Brown claimed that the conspiracy involved dozens of persons, including the leadership of the FBI. Both the Mafia and well known politicians have been involved, – with journalists being helpful in various ways. Similar suspicions have been echoed by a number of Johnson’s associates in the 2006 documentary “Evidence of revision.”
2.>>>Regarding the autopsy report Douglas Horn – the Assassination Record Review Board Chief analyst for military records – said that he was “90-95% certain” that the photographs in the National Archives are not of President Kennedy’s brains. Dr Gerry Aguilar together with Dr Cyril Wecht wrote in the 1999 “Consortium News”: According to Horn’s findings, the second brain – which showed an exit wound in the front – replaced Kennedy’s real brain – which revealed greater damage to the rear, consistent with an exit wound and thus evidence from a shot in the front.
3.>>>Emiritis Professor of history David Wrone (Wisconsin University – Stephen’s Point), after examining the Zapruder film in 2003, concluded that the shot(s) that killed JFK came from the the grassy knoll at Dealy Plaza. From 3 different angles, three shots were fired, non of them from the window of Lee Harvey Oswald at the Texas Book Depository.
The wooden fence atop the grassy knoll, and the Triple Underpass with the highway sign, which at the time of the assassination read “Fort Worth Turnpike Keep Right” in the Zapruder film. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
1.>>>RFK has been assassinated because the same people being in place responsible for the JFK assassination would not allow an RFK Presidency, with implications on discovery of the truth, a shake up within the CIA systems, withdrawal from Vietnam, and with a “no pardon” for LBJ, Hoover, Allan Dulles, Gerald Ford, the CIA and others. Not only this but his true sense of required social reforms were not accepted by those who wanted the status quo to be continued with Nixon.
CONCLUDING IN GENERAL:
Final conclusions are not possible as yet
1.>>>Potential dangerous US dynamics are still there and could strike again at any time in the future. As long as a US President stays within reason of the established frame work of both FBI, the CIA and the Pentagon he is on safe grounds, – however if he is braking with old traditions and existing connections – even if they are controversial or corrupt (depending on the dynamics and undercurrents), – then even a US President again would be at potential risk of being assassinated, even if there are no constitutional grounds for impeachment. The cover up’s of the Warren Commission with all the participants, including the joint dealings of both the FBI, CIA and the Mafia on the 22nd of November 1963, – were not only unconstitutional but they were high treason to the US, hence all efforts were put in place to wipe out all potential witness and destroy or tamper most of the crucial evidence. It proved that all involved high-ranking government officials and furtive undercurrents were stronger than the US Constitution (or those who were supposed to protect this) in their joint efforts to mislead the public in the aftermath of this horrendous crime.
2.>>>The complications of the CIA and Pentagon being a disproportionate power in the US has never been resolved, likewise the undercurrents being involved in various actions both at US homeland and abroad, – despite historical warnings from both Truman and Eisenhower.
Dallas 1963 proved that even for a popular and powerful US President, – neither personal safety nor Presidential protection rules will be secured if Government Agencies conspire (e.g. with the mob) to end a US President.
3.>>>In the more recent past there are still many unanswered questions as well about e.g. the 9/11 drama including the vertical collapse of Building 7 -(WTC7) , – which did show a controlled demolition with the destruction of lots of investigative CIA material. See nr 8 again for more detail as repeating certain facts may help to see the complexities.
The building was of a very sound structure and this particular collapse had nothing to do with the obvious bin Laden’s terrorist attack in Lower Manhattan. The attack was reportedly used to provoke a drama far worse to aid the US to retaliate both in Iraq and Afghanistan with public support.
4.>>>The CIA has been called on several occasions the military wing of the Council of Foreign Relations. It has however never been as such formally established, but it seems close to the practical reality if legislation is not being implemented to cut the powers of this organisation.
>>>Still the Warren Commission’s findings have never been “formally rejected” by the US Government and the United States Government allowed one of it’s finest Presidents to be killed without any proper & independent investigation, – regardless the outcome!
>>>The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in 1976 on the assassinations of JFK, MLK and the shooting of Governor George Wallace, believed that the conspiracy was neither organized by organized crime nor by anti- Castro groups but could not rule out members of those groups working together. The HSCA conducted its work mostly in secret and much of the evidence (again) was sealed for 50 years under Congressional rules.
>>>In 1992 Congress created the Assassination Records Review Board with a last report on the 30th of September 1998, the day ARRB went out of existence. The ARRB was supposed perhaps to renew US citizens trust in their government, but the scope of the mission was limited. T. Jeremy Gunn was the Executive Director and General Counsel of the ARRB. The Board from its final 236 – page report concluded that still aggressive efforts were required to pursue more information and the general concern was that still “critical records may have been withheld” from its vigorous efforts to come closer to the truth. By law this Agency was required to close its doors.
The ARRB did not re-investigate the JFK assassination (as this was not the aim), however in its search for further records it did conduct many interviews revealing new links and insights into various government operations which many federal agencies would prefer to keep out of the public’s eyes.
The ARRB had deficiencies as well by e.g. not subpoena Thomas Evan Robinson. He was one of the JFK embalmers and handwritten notes of a May 26,1992 conversation with Certified Legal Investigator Joe West were found in Joe West’s Investigator’s Notebook following West’s death in 1993. The transcript of those notes do provide further evidence that the autopsy report of JFK was falsified, adding to the conclusion that the conspiracy in the cover up was very widespread. In 1997 the ARRB interviewed the government employee who developed JFK’s autopsy photographs after his murder and she disputed each picture from the set of autopsy photo’s in the National Archives.
The ARRB documents show the planned phase withdrawal of American Forces from Vietnam by President Kennedy and the fact that the plan was immediately reversed after his assassination.
Though the ARRB did do a thorough job, the report does not reflect any of the stunning revelations contained in various declassified files under their review. Copies of the release of the grand jury records and the prosecution files were only available for public inspection from 9 am to 5 pm on the 12th of June 1998 at the Public Reading Room at the ARRB, 600 E Street, NW,Second Floor Washington, DC.20530. Thereafter the records were transferred to the JFK Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park, Maryland.
Still the assassination on President J.F. Kennedy “officially” remained shrouded in both mystery and secrecy, compounded by series of Governments penchant for secrecy. Generally spoken government secrecy has been harmful for both the confidence and truthfulness of federal agencies. The ARRB needless to say was a firm step in the right direction, but there was still lack of access as agencies still considered release of further records too sensitive to open to the public.
Less than 50 years after the JFK assassination systems of government and/or agencies still prevent renewed investigations in the JFK assassination. It seems a step by step approach in which every decade perhaps more truth is allowed to be revealed, however not everything will be made public. Not even after 2017.
The powers behind the Executive Branch of the US Government are so powerful that it almost seems they are more powerful than the Presidency itself.
8.Within context it would seem that the US Military and Intelligence Apparatus could not allow the JFK presidency to be continued. Hence the dramatic intervention in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963. This truth needed to continue to be concealed as it would compromise any trust in future US Governments and it’s Agencies.
Just before he died former US President Gerald Ford reflected in his memoirs that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination, but he never went in detail on the extend of this involvement. This has been mentioned before but it is revealing
Former President Nixon on one of the “Watergate tapes” stated that the Warren Commission report was “the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated”. He did not went into detail why he questioned the report. Obviously not in the presence tape recordings.
Hence full disclosure and new independent investigation in the JFK assassination is required to show the dangers which are a threat to the US as a democracy. Like the Zapruder Film again showed that the last fatal shot came from a total different direction than the Warren Commission claimed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0tZFkVhN00
WTC7 again did contain many case files for ongoing investigations. Some three to four thousand files were destroyed. WTC 7 housed many private tenants including e.g. the CIA, the SEC, the IRS, the EEOC and the US Secret Service.
This article once more is not about 9/11 but about the issue that the truth about major (and likely Government related) criminal events in US history are kept away from public knowledge, and this includes the JFK assassination. No country or Government serves itself by accepting major crimes from the past by misleading the public it needs to serve.
In 2013 there was the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination and a whole nation came together to remember the far-reaching events in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963.
President John F Kennedy once said:
“The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.”
Abraham Lincoln once reflected: > “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves”.
It was just 100 years later that JFK concluded: >”A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehoods in an open market is a nation afraid of its people.”<
“Love is the soul of genius”, – as one would say. Without heart no genius. The way the US Constitution has been applied in both the 9/11 drama and the JFK assassination showed neither love, nor genius, nor even “heart”. The “show” for those who did know and still do know more, has been going on until almost even 50 years after Dallas and still it does not seem to stop.
Some countries prefer to live with certain lies, even when it affects the application of the Constitution in major crimes from the relatively past. Even in the days when the future looks better under the Obama Administration.
However not dealing with the past has the risk of repetitive events in the future under different US Presidential Administrations.
Facing the facts with love for the historical US truth may enhance the Constitution and “The Union” rather than compromising it.
Whilst there are many things far more important and pressing in the present, the past should not be forgotten. Fifty years down the line people in the US may even know more, – however without the powers to change things for the better as that opportunity then has gone.
Courage not served is both courage and truth forgotten!
“I have not seen anywhere else in the world a gun lobby that has the same level of influence on its own government as the NRA does in the United States.” –Andrew Feinstein.
“I am concerned for the security of our great Nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of insidious forces working from within.” – Douglas MacArthur.
“The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all” – John F. Kennedy
The topic for today is the importance of both increased national and international security and the nature of leadership we need in a changing world. However the focus will be on the first one, with an example of things starting at home in the US. Both with proper legislation and law enforcement within the domain and control of US Congress. The US here is just an example and different examples do exist all over the world.
