ArticlesBlogs

I listened to a story on National Public Radio on the 7th June 2008. It was a moving story told by a woman whose mother had dedicated and even risked her life to give medical guidance and service to pregnant women in Iran sometime during the sixties and seventies. According to her daughter this wonderful person lived her entire adult life in Iran, she married and Iranian doctor and raised a family while continuing to render medical advise and service to women.

Following her death the Iranian authorities began looking for a way to memorialize this beloved member of their community, and they found a historic and wonderful solution, they named a mountain after her “Mount Hellen.” This monument has remained unchanged to this day and it begs an important question. Is it true to say that within the hearts and souls of the Iranian people there is a genuine desire for peace and friendship with their neighbors and indeed with America?

It would seem to me that Mount Hellen stands as a Beacon that could guide us to peace and harmony; however the road could be rocky and difficult and we will need leadership with a genuine desire for peace, and the nimbleness of intellect to achieve it, what do you think?

I have spent many years in a fruitless search for a formula that would achieve universal peace. This is not to say that any individual or group could ever implement such a formula. I believe that I am a part of a silent but ever increasing majority that yearns for the quiet and comfort of a world at peace. We are beginning to face the reality that these yearnings are merely dreams that are unlikely to come true in our lifetime. However, there is a glimmering of hope at the end of this long and dreadful tunnel.

I will cite a few examples where peace was achieved, not at the point of a gun but around a conference table. In the 1970’s an obscure little country called Guyana (Former British Guyana) became involved in political conflict over territory with Venezuela who was much larger and well armed. Rhetoric was flying fast and furious across the airways and from both directions and troops were building up on both sides of the border. The situation worsened when sporadic fire was exchanged across the Barima River and war appeared to be eminent and inevitable. Doctor Eric Williams was at that time the Prime Minister of the twin Islands of Trinidad and Tobago and his timely intervention, which was supported by the Regional powers of America and England, prevented the catastrophe. An agreement called the “protocol of Port of Spain,” guaranteed peace between the antagonists for thirty years. The time has come and passed, and peace prevails between Guyana and Venezuela.

We must move on and make a brief stop in Yugoslavia and the ethnic cleansing orchestrated by a vicious and stubborn Dictator Malosavich. He ignored stern warnings from America and the rest of the NATO alliance and military intervention was necessary to stop the carnage. Malosavich was eventually arrested and put on trial at the international court for crimes against humanity but he managed to die of a heart attack before facing the justice and outrage of the civilized world. My point, military intervention to achieve peace and prevent the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children is acceptable.

The Christians and Catholics of the Republic of Ireland were at war for many decades. The British were caught in the middle and all attempts to broker a peace were unsuccessful. In the meanwhile mayhem prevailed as the apposing sides rained death and destruction on the innocent men, women, and children of Belfast and the surrounding areas. A noted American politician of Irish decent visited the country and brokered a peace agreement that remains intact to this day, and I will add that following the cessation of hostilities Ireland has become a show piece of peace and prosperity.

The date is June 21st 2008 and the news is not good. The Israelis have stated that they will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran, and war exercises were conducted by the Israelis as recently as June 16th/17th. Is it too late to reach an agreement and prevent another war 1? I hope not. Did I mention that Costa Rica does not have an army?

I will conclude by reminding you that trillions of dollars and millions of lives have been expended in pursuit of conflict within the last one hundred years. We must think of what we could have achieved if our human and material resources had been put to work for the benefit of mankind instead of war, war, and more war.

Bernard Steele is a veteran law enforcement officer (operational and administrative), now retired. He was the former chief security officer of the National Banking System of Guyana S.A. To learn about his new book visit Death in Small Doses.

Spread all over the world

Powered by Bookmarkify™

No Comments Yet »

Propaganda (noun): publicity intended to persuade or convince people.

It is imperative that you see in propaganda the probabilities and possibilities. I forewarn you, even if you do wake up – if you choose to heed my propaganda – the only thing you will gain is awareness. You will gain further knowledge of and for yourself. You will gain knowledge of the truths that have been hidden from you.

You will gain if you choose to consider this plethora of speculations and move on to the next level to answer the questions I will plant in your head. You will gain if you choose to research further for self-knowledge. You will gain knowledge the conspirators do not wish you to have or strive toward, for your knowledge diminishes their stronghold over you.

