Lieutenant Obama, the NSA, and the Global Coup d'Etat

"I will provide our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our constitution and our freedom. That means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens; no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime; no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war; no more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. It is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists" - Candidate Barack Obama (1st August 2007)

"Funny that all of Nixon's crimes - anonymous campaign cash, wiretapping, undeclared wars - are all legal now. Discuss." -Bill Maher tweet (12th June 2013)

Noam Chomsky once famously said: "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." This lively debate within the corporate-owned mainstream media (MSM) on the NSA scandal is still ongoing, rekindled yesterday with a surprise Q&A session with Edward Snowden hosted by The Guardian online news site. With further NSA disclosures promised by Glenn Greenwald, the debate is likely to dominate front pages for the foreseeable future.

Fortuitous it is that the dissemination of these leaks requires such painstaking efforts from so many journalists, headed and guided by Mr. Greenwald himself, because it takes time; if all the information was dumped in one blockbusting scoop, not only would information overload numb the shock of each individual secret program that burrows ever more deeply into the privacy of every member of the human race, but the public would soon forget it - as soon as Kate Middleton has her baby in July, and most likely before then. This drip-drip-drip disclosure greatly serves the public interest, allowing each element to be properly digested, and is the worst nightmare of authoritarian officials and their myriad apologists.

Public figures and the MSM as a whole have already branded Snowden a traitor, smeared him as a spy, shed distracting light on his youth, and - predictably - run pictures of his attractive girlfriend.

Straight from the propaganda playbook: distract from the key issue with personal smears and sensationalism.

Glenn Greenwald has not escaped the backlash. Marvel here at torture apologist Marc Thiessen - a former speechwriter for George W Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and columnist (since March 2010) for The Washington Post - writing that Greenwald broke the law by publishing these leaks and therefore offering support for Rep. Peter King's assertion that Greenwald should be arrested.

First, given Mr. Thiessen's support for torture, an illegal and - more importantly - immoral action that is condemned by neurobiologists as wholly unreliable, we should not take his opinions seriously. Second, one wonders what else Mr. Thiessen believes governments should be permitted to do in the name of 'national security', no matter how illegal and secretive, if he thinks journalists - members of the adversarial press - should be locked up for doing their job, even after going to extraordinary lengths - with many other journalists - to ensure only information in the public interest is released. Third, as any reasonably aware schoolkid will tell you, just because something is legal does not make it right. Slavery used to be legal, as did any number of morally repugnant things; would an eighteenth century Marc Thiessen similarly criticize a journalist leaking secret documents in order to highlight the evils of slavery? Fourth, given that torture is illegal, would Mr. Thiessen argue that any American authorizing or actually using torture be arrested on the same ground that publishing information on secret 'national security' surveillance data methods is also illegal? Thought not.

This two-minute video of Candidate Obama in 2007 versus President Obama in 2013 on surveillance and civil liberties is very illuminating, not only because of the contrast between an (ostensibly) young confident idealist and pragmatic (and very shifty - see video) realist. In the video, the present incarnation of Obama makes it clear that that the justification for blanket NSA surveillance is the need to protect the nation from terrorism.

This blog has discussed the actual threat of terrorism on several occasions, and various commentators have pointed out that more Americans drown in bathtubs than die in terrorist attacks. Edward Snowden himself commented yesterday that US police officers kill more Americans than terrorists do. It is irrefutably clear that in terms of lives lost, terrorism is a miniscule threat. Nevertheless, the intelligence agencies like to claim that the sacrifice of privacy and other civil liberties has prevented multiple terrorist attacks on the homeland and is therefore worth it. This crucial claim must be examined.

Since 9/11, dozens of Islamic terrorist 'plots' have been foiled. Backed up with numerous convictions, this has provided excellent cover for the Bush and Obama administrations as they have attempted to justify the enormous scope and costs of the war on terror, simultaneously allowing officials to boast that they are keeping America safe while providing justification for ever more intrusion of privacy. Terrorism, like its predecessor Communism, is the perfect, intangible, indefinable, fear-inducing enemy.

The word 'plot', however, is inaccurate. 'Sting operation' is the term you are looking for. From a 2010 article on the CBS News site:

Mohamed O. Mohamud appeared to have discovered an unusually compassionate pair of terrorists.

They told him he did not have to kill to be a good Muslim. He could just pray. A bomb was a very serious matter, they said. Kids might be killed. Time and again, they offered a way out.

At a hotel in downtown Portland, Oregon, in July, the two undercover FBI agents listened as Mohamud explained his dream of detonating a car bomb during the city's Christmas celebration. They offered to help, if Mohamud was sure he wanted to go through with it.

"You always have a choice," one of the agents said, according to court documents. "You understand? With us, you always have a choice."

It was not an offhand remark. It was part of a carefully scripted routine the FBI has been perfecting since the September 2001 terror attacks. Sting operations, choreographed by FBI and Justice Department officials in Washington, have included plots against skyscrapers in Dallas, Texas, Washington subways, a Chicago nightclub and New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport.

All the plots have been fictional. The intent, the FBI says, has been real. And the government has a string of convictions to back that up, a track record that has made undercover stings one of the government's go-to strategies in terrorism cases.

But the tactic is not without its critics. Each arrest has been followed by allegations of entrapment and claims that the government is enticing Muslims to become terrorists, selling them phony explosives, then arresting them.

Entrapment: 'The act of government agents or officials that induces a person to commit a crime he or she is not previously disposed to commit'.

Entrapment is illegal. Are you reading, Mr. Thiessen?

More from the article:

No terrorism case since Sept. 11, 2001, has been thrown out because of entrapment. Just last month, the tactic passed its latest test when a New York jury convicted four men of trying to blow up synagogues. Jurors rejected the argument that the FBI enticed the men into a plot they never would have come up with otherwise.

"When the government supplies a fake bomb and then thwarts the plot, this is insanity. This is grandstanding," Susanne Brody, one of the defense attorneys in that case, said Monday when asked about the FBI's use of undercover stings.

Brody said the tactic requires extraordinary amounts of time and money and can ensnare hapless people, not hardened terrorists.

"The people they repeatedly come up with continue to be people who have no ability to do something on their own," said Samuel Braverman, another defense attorney in the New York case who said he is skeptical of a strategy that amounts to "picking off the dumbest we have to offer."

So the FBI, presumably in a program called 'Operation Dumbass', goes out looking for young Muslim men who are angry with the West (I wonder why), but who have no serious intention or capability whatsoever to carry out a terrorist attack, and then encourage, advise and supply them right up to the last moment when - just like the movies - the cavalry moves in just in the nick of time to stop them setting off their fake bombs with their fake detonators.

The pretext, therefore, for this blanket surveillance apparatus is a bunch of fake plots in which bumbling, incompetent idiots are led by the nose to commit actions they would never have done if left alone.

The US government knows damned well that no serious terrorist would ever communicate plot details with electronic communications, knowing full well that they are monitored, and indeed have been for decades - long before Edward Snowden and William Binney arrived on the scene. It knows therefore that blanket surveillance is extremely unlikely to turn up any useful data of this variety.

Think about that for a second. All this spying on everyone...justified by manufactured plots and lies. Most genuine plots are exposed with traditional detective work, informants (often within the Muslim community itself), and sometimes just blind luck. Are we to sacrifice our most sacred rights for such meager rewards?

The true purpose of PRISM and whatever other programs the NSA has is NOT anti-terrorism. It is in fact a very useful tool to crush meaningful dissent against the system of government, the status quo so essential for the continued existence of the commercial entities which dominate the globe. With the ability to read private communications, detailed profiles of dissident leaders can be compiled, allowing various tactics to be easily deployed against them: for example, blackmail, bribery and smear campaigns. For more serious offenders - the biggest threats - persecution and imprisonment can be threatened and even implemented: one needs only to look at the cases of Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond, John Kiriakou, and Julian Assange to see that.

Indeed, this tactic of entrapment is is not only for Islamic terrorism. The Occupy movement, at first a serious threat to the establishment, was effectively smeared as a danger to the public in an operation, organized by an FBI informant, to blow up a bridge.

From the article:

This past October, at an Occupy encampment in Cleveland, Ohio, "suspicious males with walkie-talkies around their necks" and "scarves or towels around their heads" were heard grumbling at the protesters' unwillingness to act violently. At meetings a few months later, one of them, a 26-year-old with a black Mohawk known as "Cyco," explained to his anarchist colleagues how "you can make plastic explosives with bleach," and the group of five men fantasized about what they might blow up. Cyco suggested a small bridge. One of the others thought they’d have a better chance of not hurting people if they blew up a cargo ship. A third, however, argued for a big bridge – "Gotta slow the traffic that's going to make them money" – and won. He then led them to a connection who sold them C-4 explosives for $450. Then, the night before the May Day Occupy protests, they allegedly put the plan into motion – and just as the would-be terrorists fiddled with the detonator they hoped would blow to smithereens a scenic bridge in Ohio’s Cuyahoga Valley National Park traversed by 13,610 vehicles every day, the FBI swooped in to arrest them.