When times are economical challenging, foreign policy matters are rarely the topic of discussion. But in recent weeks issues on both foreign policy and security worked their way up within the public domain of attention.
During the crisis with North Korea in which China played for certain a role of influence for the better, – we had first the Boston Marathon bombings with the related questions about terrorist connections. This is relatively a new element that from areas where you don’t expect it, people find their way on US ground and evolve in personalities able to prepare bombs with the intention to kill indiscriminately. And so they did, as others may do again anywhere. Both inside the US and outside the US.
Whilst the airliner plot over the Atlantic and World Trade Centre attacks are unlikely to happen anymore in the identity as they evolved, – the prospect of terror from a different kind seems to be more of an issue in the future.
It is terror of a different kind than 9/11. But it is the terror on top of increased gun violence in the US anyway, and from both sides of the spectrum there is easy access to guns, assault weapons and other tools to inflict destruction.
It’s a warning that dynamics in society are changing and that we need to be mindful of the fact that we are simply not ready for this.
Proper legislation in line with the spirit of our time and similar law enforcement need to be in place. This being prepared in a proactive way by anticipation on the dynamics in society.
Within those recent dynamics in the US the civil war in Syria did break the news with a high index of suspicion of chemical warfare being used against the opposition in Syria. This followed by an Israeli bombing near Damascus to prevent the transport of missiles and chemical weapons close to the borders of Israel.
At the same time Congressional hearings in the US provided more detail about what happened in Libya when the US ambassador Christopher Stevens and other Americans were murdered during a terrorist attack. Lacking the total picture, some Republicans claim that the White House should be held responsible for either insufficient protection or misleading information. It would seem that the dynamics within the domain of some Republican members of US Congress go that far that they would like any effort to try to impeach President Obama on this issue, if they could. A reflection of a “House Divided” where some members of this honourable branch of Government lost touch with both reality and the priorities of this country.
It illustrates the dangerous paradox in this country, the downfall of democracy when Congress is misaligned on some major topics and obstructive elements are able to block progress against the will of the majority of voters.
This is not new and it may happen anywhere in countries with democracies. It might be considered as the play game of democracy but in some events it’s a dangerous play game setting the tone for more little fruitful dynamics in society…
Whilst not proven perhaps, there is more chance a society at peace or stable in itself at times of peace, – will sustain the disharmony at times of no peace better than the kind of society already divided in itself.
It illustrates somehow as well the sad thing that people often tend to stick together in crisis only, but go their own way when there are no dangers on the horizon.
We live however in a world where simple escalating events may lead to massive drama’s all around.
For this reason the topic to be discussed today is an interesting one as the perceptions about leadership, democracy and security are almost as different as the dimensions about security and leadership on its own. Issues about eg Israeli’s and Palestinian security have different perceptions all around the world. History shows that people can make a difference within certain positions.
Interestingly we had recently 2 US Presidential candidates with different perceptions and personalities. The person who started his US Presidency in 2009 was able to continue in 2013. The perceptions of one leader and the choices being made on behalf of international security may define the outcome of many future dynamics. Likewise within the US, US Congress may define the outcome on other dynamics.
It’s a matter of leadership and being proactive, with inclusive views.
The nature of fast growing and increasing economic and financial interdependence of countries around the world, with all sorts of growing interactions, – need a far stricter international security than ever before. It all starts in home land activities, to get grip on those things we don’t want, those things being disruptive for our well-being in the countries where we live, – the things affecting national security. An issue for all of us, wherever we may live.
Speaking about security at a challenging time in US history, we only need to look back some 150 years ago.
A time where US Congress and legislative issues paved the way for the dynamics leading to the US civil war in the 18th Century.
President Lincoln would not have been the person history remembers if he would not have been challenged after his Presidential election to lead his country through one of the most difficult times in US history.
He was the unexpected President exposed to the worst, which through a combination of circumstances made him the best!
Some would say that the American civil war in those day was a security and a significant emancipation issue for the US as a Union.
Emancipation still to be remembered, still to be remembered by those members of the Republican Party who are unable to see that emancipation and inclusive progresses are ongoing issues in history. Running behind the important social and political events of time will catch up with those who have to deal with the implications in the future. History learns that not being proactive comes at a cost.
Being true what he said in his inauguration, President Lincoln did not allow a minority to disintegrate the Union, – but he preserved the Union, by which he followed through with his planned declaration of Emancipation to end slavery.
He succeeded as part of the Republican movement at the time to create the next endeavour in US history, keeping the right balance on the required issues of national security in his days.
Whilst generally Southern Democrats were obstacles for Emancipation in the 1860 ties, – Northern Republicans are generally stumbling blocks for 21st Century US progress. Both with exceptions within each party in the days of President Lincoln and today. True is that the Republicans were the driving force for progress one and half century ago.
Republicans should take this on board.
The last still in a most divided America.
Congressional choices long ago by overturning the so-called Missouri compromise which intended to restrict slavery, played part in the evolving drama in the 1860ties, before it actually happened.
Today we jump a fair bit in time. To illustrate that divisions can go one way or the other but unresolved within the required legislation will lead to all sorts of processes in society hard to contain.
Also an issue subject to Congressional choice. The choice either being proactive or reactive.
It is not long ago the National Rifle Association moved to block a UN treaty on gun control. The NRF serves strongly the interest of both national and international arms deals, with a high level of influence in US Congress. Clear is that US Congress has been willing to serve the power position of the NRA by simply not approving Presidential proposals to revise gun legislation. The majority however of US voters wants a change in the current legislation on gun control as increasing gun violence disrupts a nation and may compromise eventually national security, the last because the current legislation is not aligned with changing dynamics in US society with more gun related violence and deaths, – both at the cost of children and adults.
Whilst some 700000 people died during the American civil war at the time of President Lincoln,- more even died as a result of unlawful gun use in the US over various decades.
The downfall of a democracy is that a minority may act against the will of the constitutional rights of voters. Voters to have their voice properly represented in the legislation a country deserves. It is true that the ignorance of a few voters – in the words of John F Kennedy – may impair the security of all. In some cases the security of a Republic.
Congressional ignorance on the issue of gun control may disregard national security interest where it comes to the protection of US citizens. Voters want to reduce the risk of more generalised and increasing gun violence in the US as the extremes will come together in the context of changing social dynamics. The last as part of increased globalisation. Congress is not allowing those facts to be considered within the concept of national interest and as such tolerating the death toll of existing gun violence, – eventually debilitating the US ability to keep control in own house. Getting worse when the forces of external terrorism meet existing dynamics in US society with more or less free access to unrestricted guns and assault rifles, enabling massacres at large scale.
A matter of national security.
Congressional choices may define future dynamics whilst the US President is almost powerless to change this at a time this being required.
It’s a matter of poorly understood national security of the United States of America. The dynamics of society turning into increasing and senseless massacres, – the last often caused by ill minded and mentally disrupted people from which the statistics say they are only on the increase. Meanwhile US Congress allowing to be influenced more by NRA interest, and not taking the dynamics in society or the wishes of voters on board.
Douglas MacArthur within a different context reflected once his concern for his own great Nation; “not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within”.
He was right in one sense, but today the danger comes from 2 directions, – both from threats within and without, and with the current Congressional attitude towards increased gun control as is today, – this is a potential menace to the security of the Union.
Lincoln would have turned away from this, – if he could! It is a matter of emancipation, constitutional emancipation.
Where history changed with new dilemma’s to be sorted, – the ask of true leadership is more profoundly needed all over the world.
But it all starts at home to have the required legislation and law enforcement in place.
We are faced with different dilemma’s this century.
True leadership is required today when the proper balance gets disrupted with lots of things being at stake. And often as it proved in history it falls back on people with a distinct personality and attitude, – bright in their assessment and determined in their actions.
The last applies for US Congress as well. An honest and fair assessment being required, both based on the choice of people being represented and the dynamics in society.
If we speak about the issue of security in a broader sense:
Not only increased globalization is asking for stricter national and international security, but also a new political economy with shifting influence from west to east and a population growth hardly possible to sustain, – with an increased unstable relationship between our fragile global civilisation and an increased depletion of our resources.
The last will become vital in the future.
Hence from an international perspective, international security in the Asia-Pacific region can’t be allowed to be compromised by nuclear dictators as eg in North Korea.
Similarly US security can’t be compromised by increasing gun violence inflicted by more people turning their hatred on society, with the same easy access to guns and rifles because Congressional legislation did not follow the trend in society.
Rifles and gun’s being far more advanced than when the Constitution was written. Dynamics within society and international far more different than they have ever been. The US more at edge than ever before.
The issues of both national and international security are getting more important as more things can go wrong at the same time with wider implications faster speed and greater destruction and disruption.
Without the right tools, the right brains and the best possible assessment, – we lose both momentum and direction for a more stable world.
And again it all starts at home.
If we look at the Middle East, the situation in Syria is a prime example of major dangers and the potential of an escalating conflict. Civilisation and reason totally lost.
There have been dangers and evils in the past, so will there be evils and dangers in the future and we need to recognise them at an early stage.
I hope the desired emancipation on gun control and the required restrictions on gun related violence will not take an other 50 years in the US. It would be a massive drain on society, both for victims and their families, but also for those who have to work in authority within the given restrictions of incomplete gun legislation.
People in the police force have families as well.