Choose your pill wisely: remain the pawns in a never-ending game, or see just how far the rabbit hole goes?

I speak of a society that questions propaganda, that questions mass speculation, that questions rhetoric. I speak of a society that questions the media’s motivation and agenda, that questions the political processes of a governing body from the top of the structural pyramid to the bottom, that questions and evaluates itself and its place in this complex world. I speak of a society unplugged from a forged world as intricate as the Matrix.

In a world managed by sentinels, which are the politicians? The agents are within the National Security Agency, Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigations, Pentagon, Secret Service, Homeland Security, and the Special Cavalry Services. All of this is manned by the architect, the political official who claimed the seat in the White House: the President of the United States. That cloaked conspirator who hovers above us all is our Agent Smith, the viral element in our society and in our world. I am your self-proclaimed Neo in this soap opera.

We exist in a forged world for which the average man, woman, and child play a vital role: to continue the succession of this world, and to keep in power those who man it. The world in which we live needs us just as much as we need it. This world and its processes wouldn’t be if no one existed upon it to do the controlling. The average man needs this strategic structure. We crave this terrain, this oppression, this hovering dominance.

I cannot take you into pinpointed details, for I do not have pinpointed details. My source will not allow me to be privy to those facts. He, she, or it has informed me that there are plenty of other authors from whom you can choose, American and international, who have attempted to do so in their controversial publications. My words are simply speculation fueled by decades upon decades of ingenious corruption, of which I have taken note. My words are meant to cause you to question your strategically conditioned belief systems and to open your minds to the probabilities and possibilities of your world, of your country, and of the society in which you live.

The aforesaid authors attempt to pinpoint truths of corruption in their literature, but the fact of the matter is that they are no different from me. It is all still speculation. A conspiracy is somewhat like a corporation. It is a fortified union fueled by people. You see, the fundamental principles of a corporation in any society are based on the mass manipulation and hidden control it has over its consumers, whom these corporations supposedly serve. In actuality, this union controls the consumer, keeping itself above the consumer at all times. This is why corporations spare no expense in a marketing campaign.

The same can be said for political campaigns – the Presidential campaign, for example. Collective manipulation is not cheap. The price, if executed properly, will be paid by voters through campaign contributions. Money talks. With a conspiracy, mass manipulation and hidden control are fundamental. Conspirators control the media, Hollywood, literature, and more, focusing us on so many distractions that we miss the truths right in front of us. We can’t see through the propaganda.

The conspirator’s coup survives primarily by dumbing down the masses. Think about it. Our government, its political processes, and its political agenda continue to stay afloat because conspirators keep Americans in their pockets. Think about it. Lives that once required average America one job to support now demand two to three jobs. This triples the taxes forked over to our government. These taxes initially caused average America to seek extra work in the first place. Here is the primary means of controlling people, but it remains only a platform for mass manipulation and hidden control.

Think about it. When the average American is tired out financially, physically, and psychologically, what’s left is an American so absorbed in his or her own fundamental survival that little attention remains for anything else. Everyday survival is top priority, until we are slapped in the face with the reality that the people we blindly voted into office are pissing on the world in which we live.

Your decisions are not your own, my fellow Americans. Strategic unknown beings dictate what you will do, what you will say, and how you will live. Think about it. When a politician is plastered on television, going on and on about subjects that fit into our current hopes and dreams, this politician gets our attention.

With the time constraints placed on us by the forged society in which we live, we are prone to “believe the hype.” A politician speaks on fewer taxes, better jobs, increased pay, a secure economy, better health benefits, homeland security, recession prevention, government refunds. So we flock to this politician. We flock like a pack of seagulls bearing down on a fallen potato chip. We are lured to baited hook because we do not know a single truth about this politician. We know nothing but what we have been told, because we are too swamped with the full-time job of survival to think about researching. Politicians know exactly which of our buttons to push when competing to govern us. Conspirators strategically plot and project that the average American will be too exhausted to question anything.

Hey, America, I could go on and on about mass manipulation and hidden control, but I feel it superfluous, for it is never-ending. In addition, I am somewhat biased. I, too, am a victim of this control. We all are, as I hope you understand.