The guy who convinced the plotters to blow up a big bridge, led them to the arms merchant, and drove the team to the bomb site was an FBI informant. The merchant was an FBI agent. The bomb, of course, was a dud. And the arrest was part of a pattern of entrapment by federal law enforcement since September 11, 2001, not of terrorist suspects, but of young men federal agents have had to talk into embracing violence in the first place. One of the Cleveland arrestees, Connor Stevens, complained to his sister of feeling "very pressured" by the guy who turned out to be an informant and was recorded in 2011 rejecting property destruction: "We're in it for the long haul and those kind of tactics just don't cut it," he said. "And it's actually harder to be non-violent than it is to do stuff like that." Though when Cleveland's NEWS Channel 5 broadcast that footage, they headlined it "Accused Bomb Plot Suspect Caught on Camera Talking Violence."

Unsurprisingly, Barack Obama has come out strongly in defense of the NSA and its secret programs, repeating the usual mantra of keeping America safe and so on. This is because he is a good employee, an invaluable lieutenant, of the financial elites who put up the cash for his electoral campaigns of hope and change. The lieutenant is doing a great job; indeed, he has achieved - among many other things - the feat of making the same Democrats who screamed blue murder at GW Bush for his illegal wiretapping program now support it, proving once and for all that a huge percentage of the population identify with 'teams', not policies...however dangerous and undemocratic those policies may be.

And what will the next disclosures be? Given that PRISM is extremely intrusive, what further horrors await? One thing is clear: the NSA wants a global system that will allow it to access all data, real-time if necessary, and perhaps even build profiles of people likely to commit crimes in the future...pre-crime. If so, the public reaction is likely to dwarf that seen so far, as anyone could potentially be arrested simply for expressing an idea outside the acceptable mainstream. Kafkaesque would no longer suffice as an appropriate adjective.

Lieutenant Obama is the benign public face of a global coup d'etat for the financial elites, one fascist in nature, which tolerates dissent only in the strictly limited 'spectrum of acceptable opinion', enough dissent to create the illusion of democracy, but not enough to actually allow real change. This coup is already complete, with traditional protest now extremely hazardous due to violent police suppression tactics. Indeed, reports of G8 protesters recently being arrested in London before actually doing any protesting suggest likely escalation of anti-democratic police tactics in the future. The only routes to real change would be a counter-coup by benign police or military officers, or a massive grassroots uprising by the people. The military option is extremely unlikely, thanks to the (intentional) worship of all things military throughout the US media and political establishment (and to a lesser degree in the UK and other Western nations). This leaves the grassroots option. We are already seeing signs of this growing in the last few years with huge, often violent demonstrations and social unrest in many nations, most recently Turkey and Brazil.

These grassroots movements are growing but remain splintered. All progressive movements...ALL OF THEM...must unite, must pool their resources in tackling a cancer that is vastly superior in power and influence except in two areas: strength of numbers and depth of humanity. It is vital at this stage to spread awareness, to encourage activism, and to ensure everyone understands that this now affects all of us, as the NSA leak so clearly demonstrates. Time is running out, especially with regard to the truly existential crisis threatened by man-made climate change. Inform friends and family, write a blog, lobby MPs, run in elections...do whatever is necessary to turn the tide.

Simon Wood (Twitter: @simonwood11) is the author of 'The 99.99998271%: Why the Time is Right for Direct Democracy' and the founder of The Movement, a non-profit organization dedicated to peace, justice and democracy. Please follow and support The Movement on Twitter: @1themovement as it provides a manifesto and strongly urges all progressive movements to unite and pool their resources in the common goal of removing the cancer of corruption that threatens us all. I urge any readers with substantial resources, or access to someone who does, to contact me directly in order to aid development of this non-profit organization.

You can follow Simon Wood on Facebook and at his blog.

Bitcoin donations are now gratefully accepted:

Address: 1BMnkhwgPap2NVNiyKGTP1gfBuMtZQVYUo

Note: Due to spam, only members of this blog can now comment. If you wish to make a comment and would like it published, please contact me via Twitter and I'll sort it out.

We Steal Freedom II - Defending Edward Snowden

An update to yesterday's article.

The NSA whistleblower has now been identified as Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former CIA technical assistant who, until the leak, worked in Hawaii for defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. His identity was made public at his own request.

There can be no doubt that Mr. Snowden is a classic example of a whistleblower, a true hero of democracy. An examination of his own words makes this obvious.

From the Guardian articles here and here which revealed his identity:

"I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong." (Bravery and idealism)

"I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions." (Awareness of consequences of actions against a corrupt and abusive state with global reach, as well as self-sacrifice: a willingness to give up his freedom, family, girlfriend, home and $200,000-per-year job for the common good)

"I will be satisfied if the federation of secret law, unequal pardon and irresistible executive powers that rule the world that I love are revealed even for an instant." (Desire for justice and awareness that someone has to act, and that if no one acts - even to provide a glimpse past the walls of secrecy 'for an instant' - the abuses of power will continue)

"I know the media likes to personalize political debates, and I know the government will demonize me." (No desire for publicity or self-promotion; in fact, the opposite: concern that inevitable media focus on him personally will distract from the larger debate)

"My sole motive is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them."

"I'm willing to sacrifice all of that [family, job, girlfriend, life etc.] because I can't in good conscience allow the US government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building." (Demonstration of conscience, a desire for the world to be open and just)

"I am not afraid, because this is the choice I've made."

"All my options are bad." (Awareness of the likely consequences of standing up to the US)

"Yes, I could be rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me. Or any of the third-party partners. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or they could pay off the Triads. Any of their agents or assets." (A chilling reminder of the capabilities of the sociopathic US machine, from a man who knows better - due to his work experience - than almost all of us)

"The only thing I fear is the harmful effects on my family, who I won't be able to help any more. That's what keeps me up at night."

"You can't wait around for someone else to act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realized that leadership is about being the first to act."

"I don't see myself as a hero because what I'm doing is self-interested: I don't want to live in a world where there's no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity."

"What they're doing [poses] an existential threat to democracy"

"There are more important things than money. If I were motivated by money, I could have sold these documents to any number of countries and gotten very rich."

"The government has granted itself power it is not entitled to. There is no public oversight. The result is people like myself have the latitude to go further than they are allowed to."

"I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest. There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn't turn over, because harming people isn't my goal. Transparency is." (A desire to protect individuals from being harmed by the leak)

"I do not expect to see home again."

"I feel satisfied that this was all worth it. I have no regrets."

The Obama administration has a problem here in that it will be far more difficult to smear this principled, intelligent and idealistic man. Bradley Manning was an easy target - all they had to do was repeatedly mention the fact that he was gay and that he 'didn't fit in', was 'seeking attention' or was prone to erratic behaviour etc. Here we have a man who has demonstrated not only a clear-minded and selfless motive, but also mind-boggling courage and self-sacrifice. Mr. Manning possesses these qualities, too, but the public perception is different because he was turned in by Adrian Lamo, while Mr. Snowden requested that his identity be made public. As clear as day, anyone reading about him or seeing him talking on video will understand that he did this not for profit, not for attention, but to enable the entire world to comprehend the nature and scope of the illegal and immoral threat being raised against them in secret and with no accountability.

This reality, combined with the fact that - thanks to the rise in social media and corresponding decline of the influence of traditional purveyors of news - the world really is waking up to abuses at all levels of power and in all arenas...this reality is an explosive mix, and few will be of a mind to tolerate or pay any heed to millionaires in suits smearing this man as a traitor on television, particularly not after the steady diet of lies and slimy evasions people are accustomed to. Large demonstrations and even serious unrest could result from this as social justice activists around the world follow the example of this exceptional and inspirational person and put their lives on the line.

The spin machine has a bona fide hero on its hands. While we should be in no doubt that ways will be found to smear him nonetheless, it will not be as easy as before. For this reason, vigorous support not only for Mr Snowden but also for all whistleblowers, whose 'outing' was not as well 'stage-managed', is absolutely vital.

Not all the documents passed to The Washington Post and The Guardian have been published yet, and indeed Glenn Greenwald says that more revelations are coming. It is the duty now of these newspapers to release all this data, with redactions where necessary to protect sources. Mr. Snowden himself said that he examined each document meticulously to determine whether it was legitimately in the public interest and it is important to honor his sacrifice by carrying out his wishes to the letter. The full nature of this sinister and dangerous spying apparatus must be made public knowledge, not only to allow ordinary citizens everywhere to better protect their privacy, but also to 'send a message' to officials (so fond of 'sending a message' themselves mafia-style by persecuting whistleblowers), who never appear to learn with regard to the irrepressible nature of the human spirit for freedom, that secret actions intended to assert control over the world and its inhabitants can never succeed; not while people of the exceptional moral caliber of Edward Snowden remain breathing.

Let us conclude with two messages:

To the US authorities: Given that this leak has exposed beyond any doubt that complete secrecy is impossible to maintain, and that the recent Boston bombings prove that even blanket surveillance is no deterrent to terrorist attacks, it is time to end this insanity, to allow the people to install the truly democratic systems they crave, and to release all whistleblowers with sincere apologies, gratitude, ample compensation, and as many medals and awards as they can carry.