Fortunately there is no room for racial hatred anymore, but whilst the last belongs largely to the past new issues of friction and potential hatred arise at the spectrum of social development, – with mixture of cultures and religions, and increased travel from various countries around the world.
Being multicultural in one sense is good and has the potential to bring the goodness of different nations together. The downfall could be when people from poverty stricken area’s in today’s world travel at different countries, – with at times the narrow and restricted perception of only blind hatred. Receiving in some occasions terrorist training in their homeland of origin, with a mission to destruct and destroy.
Alqaida has eg booklets designed to help terrorists overseas to make bombs and strike and kill in various ways. The target quite often seems to be the US and its allies.
We might be horrified to know of what is possible to happen, – but most of us get horrified when it happens. Whilst we need to love our neighbour as ourselves, we have to denounce the persons and groups inflicting violence and terrorism. Similar with countries deliberately exporting this sort of people or ideology to be held accountable in line with international law, – the last subject for renewal and change at various levels to combat the dangers of our time.
But again it starts at home.
Insufficient restrictions on international nuclear control and allowing more countries to have access to nuclear weapons by lack of internal law enforcement is asking for more dictators or other countries “pulling the trigger”, – like allowing more people in the US to have access to lethal rifles and other dangerous guns, – is asking for a more unstable society, – creating a situation with potential “mass pulling of triggers” where the US army may have to act against its own citizens at times of national unrest.
It seems correct that the Bush Administration prepared for FEMA concentration camps in case of social unrest. More important is that the triggers for social unrest never escalate in the use of massive gun violence in one society, – just for the sake of civilisation and protection of citizens. The law simply needs to be adapted to prevent an almost unlimited access is some States.
Again a matter of Congressional choice, but it would not seem they see it this way with some members of this establishment even devoted to get the Obama Administration down on what happened in Benghazi, Libya. Not being able to take the long view but using the short-sighted view to debilitate proper Governance at a time this being required makes jurisdiction stagnant.
Just an illustration how members of Congress can add to a “House divided” by not getting the priorities right.
It happened in the past, with US civil war just 150 years ago. It is for some part up to Congress to prevent this ever happening again by reducing increasing gun violence in a similar divided nation on different issues by proper legislation in line with the spirit of time.
With eg the Boston bombing just recently behind, an alleged terrorist rail plot being foiled in Canada, sarin – gas being possibly used in Syria, and North Korea “one click away” from pushing the launch button of firing ballistic missiles, – it is clear that changing international patterns are evolving into more risk involving scenario’s waiting to become reality. both national and international.
This is what I mean when I say that at some stage the extremes are coming together, both from outside the country and inside the country.
At the end of the day the means to have control is largely a matter of the right legislation being in place with the proper law enforcement and the proper people right for our time. This both applies at the arena of national and international politics.
National Security starts at home and coming back on the US, Congress should act in favour of increased gun control.
A matter of civilised and effective legislation to support both national security and the safety of US citizens.
On the extremes outside – and within the context of international security and coöperation against terrorism – it is encouraging that President Putin from Russia emphasised the need for increased international intelligence coöperation, as prevention at an early stage is the better substitute.
G8 summit in Ireland, June 17, 2013
Some nations posses the power to abolish any form of human poverty but also any form of human live. Both a matter of responsibility and choice, – a matter actually of priority to support any extended nuclear freeze proposals, and contain the current level of nuclear experience where it comes to the development of new weapons of mass destruction.
Whilst most nations appreciate the responsibilities on this and have already reduced their nuclear arsenals, new powers arise with the wish to have those weapons as well, – and with a clear intent to either use them or apply international blackmail.
Those countries are an issue of serious concern. They need to be stopped at the earliest possible stage through reason and if reason and sanctions do not help, through force if so required, – in line with international coöperation by those nations committed to stop the dangers to multiply.
The UN plays a central role.
International security on this is based on the practical choice not to allow any new country to develop those weapons, – regardless the question whether it is good or wrong that other countries do already have those weapons. It is clear that with increasing countries having access to nuclear or chemical weapons it is getting more difficult to keep the world secure.
Same applies with providing at times even more unpredictable people an almost free access to fire arms, – as such creating increasing difficulties to prevent massacres of any kind as result of gun violence, the last with a potential domino effect.
Stable we can make it through more succesful partnerships on the issues we face in the 21st century. US Congress is not much familiar with succesful partnerships on this issue of restricting gun violence.
Science is able to unleash the powers of destruction by human choice, unless we prevent humankind and powers to make this choice, – by restricting at least the powers who are able to destruct each other. Most of them who are nuclear now do realise that the choice of such destruction means self-destruction, involving all humanity.
Likewise science provides terrorists the means to unleash powers of more limited destruction, both by senseless shootings or bomb blasts at areas of their choice. However the means by which terrorists are able to apply this destruction in the future is by no means sure and increased international coöperation is required to recognise at an early stage the features of certain persons and groups committed to terror
Whether terror is provoked or inflicted by guns or bombs makes in essence not much difference when we consider the lethal outcome on both children and adults. School shootings where people die are as terrible as disrupted sport events where people are killed through the hands of terrorists using bombs. Those tools need to be be banned from the street with the restriction (if the Constitution can’t be changed as yet) of gun’s being controlled, registered and only in the hands of mindful people, – and assault rifles being excluded in any case for “civil use”.
We live in a world insufficient prepared for terrorism, – which does not mean we have to learn to live with terrorism as if this would be our fate.
Both National and International security starts at home in our own countries with the things we can control, with proper legislation and law enforcement on issues being required in the context of changes in society, changes in the way children are brought up and the way they become adults, apart from the changes related with globalization and the technology which brings people down from different countries.
Whilst it is hard to change or control the mindset to take lives for no reason, it is easier to control or limit the means by which we are able to do this.
This applies both to guns and nuclear weapons, – and it all starts at home where we are privileged to make choices on restricting the tools and dynamics of violence.
US Congress should reconsider the issue of effective gun legislation for the benefit of a more secure society where people are becoming slowly less at risk of violence as due to unlawful use of bullets, – regardless whether those bullets come from US citizens or people who travel from overseas to inflict violence for the reason of hatred against US society.
Waiting for escalating gun violence in the future, wherever it comes from, is pointless. The warnings are there, written already in the hearts of many people who lost loved ones in this repetitive cycle of non-required violence, – waiting to get worse only.
We have neither right to inflict suffering nor death on another human being unless there is an unavoidable necessity for it and any culture or country which endorses the right to bear arms amongst it citizens has blood on the law provision it provides on this and will pay at later date a price being higher than initially intended at the time those laws were made.
The clause on the right to bear arms in the US Constitution is a serious defect considering the time spirit of the 21st Century and lays the foundation of the potential destruction of it’s culture through internal destructive forces, – if not adapted.
Among free men,” said Abraham Lincoln, “there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet; and those who take such appeal are sure to lose their cause and pay the costs.”
Those who get confused about the real priorities on earth and lose their cause will pay the costs
This is the reason I want to speak about the prospect of war tonight, not because I like it but the risks are more clear than ever before. The risk of people as part of humankind as a whole being confused about the real enemies and threats we are faced with.
This is the topic for tonight
Tonight people in Western Australia‘s Pilbara region are being warned that the pending Cyclone Rusty could bring 250 km/hour winds slamming into the coast and inflicting massive destruction. Major parts of the Queensland coast and New south Wales have been battered by storms, twisters and flooding at a scale of increasing force. Both the east and west coast of Australia are encountering changing in patterns subject to greater forces of violence of nature in the future.
That’s nature only.
Like one small wave or earthquake may cause a tsunami, destructive in all its power, – a minor escalating conflict may cause atomic war
Just moments before a tsunami hits can be a time of serene calm, – as calm and hidden can be the preparation of war. In some places the water actually pulls back from the coast. In some cases, harbours and bays are entirely emptied of their water. And people may be misled by those signs, whilst full destruction is pending.
The same applies when times are filled up with hope, where the absence of war does not mean there is peace. Peace though being desired as the most important revelation on earth, – peace being desired as the most important power being able to combat both war and the preparation for it. Peace being required to combat the elements of nature and not destruction ourselves by choice through science being used the wrong directions.
It will be neither Air Force One which brings this peace, nor is it the breaking of a man’s spirit which may cause war, – but the sum of all efforts in either direction of both peace or war will make the difference between our existence or our total destruction, – the difference between the worst possible menace of violence, or our ability to communicate with each other and try to solve problems, – civilised within the potential of our humanity, as civilised we need to be at the major platforms of international discussions
“Civilisation” in the international arena of politics and eliminating dangers, both about forces of nature and war, should be based by principle on communication and efforts to change perceptions and give countries a chance to stick to international acceptable standards, – knowing we do not live in an ideal world. Hence the reason to do it this way, rather than the other way round.
When the bible speaks about the Kingdom of God being pending within the given variety of historical options and debate, – regardless indeed the potential of global self-inflicted destruction, – we have to remember that still a natural law applies: that we can only bring so much of God’s domain into this world as we have access to and willing to apply.
In the past 100 years, since 1914, we have seen two “World Wars”. World War 1 was more profound in it’s destructiveness than the sum of all the wars over the last 2500 years. World War II was four times more destructive than World War I.
The nuclear annihilation of two cities in Japan was the end of it
Two small bombs.
The nuclear bombing which crippled Japan for many years, – had the most painful physical effects for many.
In no comparison with what is available now.
