Worldwide Israel Sanctions Until Palestine Achieves Independence.

Posted on October 23, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

ocean222Alphabet United Nations Security Council President for the month of October is Argentina’s representative to the UN, and on October 21 an extremely important open debate on the Middle East and Palestine was held lasting 7 hours 30 minutes. Around 60 men and women UN representatives from around the world took turns speaking. Without exception, but for Israel’s UN ambassador, every speaker called for an independent, sovereign State of Palestine (two-state solution) after the 51-day, latest Israeli aggression against Gaza killing 2,180, injuring over 10,000, destroying 20,000 homes, commercial buildings, schools, hospitals, as well as destroying Gaza’s major infrastructure. Over 100,000 Gazans are now homeless because of Israel’s military aggression.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, after traveling to Gaza recently, described the destruction as “beyond comprehension”. The over-7 hour meeting saw each speaker, as well as calling for an independent State of Palestine, pointing out the need for Israel to immediately end its confiscation of occupied territory and construction of settlements. Many speakers made the point that the United Nations has discussed the issue of Israel-Palestine again and again and again through the decades without realizing a long-lasting peaceful solution but – as the woman ambassador from Belize said, “this (Israel’s 50-day bombing campaign) is the last straw of the last straws” – the clearly unanimous consensus during the meeting is that the time for empty words without results is over.

Listening closely to the words coming from Israel’s UN representative during his turn to speak – then again after everyone spoke and Argentine’s President of the Security Council asked if there were additional comments – was very odd in that he failed to discuss seriously (not at all, really) any of the very significant points made by what seemed like 59 out of 60 meeting attendees. The total unwillingness of the Israeli UN representative to acknowledge any detail out of the entirety of the meeting’s clear, unambiguous message from men and women there could be described as irrational because of the extreme difference of opinion between an in-agreement 59 compared to one.

Many of the speakers used the word “intransigence” in describing the Israeli government’s uncompromising stance regarding Palestinian independence. They are precisely correct, and for that reason the only way Israel will compromise and agree to Palestinian statehood is a worldwide sanctions movement on Israel, based on the economic sanctions model currently applied against Iran, Russia and other nations around the world. Every nation on Earth, including the United States of America, must completely halt all economic, financial and military dealings with the State of Israel until Palestine has become an independent nation. Signed, sealed, and delivered.

Israel will not alter its law-breaking actions and cooperate with the international community to allow Palestinians their own sovereign nation without the necessary, powerful incentive of a sanctions process carried out by the world’s nations. It has become painfully clear Palestinian statehood is inevitable. That reality needs to occur as soon as humanly possible, because the Israel-Palestine conflict represents war and peace in the Middle East region depending on when Palestinian statehood is irreversibly achieved.

—-

In the following CCTV interview a former Israeli ambassador to Mauritania, now journalist in Israel, Boaz Bismuth becomes asked for his thoughts on recent actions by the nations of Sweden and Britain to recognize the State of Palestine. His responses, very similar to Israel’s ambassador to the UN during yesterday’s meeting, fail in addressing the concerns of an increasingly aware and rapidly growing majority of the world’s people and government officials, and, because their Israeli narrative could be compared to an encapsulated summary of over six decades of irresolution of the conflict. At the end of Israel’s UN ambassador’s words in front of the Security Council yesterday, after Boaz Bismuth’s interview here on CCTV, and after over 60 years of Israeli “intransigence” and consistent violations of international law – Israeli words and actions have contributed nothing to solving the conflict with Palestine: creation of a Palestinian state.

(Boaz Bismuth / Thank you to CCTV America at YouTube)

Compare what Boaz Bismuth said to an excerpt on Israel-Palestine from the address by Luxembourg’s UN representative, which she delivered yesterday to the Security Council.

“I’d like to thank the Secretary General for his presentation as well as the permanent representative of the State of Palestine and the permanent representative of the State of Israel for their interventions. Luxembourg fully associates itself with the statement that will be made by the European Union. Madame Chairman, the Secretary General has just presented the appalling outcome of the 50 days of war on the Gaza Strip; the third such war in 6 years that has caused so many deaths and wounded people; that has destroyed so many lives and entire neighborhoods”.

“We’d like to thank Egypt, its efforts have led to a ceasefire concluded on August 26. It was the first step that was essential to put an end to the hostilities, suffering and humiliations. We also welcome the conference on Palestine restructuring of Gaza that was held in Cairo on the 12th of October, organized by Egypt and Norway in the support of the Palestinian Authority. Our Minister of Foreign and European Affairs was there and he reiterated the strong solidarity of Luxembourg with the Palestinian people that translates into a lasting financial commitment of approximately 7 million Euros a year”.