To potential whistleblowers and other social justice activists: More than anything, Edward Snowden has shown the incredible things that can be achieved with just one person's courage, honesty and integrity. We must all strike now as the authorities are reeling. Act! Sun Tzu said something about striking when your enemy is reeling! Come forward with more information and bring this evil Empire crashing down by demonstrating to the world its illegality, immorality and inhumanity. They can't silence or arrest everyone. Force even the mainstream media to cover the information you reveal and the actions you take. Nelson Mandela's grave illness or even some engineered celebrity scandal will be milked to death to distract everyone, but that can be made impossible if your actions are powerful and sustained enough. You will not be alone: the unprecedented outpouring of support for Edward Snowden demonstrates this. Don't let his sacrifice go to waste, buried by media spin and smears; he deserves better. You know perfectly well what will happen to this great man if the US gets its hands on him...and you know that they will if we do not act. This must not be permitted. If tears do not well up in your eyes on considering his hopeless plight, you're not human; you're a victim of induced sociopathy, a mental state brought on by a devastatingly shallow society with all its intentionally-wrought ills.

Time to step up and be counted.

Author's note: in order to protect people like Edward Snowden and bring about the just, democratic systems he so obviously believes in, we need to act ourselves and take power back now. Please follow and actively support The Movement as detailed below.

Simon Wood (Twitter: @simonwood11) is the author of 'The 99.99998271%: Why the Time is Right for Direct Democracy' and the founder of The Movement, a non-profit organization dedicated to peace, justice and democracy. Please follow and support The Movement on Twitter: @1themovement as it provides a manifesto and strongly urges all progressive movements to unite and pool their resources in the common goal of removing the cancer of corruption that threatens us all. You can also follow Simon Wood on Facebook and at his blog.

Bitcoin donations are now gratefully accepted:

Address: 1BMnkhwgPap2NVNiyKGTP1gfBuMtZQVYUo

Note: Due to spam, only members of this blog can now comment. If you wish to make a comment and would like it published, please contact me via Twitter and I'll sort it out.

We Steal Freedom

"It is curious that physical courage should be so common in the world and moral courage so rare" - Mark Twain

For those tired of being dismissed as 'conspiracy theorists' for the crime of paying attention and digging deeper than a Yahoo.com news headline, this has been a week of vindication. An unidentified whistleblower trusted the journalist Glenn Greenwald enough to send him documents concerning PRISM, a top-secret US government surveillance program that directly taps into the servers of nine tech giants (Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple and PalTalk). Potentially all forms of media can be and have been monitored, with anyone in the world a viable target. General information can be found here, while Darker Net provides a typically excellent and detailed rundown here of what we know so far.

The 99.99998271% would like to go on record as saluting the courage of both Glenn Greenwald and the unknown whistleblower in question. Both knew the potential consequences of their actions in this era of thinly disguised tyranny, but acted in the public interest nonetheless.

While, officials assure us, the actual content of phone calls cannot be tapped without special legal permission, the PRISM program allows the NSA to access so-called phone 'metadata', which is basically who called whom when and from where, along with any other available data about the call. Government officials have assured Americans that they have nothing to worry about because only this metadata is accessed, but as this informative article by Jane Mayer at The New Yorker explains, Metadata can in fact allow extremely private information to be inferred, rendering actual call content unnecessary.

From the article:

So how bad could it be?

The answer, according to the mathematician and former Sun Microsystems engineer Susan Landau, whom I interviewed while reporting on the plight of the former N.S.A. whistleblower Thomas Drake and who is also the author of “Surveillance or Security?,” is that it's worse than many might think.

"The public doesn't understand,” she told me, speaking about so-called metadata. “It's much more intrusive than content.” She explained that the government can learn immense amounts of proprietary information by studying “who you call, and who they call. If you can track that, you know exactly what is happening - you don't need the content.”

For example, she said, in the world of business, a pattern of phone calls from key executives can reveal impending corporate takeovers. Personal phone calls can also reveal sensitive medical information: “You can see a call to a gynecologist, and then a call to an oncologist, and then a call to close family members.” And information from cell-phone towers can reveal the caller’s location. Metadata, she pointed out, can be so revelatory about whom reporters talk to in order to get sensitive stories that it can make more traditional tools in leak investigations, like search warrants and subpoenas, look quaint. “You can see the sources,” she said. When the F.B.I. obtains such records from news agencies, the Attorney General is required to sign off on each invasion of privacy. When the N.S.A. sweeps up millions of records a minute, it's unclear if any such brakes are applied.

Metadata, Landau noted, can also reveal sensitive political information, showing, for instance, if opposition leaders are meeting, who is involved, where they gather, and for how long. Such data can reveal, too, who is romantically involved with whom, by tracking the locations of cell phones at night.

The reaction to this leak from the intelligence community, administration officials and associated lackeys has been predictable. Quote sources here and here.

Karl Rove on Fox:“I'm not going to defend the Obama administration. I will defend the intelligence community. To identify patterns of phone calls between individuals here and individuals abroad, and then you identify the patterns of phone calls inside this country...that allows the intelligence agencies to identify connections between people abroad and people at home.”

Democratic Senator for California and Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Dianne Feinstein: "It's called protecting America."

Republican Senator for South Carolina Lindsey Graham: "I don't mind Verizon turning over records to the government if the government is going to make sure that they try to match up a known terrorist phone with somebody in the United States."

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper described the program as "important and entirely legal" and said the leak of a document describing it was "reprehensible and risks important protections for the security of Americans."

Regarding the phone-tracking program, Mr. Clapper said the unauthorized disclosure "threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation."

Senator Ron Wyden asked Mr. Clapper about NSA data collection at a Senate hearing back in March:

Wyden: "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"

Clapper: "No, sir."

Wyden: "It does not?"

Clapper: "Not wittingly. There are cases where they could, inadvertently perhaps, collect -- but not wittingly."

Mr. Clapper expanded on these remarks this week in light of the revelations:

"What I said was, 'the NSA does not voyeuristically pore through U.S. citizens' e-mails.' I stand by that."

[Aside: lying to Congress is a crime punishable by up to five years imprisonment.]

Are Americans targeted?

A White House official has an answer:

"The program is subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Executive Branch and Congress." It involves extensive procedures, specifically approved by the court, to ensure that only non-U.S. persons outside the U.S. are targeted, and that minimize the acquisition, retention and dissemination of incidentally acquired information about U.S. persons."

In its latest article on this topic, The Guardian today revealed the existence of the NSA's secret tool for tracking global surveillance data, known as 'Boundless Informant'.

[Aside: what is it with the US and its creepy names for tools, operations and missions???]

From the article:

The disclosure of the internal Boundless Informant system comes amid a struggle between the NSA and its overseers in the Senate over whether it can track the intelligence it collects on American communications. The NSA's position is that it is not technologically feasible to do so.

Judith Emmel, an NSA spokeswoman, told the Guardian in a response to the latest disclosures: "NSA has consistently reported – including to Congress – that we do not have the ability to determine with certainty the identity or location of all communicants within a given communication. That remains the case."

Other documents seen by the Guardian further demonstrate that the NSA does in fact break down its surveillance intercepts[,] which could allow the agency to determine how many of them are from the US. The level of detail includes individual IP addresses.

IP address is not a perfect proxy for someone's physical location but it is rather close, said Chris Soghoian, the principal technologist with the Speech Privacy and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. "If you don't take steps to hide it, the IP address provided by your internet provider will certainly tell you what country, state and, typically, city you are in," Soghoian said.

That approximation has implications for the ongoing oversight battle between the intelligence agencies and Congress.

Glenn Greenwald himself put his finger on the exact problem exposed by this leak in a recent article:

The way things are supposed to work is that we're supposed to know virtually everything about what they do: that's why they're called public servants. They're supposed to know virtually nothing about what we do: that's why we're called private individuals.

This dynamic - the hallmark of a healthy and free society - has been radically reversed. Now, they know everything about what we do, and are constantly building systems to know more. Meanwhile, we know less and less about what they do, as they build walls of secrecy behind which they function. That's the imbalance that needs to come to an end. No democracy can be healthy and functional if the most consequential acts of those who wield political power are completely unknown to those to whom they are supposed to be accountable.

That's it in a nutshell. We have officials elected via fake elections in fake democracies building walls of secrecy to protect and consolidate their own power (and wealth), all the while working to ensure that the status quo is maintained for the entities which support their political careers (and revolving-door retirements) financially - the banks, corporations, various big-money lobby groups and rich donors.

The pretext for mass NSA surveillance is, of course, the 'War on Terror'. Putting aside the fact that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack in the US are around one in twenty million, there are other ways to ensure the legal requirements of probable cause or reasonable suspicion are satisfied. Given the enormous financial resources set aside for the war on terror, it would be a simple matter to have, for instance, a cadre of specialist judges on call twenty-four hours a day to instantly review official requests from law enforcement officials (who may be working on time-sensitive cases) who suspect (using whatever powers legally permitted - for example, keyword detection software that does not show ALL content of a communication but merely flags it as suspicious) a particular individual of plotting a terrorist attack and require legal permission to probe their private communications. This would negate the need for blanket surveillance at a stroke.

[Note: I do not believe the answer to terrorism is surveillance - for example, the keyword detection software cited above. It is suggested here merely as a possible legal alternative to blanket surveillance in the context of this specific issue. One potent answer to terrorism is to stop invading, bombing and generally interfering in foreign sovereign nations...but that's an assertion for another article.]

Instead of expanding this power (that it already possessed) in such a legal manner, the US government has given the NSA free rein to violate the privacy of anyone it sees fit to. That it has chosen such a path is clear proof that the purpose of such a program is not surveillance to prevent terrorism, but instead surveillance of the world population in general; surveillance which will allow the targeting of any potential threat to its dominance in any arena, along with valuable data on human behavior patterns, including in the commercial field, which can be traded. Further, with a targeted person's private data in its possession, the NSA may then enable that particular threat (a meddling journalist, for example) to be dealt with in various ways where necessary: blackmail, bribery, smear campaigns and so on.