Any humans which survived the first blast of this explosion in eg one city only had major radiation exposure. Some 140000 people who survived this first nuclear explosion being used in war, sustained radiation exposure with many 3rd degree burns and were after the blast subject to the long term after effects of radiation poisoning. They were subject to increased risks on various cancers, the unborn being exposed, – and once born months later, far more vulnerable, with the far reaching increased risks of leukaemia and other malformations later in life.
From the first survivors only some 10% did live for a further 2 weeks as due to the wounds, the pain and the agony.
Nurses being overworked waited just for people to die as this was the last blessing to be relieved from their pains.
The long term after effects were horrendous.
The 2 nuclear bombs destroyed everything in its path. Those bombs killed about 165000 people within the first 3 months in Hiroshima and some 80000 in Nagasaki at a similar time frame
Nothing in comparison with what is available and possible now when any nuclear power would opt to use its arsenal, apart from the domino effect on other nuclear powers doing the same out of retaliation.
The Tsar Bomb eg developed by the USSR and detonated in 1961 over the Arctic island of Novaya Zemlya, had a power of 50 megatons, – about 10 times the total explosives used in WWII, including the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Its fireball was so huge that it reached the ground while almost reaching the altitude of the bomber plane 10 km in the sky. It was felt almost 1,000 km from ground zero, and the heat from its first flash could have caused third degree burns some 110 km away. The mushroom cloud that formed was about 65 km high and 45 km wide, and the blast could be seen and felt in Scandinavia, where windows were broken. This bomb was originally designed to be one of 100 megatons, in other words twice the power as been exploded.
The Soviets decided in the end not to go ahead with this 100 megaton bomb
Mind you, – – those nuclear explosives were developed in the early 1960ties some 15 years after the end of the second world war and now we are living in a time where small nations developing nuclear weapons which could equate the 100 megatons in about 20 years or less, as those initially being designed by the Soviets and exploded in 1961.
The potential problem for every country in the third world which wants to be a nuclear power, provides the risks they may develop the sort of weapons both the US and Russia already had in the 1950ties, – and the world for certain should not allow this regardless the fact that the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia, India and Pakistan already have nuclear bombs of various strength, -with Israel being included for almost a half century.
North Korea eg is an increasing power, -however a very unusual and unpredictable power, – last but not least as part of its almost total isolation. Despite good connections with both Russia and China in the past, the last 2 superpowers are getting concerned as well, – and the UN does not affect North Korea in any way to change positions of the regime.
There are different ideas about diplomacy and how to apply this in certain circumstances, – but so be it.
There are ideas about applying force, – so be not at this stage!
There is nothing against down to earth diplomacy, face to face at top level, – to prevent an otherwise potential worst case scenario. Only a minor shift in perception may change the risk of war. The reasoning behind this is that North Korea wants to go nuclear as part of its military deterrent in its confrontation with the United States, – which it describes as “the sworn enemy of the Korean people.”
Long range missiles are not aimed for South Korea but are on the long term for the US and its citizens and the only way is working on a shift in perception, guided by both Russia and China as the long term developments and scenario’s may hit them as hard as the US in terms of costs protecting its citizens. It will help the US to get both China and Russia on the same page of the international agenda to stop North Korea with its dangerous endeavours.
The diplomacy of the kind being applied till so far did not work, however top level face-to-face diplomacy has not been tried as yet. Top level diplomacy does not mean bending towards NK’s demands, but high level direct diplomacy should be both aimed to ease the tensions and to create a fruitful alternative, – or NK indeed to face the gradual implications which would make regret its actions.
Such meetings with NK is not rewarding them for bad behaviour but allowing them by choice, and after exploring the alternatives, to engage as the last possible option into the domain of civilisation, – besides preventing the possibility that nuclear technology might find its way to Iran, al-Qaeda and others.
The last scenario would be only the start of a more devastating process, – widespread nuclear terrorism included – –
In the long history of the world, at times there were good powers in the Middle East, – like there were repugnant powers as well, living at the cost of many others, – those who died, forgotten in the dust of history.
As history often shows, people do not learn the way they should do, as a group or as a society, – and with this knowledge in the 21st century we need to make this different to survive as a human race on this planet. The flaws in foreign policy from the past should not be the repeated flaws in the future. Nuclear war starting in the Middle East could easily annihilate the human race, with a destruction and chaos as never being met before.
Like a tsunami may hit us unexpected at the lower coast lines, – nuclear war could hit us unexpected anywhere and unprotected everywhere.
The US may play a major role to help fruitful dynamics, along with China and Russia.
The US can’t be indifferent as a broker, however this does not mean it would be dishonest, or should be dishonest with integrity by principle, – regardless the agenda of placing some safeguards for Israel. Safeguards being justified within the context of ongoing threats. Safeguards, – as the alternative of doing nothing to bend the road among the dynamics in the Middle East more positively, – means simply the clock is ticking towards more chaos and violence. Whether this is in Egypt or with the Palestinians, – Hezbollah in Lebanon or Iran, – or any other areas with conflict including Syria. The last with a promising diplomatic Russian intervention yesterday, with the current regime being ready now to talk to all parties, – despite the risk of so called lip service to dialogue in more sustained ways.
We know it’s all complex, but terrorism and war are even more complex, – and safeguards should be there for any party agreeing with the fact that broader violence is an inflated perception, leading to nothing else than a final destruction of this whole area and with this at least part of the world. Destruction of what once was build in terms of culture and difference. The Middle East being ancient and rich as once was the Roman empire, the first even older than the last.
Everything is a matter of perception and perceptions do rule the world, either in the leaders of people and governments, or in the people themselves. Whether those perceptions are right or wrong, bizarre perhaps at times – if we put up barriers feuded by prejudice, and as such preventing that we work with the most crucial different perceptions of our times, – we are taking away the opportunities of people coming together and making the impossible possible.
Impossible it seems before arriving at meetings, impossible when people are angry at times and reasoning from emotions, leaders living with ideas of going to war, – especially when those ideas do resonate at Departments of existing Foreign policy or at major military platforms. But history shows that the impossible is possible, even when we are faced with the impossible, like we are faced with the impossible of earthquakes and tsunamis when forces of nature do hit us wave by wave leaving behind bewildered people amidst destruction. But the last are situations where people despite destruction and losses of lives find each other in their willingness to help. That’s again a difference in perception, guided by what hits us.
Guided by what hits us, – whether it is a major bushfire or flooding, a tsunami or an earthquake. Those are challenges we don’t ask for but they hit us unexpected, – like a major rock from space can hit us unexpected.
And you know, – we train doctors and nurses, medical teams and fire brigades and all the others to help when required, – but the terrible contradiction comes in when major war hits the horizon.
War may hit us unexpected but the difference is that the dynamics leading to war are premeditated, dynamics who find their roots far too often within inflated perceptions not being properly discussed or taken to a level of exploring different alternatives.
This is the world as it does present us to day, whether it applies to the problems in the Middle East or in Korea, whether it applies to tensions between the US and China. And even when it seems that certain perceptions are not subject for change, those perceptions being purely based on blind hatred and prejudice, – whether it is the prejudice against the Jews or prejudice of any other kind, – still it is worth giving communication a chance, perhaps a last chance. Even when it seems against all odds. However, there should be zero tolerance for people and even countries who simply kill either on their own or in groups, – just for killing and destroying lives.
Zero tolerance for this!
leadership and I mean true leadership is not the rhetoric from behind the desk in front of a microphone, nor is it confronting people with the facts after disaster happened with the knowledge it could have been dealt with differently. Leadership as well is taking fear for granted and leave it behind in order to tackle the problems which need to be tackled. Leadership is not watching a train taking the wrong railway path and simply watching how a collision will occur and tell us thereafter that it occurred without taking action to alarm those being able to stop the train, or plane, – going into a collision course. This applies to the dynamics of potential world events as well, and we know they are closely watched with far too often too little proactive action. And if we speak then again about eg North Korea, the questions is what kind of discussions with NK do we mean? What kind of settlement do we seek? – – Not an American forced process which may escalate problems by American weapons or war. Not the security of us being a slave from a dogmatic regime running the treadmill of their own insecurities by isolation themselves of the rest of the world by their war machinery. Not only by their current war machinery, but by their nuclear potential just years down the line. We can’t afford to turn a blind eye for this.
I am really talking about a genuine process which helps both sides to reconsider an ability to take a different direction, – a direction of helping to grow one nation sidetracked from common civilisation, – anxious about the concept of liberation as it would as such destroy the current status quo.
What we know from history is that nations did arise and disappeared at times in the dust of history, a process over many and many more years. We know as well that dictators grew old and were replaced at times. We know as well that the people of some nations said that they had enough and went on the street to provoke change. Change at times so desired and needed. All this is not possible at the moment but we can’t allow one nation at this point of history potentially destroying history itself by simply not talking. Total war as a result of this, triggered by error or miscalculation makes no sense as no one will surrender without resort to those forces which could destroy us all. Believing that negotiations and fruitful discussions do not make sense means that people feel it is inevitable that NK goes it own way by further producing thermonuclear devices and more advanced missile systems in the future, – allowing as such that at some stage we will or may be subject to international blackmail. Not believing in the only possible way of discussions, to change perceptions as an act of real leadership, is a regressive defeatist belief leading to the belief we have no grip to change those forces and powers which need to be changed, – forces which need to be modified based on simply the reason at this time in history.
This time in history!
Whilst sensible words and conversations do not harm and open options for further dialogue, easing tensions, – provocative words and actions may lead to war.
This time in history!
Whilst there is no “magic formula” to make peace, man’s reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly impossible and I believe we can do it again whilst we learn from the past and walk the many miles to reach out to make the impossible possible, – like this happened eg during the Cuba crisis, like this happened eg when the Iron Curtain between East and West Berlin was abolished, like it happened eg when a first US President did visit mainland China for a new chapter in history.