“We also welcome a mechanism established between the United Nations and the Palestinian Authority and Israel, which is also an essential step in the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, but we know that we need to go further. No people would be able to live under the conditions imposed on the inhabitants of Gaza, besieged between three walls on one side and the sea, and that survive only thanks to UN and international aid. We need to lift the blockade that is strangling Gaza and its economy”.

“Madame President, the war on Gaza confirms that fighting is inevitable in a context of political stalemate, hatred and discord. Over the past 20 years, the peace process has gone through repetition of three successive phases: relaunch, bogging down and failure. Each new cycle has provided its share of suffering. Its time now to step off the beaten path. The time is no longer to repeat the same sterile processes of perpetual negotiations that don’t lead to anything. Our duty is to draw the lessons from the past. The components of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East have been set forth many times; we all know the terms of the equation, there’s no need to repeat them”.

“The goal is quite clear: an independent, democratic, contiguous Palestinian State, living in peace and security next to Israel on the basis of 1967 borders with Jerusalem as the capital of two states. The time has come to take bold and concrete measures to implement the two-state solution, before others take further measures that will make this solution impossible. In this context, Luxembourg condemns the recent decision by the Israeli authorities to approve the construction plans for 2,600 housing units. This decision is a direct threat to the two-state solution and the need for Jerusalem to be the capital for the two states Israel and Palestine”.

“If this decision is maintained, it would confirm our doubt about the commitment of Israel towards a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians. Luxembourg would like to recall here that settlements are illegal with regard to international law. We call on Israel to reconsider its decision, and more broadly, to put an end immediately to settlement activity in East Jerusalem and the whole of the West bank. Just as the European Union, Luxembourg will not recognize any changes to the 1967 borders except those agreed by both parties”.

“We hope that the Security Council is able to play its constructive role in order to achieve peace, to encourage and facilitate efforts aimed at saving the two-state solution and putting an end to occupation. My country is ready to support those efforts”.

Luxembourg’s woman ambassador to the UN expressed views virtually identical to all men and women who spoke at the October 21 Security Council meeting on the Middle East, which can be heard and viewed at the United Nations website, UN.org.  Sweden and Britain have taken actions heard round the world when they recognized the State of Palestine. Boaz Bismuth replied to his CCTV interviewer about Sweden and Britain’s actions: “I would say it is, I would say, that it is a spectacular display of ignorance”.

When the CCTV interviewer suggested that Israel was facing increased world isolation, Mr. Bismuth responded, “Should Israel commit suicide now because of world public opinion?” He told the CCTV interviewer that Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas’ address to the 69th United Nations General Assembly calling for Palestinian statehood was “vicious, violent lies”, Israel is just a small nation, and finally “This is ridiculous, it is ridiculous”.

Every nation on Earth must place overwhelmingly powerful economic and military sanctions on the State of Israel with the stated purpose of bringing into reality a Palestinian State. Israel’s stubborn, uncompromising, criminal actions are not only irrational but, with its possession of hundreds of nuclear weapons, extremely dangerous.

The world cannot risk waiting for Israel to come to its senses and conform to the wishes of an increasingly growing, “not buying it anymore”, impatient world. An international sanctions regime placed on Israel represents the action closest to a guarantee that Israel will capitulate to internationally agreed upon reason and rationality, and may offer the one and only chance of peace for men, women and children living in the Middle East region of Earth.

—-

(Part 1 of 3 / The 7,281st meeting of the United Nations Security Council) 

http://webtv.un.org/watch/part-1-middle-east-including-the-palestinian-question-security-council-7281st-meeting/3851389937001

Is Anyone Investigating Mass Murder In Kiev, Ukraine?

Posted March 16, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

“For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are.”

– Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527)

whitekeys4Weeks have passed since nearly 100 men, women, and police officers were tragically gunned down and killed in Kiev, Ukraine. Have the killers been apprehended? Has an investigation even started yet?

Asking if an investigation into the murder of 100 people in Kiev has begun places one in the world of the unreal, especially when one compares the standard actions taken by small,  medium, and large cities’ law enforcement agencies anywhere in the world after murders are carried out.

For men and women residing in a town of 5,000 population, if a murder occurs local law enforcement will begin an investigation immediately. For those who live in cities of 30,000 people, when a mass killing of four people happens, the city police department will join with nearby cities’ law enforcement agencies and probably the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) – then immediately begin the intensive hunt for the killer(s).

If ten people get murdered by snipers in a city of 250,000 residents, such an event will get reported as the lead story in every newsroom in America – and probably around the Earth. A scenario where 100 men, women, and police officers get shot to death by snipers in the capital of the United States – Washington, D.C. – would begin an immediate investigation the likes of which no human has ever seen before.