What to do. The first step is to move all your communications away from the companies named in the leak. This very useful article details how you can use the Internet without using PRISM companies. It is also vital to spread awareness on this issue, and in particular to vigorously challenge any fool raising the 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' defense.

However, these are only short-term measures. While extremely important, this leak highlights just another in a very long line of abuses of power by an out-of-control elite who believe they can do anything they wish, and who see you, a citizen, merely as a commodity. In order to end this orgy of abuse, incompetence, greed and corruption, which could literally kill us all when one considers the inaction on catastrophic climate change, it is necessary for you and anyone you can convince to become active in support of progressive movements that seek to bring about truly democratic systems which prioritize human rights and social justice over capital and power.

This leak highlights the extent of the ambitions of the elites; they seek nothing less than total control, making themselves unassailable to any conceivable challenge to their dominance. Government officials will play down this leak, assuring 'us' that it is legal and that 'we' really have nothing to worry about, but there will be no contrition or backing down: they are in for a penny, in for a pound.

One thing we can be certain of is this: Glenn Greenwald will face serious flak - possibly more than that - and the leaker will be extremely fortunate to escape the inevitable witch hunt. As the mafia are wont to say, a message must be sent, and that - as we have seen from the barbaric persecution of whistleblowers like Bradley Manning and John Kiriakou etc. - is the true face of those who claim power over us.

Simon Wood (Twitter: @simonwood11) is the author of 'The 99.99998271%: Why the Time is Right for Direct Democracy' and the founder of The Movement, a non-profit organization dedicated to peace, justice and democracy. Please follow and support The Movement on Twitter: @1themovement as it strongly urges all progressive movements to unite and pool their resources in the common goal of removing the cancer of corruption that threatens us all. You can also follow Simon Wood on Facebook and at his blog.

Bitcoin donations are now gratefully accepted:

Address: 1BMnkhwgPap2NVNiyKGTP1gfBuMtZQVYUo

Note: Due to spam, only members of this blog can now comment. If you wish to make a comment and would like it published, please contact me via Twitter and I'll sort it out.

Open Letter to US Armed Forces

"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. (So help me God)" - United States Uniformed Services Oath of Office

"An individual who breaks a law that his conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in fact expressing the highest respect for the law" - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dear all members of the US armed forces:

"Thank you for your service."

Any talking head or 'chickenhawk' politician who values his or her career reminds the nation on a regular basis of the unquestioning gratitude and reverence one must display toward the military. The sincerity of such people, however, is suspect when one considers the reality of life for many US veterans.

Some facts about veterans from the article:

45 percent of homeless veterans suffer from mental illness.

500,000 veterans experience homelessness each year.

1 in 3 homeless males are veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces.

76 percent of veterans experience alcohol, drug, or mental health problems.

If they really cared about you, would the situation revealed by these shocking statistics be permitted? Or are they full of shit, giving lip service for self-promotion purposes? You decide.

Every single serviceman and woman has their own reasons for joining up, and most undoubtedly feel an urge to serve and protect the homeland. However, few soldiers would describe themselves as 'heroes', and this forces us to confront an unpleasant reality about the motives behind this media beatification of all things military.

From a Guardian article about Veteran's Day:

When someone is declared a hero for lacing up combat boots, no matter how far from harm's way, what does that say about those who patrol the Nuristan Province under constant threat from Taliban ambush? And what does it say about the soldier who darts into the open to attend to a fallen comrade?

Are they all equally heroes? Or have we devalued the word?

This growing "cult of the military" would be vexing if it were, indeed, the result of the society acting spontaneously to expiate past sins. But the truth probably has more to do with manipulation. Think back to the invasion of Iraq, a stupid, costly, trumped-up war that divided the nation. When the public finally began to wonder what in the world deposing a Gulf dictator had to do with 9/11 or our national security (answer: absolutely nothing), suddenly the bumper stickers began to appear:

"Support Our Troops."

And with that, skepticism about George W Bush's invented threat, not to mention the abominable expenditure of blood and treasure, was conflated with undermining our heroes.

To question the war was somehow to question them. It was unpatriotic. It was a betrayal. And thus did the worship of the uniform serve the interests of the government. Reduced to the role of poster children, our heroes easily won our sympathy – at the expense of our reason, and ultimately their own dignity.

With this unyielding pressure to live up to the status of a 'hero', only confusion in comprehending the true role of a soldier can result. Wearing the uniform does not mean blindly obeying orders, whatever they may be. As demonstrated most notably in the 1945-6 Nuremberg Trials, there is a moral responsibility to uphold international law (enshrined in treaties the US has signed in good faith like the Geneva Conventions and so on) and also to report abuse and crimes committed by one's own military.

US military field guides since World War II have made it clear that any soldier has a responsibility to report such abuses or crimes through the chain of command. The US soldier's manual (1984), for example, states:

You must report crimes immediately through your chain of command. If the crime involves your immediate superiors, report to their superior. You may also report violations of the laws of war to the inspector general, provost marshal, chaplain, or judge advocate. In any case, the law requires that you report actual or suspected violations immediately so that evidence will not be misplaced or disappear.

Reality, however, bites. A culture of abuse within the military, legitimized by the criminal actions of those at the very top of the chain of command, has led to a breakdown, a pole-reversal of morality. It is now the norm for soldiers or officials who authorize or commit terrible abuses to get off lightly, while those who shed light on those abuses get shafted with the full force of the law.

From an earlier article on this blog:

This week a CIA whistleblower, Jack Kiriakou was sentenced to two years in prison for informing the world of the CIA's torture rendition program (known as the Rendition, Detention, Interrogation (RDI) Program). On the other hand, the head of the program, Thomas Fletcher, a man who allegedly oversaw and actually took part in horrendous abuse of detainees is free to enjoy his retirement in Virginia.

Torture is illegal under international law.

Bradley Manning, the young US private who allegedly passed hundreds of thousands of US diplomatic cables to Wikileaks, has been detained for two and a half years in conditions described as 'torture' by both Amnesty International and Juan Mendez, the UN's top torture official. The perpetrators of the multiple criminal acts detailed in the cables remain free of even a whiff of investigation.

These are but two examples of literally thousands of cases of human rights abuse, political persecution and gross injustice, but from them the message is crystal clear: act in good conscience in order to inform your fellow citizens of corruption, illegality or criminality on an industrial scale and you will be punished and persecuted; actually commit the crimes and you will be left alone; indeed, you may be rewarded.

The world is upside-down. The level of dysfunction is such that true justice, democracy, equality and freedom for all is now a distant ideal, a romantic concept espoused by the naive, contemptuously dismissed by the Machiavellian advocates of realpolitik.

So what is a hero? Certainly, the soldier who braves enemy fire to rescue a wounded comrade fits the bill. Lost in our upside-down morality, however, is the less obvious definition of a hero as someone who bravely steps outside the paradigm in an act of pure conscience (not for profit, as many appear to believe), knowing full well that a holy shitstorm will ensue. Bradley Manning, whose trial begins today, June 3 2013, is such a man.

This blog has written extensively on Manning, and it is recommended that those readers wishing to understand the background of the case and reasons why he is not a traitor read the links here, here and here.

Many US servicemen and women have expressed support for Private Manning, saying (correctly) that his actions in leaking evidence of vast US criminality led to the Iraq withdrawal and therefore without doubt saved many of the lives of his (and their) fellow soldiers. Many others, however, have swallowed the corporate media propaganda of Manning 'breaking the rules' and therefore being a 'traitor'.

To those who believe this is true, please consider the following scenario:

1. If you saw evidence of war crimes, including murder, extrajudicial executions, illegal spying on UN officials etc., would you remain silent? If so, as demonstrated earlier in this article, you are breaking both army rules and international law by not reporting these transgressions to a superior.

2. If you found yourself unable to remain silent, would you report the transgressions to a superior officer? Manning also tried this but was told to shut up and get on with his job.

3. What would you do then? You know that under the Nuremberg Defense, soldiers can also be punished (albeit to a lesser degree than their superiors) for refusing to disobey orders that clearly cover up war crimes. Sadly, you also know that recent history offers an escape: the abusers in the Abu Ghraib scandal and others got light sentences or were simply discharged without punishment. This gives you a choice: keep your mouth shut and accept the tiny punishment you may get if found guilty of covering things up, or see the bigger picture and become a classic whistleblower, just as the revered Daniel Ellsberg did when he sent the Pentagon Papers to the media. Note also that the Pentagon Papers were designated 'top secret', while none of the files exposed by Manning were.

Putting yourself in Manning's shoes likes this helps one understand that he made a conscious moral decision to do the right thing, something our parents and teachers (rightly) teach us to do from early childhood. As a result he has been imprisoned awaiting trial for three years, spending much of that time in conditions described by Amnesty and the UN's top torture official as torture. With this in mind, members of the US military (and public) should re-examine their reflexive urge to label this man a traitor when an honest look at the facts demonstrates the opposite to be true.

