Nobel Peace Prize Laureates Challenge American Militarism.

by Jerry Alatalo

Rocky Top - 1Alphabet When three Nobel Peace Prize laureates come together for an interview, you know it’s a special occasion. Mairead Maguire was awarded the Prize in 1976 – the youngest recipient up to that point, she was 30-years old – for her efforts to bring peace to her native Northern Ireland. Jody Williams received the 1997 Peace Prize for her efforts to ban land mines globally, and Leymah Gbowee received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011 for helping to end the second Liberian Civil War in 2003.

The phenomenon of women becoming active for peace is nothing new, as the three women were in the Hague for a ceremony unveiling the statue of Dr. Aletta Jacobs, who in 1915 as World War I was ongoing organized the International Congress of Women calling for world peace.  During their short interview with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now some challenging words were said on America’s militarism, and one is left wondering if the women will become invited to talk before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations committee any time soon.

Most reading these words likely believe that eventuality is a long-shot at best, but, after listening to the interview and the clear sincerity coming from the women, if they aren’t invited to appear before Congress it’s surely missing, first, any chance for repairing America’s reputation as a warring nation (these women are Nobel Peace Prize laureates!), and second, a great opportunity for learning peace. Again, two of the three Nobel Peace Prize laureates – Mairead Maguire and Jody Williams – directly challenged America’s militarism.

Mairead Maguire – after commenting on the need for a change of global consciousness and deciding we aren’t going to kill each other anymore, how the news media reports the world is falling apart, that 99% of the world’s people don’t want to kill each other, and that governments take us to war but we don’t want it – said:

“I would challenge the American government, because I think the American government’s policies are totally wrong. Their approach of going after militarism and war, and bombing countries is uncivilized, illegal and absolutely dreadful in the 21st century. So, I do believe that America has a moral and ethical responsibility to the world to listen to… the people in the world (who) want peace. Everybody has a right to peace. They can do it through dialogue and through negotiation, and let’s give peace a chance.”

Jody Williams:

“Of course we can change the world. Sometimes, as Mairead said, when we look at that, when I look at my own country – I’ve been fighting the U.S. foreign policy since Vietnam, my first protest, 1970, University of Vermont. But, change is possible, and, because I believe, like Mairead, the majority of the people of the world are sick to death of this, and we are starting to stand up and say no. We’re starting to challenge, and not accept words out of one side of the face and the actions which are different. I never thought, unfortunately, I didn’t drink the Obama kool-aid. That man fired, authorized, more drone strikes in the 1st 3-months of his administration than George W. Bush did in eight years of office.”

“We have to, as Americans, I agree with her (Mairead), accept the responsibility that we have the most militaristic nation in the world, and take responsibility to stop it.”

Later, Mairead Maguire (1976) added:

“Well, you know America’s a great country, and Eleanor Roosevelt was one of the contributors to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and you have a wonderful constitution. But… revive your constitution and dedicate yourselves to international law. Be a peacemaker, not a war maker.”

With only a minute left, Jody Williams (1997) added:

“Women need to be involved in all aspects of peace and security.”

Finally, Leymah Gbowee (2011):

“Do one good thing every day that everyone else is scared to do.”

Let these great women talk to the United States Congress.

Isn’t it time to talk peace in Washington?

****

For more information visit: peacepeople.com

(Thank you to Democracy Now at YouTube)

False Flags And Ending The Military-Industrial-Complex.

Posted on October 12, 2014

by Jerry Alatalo

aaa-15Kind of a double post here, with Kevin Barrett and James Fetzer on their show “False Flag Weekly News” from Thursday October 9, then an October 13 article titled, “The Disturbing Expansion of the Military-Industrial-Complex” by 1976 Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire of Ireland.

—-

Mr. Barrett and Mr. Fetzer always seem to cover a lot of topics on their show, and this one is no exception. Both agree that they’d be happy if the world no longer experienced false flags and government lies, even though they’d have to find other things to do with their time spent researching and reporting on them. It’s interesting to note that this video has been seen around 1,500 times on YouTube, while music videos, funny clips, “hot new trailers” for movies, and “popular right now” at YouTube’s front page received views in the hundreds of thousands up to 8 million.

Former university professors Barrett and Fetzer talk about such wide-ranging issues as British Prime Minister David Cameron’s United Nations address where he equated men and women who question the official government narrative on 9/11 and 7/7 to members of ISIS, unusual occurrences (including the death of a friend of the brothers accused) surrounding the Boston Marathon bombing,  and Joe Biden’s truthful “foot in the mouth” statements about the US’ allies funding of ISIS.

Other issues discussed include European Union member states’ purchasing of oil from ISIS, newly discovered “imminent threat” terrorist group Khorasan, Rita Katz’ release of another beheading video, Argentina’s revelation of Israeli 1992 and 1994 false flag/black-ops in Buenos Aires, Sweden’s recognition of the State of Palestine, a German journalist’s admission of media involvement by US intelligence and narratives pushing for war with Russia, high numbers of civilian deaths from drone strikes compared to actual terrorists, the death of a young Venezuelan politician, the FCC’s plans to regulate the internet, Ebola, Hong Kong demonstrations, and more.