This time in history again!
Facing the facts of this world we can’ deny fanatic nationalism being on the rise, with the situation worldwide being similar to the conditions that triggered both past World War’s. In 1994 Africa’s Rwanda proved how tensions suddenly can explode; church-going neighbors turned on one another with genocide. Close to 1000,000 died. Even women and children that took refuge in churches were hacked to death by machete.
Again this time!
Multinational wars in Africa claimed some 2,500,000 lives, including the hidden war in the Congo, almost completely ignored by western news media. India and Pakistan have exchanged angry threats in the past, backed by nuclear missiles.
War usually does cause famine by disrupting farming, like happened during and after the 2 World Wars. Stalin created death by starvation of millions of his own countrymen in Russia . After the second World War about a fourth of the world was starving.
Corruption and war has starved millions in both Angola, Somalia, Ethiopia and North Korea. Zimbabwe had a corrupt and brutally racist regime, using selective starvation to crush dissents. Wealthy nations do show “compassion fatigue,” Sometimes the news media just ignore situations until hundreds of thousands are already dead. In other places, the problem is not one of war but gross inequality: the rich are sumptuously stocked, while just across town the poor cannot afford even a balanced diet. All too often the poor in so-called “developing” countries have to stand with empty hands and empty stomachs whilst rich harvests are exported for hard cash which then being used to buy weapons being used by the government against its own people.
All this in our times!
The World Health Organization reflects that at least 5 million children die every year from malnutrition. At the same time in the well developed world many children are grossly obese with already early signs of both diabetes and high blood pressure.
The world is shaking both by its bankruptcy of moral values in some countries as literally by earthquakes. Besides this there have been major upheavals in societies and governments in the past century. Empires have been broken up, and divisions have split nations along ethnic and religious lines. In 2008 there was a near-collapse of the world economy due to greedy financial manipulation, with great difficulty slowly recovering but the markets both in Europe and the US still unsure, the last as due to a huge deficit. In early 2011 we observed an Islāmic Spring with still uncertain outcomes.
We can’t deny it, it happens all in our time, in past time and currents times over and over!
In many places around the world people put heavy steel bars over their windows. Often honest people being in jail whilst criminals walk the streets. Confessed rapists and murderers set free and courts finding technical excuse to do so. In some places 80% of all children are born to single mothers with not rarely the father not being known. Many semi-slave laborers as part of the human trafficking industry, often enslaved and very young within an increasing dangerous and powerful evil business overtaking in the years ahead the industry of the “drug barons”. Poisons being poured out into rivers whilst people downstream have no other choice but to drink the contaminated water. Multinational corporations hiding their trail of injustice and profits in a legal jungle of complex contracts where government officials turn a blind eye for cash. The exponential increase of our human population in the 21st Century will raise more expectations on normal living circumstances and shelter, – unsustainable as more people adopt modern lifestyles of consumption and pollution. Climate change will provide a burden for us all, – but in particular for those people with little shelter and less normal circumstances of living.
The 21st century, – all our time and may be the end of times if we don’t pull together as civilised nations and use reason as the guiding force to streamline our decisions, decisions or choices which will determine how we proceed this century.
Conflicts are increasing over essential resources, especially water and energy. Accelerating climate changes with profound changes in patterns both in Australia, the US and other parts of the world. Political and economic instability including the slowly spreading of nuclear weapons give little hope in objective terms. Church officials being exposed as pedophiles, seducing or raping little boys and girls. The Roman Catholic Church turning a blind eye for a long time to this like they turned a blind eye to Hitler Germany to continue as a Church. A reflection of the violence of institutions, indifference and inaction and slow decay. But still amidst this good people as well fighting this decay.
Many good people in our times as well! —-
Going back as not being finished yet:
Hitler, Lenin and Pol Pot who did mislead millions of people doing the most repugnant and wicked things, apart from the “smaller evils” like eg Idi Amin.
However, – still we have the last choice, if people say to kill we don’t need to kill.
If we were abused as children by parents, we don’t need to abuse our children..
For some, – religion as part of their appeal with Al-Qaeda being a prime example now.
All in this world and in our time!
And still, – we can only bring so much of the Kingdom of God into this world as we have within ourselves, – which includes our sense of piety or respect for life, – within the concept of a practical and down to earth wisdom on international relationships.
Our times are full of shame and sorrow despite the hope for a better future where forces of nature should be the enemies and not humankind divided in itself. The victims of the violence and senseless bloodshed are across all religions, black and white, rich and poor, young and old.
“Among free men,” said Abraham Lincoln, “there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet; and those who take such appeal are sure to lose their cause and pay the costs.”
Violence breeds violence, repression brings retaliation, and indifference amidst this is a different sort of violence on its own. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, the hungry and those being victims of broad-spectrum abuse, whether it is human trafficking or the abuse of elderly in homes.
I am not saying this because I have remedies for this. No not at all. It’s more that I am speechless of the complexities and dangers of this world, – our only world.
It is not about me but it is about all of us, young in heart and spirit to do what life asks us to do with the predicaments of our time. This time and for all times, just to set the records straight for future generations.
The question is when we may find in our own hearts that sort of leadership re humane purpose that will see and hear the terrible truths of our existence, to be replaced by the kind of love and commitment which helps people and nations to grow with real destination, with true distinctions in our search for meaning in life, – neither enriched by hatred nor revenge. But a meaning which frees our children from the injustice inflicted by others and allows them not to build their futures on the misfortunes of those who lost their fight for justice in the agony of life.
Let us look around towards our fellow men and women to seek the bond of common faith.
This faith which can teach us neither to be indifferent nor to have illusions, but to see the world as it is and still keep hope by working and healing wounds in hearts and spirit, – by working to be brothers and sisters with a common goal to make the impossible possible.
Whilst there is again no “magic formula” to make peace, – man’s reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly impossible.
And I do believe we may do it again by being free man and taking our bullets of self-destruction to the ballet of international coöperation, – to counteract the problems of our time, to counteract it for the future of our children and their children, – but it will come at a cost we can’t foresee as yet.
Tonight once again, once again the same old discussion. The discussion being heard so many times but so little effective action being taken.
The discussion about the pending and increasing dilemma’s as how to deal with North Korea. North Korea perceived as an increasing threat, – North Korea being an increasing threat.
North Korea, with snowy mountains in the north and rugged ranges in the east with swift rivers flowing to the sea. A country ideal for growing rice and other crops, but being harsh in winter. A country with mud coated and thatched cottages being bleak, and black pigs lolled by barns, – and the digging of soils still being carried out by the kind of spade used by land working men.
Men and women, – like us, like everywhere.
The country where fishermen converge like seabirds in tiny fishing boats to catch a share for thousands of families to sustain the living conditions in an exploited land full of stricken poverty, – and malnutrition of far too many children.
A country once invaded by the Russians and denied free elections in history, with iron curtains dividing both the south and the north.
A country once invading the south with the US and Japan coming to the rescue of the south, – with finally the south and the north controlling each their own zone… Isolated now, close to the borders of China, – not only isolated in terms of trade and other good things with the outside world, – but foremost isolated as well as a country in terms of rational international diplomacy.
North Korea in 2001 still the country remaining communist, closely spied by its Government, cut off from almost all outside contacts and over and over armed.
One new young leader now with a massive war machinery behind him, in a way fragile and not mature as a person, – but coming forth from a family tradition of maximum power and ambition. Encapsulated in various inflated views about the world of North Korea and the real world.
Encapsulated by historic traditions within the army, a powerful army, – but the last powerful as well where it comes to keep up existing doctrines, which do not work.
Neither do they work for the many people who are poor in North Korea, the families with children and malnutrition being the events of the day, nor do they work for the outside world, – as North Korea is one of those nations enduring great difficulties to face the challenge to become civilised, and responsible, – in the way they deal with matters.
It is one of those countries who perceive in their isolation threats from the outside world, – perceive their family neighbour from the south as an enemy, – perceive the US as an enemy. And in all this are preparing for conflict, – being both irrational and pointless.
The facts are now that North Korea will conduct its third nuclear test soon, – that North Korea did sent a satellite into space in December and are preparing for both long range missiles eventually having the ability to carry nuclear and/or other weapons.
Reason does not seem to work as North Korea is perhaps the worst enemy of its own ideology, but reason never reached North Korea as isolation created fear and fear created the potential for major confrontation where nobody as head of any civilised state apart from China did visit North Korea in the eye of its Parliament.
It takes courage to prevent war and create dialogue. History showed on a few occasions that the actions of men are able to this, as once illustrated in the Israelite Parliament with the visit of a seemingly almost forgotten Egyptian President, who stood up for Peace being the last rationale argument to fight for.
Different circumstances though, the last, but the examples are there of men and women, people and Presidents taking action with a bigger interest at heart, proactive in style and determined to win their case, – as a lost case being the case of war goes at a cost of millions who are innocent and did not ask for it.
In the eyes of North Korea both the US and South Korea are earth enemies for reasons never being really clarified in face to face communication. Face to face communication with both modesty and strength, to reach both out and to try to diffuse inflated perceptions. Face to face communication – like eg happened in dialogues between Reagan and Gorbachev at a crucial time of the cold war right in the face of all hard-liners, – all hard liners being surprised of the break through being created at the time.
There is a situation now not being the place for making any threats, – as words lead to provocations and provocations lead to war and war leads to an instinct of willing to combat by every means.