Leading to a larger point - the role of the US soldier:

Are you really 'defending the homeland' when your drones blow up kids in Pakistan, Yemen and other nations? Or are you in fact endangering the homeland by creating thousandfold the rage only a parent can feel when their child is murdered by a foreign power in a so-called 'signature strike' (strikes based on 'suspicious' patterns of behavior instead of hard intelligence) or 'double-tap' strike (where one missile is fired, followed by a second when rescuers arrive on the scene - a clear war crime), with that murder justified by lame propaganda you know to be false. Surely you can imagine how you personally would react if a powerful foreign government - China, say - bombed an area where your own children happened to be and justified it under the terms of their own 'war on terror'. Quite clearly, hatred and the urge to retaliate would dominate your emotions until the day you died.

Are you defending the homeland by having bases in more than 150 nations around the world, with covert military operations ongoing in at least seventy? Nations with negligible military forces suffer no problems from terrorism; nations far freer than the US. Please do not continue to believe the ludicrous refrain: 'They hate us for our freedoms', as indeed freedom in the US is fast disappearing, with the provisions of the NDAA allowing indefinite detention of anyone designated 'a threat' (note, any critical or dissident journalist could easily be labeled in such vague terms). Add to this ubiquitous cameras; the uber-creepy Trapwire system (revealed by Wikileaks via the Stratfor leak for which Jeremy Hammond is now facing federal criminal charges); and the NSA surveillance network that now stores every single communication by American citizens. To many, these are clear signs of a US falling inexorably into fascism. Obvious proof that the US is already a police state was made clear by the ludicrously overstated response to the recent Boston bombings.

Begging the question: who are you really defending? The answer is simple: you defend the status quo for the corporations who want the world to stay exactly as it is. The reasons they wish to maintain the status quo are two-fold: first, it is ideal for the tiny corporate, political and financial elite to keep the vast majority of the world's wealth and resources flowing into its hands; and second, under the current system of control enforced by US military power, it is harder for alternative visions of civilization - ones that prioritize human rights and well-being over the acquisition of capital - to gain a foothold. Thus we see the elevated persecution of whistleblowers like Manning and (non-profit) transparency organizations like Wikileaks: entities that present a true threat to their hegemony as they shine unwelcome light on their real activities, activities ordinarily hidden by walls of extreme secrecy.

A silent revolution is occurring: one of thought. The rise of social media has corresponded with a global awakening to the true role of nation states, their governments and - critically - their corporations, which care nothing for national borders. Damning statistics flit around the ether - regurgitated by ordinary people with exponentially increasing outrage - as they discover one by one, ten by ten, in their hundreds...thousands...multitudes...the extent to which democracy has been subverted to serve special interests.

This corrupt, bloated, corporate-controlled empire is only kept in place because you, the soldiers, enforce order: in many ways you are the Roman centurions, patrolling the outer districts of a monstrous entity of control founded on violence and debt, there simply because you are 'supposed to' be and paid to be there.

But ask yourself: where is the good in what you are doing? Do you want to be defined by the fact that you defend not a nation and its people, but a tiny group of mega-rich elites who have hoodwinked the US population - with the help of aggressive marketing of the concept by the corporate-owned media - into believing that terrorism is an existential threat, when you know full well that in terms of numbers, terrorism is in fact a miniscule danger in comparison to other far more pressing and damaging issues like gun crime, health crises, disease, drug abuse, organized crime and poverty.

US armed service members of conscience - the vast majority - must re-examine their motives for serving in the military, must educate themselves on how the world really works, and recognize their crucial role in allowing this deeply corrupt and criminal global system to continue to exist. Consider also that you might have judged Bradley Manning harshly - look into the case and find out the facts. Think about his actions from an objective viewpoint - not from the assumptions you have always held - because those assumptions are likely to have been formed under heavy assault by the media, which has a vested interest in confusing you.

Barring a popular global uprising of mind-blowing proportions, the only hope of overturning the corrupt system we all suffer is the men and women in uniform who enforce it coming to their senses. Recall the oath you took on entering the service, and remember that you swore to protect us from enemies both foreign and domestic. There is an enemy within and deep down you know it. You also know that the world does not belong to a few mega-rich white guys in suits (who so often somehow manage to keep themselves and their kids safely away from active military service); it belongs to all of us - including you.

Simon Wood (Twitter: @simonwood11) is the author of 'The 99.99998271%: Why the Time is Right for Direct Democracy' and the founder of The Movement, a non-profit organization dedicated to peace, justice and democracy. Please follow and support The Movement on Twitter: @1themovement as it strongly urges all progressive movements to unite and pool their resources in the common goal of removing the cancer of corruption that threatens us all. You can also follow Simon Wood on Facebook and at his blog.

Bitcoin donations are now gratefully accepted:

Address: 1BMnkhwgPap2NVNiyKGTP1gfBuMtZQVYUo

Note: Due to spam, only members of this blog can now comment. If you wish to make a comment and would like it published, please contact me via Twitter and I'll sort it out.

The Movement

"That’s home, that's us – every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there; on a mote of dust, suspended on a sunbeam. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us" - Carl Sagan speaking about Earth.

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that" - Martin Luther King, Jr.

It is neither grandiose nor melodramatic to state that the human civilization is approaching a major fork in the road. When we reach this fork, THE question must be both asked and answered: if we now have the capability via scientific and philosophical progress to achieve almost anything at all...if we can conceivably put humans on Mars, cure previously intractable diseases like AIDS and create advanced theories (and put them into practice) in any field...why - permitted within the 'democratic' political and economic systems we currently have - are the following eminently preventable travesties and tragedies still ongoing:

Note: for brevity, please follow links for details on each issue.

1. Widespread poverty (including extreme poverty) and inequality. 21,000 children die every day around the world of easily preventible causes. For a single attack in Boston or London, we have blanket media coverage for several days; for this slow-motion holocaust we get...silence, which is apt as most of these deaths are indeed slow and silent, of starvation or disease, in poor villages far removed from media scrutiny or interest. At the same time, a tiny group of the mega-rich are hoarding (by a 2012 estimate) around $21 trillion on the Cayman Islands and other tax havens - a sum of money so obscenely huge - and is not being used in any meaningful way - that most humans can not even comprehend the scale of the numbers. A tiny percentage of this money could solve every single human rights issue on the planet.

2. Perhaps you thought the slave trade was a thing of the past? Slavery and human trafficking are alive, well and more profitable than at any time in history.

From my book:

Even the most basic human rights violations occur every day. The practice of slavery, for instance, has existed for thousands of years, and although it is now universally illegal - the last country to abolish it was Mauritania in 1981 - according to varying estimates, between 12 and 27 million people (equivalent to the population of Malaysia) are currently held in slavery. Most are bonded laborers in Asia - notably Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Nepal – people whose bodies are collateral for debts which, in many cases, will never diminish or be paid off. Many modern slaves are children, who are particularly susceptible to sexual abuse, while those aged younger than ten are often trained to commit crimes in order to take advantage of the fact that they fall below the age of criminal responsibility.

Human trafficking is also alive and well. Although there is debate about the numbers, the United Nations estimated in 2008 that 2.5 million people from 127 countries are being trafficked into 137 countries at any time, pressed into the sex industry or being used as forced laborers. It is extremely profitable, making it a priority for international criminal gangs – an estimated 32 billion dollars a year is brought in, only slightly less than that made from arms trading or drug smuggling. This industry is growing and is expected to overtake drug trafficking as the most profitable criminal industry in the future.

3. Several genocides are either currently or at great risk of occurring worldwide.

4. Endless war is ongoing, including covert operations in at least seventy countries run by the US alone as well as drone attacks on civilian targets like weddings, funerals and rescuers in several more nations. The world's military spending in 2012 was $1.75 trillion, roughly $200,000,000 per hour. The arms trade itself is deeply corrupt. War also leaves lasting devastation: in Iraq, for example, multiple cancers and hideous genetic defects are being reported thanks to the use of depleted uranium by the US, UK and its 'Coalition of the Willing'.

5. Mafia-style, criminal bankers who are above the law; persecution and imprisonment of whistleblowers; a worldwide torture and rendition network; an evil 'war on drugs' that is now specifically used to remove the underclass that is no longer of use to capitalism and make a profit simply from their existence via private prisons; a farcical war on terror that is the justification for endless war and the systematic destruction of civil liberties; an ever-growing national security apparatus that now, in the US, records every single communication on every media and stores it; not to mention a looming climate-change catastrophe that is going to kill millions upon millions of vulnerable people. Details on all these intolerable issues here. (PLEASE read this link!)

6. More? You bet there is. Our world is host to charming operations like 'vulture funds', which bleed impoverished nations dry for the benefit of already obscenely rich white men in New York high-rise offices. Big-money lobbying ensures that the idea of democracy as everyone having an equal say in society is a sick joke, as the men with the money get all the access to power. We have brazen conflicts of interest, with elected officials having significant personal financial stakes in private companies that benefit from access to public institutions like the NHS in the UK. Read this truly outrageous list of UK politicians and lords who stand to gain financially. We suffer the chaos and tragedy that results from putting human services in the hands of private corporations...think ATOS in the UK as well as the aforementioned private prisons, where mothers, fathers, sons and daughters are locked away for non-violent, victimless crimes purely for profit.

And here are some more:

7. A corporate stranglehold over the food supply (and a push towards GMO foods), corporate control over medical drugs, making them too expensive for the poor, and patents on human genes - a ludicrous state of affairs.