At the end of their last number of shows, Mr. Barrett and Mr. Fetzer have included a humorous article. Ending the show with a laugh becomes greatly appreciated as the topics these men cover are far from humorous, and most men and women understand the need to break the dark mood produced by harsh realities in the world and allow some normalcy, sanity and balance.

—-

(Thank you to noliesradio at YouTube)

****

Mairead Maguire’s latest article provides contrast to Kevin Barrett and James Fetzer, where she writes about the broad implications of continued militarization, war, and spending on weapons around the Earth. Her wise views will be represented in an upcoming writing about a concept for transforming the world’s many separate national militaries into one global police force, possibly eliminating nation against nation warfare.

—-

(Cross-posted from InterPress Service News: http://www.ipsnews.net)

by Mairead Maguire, 1976 Nobel Peace Laureate

BELFAST, Oct 13 2014 (IPS) – How can we explain that in the 2lst century we are still training millions of men and women in our armed forces and sending them to war? 

There are more choices than war or peace, there are multi-optional choices and a civilian-based non-military diplomatic-political policy has more chance of succeeding in solving a violent conflict.

In war, the cost in civilian lives is incalculable, not to mention the many military personnel whose lives are destroyed.  Then there is the cost to the environment and the cost to human potential as our scientists waste their lives planning and researching even more horrific weapons which increasingly, in modern war, kill more civilians than combatants.

 

For example, the United States and the United Kingdom committed genocide against the Iraqi people when, between 1990 and 2012, they killed 3.3 million people – including 750,000 children – through sanctions and wars.

We all also watched our television screens in horror in July and August this year as the Israeli military bombarded civilians in Gaza for 50 days.

But, why are we surprised at this cruelty of military when they are doing what they are trained to do – kill, at the behest of their politicians and some people?

It is shocking to listen to politicians and military boast of their military prowess when in lay persons’ terms what it means is killing of human beings.

Every day through our television and local culture, we are subjected to the glorification of militarism and bombarded with war propaganda by governments telling us we need nuclear weapons, arms manufacturers, and war to kill the killers who might kill us.

However, too many people do not have peace or the basics to help them achieve peace.

“Every day through our television and local culture, we are subjected to the glorification of militarism and bombarded with war propaganda by governments telling us we need nuclear weapons, arms manufacturers, and war to kill the killers who might kill us”

They live their lives struggling with the roots of violence, some of which are poverty, war, militarism, occupation, racism and fascism. They have seen that they release uncontrollable forces of tribalism and nationalism. These are dangerous and murderous forms of identity which we need to transcend.

To do this, we need to acknowledge that our common humanity and human dignity are more important than our different traditions; to recognise that our lives and the lives of others are sacred and we can solve our problems without killing each other; to accept and celebrate diversity and otherness; to work to heal the ‘old’ divisions and misunderstandings; to give and accept forgiveness, and to choose listening, dialogue and diplomacy; to disarm and demilitarise as the pathway to peace.

In my own country, in Northern Ireland, when faced with a violent and prolonged ethnic/political conflict, the civil community organised to take a stand, rejected all violence and committed itself to working for peace, justice and reconciliation.

Through unconditional, all-inclusive dialogue, we reached peace and continue to work to build up trust and friendship and change in the post-conflict era. The civil community took a leading role in this journey from violence to peace.

I hope this will give an example to other countries such as Ukraine, where it is necessary for an end to the war, and a solution of the problem on the basis of the Charter of the United Nations and the Helsinki Accords.

We are also challenged to continue to build structures through which we can cooperate and which reflect our relations of interconnection and interdependence.  The vision of the founders of the European Union to link countries together economically in order to lessen the likelihood of war among nations is a worthy endeavour.

Unfortunately instead of putting more energy into providing help for E.U. citizens and others, we are witnessing the growing militarisation of Europe, its role as a driving force for armament and its dangerous path, under the leadership of the United States/NATO, towards a new ‘cold’ war and military aggression.

The European Union and many of its countries, which used to take initiatives in the United Nations for peaceful settlements of conflict, are now one of the most important war assets of the U.S./NATO front.  Many countries have also been drawn into complicity in breaking international law through U.S./U.K./NATO wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and so on.

—-

It is for this reason that I believe NATO should be abolished and that steps be taken towards disarmament through non-violent action and civil resistance.

The means of resistance are very important. Our message that armed groups, militarism and war do not solve our problem but aggravate them challenges us to use new ways and that is why we need to teach the science of peace at every level of society.

The whole of civilisation is now facing a challenge with the growth of what President Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961) warned the U.S. people against – the military/industrial complex – saying that it would destroy U.S. democracy.

We know now that a small group made up of the military/industrial/media/corporate/academic elite, whose agenda is profit, arms, war and valuable resources, now holds power worldwide and has a stronghold on elected governments.  We see this in the gun and Israeli lobbies, among others, which wield great power over U.S. politics.

We have witnessed this in ongoing wars, invasions, occupations and proxy wars, all allegedly in the name of “humanitarian intervention and democracy”. However, in reality, they are causing great suffering, especially to the poor, through their policies of arms, war, domination and control of other countries and their resources.

Unmaking this agenda of war and demanding the implementation of justice, human rights and international law is the work of the peace movement.

We can turn our current path of destruction around by spelling out a clear vision of what kind of a world we want to live in, demanding an end to the military-industrial complex, and insisting that our governments adopt policies of peace, just economics and cooperation with each other in this multi-polar world.