In every single small to large imagined scenario just described, law enforcement agencies, detectives, street patrol officers, and all staff would share one absolutely common response. In each case immediate, concerted actions to find the murderers would occur.

The intercepted phone conversation between the European Union’s Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet, where Mr. Paet suggested that snipers in Kiev, Ukraine were shooting both civilian Ukrainian protesters and police officers – backed by members of the transition government and not ousted President Viktor Yanukovych – became public on March 5. The civilian and police deaths occurred weeks ago.

A full-scale investigation, similar to the imagined scenario example of Washington, D.C. mentioned above, has yet to begin in Ukraine. Have there been calls for a combined multinational law enforcement effort to find the mass murderers in Ukraine? Where does finding those who did the killing rank on the list of urgent issues needing immediate action/address by leaders from the new government in Ukraine, leaders in the European Union, United States, and Russia?

How is it that the killers of 100 men, women, and police officers are not yet behind bars – and, the question which is even more baffling – how is it that an investigation to find the killers has not yet begun?

The situation in Kiev, Ukraine is absolutely unreal.

****

(Thank you to InnerCity Press at YouTube)

Ukraine: The Time Has Arrived For United Nations Truth Commission.

Posted March 10, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

Attention: United Nations Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-Moon

The time has arrived for the end of propaganda and half-truths about the Ukraine situation. This is a proposal to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to arrange and convene a Truth Commission on Ukraine at the United Nations as soon as humanly possible. The Truth Commission on Ukraine would film and record any United Nations (UN) member state’s representative who wishes to speak for one hour about ideas that would resolve the situation truthfully and, most urgently, peacefully.

The list of those men and women representatives would be arranged on a first come, first speak basis. Men and women who represent their nations at the UN have been chosen by their people for their qualities of honesty, altruism, humanitarianism, and desire to help build a peaceful world. The concept of a truth commission may eventually become a permanent fixture at the UN where any nation’s representative can talk freely, at any time, about any issue of concern.

Establishment of such a truth commission and making it a permanent part of the UN is an issue that can be focused on at a later date. At this time, the most important step the UN can take is to allow the truth to emerge regarding events in Ukraine. The number of people around the world who have come to be concerned about the situation there are looking for the wisest, most reasonable men and women on Earth to come forward with rational ideas which result in the best actions offering the greatest possibility of good outcomes for all the people of Ukraine and the world.

A UN Truth Commission on Ukraine offers humanity the best opportunity for results that most of the Earth’s people will agree on.

The people from all nations in the world, because of their natural concern about events in Ukraine, are searching for the truth in a variety of ways. Some are getting their information from televised news broadcasts, while others are getting their information from the so-called alternative press or the many websites reporting on events in the Ukraine, including the UN’s official website.

The essential problems which a UN Truth Commission on Ukraine would solve is the world’s people basing their perceptions on misinformation, disinformation, outright lies, and other biased information which is being produced by people and groups which do not have absolute truth as the highest priority. Information about Ukraine is being directly attached to agendas not in line with the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

A UN Truth Commission on Ukraine would first defeat those who are putting out disinformation and lies, while giving the concerned people of the world a place to go for truthful representation of facts. This is urgent because people may take regrettable actions based on false perceptions, at the same time passing the same false assertions to others, who may then take regrettable actions based on those same false perceptions. There is an urgent need to eliminate as much as humanly possible any possibility of people taking actions based on falsehoods.

Secondly, a UN Truth Commission on Ukraine allows the UN member state representatives to offer their most heart-felt, benevolent, and wisest ideas to become shared with their fellow UN representatives, and the world’s people. This action allows for the wisest, widest, most thorough, and most focused examination of the Ukrainian situation, and is the road most likely to bring forth a good outcome for humanity, especially the people in Ukraine and that region.

A UN Truth Commission on Ukraine offers humanity the best chance to get important questions answered, and sincere concerns to become genuinely addressed. Good ideas and good solutions will come forth and allow for further discussion, leading to a further distillation of ideas until the best solutions are obvious and certain to be agreed upon by the majority of the human race.

Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, please view the following video which is but one example in thousands of humanity’s information sources containing questions and concerns about Ukraine that a UN Truth Commission on Ukraine would answer and address.

Very truly yours. Thank you for every consideration.

****

The United Nations And Oneness On Earth.