8. An endless commercial assault from all angles and media. No one (especially children) is immune from this deluge of commercial imagery, a form of trickery to make people believe that a particular material item is vital for your well-being, reinforced by the shallow Western ideal that the acquisition of material wealth equals a successful life.

9. A commercially-owned, profit-driven, soundbite-friendly global mass media that in many cases misinforms and confuses its readership and omits important issues. The result is a vastly ignorant, dangerously misinformed mass of people who do and accept things that are not necessarily in the interest of themselves or their communities.

10. Education systems designed not to create young adults who are able to think critically or to encourage self-education, but which instead focus on rote learning and memorization of 'facts', combined with a 'get ahead of the crowd' mentality, which turns peers into potential rivals, not allies with whom to work together for better things.

This miserable list could continue ad infinitum, but one gets the idea. One theme links all...profit. You can be sure that wherever one finds evil in the world, someone is making a profit out of it. And this is what we must change.

But nothing is going to change unless the people unite. Perhaps you are not the only one who feels the impotence of sharing a link on Facebook about the latest (daily) outrage or abuse by financial and political elites, or re-tweeting it on Twitter etc. All this is just noise, and the elites are happy as long as it stays that way. Scores of organizations and movements have sprung up in response to this deadly assault on humanity: groups like Anonymous, who stand for freedom, and non-profit transparency organizations like Wikileaks. That they are a threat to the elites is easily demonstrated by the level of persecution they have - and will continue - to suffer. Other movements like the Zeitgeist Movement, Avaaz, Hugo Chavez's Bolivaran missions, Quebec's student movement, Spain's Indignados, the Pirate Party and Beppe Grillo's Five Star Movement in Italy etc. etc. have also made themselves heard with varying degrees of success. Thousands of smaller movements and organizations work tirelessly and courageously to repair the damage.

All these movements, working with disparate aims, need to unite under one umbrella...a globally unifying movement that has one broad aim: the restoration of freedom and the removal of corruption. All their resources should be diverted toward this aim because, unless they unite, their own individual aims will never be achieved anyway. Alone, each movement is too puny to threaten the status quo; together, there is no limit to what can be achieved. Ego and personal advancement must be set aside in pursuit of this single goal.

The political systems we have employed for thousands of years have proven vulnerable to corruption and we must therefore abandon them. Before we can create a credible movement, we need to accept some hard truths about human nature:

1. It is impossible that everyone will be completely satisfied, so some give and take for the good of the overall community will always be necessary.

2. Power corrupts: this has been demonstrated endlessly throughout history. It is therefore vital that no single individual (or small group) is given sufficient power to cause damage. Read this article for details on the phenomenon.

3. There will always be those with nefarious aims who will work constantly to undermine systems of freedom and democracy, and therefore constant and rigorous vigilance is essential.

With these realities in mind, we can create the broad philosophy and manifesto of the Movement. The following is a list of ideals that the Movement believes in. Anyone who agrees with most or all of these points in principle is welcome to join. Note: the Movement is leaderless and borderless.

The Movement believes:

1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) should be adhered to both in principle and in practice.

2. In any conflict, the welfare of people must always take precedence before the issue of capital.

3. Societies will be governed not by politicians (who are often ideologues, not experts) but by committees of real experts who formulate policies based on their expertise and deep experience. Viable options are then voted upon by the people via direct democracy, which is perfectly viable. Note: Switzerland, recently named the best place in the world for quality of life, has a system of direct democracy...so don't believe the propaganda about direct democracy being unworkable. Under such a system, it will no longer be possible for industry lobbyists to write government policy, as is currently so often the case. Big-money lobbying will be finished forever. All experts on committees will be thoroughly vetted for financial and/or ideological links to corporations and other bodies that may present conflicts of interest.

4. Article 23 of the UDHR states:

(A) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment

(B) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(C) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

(D) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Therefore this Movement supports full employment via the job guarantee system. (Please read link for details).

5. Investment banking will be separated irrevocably from high street banking. Taxpayer-funded bailouts will be outlawed. 'Too big to fail' will no longer be a reality.

6. The private sector will be outlawed from human-related services at the fundamental level. This means all private contracts will be nullified and all human services (health, education, counseling, prisons, rehabilitation etc.) will be nationally operated and funded. Note: private hospitals and schools are still acceptable, but every single member of the population must have free access to decent health, education and other services, as envisaged by William Beveridge and Clement Atlee in the UK in the 1940s.

7. The end of the two-tier justice system in which the wealthy get away literally with murder while the poor get locked away, sometimes for decades, for tiny, often victimless transgressions.

8. Tax laws will be reformed to ensure that everyone pays their fair share. Use of all tax havens will be abolished and all loopholes will be closed.

9. In the cause of peace, national constitutions will be amended so that aggressive military action is outlawed, so that the only possible reason for war is self-defense. Further, non-aggression pacts will be offered to every nation on the planet, to ensure mutual peace and harmony.

10. The immediate commencement of dismantling of all weapons of mass destruction (chemical, biological and nuclear weapons as well as landmines and cluster bombs).

11. Education systems will be reformed in order to allow young citizens to be happy, constructive and active in their societies and more able to enjoy fulfilling lives and careers.

12. Commercial media monopolies will be outlawed, and a plurality of media ownership enforced. Further, as a free press is essential, journalists and whistleblowers will be protected by law, and encouraged to speak out on abuse of power wherever it is found. An independent civilian oversight committee will be formed to ensure media organizations do not lie, distort or omit vital information in their reporting. Those that do will be subject to prohibitive punitive measures, and repeated transgressions would lead to closure. The Daily Mail and its repugnant ilk would be finished.

13. Complete transparency and accountability for all levels of authority will be strictly enforced.

14. Surveillance of private individuals for the purposes of national security and law enforcement will be permitted as it always was - only with the permission of a judge when probable cause is demonstrated. Blanket surveillance of innocent, law-abiding citizens is the prelude to a dystopian police state.

15. Fossil fuels will be phased out as soon as possible in favor of green energy. A new green global infrastructure will be put into place. This would obviously create huge numbers of jobs, providing a generation of people with skills and a livelihood while simultaneously helping the economy and the environment.

Note: The above list is not exhaustive and is general in nature. It is intended to provide a broad framework for the ideals of the Movement, and also to spark honest and constructive debate.

In order for the Movement to have any success at all, concrete actions must be taken. The Movement's methodology is as follows:

1. Raise popular support: Each member of the movement will hopefully take an active role, do as much as they can to help. This can range from simply spreading the link to this article to people they know, to actively lobbying high-profile figures to also get involved. It is vital that sympathetic public figures lend their support to the broad aims of this movement in order to give it credibility. As the founder of the Movement, I therefore urge ever supporter to use their imagination and energy to motivate public figures to spread awareness and help as much as possible.

2. Run for office: This is where the action really begins. Take the example of the UK: it is possible to run as an elected official for a reasonably small amount of money and the nominations of ten voters. Candidates will run in every constituency as independents using the ideals of the Movement as a manifesto. Ideally, candidates should be popular local figures that people trust, especially people who have experience in public service. It is vital to get representatives of the movement actually into the halls of power, and, given the desperate state of affairs in many nations, there will be no shortage of volunteers to run.

3. Fire the public imagination: This is where we need all progressive movements to come together and work for the same goal, spreading awareness, drumming up support, and using interesting and unusual methods to grab public attention. The Movement will never be able to compete financially with the major political parties, and the corporate media will pour scorn and bile upon it at every opportunity, so it has to rise above this and use the most potent weapon at our disposal: the internet and social media. All members and sympathizers of this movement have the freedom to set up Facebook pages and Twitter accounts etc. in all languages. The movement will require volunteers to run these pages. Anyone wishing to volunteer should contact me via the Movement Twitter account or email (see below). It is envisaged that each nation or region will have its own official social media site in order to make collaboration easier.

Following these steps, the Movement may gain a foothold and eventually attain real power for the people, breaking the stranglehold of the banks and corporations. Beppe Grillo in Italy won 25% of the popular vote with a similar movement. Think about that - it is incredible. People are so sick and tired of the status quo, sick of lying, cheating, expense-fiddling, corrupt and idiotic politicians, that they are desperate for a credible alternative. This proves it is possible for us to fight the cancer that has taken hold of civilization. Given that climate change is about to send us over the edge into catastrophe, there is no more time for delay. We must put our welfare into the hands of our scientists, our philosophers, our geniuses, and those who have no interest in power or material gain. I urge all progressive organizations and movements to pledge their support for the Movement and to actively work toward its advancement. I further beg all readers to do all they can to spread the word and, if possible, actively agitate on behalf of this idea.

The alternative is to keep on suffering corrupt and incompetent officials fleecing nations and poor people dry, criminal banks, rapacious trans-national corporations that cause untold human misery etc. etc. You all know the story...you've shared hundreds of stories about these issues on social media. Now let's do something that will actually make a difference. Do we really want to live in a world of commercially designed chain stores and pubs that all look the same, where small shops businesses with all their unique and quaint creativity are eaten up by by huge enterprises undercutting them? Do we honestly want our art and music endlessly co-opted for base marketing purposes?

If you have access to someone with profile or influence, politely ask them to read this article and urge them to publicly support the idea if they are so inclined. Paste the link below the line (in comment sections) of mainstream media articles or re-blog the article anywhere to get more attention. Or are we just going to do nothing and let the bastards win? Get the legendary Anons on the case - they know how to spread an idea when they like it. Do anything you can think of to get people working towards the same goal. Always be polite and friendly and open to debate with serious detractors. Ignore and block the trolls - there will be thousands so don't waste a second of your time on them. Use your imagination and humor. If we are honest about our goals and ideals, we will not fail.