Pragmatic author A.K. Kuykendall has a passion for writing conspiracy, espionage, horror, and suspense literature that blends the concepts of fact and fiction. For more information on his projects, visit The Writer of Books or, to email the author directly for Q&A on this article, write to chooseyourpill@thewriterofbooks.com.

Spread all over the world

Powered by Bookmarkify™

No Comments Yet »

Did you know that unaffiliated voters are the fastest-growing voting bloc in America? In more than a few states, independents now outnumber both Republicans and Democrats, creating a huge swing vote that could determine the outcome of this year’s election.

Ross Perot ran the most successful independent campaign for president in U.S. history sixteen years ago. During his 1992 campaign, Perot was invited to participate in the televised presidential debates watched by almost 100 million people. On election day, he received nearly 20 million votes.

The major political parties were determined not to let this happen again. Before the 1996 election, the Republican/Democrat-controlled Commission on Presidential Debates concocted requirements to keep both independent and alternative party candidates out of the debates. As a result, Perot received less than 9 million votes that year.

How desperate were the established parties to prevent access to the debates and media by alternative party candidates and their supporters? One answer is shown in the following excerpt from my book, “The Perot Legacy: A New Political Path.”

Donna Donovan, the national Reform Party communications chair, explained:

“When Ross Perot was excluded from the Presidential Debates, his Connecticut supporters decided to stage a ‘Demonstration for Democracy’ in Hartford, the state capital, while one of the three debates was taking place on October 6, 1996. Our goal was to create a big enough media event to bring attention to the stranglehold that the two major parties and their accomplice, the bipartisan Debate Commission, maintained on the debates….We planned to march through the city to the park a block from Bushnell Theatre where the debate was taking place….That night, nearly 700 people…converged on the park…where we encountered police, who immediately herded us into a ‘corral’ constructed of a snow fence in the center of the park….They marched in military formation, eventually surrounding us completely….

“Police officers on horseback formed another ring around the riot squad. Then, unbelievably, National Guard forces arrived with tanks and took their places in the street around the park…

“A freelance cameraman was shooting footage for C-SPAN, but days later we were told it was too dark to use. And what about the rest of the media? … We later heard from some that police and other security told them there was no one in the park, and since the direct-access streets were closed off, they assumed it was true.”

Because of a charismatic leader with access to millions of dollars, the presidential campaign of Ross Perot and the newly created Reform Party were perceived by the major party leaders as a threat to their established two-party system. Rather than viewing this event as an exercise in democracy and an expansion of choice, the party operatives did all they could to prevent the establishment of a third option.

Some of the other attempts to exterminate the Reform Party’s influence included misuse of ballot access laws, attempts to gain control of any federal election funds available to the Reform Party after the 1996 presidential election, and the use of a politicized judicial system.

In spite of it all:

* The Reform Party still survives today.

* A new issues organization (ICAN—Independent Citizen Action Network) is being established.

* The number of independent voters in the United States continues to grow dramatically.

* A tell-all book has now been published so that more people will know the facts, and can learn from our na

Spread all over the world

Powered by Bookmarkify™

No Comments Yet »

It’s never easy following through on an electoral pledge, and if any politician knows how difficult it is, then it must be the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy.

So far he has failed miserably on last year’s major presidential campaign promise to increase the purchasing power of the average man and woman on the street here in France and kick-start the sluggish economy he inherited.

But Hallelujah on Monday a minor miracle happened, when his plans to overhaul the French constitution - another key electoral promise - received the parliamentary seal of approval from the country’s elected representatives.

Now this is far from being the stuff to whet the appetite of most readers, but bear with it for a moment because there’s plenty of substance in what happened in the run up to the vote, and the far-reaching consequences for French politics.

Sarkozy’s “victory” was not one easily gained. There had been weeks of arguing, back-room negotiations and comprises as the reform package passed separately through both chambers of parliament, the National Assembly and the Senate.

But for any constitutional changes to be made in France, both had to meet in a joint session in the sumptuous setting of the chateau of Versailles, and a three-fifths majority of votes cast were required for the reforms to be endorsed.

Right up until the last moment the vote was too close to call. The opposition Socialist party had promised to vote “no” and there were even some members of the governing centre-right Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (Union for a Popular Movement, UMP) who were less than happy with the proposed reforms.