Posted November 4, 2013

by Jerry Alatalo

earthblog3

“This is the problem: Is there any way of delivering mankind from the menace of war?… As one immune from nationalist bias, I personally see a simple way of dealing with the superficial (i.e. administrative) aspect of the problem: the setting up by international consent of a legislative and judicial body to settle every conflict arising between nations… Thus I am led to my first axiom (accepted truth): the quest of international security involves the unconditional surrender by every nation, in a certain measure, of its liberty of action, its sovereignty that is to say, and it is clear beyond all doubt that no other road can lead to such security”.

Albert Einstein (1879-1955) In a letter to Dr. Freud, 1932

The United Nations. The organization began in 1945 with fifty-one nations, after World War II, when there was widespread agreement that a third world war would be catastrophic for humanity.

One can only guess if the words of Albert Einstein quoted above had anything to do with the beginning of the United Nations. Seeing that in 1944 Mr. Einstein would have been age 65, and a person whose name was known around the world, it could be seen that at the time his words were highly respected and any suggestion he may have made regarding world peace and security would have been considered seriously.

As Albert Einstein was a scientist, for him to utter the words, “clear beyond all doubt” leads one to believe that he spent a considerable amount of mental effort to come to such a conclusion. In 1932 Einstein was in effect predicting the establishment of the United Nations. Here in 2013 his description of an international legislative and judicial body is close to completion in today’s United Nations (UN).

All that is left to accomplish before Einstein’s vision of such an international governing body is for every member state of the UN to agree on such an Earthly governmental arrangement. As mentioned the UN is the body on Earth that is as close to Einstein’s vision as any. One could say that 97% of the structure is in place and there is relatively little needed to reach that vision – but political will.

Some would consider a truly worldwide governing entity embodied in the UN as some type of “New World Order” or “One World Government” which immediately brings about suspicions and reservations, thanks to ridiculous conspiracy theories surrounding such a planetary agreement. Because of these ridiculous, uninformed, unreal ways of thinking many have come to the point where any talk of a world governing body (remember Einstein’s words) is quickly discounted and given no further analysis.

Most nations on Earth already have a form of world government, it is their national government. Most nations elect representatives and have the equivalent of a Supreme Court. Why completion of Einstein’s vision, a supra-national governing body in the form of the UN, is important and beneficial we shall try to point out.

Why the UN should become the world’s governing body.

Benefits of UN becoming the world’s governing body:

Eradication of national criminal behavior. The example here would be the Iraq War begun in 2003, where the United States and the United Kingdom went against public opinions of the majority of the world, and over one million Iraqis were killed, the environment of Iraq was destroyed, and the infrastructure of that country was obliterated. If the United Nations was the world’s governing body in 2003 the Iraq War would have perhaps been prevented.

Other examples of criminal behavior include corruption by corporations, including debt-trap loans, bribery, covert wars, and political assassinations. A world judicial/legal body, a World Supreme Court, would, because all UN member states have signed on to honor the decisions of the World Supreme Court, would effectively deter any criminal actions that have major consequences for the people of the world.

As an example, George Bush and Tony Blair, if such a World Supreme Court had been in place with agreed upon laws and punishments from 2003, these two men would be behind bars. Please don’t misunderstand what I am saying here: I do not have a personal goal of seeing George Bush, Tony Blair, and others behind bars or receiving the death sentence. What I am saying is that the killing of over one million Iraqis, over four thousand coalition forces, and the expenditure of over one trillion US dollars (which could have gone a long way toward eliminating disease and poverty, while improving living conditions for millions around the world) could have been prevented.

Men, women, and children around the world would begin to see the rest of the world’s people as part of the human family, the spiritual concept of oneness, unity, and compassion would develop in great measure, starting a chain-reaction which begins the diminishing of separation concepts such as “nationalism”, “us versus them”, etc., until these separation “theologies” become a thing of the past – replaced with the true reality of life on Earth: oneness.

Because of this world evolutionary thinking a great deal more time will become devoted to solutions-based thinking and creativity, as opposed to thoughts which have a certain element of separation thinking factored into the thinking process. Once again, in the area of human study, critical thinking, and solutions-centered creativity, a great increase of positive, mutually beneficial ideas will be entered into the collective consciousness, while those actions and thought processes which bring about deleterious/harmful consequences for the human family will begin to diminish and, eventually, disappear from the face of the Earth.

Co-operation will become the working rule of the day, as opposed to historical competition, which has led to the severe levels of wealth inequality experienced today. It has become plain and obvious that when some very small segment of humanity has come to control an inequitable percentage of the world’s financial and natural resource wealth, while most of the human race struggles for its very physical survival, that certainly a change is truly in order.