Just keep in mind: WE ARE The Movement...and as long as we are united, nothing can stop us.

Author's note: I am painfully aware in writing such an all-encompassing article and founding a movement which basically aims to change the world that I will be open to accusations of megalomania and self-promotion. I would like to make it clear that I have zero interest in self-promotion or financial gain, and I believe the fact that I have spent a significant portion of my time writing free articles and also a freely available book should make it plain that my concerns are purely humanitarian. I simply reached the conclusion that someone has to try to do something, and as I only see splinter groups agitating for their own causes in the main, I decided that it might as well be me. Too many people are getting shafted to worry about how I come across on a blog, so I'll just have to take the inevitable accusations that I'm some kind of egomaniac. The travails of the Occupy Movement (not a criticism of a movement which is made up of many very good people) has made it painfully obvious that popular protest on the streets alone is ineffective...action is needed in all arenas. There is simply no other choice. I hope you will stand with me and make this a success.

Author's note 2: The Movement follows no particular established political ideology and is not interested in simplistic 'left' or 'right' classifications. This is a purely humanitarian movement, born from the realization that capitalism and commercialism are anathema to human rights and welfare. The Movement expects, and indeed hopes, that members will hold differing philosophies, as that will provide the healthiest platform for development and improvement.

Further information: Follow the Movement on Twitter: @1themovement. Those with questions or suggestions please email me at themovement285@gmail.com

'The 99.99998271% - Why the Time is Right for Direct Democracy' by Simon Wood is available for free download. In this 70-page book, the current state of human rights and democracy is discussed, and a simple method of implementing direct democracy is suggested. Find Simon Wood on twitter (@simonwood11) and Facebook or at his blog. The Direct Democracy Alliance, a voluntary group dedicated to creating national/global direct democracy, is now also on twitter: (@DDA4586)

This article may be re-published or re-blogged freely. Bitcoin donations are gratefully accepted.

Bitcoin address: 1BMnkhwgPap2NVNiyKGTP1gfBuMtZQVYUo

The Rohingya Genocide

"The inaction of world leaders in the face of mass slaughter goes back well before the holocaust, and genocidal leaders have taken note" - Daniel Goldhagen

Over the last century more than 100 million civilians have died in genocides. The Turks killed over a million Armenians during World War I. The Japanese, Communist China and the Nazis killed tens of millions more. More than eight million have died in the Soviet gulags. Pol Pot and the Khymer Rouge killed 1.7 million Cambodians in the 1970s. Genocides have occurred in Bosnia, Darfur, Congo, Guatemala, Rwanda and many other nations - the list goes on and on. According to the Genocide Watch website, mass killings are currently occurring in nine nations, and concerted campaigns to marginalize and demonize ethnic or religious groups exist in many more.

One of these nations is Burma, re-named Myanmar by the military junta that kept the internationally celebrated Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest for fifteen of the twenty-one years from just before she won democratic elections in 1990 until her most recent release in 2010. Burma has been a hot topic in the world media recently for ostensibly positive reasons: an opening-up and democratization of the nation, most clearly symbolized by the allowing of what the nation calls a free press as sixteen independent newspapers were given operating licenses for the first time after almost fifty years of state censorship.

However, despite these positive signs, there has been a campaign of targeted and organized violence (mass killings, rapes, mass arrests, ill-treatment of detainees etc.) aimed initially at the Rohingya people that has spread to other parts of the nation, with other ethnic Muslim groups now targeted.

From an article at the Progressive Press:

As The Progressive Press has been reporting, for the past month in Burma (Myanmar), there has been "escalating daily violence against minority Muslims by Buddhist mobs. Initially focused on the Rohingya, the mob violence has now spread further throughout the country, with attacks coming against other ethnic Muslim tribes as well as to those simply appearing to be of Indian or Southern Asian [descent]." (typo corrected)

Daniel Goldhagen's harrowing documentary on genocide, 'Worse than War', sheds light on factors common to all genocides:

Leaders choose to initiate the killing.

Ordinary people make a conscious choice to participate.

Killers can be friends and neighbors.

Genocide is always the decision of one leader or one small group of leaders. Leaders' goals vary depending on time, place and circumstances.

Killers frequently believe the victims will come to kill, enslave or dominate them if they do not strike first.

Other common themes: target population is expelled from the country, herded into camps, and subjected to planned rape and slaughter. Cruelty is a key element. Victims are often 'brutalized in a way that far exceeds what is needed to kill them'.

Genocide is never just about killing. Perpetrators want to eliminate all or a substantial part of the group. After all, if the purpose is just to wipe people out, why do we see so much cruelty and murderous passion, especially against women and children?

Genocidal leaders have learned that, in the main, the international community rarely intervenes (at least not until it is too late) and therefore that they can act with impunity.

Gregory H Stanton, Research Professor in Genocide Studies and Prevention at George Mason University in Fairfax County, Virginia, United States and President of Genocide Watch wrote a report entitled 'The Eight Stages of Genocide'. The report is summarized briefly here but it should be read in full as it also contains suggestions of preventive measures at each stage of the cycle. The eight stages of genocide are:

1. Classification: An 'us and them' mentality in which there is little or no common ground

2. Symbolization: Target groups are given specific names or distinguished by colors or dress.

3. Dehumanization: One group dehumanizes the other, comparing them to 'animals, vermin, diseases or insects'. This helps overcome the natural human revulsion toward killing. Hate propaganda vilifying the target group is found throughout various media.

4. Organization: Genocide is always organized, usually at the state level, with local militias often used in order to aid in government denials of responsibility.

5. Polarization: Groups are driven physically apart by extremist groups. Moderates from the perpetrators' own group can be targeted and killed as they are the main threat to the genocide proceeding at this stage.

6. Preparation: Victims are identified and separated out; death lists are drawn up; property of victims is expropriated; victims are segregated or deported into ghettos or camps - or confined to famine-stricken regions and starved.

7. Extermination: Mass killing begins - called 'extermination' by the killers because they see victims as less than human. It is sponsored and organized by the state but security forces often work with local militias to kill. If the victims are organized or have access to weapons, this can result in bilateral genocide. At this stage, only rapid and/or large-scale intervention can hope to end the cycle of killing.

8. Denial: Perpetrators dig up mass graves, burn bodies, intimidate witnesses and/or attempt to cover up evidence. Crimes are denied and the victims are often blamed. Official investigations are blocked and perpetrators continue to govern until removed by force.

Human Rights Watch published a report into the violence aimed at the Rohingya in Arakan State, Burma. The strongest possible language is used to describe these actions, with documentation of 'ethnic cleansing', 'mass arrests' and 'ill-treatment' of detainees, 'destruction of homes and mosques' and 'collusion and coercion to forcibly displace Muslims'. The paper states that the attacks are 'coordinated' and contains reports of direct involvement of security personnel in killings, as well as beatings and other abuses. Mass graves at Yan Thei Village, Mrauk-U Township and outside the Ba Du Baw IDP Camp as well as another mass grave on Thackabyin Road and bodies taken by state security forces are also reported on. The report documents the mass flight of the Rohingya from the area, especially into neighboring Bangladesh, which - like Burma - does not recognize the citizenship of the Rohingya people.

Some excerpts from the report follow. It is easy to note the close similarities (emphasized in bold) to the common themes of all genocides cited by Daniel Goldhagen and Gregory Stanton earlier in this article:

Beginning in June 2012, Arakanese political parties, local monks’ associations, and Arakanese civic groups made public statements and issued numerous pamphlets that directly or indirectly urged the ethnic cleansing of Rohingya from Arakan State and the country. The statements and pamphlets typically deny the existence of the Rohingya ethnicity, demonize the Rohingya, and call for their removal from the country. Most were issued following public meetings that national officials should have understood to be clear warning signs of imminent and serious violence.

The two groups most influential in organizing anti-Rohingya activities in this period were the local order of Buddhist monks (the sangha) and the locally powerful Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP), a party founded in 2010 by Arakanese nationalists. The RNDP currently holds 18 of the 45 seats in the state parliament, or hluttaw, and 14 seats in the national parliament. The RNDP is the dominant party in the Arakan State parliament, making it the only political party in Burma to have more seats at the state level than the ruling Union State and Development Party (USDP).

A statement by the Buddhist monks' association in Mrauk-U:

"The Arakanese people must understand that Bengalis [Rohingya] want to destroy the land of Arakan, are eating Arakan rice and plan to exterminate Arakanese people and use their money to buy weapons to kill Arakanese people. For this reason and from today, no Arakanese should sell any goods to Bengalis, hire Bengalis as workers, provide any food to Bengalis and have any dealings with them, as they are cruel by nature.

Further:

The RNDP also played an instrumental role in stoking fear and encouraging isolation of and violence against the Rohingya. A public statement released by the RNDP on July 26, attributed to RNDP chairman Dr. Aye Maung, says “the present Bengali population causes threats for the whole Arakan people and other ethnic groups." The party statement denies the existence of the Rohingya and refers to a “fabricated history,” stating the "Bengalis" are “damaging Arakan people and national sovereignty.” Finally, it urges a “complete solution,” including a call to“temporarily relocate” Rohingya “so that they do not reside mixed or close to Arakan people in Arakan State territorial towns and villages,” and to “transfer non-Burmese Bengali nationals to third countries."