In the end though, the bill got the backing of 539 parliamentarians - just one more than the three-fifths necessary - with only one high profile Socialist, Jack Lang, breaking ranks and voting in favour.

Lang’s “defection” was perhaps not too much of a surprise as he had served as vice president on the commission charged with proposing many of the reforms. But his decision is likely to have made him even more persona non grata among the Socialist party faithful than he already is.

So what of those reforms - said to amount to the biggest shake-up of the Fifth Republic’s constitution since it was first introduced by Charles de Gaulle back in 1958?

Well they include changes to make the president more accountable to a parliament. It’ll be able to veto some presidential appointments and the government will be forced to seek parliamentary approval for a military operation (abroad) lasting longer than six months.

The number of terms a president can serve will be limited to two (periods of five years) and the process of allowing national votes or referenda on issues will also be possible if the requisite number of signatures are collected and it has political backing.

So in a very real sense the changes can be, and have been interpreted by many, as at the very least boosting the powers of parliament. Indeed a weekend opinion poll before the crucial vote showed that almost 70 per cent of the French questioned supported the changes.

But while many - and in particular Sarkozy himself of course - are claiming the vote to reflect a “victory for French democracy”, critics and in particular the Socialist party claim that the reforms will further weaken the role of the prime minister - already appointed and dismissed at the head of state’s discretion.

They fear in particular that the most controversial of the reforms included in the package - allowing the president to make an annual state address directly to parliament along the lines of the US president’s state of the nation speech.- will blur the boundaries between the executive and legislative arms of government.

The separation of powers has been an essential part of French politics since 1873 and the president has been banned from appearing in person before the National Assembly or the Senate.

Opponents, and in particular the Socialist party, also claim that the reforms will help create a de facto “monocracy” in which the system of government will be reduced to virtually just one person - the president.

But the stance of the Socialist party itself hasn’t been without its own critics even among parts of the media that would ordinarily give the party its backing.

The left-of-centre national daily Lib

Spread all over the world

Powered by Bookmarkify™

No Comments Yet »

Illegal Immigration… lack of health care for millions of Americans… an enormous trade deficit… a bottomless government debt… outsourcing of American jobs… elected representatives who don’t listen to the people who put them in office and pay their salaries.

These issues represent just a few of the serious problems we face today. What can we do about it? We can elect leaders who will listen to the American people and make the changes we need to solve the problems.

Are the candidates the Democrats and Republicans are giving us willing and able to solve these problems? NO.

Barack Obama and John McCain have held public office and allowed these problems to fester and worsen over the last 15 years. These major party candidates keep talking change. Why should we believe that any of them would suddenly change their stripes and work for change? It’s time for new blood and a different approach. We need a third choice and a new political path.

What if a third party or independent politician surfaced with real answers to America’s problems and the courage to take on the political establishment? It’s happened before -– from John Anderson to Ross Perot — and it could happen again.

Although overshadowed by Obama and McCain, both Libertarian Bob Barr and independent candidate Ralph Nader are making a determined run for the presidency this year.

It’s time for the American people to make their voices heard. It’s time for the people to reclaim their right to direct involvement in the governing of the United States of America.

That can only happen through an independent candidate for president, a new political party, or a new organization that represents the views of the majority of Americans and fights to have these views heard and enacted into law.

Americans must realize that the two-party system is hurting America. Why should the Democrats and Republicans have a stranglehold over U.S. politics?

To get our country back on the right track, we need to:

* Make sure every change and law is good for our country and all of its citizens.

* Pass a term limits law for every elected office. That way, new people will get the chance to serve our country and then return to private life and live under the laws they helped to enact. That’s what our founding fathers envisioned.

* Vote in EVERY election and not become discouraged and apathetic. If you don’t participate, you don’t deserve to be listened to when you complain about the direction of our country.

* Remember the words of Thomas Jefferson, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. If you expect people to be ignorant and free, you expect what never was and never will be.”

It’s time to remember our duty to ourselves and our country. Learn all you can about the people running for president in 2008. Get up off the couch and participate in our political process. If we all do that — and only if we all do that -– we can make a difference.

What are you waiting for? In this election year, you can change the future…now.

What

Spread all over the world

Powered by Bookmarkify™

No Comments Yet »