It’s pointless, – pointless as it proved so many times in history!
Lets face it, we are not living any more in time of guns and bullets only, but the guns have been replaced by potential missiles and the bullets have been replaced by plain potential nukes, – either dirty or clean, but in both cases devastating in its implication once used by people who lead wars from behind their computer, – blind for the destruction of human life and culture
The new US Secretary of StateJohn Kerry liked engaging North Korea in the past at the time he was a Massachusetts Senator and this is the only way forward. Kerry, who replaced Hillary Rodham Clinton, joined with South Korea and Japan in calling on the North to end its “provocative behaviour” or face “significant consequences from the international community” in a statement Sunday, – but he did not make endeavours to visit North Korea as yet. Being only joint by Japan and South Korea, statements of this nature have no impact on North Korea at all!
Media presented threats do not help. “There’s a reluctance in the White House to have a deal with North Korea only to have it repudiated again,” said James Acton, an expert on nuclear non-proliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. However, – some risk is required as the risk of war and not being able to end the process once the last is implemented is a greater risk, and again we are not simply speaking about guns. North Korea will master a delivery system for nuclear weapons, and it will join Russia and China as the only non-U.S. allies with such capabilities, – besides Iran perhaps. Kim Jong Un seems to shrug off pressure from most of the international community, including North Korea’s main ally, China, and go ahead with a third test. Bruce Bechtol, a former Pentagon intelligence analyst, said it is really not up to the United States solely to alter the North’s behaviour. He said Kerry’s instructions from Obama will likely be to work closely with the South Koreans and have them set the tone.
However the US needs to go into a straight dialogue with North Korea and Kerry needs to visit and speak to the Communist Parliament as only a minor shift in perception may change events in history, the last being of greater impact when a delegation of South Korea would visit the North. The reasoning behind this is that North Korea wants to go nuclear as part of its military deterrent in its confrontation with the United States, which it describes as “the sworn enemy of the Korean people.”
Long range missiles are not aimed for South Korea but are on the long term aimed at the US and its citizens and the only way is working on a shift in perception, – a shift of perception delivered perhaps even by the US President in North Korea.
The new US Secretary of State John Kerry would be well able to visit first, and discuss with the North Korean leadership the issues of concern. Such a visit will have a major impact and may help the required shift in perception which enables parties to reconsider existing strategies. Besides this benefit it will create some element of goodwill, – noticed by both Russia and China, as the US goes out of his way to avoid confrontation. However one should be watchful for this oppressive regime
If no change afterwards it will help the US to get both China and Russia on the same page of the international agenda to stop North Korea with its dangerous endeavours, leading simply to an avoidable war, – now.
Leadership by providing a change of perception works stronger than sanctions as sanctions proved to be the cut corner strategy not having an impact on historic based perceptions in this case, – the last neither being changed by media delivered warnings nor by measures being perceived as provocative
North Korea is able to test two devices at the same time, one with plutonium and the other with uranium, both then with more technological information and political damage being provided, – apart from the single fact that they are not far away from testing a thermonuclear device more powerful than any of their earlier devices being used, and again, – again straight on dialogue and working on a shift in perception with coöperation being the aim is a short-term goal of eminent importance, – even if this is against Pentagon advise.
Politically the new regime of Kim Jong-Un is more defiant to U.N. dictates than his predecessors, – just by still pursuing his nation’s nuclear aims. Neither stronger sanctions, nor the likely discontent of both Russia and China with his behaviour, appears to change North Korea’s young leader from its military driven aim and it is clear that only straight on discussions on both dismantling and cooperation might be helpful to change the perception that the US is not not the number one enemy, – as this is an inflated perception not based on any realistic facts, – unless the facts do change by further provocations by North Korea.
This is what the military leadership in North Korea needs to understand or facing the implications if North Korea indeed is going to face a nuclear threat for the region, with growing pressure from both China, Russia and the US.
The UN proved to be of no value to North Korea.
The aim is to get both China, Russia and the US on the same page of the strategic agenda as by not achieving this shift in perception with the North Korean leadership, this nation becomes a vey unpredictable nation at the potential cost of millions of people inside North Korea and outside its borders.
Hence steps of courage being required at the personal level to change those possible dynamics in history, as history will judge both in retrospect and relentless, on what “we” did to prevent “the North Korean problem” from evolving into a worst case scenario.
“We shall live at last as free men on our soil, and die peacefully in our own homes”, – as Theodor Herzl once wrote in his book “The Jewish State“.
He wrote this almost a century ago, long before the concentration camps of Hitler, long before the increasing tensions in the Middle East, – not being aware that what he said now applies for most people living in the Middle East, the young and the old, the sick and the frail….
The tensions between Israel and the Palestinians, the tensions between some Arab nations with both each other but with Israel as well, – proved to be one of the most intractable and ever-lasting conflicts in modern history, not forgetting the history of thousands years ago. A conflict with still powerful impacts outside the boundaries of the Middle East, either on the price of oil or on the growth of global terrorism, – fended by those states getting increasing powerful.
The Middle East is both a dream and a reality, – the Middle East a frame-work for both interesting difference and evolving cultures, – but still a major threat to both international security and peace.
As one said years ago: “We have tears about Johannesburg”. This at the time of major friction in South Africa, with the risk of ripping South Africa apart and social unrest escalating into civil war. It did not happen finally as wisdom did reign by the actions of some.
Today can be said: “We have tears about the Middle East”, as neither Allah nor God, the same, – would approve any of the activities of those who hate, those who kill without reason.
Yesterday, – about 43% of US voters had the opinion that the United States was too much involved in the Middle East, some 15% did believe the US should offer broader involvement in the Middle East. Perhaps some 31% felt fine about the current level of US involvement in this part of the world. This has been the outcome of a recent Rasmussen Report with a 95% confidence level. In other words, the outcome of the Rasmussen Report was very close to give an correct idea of the American public at a time the role of the US in the Middle East takes a more central role, – as far as the confirmation hearings of the nominee Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel concerned.
Is this surprising?
Some may feel this is part of an ongoing worldwide conflict between the Islāmic world and the West, but such feeling is most questionable if we look at the Islāmic culture and it’s real traditions, – which by far the majority of people of Islāmic background is favoured. Most of the Islāmic people are hardworking people with a common faith and a common believe in family traditions and a common hope for peace on earth. Both for their children and themselves.
In essence their belief system is close to ours perhaps, where it goes to be tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, supportive to the striving and tolerant to both the strong and the weak. The tensions in the Middle East are not between regions or religions, it is not about the poor versus rich, but it is about those who hate, – and those who feed their hate with weapons of prejudice and destruction, with infiltration by night and attacking by day, – both at small and larger scale, – both with risk of massive escalation.
The current US Administration is sharing this view and it is about the last risk being mentioned that US involvement may shift to a broader involvement, – perhaps against public opinion, but with the aim to prevent an escalating situation where this is possible on reasonable terms.
Widespread coöperation is still possible, as illustrated eg by the famous Conductor and pianist Daniel Barenboim‘s with his Youth Orchestra, – joined by young talented Arabs and Israelis. This was a real life show of musical harmony in the Middle East, a show as well that behind the scenes, behind the scenes of hard work, – those young people were able to share what they have in common, to share their humanity and their dreams regardless of what their Governments say. And as so often happens, – it became clear as well how many of those people who created for a brief moment musical harmony in the Middle East, – were influenced of what was spread by the media in their own countries, the prejudice of often their own Governments, affecting the nations of many people. People who don’t want to have anything to do with a new war, – don’t want to live in ongoing fear.
Musical harmony is great, as it bind souls and people in common endeavours, – regardless colour, race, identity or belief. It binds the people good at heart and intention, – being ready to work for harmony with the tool set of various instruments and skills, under the guidance of great and skilled Conductors, – Conductors encouraging people young in heart and spirit, encouraging people who are not blindfolded as yet by the common convictions of prejudice and hatred.
That’s about music and music needs harmony.
Those who persistently fail, either on purpose or lack in effort, – lack in effort to play their own role at such an Orchestra need to be replaced as they destroy the collective effort. The last does not need force, it requires reason, – and most of those participants make place for better ones, even if it takes an argument. But it is better to loose an argument than a friend. At the Orchestra of world politics, at the orchestra of politics in the Middle East, – repetitive exercise to get the best out of our endeavours is required as well. Required the repetitive exercise to increase the need of harmony, with the obligation players being ready to use their tools and instruments to make such harmony, this harmony all around, – despite differences, despite errors, despite tears at times.
When it was decided to go to the Moon, when it was decided to go for this goal, – it was not because it was easy but because it was hard. It was not because it was cheap but it was expensive and worthwhile to explore the wonders of nature, and to bring out the best of us in a common endeavour where everybody has it’s own role, – a role to bring those who were nominated and trained, – to visit that part of the universe not being explored as yet.
And yet, the universe of peace and harmony has never been explored that much, – as what music is able to do in harmony, as what we can in our efforts to explore the moon and all the others, – as what we are able to do in science and technology.
It is nearly as what Isaiah not literally once said almost 3000 years ago, – that the “prostitutes” do not only represent Rome, but that they represent all the corrupt powers, the evil powers and authorities of every age and every generation, powers still having their share in evil and massacres, – in immorality and abuse.
The Middle East is possibly the most dramatic scene of potential major violence, the most dramatic scene of emotions neither being controlled nor realistic. Ongoing conflict not being resolved, – as so many players are due to be replaced, as so many Governments are due to work through change in the spirit of hope and challenge to get the best out of our human endeavours.