In some cases, the RNDP issued warnings and threats against Arakanese found to be aiding or associating with Rohingya in any way. Two photos of unknown provenance have emerged online showing Arakanese men who were found providing food to Rohingya. The men are shackled and in one photo, a homemade sign is placed around the neck of an Arakanese detainee in custody that states, "I am a traitor and slave of kalar." In the other photo, a shackled man is wearing a woman’s garment on his head, which is considered highly humiliating and culturally shameful for an Arakanese man.[15] Before these photos emerged, local Arakanese sympathetic to the plight of the Rohingya explained to Human Rights Watch that it would be extremely dangerous for them to go near the Rohingya IDP camps, let alone provide aid. They feared they might experience violence from their own community that would regard their actions as “traitorous.”

Note: 'kalar' is a derogatory term for Muslims.

An al-Jazeera documentary on the plight of the Rohingya was broadcast in late 2012 and was strongly condemned by the Burma government for 'exaggerating and fabricating the incidents in Rakhine State'.

This, of course, would be the last of Gregory Stanton's eight stages of genocide: denial. Stanton points out in his report that denial is the surest indicator that further mass killings will ensue, and so they have, with reports of the violence now spreading to other parts of the country and other ethnic Muslim groups.

In the documentary we learn that the Rohingya people must pay money (around $150) to the authorities when a baby is born. In order to marry, a couple must apply for permission and pay $750 (other accounts online say between $1,500 and $2,000). Failure to do this results in five years in prison for the couple. Note that a Burma prison is unlikely to be a pleasant place for any Muslim. Al-Jazeera also says it obtained a 1988 secret memo drawn up by Rakhine nationalists which contained plans to restrict movement, limit education and control the birth rate.

Why is this happening? I asked Jamila Hanan (@JamilaHanan on Twitter), a human rights activist who is campaigning on behalf of the Rohingya, for her view:

The hatred against the Rohingya has been stirred up by government sponsored propaganda. It has been their fascist policy for decades to cultivate a policy of pure religion to support their dictatorship. The hatred is real, but as I said has been stoked up, and would not lead to ethnic cleansing without state support. The move towards 'democracy' is a farce - the old regime is playing a new game, talking a modern language, but their mentality is no different. They have a vision for Burma, as a new empire, without Muslims - they don't fit. They are also living in strategically important redevelopment zones and are likely considered a security risk to the new Shwe oil and gas pipeline. Than Shwe, their previous dictator, had been trying to wipe out the Rohingya for a long time - some consider him to be still pulling at the strings in the background, still very much in control, and I suspect he has the largest shares in most of the assets and investments taking place at the moment. If you look into his character you will see he fits the typical profile of a genocidal mastermind. The silence of the international community is largely due to conflicting interests where new business deals and a struggle for influence in the area (particularly over China) take precedence over human rights.

I also asked Ms. Hanan why Aung San Suu Kyi has not spoken up on behalf of the Rohingya, who are now clearly victims of the most serious human rights abuses possible:

ASSK is silent because of politics. Speaking out for the Rohingya is a vote loser. Plus some say that she is misinformed - genuinely thinking this is an immigrant issue. The media in Burma really has brainwashed even the educated. She spoke out recently a bit following a conversation with William Hague - he had called her and asked her to speak out the week before she did.

Another expert's view:

"Politically, Aung San Suu Kyi has absolutely nothing to gain from opening her mouth on this," Maung Zarni, a Burma expert and visiting fellow at the London School of Economics, told the Associated Press. "She is no longer a political dissident trying to stick to her principles. She's a politician and her eyes are fixed on the prize, which is the 2015 majority Buddhist vote."

The silence of Aung San Suu Kyi is likely to baffle her hundreds of millions of admirers around the world, people who believe she is truly a cut above the average politician and actually puts human rights before her own political career and fortunes. This could in fact make things worse for the targeted Muslims in Burma as people are more likely to believe that there can't be anything really serious happening if a human rights defender possessing her saintly reputation remains almost completely silent.

From an article on the issue:

Treating this native-born population as invaders is roundly condemned around the globe. The Rohingya, like many persecuted groups before them, have pleaded for support from Aung San Suu Kyi. The 67-year-old parliamentarian, beloved for challenging Myanmar’s despotic generals, is traditionally seen as a voice of Myanmar’s oppressed.

But in an interview with GlobalPost, the Nobel Peace Laureate’s spokesman and confidante, Nyan Win, confirmed that Aung San Suu Kyi has no plans to champion the Rohingya cause despite criticism swirling around her silence on the crisis.

“So many people blame The Lady,” said Nyan Win, using a nickname for Aung San Suu Kyi made popular during Myanmar’s police state era, when speaking her name in public could attract unwelcome government attention.

“For example, in the Rakhine case, she very rarely says anything about this. She says she was forced to speak about the Rohingya group,” Nyan Win said. “She believes, in Burma, there is no Rohingya ethnic group. It is a made-up name of the Bengali. So she can’t say anything about Rohingya. But there is international pressure for her to speak about Rohingya. It’s a problem.”

This, if true, is extremely worrying. It also demonstrates the depressingly familiar mindset of officials - all officials, almost without exception - under pressure: more concerned with their own problems than what should be a human rights issue that trumps all other considerations.

Is it a genocide? In the al-Jazeera documentary, Professor William Schabas, an internationally respected expert on human rights law, the death penalty and genocide, stated:

"I don't think there is much difficulty in asserting, in the case of the Rohingya, that we're moving into a zone where the word ('genocide') can be used. When you see measures preventing births, trying to deny the identity of a people, hoping to see that they really are eventually...that they no longer exist...denying their - denying their - history, denying the legitimacy of their right to live where they live, these are all warning signs that mean it is not frivolous to envisage the use of the term 'genocide'."

The record of the international community and the UN is, frankly, woeful on the issue of genocide. A general propensity to wait and hope for problems to go away is a recurring theme throughout history. If the international community had acted three years earlier in Bosnia, at a time when activists had already long been desperately trying to force action, thousands upon thousands of people would still be alive today, mothers would still be with their lost sons, fathers their disappeared daughters, children their murdered parents. The international community needs, as the Rwandan justice minister says in the 'Worse than War' documentary, to 'go back to the drawing board' and understand that prevention and deterrence are the key issues, not just stampeding in with the cavalry several years too late for the thousands who are tortured, raped and killed.

Empathy on the part of ordinary citizens around the world is also vital. Don't think about the Rohingya as just another oppressed ethnic group on the other side of the world that you've never heard of. It is absolutely essential to stop dividing humans into subcategories of race, ethnicity, sexuality or whatever else. Each man, woman or child who is raped and killed at the hands of the Burmese security forces is a person just like you and your children. They have hobbies and interests; they like sport and music just as you do. They hope one day to be doctors or teachers or even just to have a family - just as every human should have the right to. Imagine your anguish if such things happened to a member of your own family.

And if this can happen to them, you'd better understand that it can also happen to you and yours. History shows that genocide can happen to anyone, anywhere - developed nation or not, rich or poor - making a mockery of the all-too-apparent conceit that some human lives are more valuable than others...we only have to see the way the Western media counts casualties of war to understand that - every Western soldier who dies is counted and honored, but not the nameless (read worthless) civilians unfortunate enough to be caught up in a war zone.

Do not allow yourself to be brainwashed in this way. The loss of any life anywhere is a tragedy - maybe not to you personally, but that person has a mother, a father, kids...close friends...who will all be devastated. The strength of human emotion does not vary by race - it is the same for everyone, and infinite in scope.

Burma is not the only place where genocide is occurring, or where human misery is complete (as in - among other places - West Papua). Educate yourself on this most tragic of human rights issues and do something. Politicians sometimes act if you put pressure on them. Inform your friends, write a blog, sign petitions, follow activists on social media for up-to-date information, call officials directly, message influential or high-profile people on Twitter and Facebook, hell...go to the offices of politicians in person.

And keep in mind that helping others begets happiness for both parties, and sets an example to others that may encourage them to act selflessly also. Such actions can only help society as a whole. And isn't that what it's all about?

Sign a petition to help the Rohingya people here.

'The 99.99998271% - Why the Time is Right for Direct Democracy' by Simon Wood is available for free download. In this 70-page book, the current state of human rights and democracy is discussed, and a simple method of implementing direct democracy is suggested. Find Simon Wood on twitter (@simonwood11) and Facebook or at his blog. The Direct Democracy Alliance, a voluntary group dedicated to creating national/global direct democracy, is now also on twitter: (@DDA4586)

Author's note: For over a year I have been writing detailed articles on human rights and direct democracy, and have written a book on the topic which is freely available. However, despite some small successes, I am yet to make a scratch in any meaningful way that will bring about real change. For this to happen, I need to create an NPO or similar organization devoted to creating and promoting direct democracy and human rights. I therefore appeal to any reader who has significant resources, or who has connections to someone who has, to contact me with regard to making a philanthropic donation to bring about a transparent organization with paid, professional staff which can actually make a difference. Bitcoins are also gratefully accepted.

This article may be re-published or re-blogged freely.

Bitcoin address: 1BMnkhwgPap2NVNiyKGTP1gfBuMtZQVYUo