Co-operation will also start the beginning of the end for war and killing for economic and power reasons. As a result of new thinking by the people of the world, those issues, concerns, and situations which lead people to desperate actions, such as those of so-called terrorists, who are many times younger people who have run out of options, shall be dealt with in the best ways humanly possible.

While there are many more beneficial consequences of United Nations member states‘ agreement to operate under the laws and rules of a UN World Government, perhaps a few reform ideas would result in an even more democratic UN and world.

Reforms for a more democratic UN and world.

As the UN Security Council is the most powerful organ of the UN, my suggestion is its discontinuance. At present five nations – China, Russia, USA, United Kingdom, and France – are permanent members of the Security Council and have veto power. With the discontinuance of the Security Council there will be no one single nation able to stop initiatives – the entire General Assembly – all 193 member states would vote on important resolutions, with each nation’s vote given equal weight to their country’s percentage of the total population of the planet.

For example, if such a truly democratic framework were in effect at the UN during recent debate on possible actions regarding the war in Syria, all 193 member states would vote on any, and all, resolution(s). For the USA this would have meant that their vote would hold the weight of approximately 4.3% of the total vote. If we divide the total population of humanity, 7 billion, by the population of the USA, 300 million, we find the USA’s percentage at .042857, or 4.3%. Or 4.2857%.

On the same vote India would find their percentage at 14.3% (One billion divided by seven billion = .142857 or 14.3%). Or 14.2857%. So, every one of the 193 member states/nations would be democratically represented according to the population of their nation as a percentage of the population of the entire human race.

Each UN member state will choose a people’s representative to the UN, at the same time that nation elects a president or prime minster, etc.

The elected-by-the-people UN representative will serve along with the representative appointed by the president or prime minister, who is most of the time approved by the congress or house of representatives of each nation. So, each member state will have two representatives to the UN, one appointed with the approval of the nation’s governing body, and one elected directly by the people.

This additional reform, election by the people of each member state of a “UN people’s representative”, will require a further breakdown of resolution votes. Each member state will receive two votes on resolutions, one by the appointed representative, and one by the elected representative. The combined vote of the 193 member-states appointed representatives will entail 50% of the vote on individual UN resolutions. The combined vote of the members’ elected representatives will entail 50% of the vote.

Why add an “elected UN representative”?

The reason is simple. If we use the example of 2003 and the Bush and Blair regimes in the run-up to the Iraq War, we find that the appointed UN representatives in the USA and United Kingdom went along with Bush and Blair. If the USA and UK both had elected UN representatives in 2003, there would have been an additional, conflict-of-interest-free voice in each nation who was elected by the people. An elected UN representative adds another democracy-enhancing layer to government, helping to correct conflict of interest issues as well as providing an independent representative for the people of the world.

UN vote chalkboards.

Another possibility of increasing democracy on Earth, in addition to the reforms presented on the UN, is direct popular voting on UN resolutions. Imagine a permanent chalkboard capable of recording 50,000 or less votes, cast with chalk in front of everybody, in every voting area on Earth inside the member states of the UN. Firstly, popular vote on UN resolutions would be totally transparent – not secret. When a UN resolution vote is upcoming average men and women in each member state will come to their polling place, vote yes or no on the current resolution (in front of everyone) in one of the 50,000 (or less) squares on the permanent UN vote chalkboard.

Only those who have the courage to let their views become known to everyone will show up to vote. Everyone will know what the vote of that district is, and the results shall be published to make sure there is no voting fraud. This type of voting will be 100% clean and correct. From those results both the appointed and elected representative of the nation will know how their people feel. This is an idea that could become implemented to further democracy and at the same time encourage citizen involvement in the issues which affect the entire human race.

The previous paragraphs have been shared in an effort to communicate what I believe are ideas which will, when agreed upon by the people of the world and implemented at the United Nations, be beneficial for humanity and future generations. I cannot even think about myself in the same intellectual league as Albert Einstein. Al I can say is that, with regard to Mr. Einstein’s letter to Sigmund Freud at the top of this post, I agree 100% with his sentiments. Albert Einstein spoke words that many of you are familiar with: “Imagination is more important than knowledge”.

What I have written here is a product of imagination – what I believe is possible. The ideas are now in the public sphere on the internet, available to men and women in every nation on Earth.

****

The following video contains an address by 30-year United Nations veteran Mr. Shashi Tharoor. Perhaps his discussion will add texture and context to the idea of the United Nations’ evolving into the world’s first supra-national governing body.

Finally, these are the last written words of Albert Einstein – April 1955:

“Not one statesman in a position of responsibility has dared to pursue the only course that holds out any promise of peace, the courage of supra-national security, since for a statesman to follow such a course would be tantamount  to political suicide”. 

 

Related articles