Israel, some days ago, did sent warplanes into Syria with widespread condemnation of both Syria, Hezbollah and Iran, condemnation from Russia as well. Iran warned last week via Abdollahian that Iran would consider any attack on Syria as an attack on Iran itself.
Whilst world leaders try to seek aid for Syrians being the victims of their brutal regime, Israel’s warplanes did hit a convoy with surface-to-air missiles, likely Russian-made missile parts potentially being used in a possible pending attack on Israel. Those weapons were intended to be provided to Hezbollah in Lebanon, supported by Syria and Iran.
We know the Assad’s regime is failing after nearly two years of fending off the ongoing and justified rebellion, and Hezbollah probably wants to take hold of various weapons before the al-Assad regime gets crushed, – again supported by Syria when everything is lost. The last thing then to do is to divert the attention by supplying even chemical material to equip some of the Hezbollah Scud missiles. It is not surprising that Iran is responding the way it does, turning a blind eye to the violence inflicted by the Syrian authorities on its own people, but supporting Hezbollah inflicted violence, – providing a reason to retaliate if Israel would hit back.
Both White House spokesman Jay Carney and Victoria Nuland from the US State Department refused to comment on the Wednesday airstrike, with Israel not having much to comment either.
It looks like a simple incident but whilst the Syrian authorities are still entertaining their cruel efforts to hold on power with all means they have to kill, regardless age and gender, – the UN needs now to respond as requested by Syria and other nations, whilst Israel only tries and tried to prevent worse scenario’s as potentially being prepared.
Iran Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said that Israel’s attack was “in line with the West’s policies of undermining the victories of the Syrian Government.”, with the ambassador for Syria in Lebanon saying that Syria reserves the right to a “surprise retaliation” against Israel .
Victories of the Syrian Government?
It shows how the dynamics are. It shows the evil in some existing systems not being overruled by the people younger in generation, avoiding conflict and war. Systems of evil being allowed at the Orchestra of world politics to kill eg it’s own citizens at massive scale, not in the name of Allah, – but in the name of corruption and holding on too brutal power. Syria eg again is a prime example, apart from a few other countries.
This is the reason that the US needs to keep a very close eye on the dangerous dynamics in the Middle East, – as those dynamics changing in a war machine of preparation affect us all once they escalate.
Neither music nor Conductors can change this, but the power of people and real leaders may change this when the efforts are there, – and the wind has been taken away from the sails of those who hate, those who kill regardless gender or age.
What happens here has neither to do with the authenticity of the Islam culture nor with a worldwide conflict between those who represent the West and those who have an Islāmic background. It’s the conflict between barbaric or evil elements and culture, the conflict between evil and civilisation. It’s about the insight that the travel of prejudice, narrow-mindedness and bigotry is fatal
Like the famous Conductor and pianist Daniel Barenboim’s Youth Orchestra showed the coöperation between young Arabs and Israelis, who found common ground in the way we are as a people, – it’s the next generation of youngsters perhaps who may offer peace and coöperation in the Middle East, after all the evil offending participants have been taken away from the political arena of the Middle East.
Hence wisdom and restraint being required until this happens, but the day will come, – and we are all waiting for this.
It is like Gandhi once wrote: “Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding.”
The time may come that war is asking us what we were doing all the time before it started, – and this is the reason that US role in the Middle East is vital until a new generation of peace makers takes over. Whilst wisdom is a matter of reflection, long and hard before we act, – it is Israel who failed to withdraw from the West Bank, Hamas and Hezbollah continuing to mount attacks on Israeli’s citizens leading to military responses by Israel. All this serves fuelling the hatred against Israel with the USA being Israel’s major supporter, but the Middle East dynamics support as well the murderous activities of groups like al- Qaeda. It supports as well other evil systems in the Middle East, – and hatred seems to be the irrational engine of all activities of violence.
It seems hatred is the longest lasting pleasure in the Middle East, creative in it’s dynamic’s but creative as well as to the extinction of values and human rights, – hence our support for those youngsters turning away from the “masters” of hate, working on the harmony among people from all different backgrounds, – like some may find in the harmonies of music. Those people are the people who represent somehow the will of both God and Allah, – the same. And during their endeavours of tuning their instruments and playing together, – they will meet each other from heart to heart and work out the reason for which they were created, …regardless the settlements, the military, the defeat, and the tears at times.
Meanwhile the US needs to play its role. Trying to enforce peace in the mindset of people not ready for it is like painting on a wet wall. It does not help. Vision and mission to create an enduring peace and an enduring cooperation requires leadership receptive for the sentiments of all parties, – besides deep trustworthiness. We are not there as yet. We may not do it in this generation and even not perhaps in the next generation.
The main emphasis when people are not ready to talk and get a real understanding from where they are coming from is to try and avoid conflict and balance the powers as good as possible.
Israel is entitled to defend itself against eminent significant threats.
America’s role in the Middle East is an important one with an adequate US Administration now being place, as through reasoning and diplomatic actions with the right mind and skill set, – to give diversity and hopefully “non violence” a place. trustworthiness in any endeavours may give the cement to keep a fragile peace the least, ..and the last is more important than no peace at all. Whilst the US has obviously an important and influential role, – it’s not only the responsibility of the US as there is something like a “global responsibility” as well. A responsibility of nations being prepared, nations being able, – to take this supportive role on board.
Peace in the Middle East is a process of many little positive actions, providing forums where people can meet face to face to dissolve hatred and hardline policies. The US and others perhaps can only be the facilitator, – as when nothing changes in the heart and mindset of people, nothing will change in the world of the Middle East.
Finally, – history shows that the root of most evils is hatred. The art of real leadership when the heat is going up, amidst the dynamics of hatred, – is to try to diffuse the last in the most reasonable acts to prevent this hatred flowing into the most irreversible deeds of evil. Whilst this is not always possible, those acts are justified. Those acts like straight on meetings with enemies or foes need both talent and skill, besides foremost great compassionate and deep rooted courage. The courage not to refrain from encouraging both opponents or foes to renewal and change, – not to refrain from trying to rejuvenate responsible and reasonable thinking. And if possible, not to refrain from trying to prevent hardening existing perceptions, – as perceptions may soften in humble face to face meetings perhaps.
This is what seems to be required in the Middle East,
to prevent the tears of future generations….
The point is, – we either die together or we live together!
“Courage is the discovery that you may not win, and trying when you know you can lose”
…We thought about it and we spoke about it for many years already and It has gone through our minds, perhaps someway for ages.
Not for everybody but for some.
Often we did see the examples in day to day life and we admired them wishing it could be our own, – less often we did read about it, in the papers or in some books perhaps, – besides from what we were able to see on TV, in documentaries or on DVD‘s
Do you remember the question going through your heart and mind as well?
Did we fail at times that we were running low and progress was slow, did we fail at the times we forgot about it as things seemed well, and there was perhaps no reason to ask again, – or to raise again the issue of character and courage?
We like to be of good character or want to be seen as such. We like to have courage and faith but there are moments we fail in both courage and good character. Not that those incidents give a fair assessment on the total of our actions, – but simply the fact is that we are never always good in character, or always good in showing courage.
Is this an “open door”?
Yes, – it is, as trying to get to the bottom of the question of character and courage a fair assessment is required.
We like to be true to ourselves as well, but not always are we true to our real self. As I said once, freedom and choice are indivisible and need to be earned and conquered each day,each week and each month, – and the sum of those efforts may work in favour of both our character and our courage. Both courage and character are indivisible as well, – like so many things are related or interrelated.
Whilst the secret of happiness is perhaps freedom, using the gift of choice the greatest potential, – the secret of freedom is courage. The last implying being able to make the right choice under any circumstances.
A matter of character as well.
For sure any of us will have our weak moments as long as we raise when the storm sets in, – even when the storm imposes a strain or challenge on our position or principles, – when it imposes a risk for ourselves, our future and other things perhaps. When the storm comes the leaves may fly away as long as the tree stands firm, and when the storm settles, like so many storms, – the tree may start a new season as no storm will leave nature unmoved. It’s part of life, – it depends how we are grounded, being firm in our convictions or weak in our principles.
There are many small actions of character and courage, often shown when “we feel like it” or were “in the frame of mind” to do so.
Those actions are neither dramatic or huge as the actions of those leaders who at the right frame of mind, at both the right place and the right time in history, were able to turn events in favour of greater change for humanity, – nor are they as dramatic as the courage of the last moments when we are facing death.
Speaking about the very last, – this crossed my mind when a young woman in her 40ties got cancer. Her family around her and her older sister were there when her time came. They had their memories, laughter and sadness, but when she died it could be seen that she went back to her own Creator. She took her death with peace as she knew she went back where we all came from, despite the agony and pain at times. When this happens in your family, losing loved ones at young age, – you realise there are only a few things in life which really matter. It’s a small thing only to have been able in life to enjoy the sun, a small thing to have lived light in the spring, – to have both loved and done when we “leave our footprints on the sands of time.” And even those footprints will be wiped away as time evolves and little will be remembered, unless we showed both great love and courage. In this it’s all about the courage to love , the courage to live and the courage to leave a legacy, – besides the courage to face death when the last is facing us.
So courage again, in general, is important, – but the courage to love as well, the compassion of doing the things being both right and good at every point of testing. The courage to live life in such away as if every day could be the last one. This takes besides having a mental alertness to have courage, both in the simple things but in particular at times of adversity, at times meeting the facts of life, at times when it is required to go straight at things without dodging them. It means as well we have to pick up or seize the vital issue in a complex matter, without getting wounded by running away from it.
Long before he became US President, John F Kennedy did write a book about “Profiles in Courage“. A study of men in the historical and political arena of the US where they stood firm on their principles at times of challenge in either the US Senate or the House of Representatives (apart from some other area’s), – at times when crucial decisions were due to be made and the balance between conscious and public opinion or “public favour” were tense, at times when both the public and colleagues were hostile.
Courage is not about the past, it is about the future, – and therefore the examples of courage are so important.
So many examples!
The soldiers who save their mates at the battlefield at risk for their own lives, the people fighting for human rights and going into areas and questioning the areas of controversy at risk for their lives, the courage to stand up when it is required for either a good cause or in a speech when the real issues need to be challenged. But also the people who stand out to help those at times of disaster, – bushfires, massive flooding and earthquakes etc, – all often not without risk for own life.
The “New Frontiers” of Kennedy were neither East nor West, neither South nor North, – but in his own time as US President where he fronted the facts as they were. At the level of President Obama we find an untroubled spirit who tends to look at things in the face as how he meet them, and know them for what they are, – dealing with them at the right time and place.
Courage, – the combination of bravery at times, integrity more at times, – based on principles. And life is the arena where we are tested on those virtues, each of us at times under excessive pressure, rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation and constant in praying, – for those who pray within the silence of our Creator.
This is one of the dimensions of courage.
As Bob Greene once said: “You need to know what life you want (as well as what life you don’t want), then you have to muster up the will and the drive to go after it.”
This is courage as well.
Courage is like a diamond, “unbreakable”, with a hardness and the sort of light dispensing, – allowing to show people the various dimension of the light it reflects. As a gemstone it is a highly valued commodity, but courage in human life is an essential commodity, – not as highly traded perhaps but being graded as the one and only virtue at each testing point in life’s endeavours.
As the Roman poet Horace once wrote more than 2000 years ago: “Tomorrow we take our course once more over the mighty seas.”
It takes courage to do this, it takes courage to be the housewife with 4 children and going every day over the mighty seas of friction and care for loved ones, when the income is low and the prices are high.
Courage is “grace under pressure” as Ernest Hemingway once said, but it takes courage to raise the sails if the winds of grace are blowing, – and they don’t blow every day. At times it is easier said than done when the oil of daily life is going through our troubled sea of thoughts, as life may face some of us this way, – preventing to keep our mind smooth and equable.
Tough times can come when we are at our weakest point, and raising up to be the “unbreakable diamond” we want to be may arise at the worst possible times, as we may be discouraged as human beings as due to ongoing misery, – as due to staring at the water without being able to cross the sea.
Blessed are those who keep our hopes up in those circumstances.
The circumstances when we can’t get into the mountain ranges as due to the desert where human feet can’t go, – as due to the ends of unknown seas when neither wind nor sails are the tools we normally use to find direction. Human life has those circumstances where there is neither boat nor sails, neither the morning breeze at a blue ocean nor the sight of a destiny.
Perhaps it was once there, but for some it has gone from their sight, – those being depressed under the most horrendous circumstances of both poverty and abuse, – deprived from education and diminished in self-destructive perceptions.
That’s life, – a mixture of both tragedy and triumph, both with implications and expectations, both with dangers and failures all around.
But still, as once the 3rd US President said: “One man with courage is a majority.”
From that point it is true that the courage of “one man standing up for an ideal” as Robert Kennedy once said, standing up to improve the lot of others, others who suffer the implications of injustice, – is an act of courage as well.
The courage of helping those with neither hope nor courage. The courage to send forth the implications of peace, against oppression and resistance. The courage to build up a current in which people can raise their tiny sails on restless boats, – to cross the barriers and waters they have to cross to build a life for their own, both with value and dignity.
“The world is a lost place” as some would say, – however not for those who judge themselves on the contributions they have to make, and the goals they have to shape, – to improve the lot of others.
And then when we have to face death ourselves as part of an eternal cycle, – the question is not how much money we made. The question is whether we tried “to love our neighbour as ourselves” and whether we made a genuine effort to improve the lot of those who really needed this.
Indeed, when we are going back from where we came, the only one Creator, – our time has gone, our attitude has gone, both our joy and abundance have gone, – but what stays in the twilight of memory, in the actions of people we had an impact on, is whether our private chart during our discovery on both the earth and the sea did contain the light of spring: that we have loved and done, that have done and loved.
This is what takes courage, – courage in sustained ways, but also the courage of the diamond with that single strong reflection which holds everything together, – by sharing it freely from our heart and spirit, in whatever life asks us to do in all those things we need to do.
This is a question of courage and character, a question of encouragement or discouragement, – the question or ask to be a sparkling light as we have the privilege of a free choice to be this way.
This is what matters most, the question of character and courage, – the matter of grace under pressure and the ability to make the right distinctions when the heat is on, – all this with wisdom and perseverance.
“We need to find the courage to say NO to the things and people that are not serving us if we want to rediscover ourselves and live our lives with authenticity.”
—Barbara de Angelis
SOME PEOPLE ASKED me in which way they could serve in the best possible way, – and I smiled because they asked me.
For those who don’t know, I serve my patients from a comfortable position being paid as a Family Physician in Australia. However I love what I do and look with gratitude on the things I received and still receive, – knowing that in all of this I am dependent on the work many people did before I was born, and during the time of my life until the present.
The best answer on the question as how to serve in the best possible ways can be given by those who serve or served best.
Those who went out in any kind of wilderness, – lacking money and recourses and build up their heartfelt dreams.
There are different ways of serving.
I have neither vivid memory on my school friend who died to early at the age of 6 as due to childhood cancer, nor do I remember his face, – but he “served” me in the way he died with a peace you don’t often see.
Besides this he left me with one of Bach‘s most beautiful organ plays, played by Albert Schweitzer. This left me at an early place in life with a memory on something different from life itself. I am still grateful that this old school friend passed my way, not because of what he was, – but of what he was able to “plant” without knowing it.
Sometimes, many years later, we do realise. In a way this is a secret of a kind we need to cherish, not by speaking about it when we do realise, but by allowing it to grow. So are human encounters at times of a nature we better not speak about, but our “awareness” is enough on its own and as such we respect life as it is without touching it. On other occasions we do good to show our gratitude at least ten times more than we tend to do.
There are 100 billionaires all over the world who could wipe out hunger with little more contribution. The difference between rich and poor is getting bigger and bigger. Some of them indeed do contribute but they are not the people who work in the front line against poverty, against war and against various abuses of human rights. If people ask me as how to serve, I tend to say to look at those people who do and find the answer in your own heart.
We are limited perhaps in our potential as due to nature and living conditions but there is neither limit nor ceiling to our potential to love and work our imagination the desired direction in our own circumstances.
It is as Albert Schweitzer once wrote about his work in Lambarena less then 100 years ago, – that anybody can create his or her’s own Lambarena. An affirmation only to illustrate that everyone can create his or her’s domain of care, and serve as such. Those who care do serve and the options are endless. Many examples are not seen by the world or valued for what they are.
Child soldiers who lost their innocence at an age far too young. Many of them did do terrible things but some of them reacted amazingly well by saving lives. People who fight the cruelty in central Africa, – within the domain of strong discomfort but perhaps with peace at heart. People who reach out without fame or name, saving friends and family amidst war.
Fire- fighters entering houses with people, children, at risk to be burned, and they do this at risk for their own life. People providing aid in Syria now. Fathers and mothers protecting their children in the Congo, without caring for themselves anymore. People providing polio vaccinations in Pakistan despite Taliban death threats. Journalists working at the forefront of all those things to bring the news, at risk of their own life.
Human encounters are essential before being able to serve as the memory of some people may enlarge what we are able to do.
And in our memory those people deserve honour.
The question as how to serve best is an interesting question, but much depends on the situation where you are and on both your desires and imagination, besides the level of love you feel for those desires.
Sometimes people may be put in a situation where they have no other choice than to serve as staying on the side line would be betrayal of one’s own conscience. Sometimes people go out and meet those situations by
Again it’s hard to say.
One thing is sure, we can’t wait for the moment everything and everything is ready because in such case we are not likely to begin to serve or reach out.
The other thing is true as well, – true that if we want to work on a dream, to build a ship, – that it is no point to drum up the people to collect the wood and other material. That there is no point to give them tasks of the work due to be done. Working this way is an error of judgement, as the starting point is to help people see what you see, and teach them the ways to get the dream into a reality, – to help them to buy into the endeavour themselves, and then it’s time to collect the wood and all the other things.
Faith is to believe the things you don’t see, rewarded at times by seeing the things you believe. Time might seem to be a limiting factor but not where it comes to the frequency of love. Love is the prime substance of both our life and nature, the prime substance of both earth and heaven. Without this love there would be neither cosmos nor sun, neither earth nor life.
“For everything there is a time and place”, – so to say.
The other thing being true is that you don’t travel as you think, but you think as you travel. Neither is it true that as you attract you do love, – but as you love you do attract. True love and real care are indispensable and we don’t always touch what is beautiful, neither do we lose the opportunity to see anything which is beautiful, – whether it is a fair face or a plant, a fair sky or a dark cloud. We absorb the seeds in our own soul and this gives life, – and may give direction as where to go, as alert we need to be. One spark of fire may light ourselves and from that fire we may light the world. None of us is too small to serve and freedom can be gained by giving more of ourselves.
Real love may reach the frequency of “the universe”, the last which may transform us as a transitional “human-being”, – through the awesome grace of God.