Peaceful Protester's Journal
Member since: Thu Oct 13, 2011, 07:58 AM
Number of posts: 216
Number of posts: 216
Thank you for sharing. Great lessons from an credible speaker on how to listen and be heard in an era of divided politics.
Jesus taught that the cycle of violence and revenge could be broken through the process of love and forgiveness. Both Martin Luther King Jr and Gandhi studied scripture and had understood the radical message of selfless love Jesus had taught centuries before. Though they were vilified, all three men showed us how a greater and deeper selfless love could benefit all.
To develop such selfless love, each thought, word, and deed must be motivated by the welfare and well-being of others, and not for one's own gratification; and not just for those whom we care. MLK and Gandhi became powerful leaders and political figures because they empowered everyone around them. They understood the power of engaging others with respect, dignity, love, and forgiveness.
Both men had understood the radical message of love that Jesus taught centuries before. Jesus' teachings were as radical for his time as they are today. Through his words and actions Jesus led the way. Through the use of positive nonviolence any one can be that positive catalyst for change as this speaker so eloquently explains.
Principles of Love and Forgiveness (as taught by Jesus)
• For all have sinned
• None is righteous, no, not one
• Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be blotted out
• Forgive others as we have been forgiven
• Love one another as I have loved you
• Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you
• Judge not lest ye be judged
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Tue Mar 7, 2017, 12:19 PM (0 replies)
Trump's executive order shows he is willing to go to great lengths to appease his base while obscuring the fact he promised them a Muslim ban during his campaign. He claims his executive order is merely about security. Yet, many experts believe this will make us less, not more safe. Meanwhile, even Israel thinks it is a bad idea.
Trump has business ties in many countries throughout the Middle East, but none of those countries are named in his executive order. Most of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia; a country not mentioned in the executive order.
In Battle for Iraq, a PBS Film, soldiers in Mosul deal with unidentified people asking for help. Yet soldiers help these people when they can. Over the years, soldiers have learned they must treat locals with dignity and respect to gain their trust and support. Somehow amidst the fighting and chaos they are able to keep their cool and quickly assess potentially dangerous situations. We can and must learn from these brave and honorable men and women who defend us on the front line.
Trump's executive order is not so much about security as it is about Trump himself, power, control, appeasing his base and fear-mongering.
Trump, who campaigned on a Muslim ban, says to stop calling it a Muslim ban
Giuliani: Trump Told Me He Wanted A "Muslim Ban"
Countries where Trump does business are not hit by new travel restrictions
Battle for Iraq | FRONTLINE | PBS
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Wed Feb 1, 2017, 10:01 PM (0 replies)
It makes no difference what color you are or what station in life you find yourself. All people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect!
George Zimmerman's MySpace Disparages Mexicans, Mentions 2005 Criminal Charges
(Read More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/02/zimmerman-myspace-page_n_1471818.html)
Thank you, CatWoman
Stand Up And Speak Out Against Injustice
Speak out with dignity and respect, reach out with love and peace, and embrace non-violence to address an injustice.
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Mon Jul 15, 2013, 09:28 PM (0 replies)
George indicated his initial contact with Trayvon began with the following words:
Trayvon: "Do you have a problem?"
George: "No. I don't have a problem!"
Trayvon adopts a defensive position after coming into contact with the person he believes has followed him for no reason. In his response, George neither identifies himself nor his intentions. George simply challenges Trayvon's defensive attitude with his own; thereby, unnecessarily escalating an already tense situation. At this point, it would be reasonable to believe ones life was in immediate danger.
George should have identified himself and his intentions. If George had simply treated Trayvon with respect and been straightforward, how different the outcome:
Trayvon: "Do you have a problem?"
George: "No. I'm with neighborhood watch, and we've had several incidents lately."
George: "I was just wondering if you live around here?"
Why Racial Profiling is a Bad Idea
Racial profiling doesn't work.
One of the great myths about racial profiling is that it would work if only law enforcement agencies could use it -- that by not using racial profiling, they're tying one hand behind their backs in the name of civil rights.
This simply isn't true:
• An ACLU lawsuit uncovered police data indicating that while 73 percent of suspects pulled over on I-95 between 1995 and 1997 were black, black suspects were no more likely to actually have drugs or illegal weapons in their cars than white suspects.
• According to the Public Health Service, approximately 70% of drug users are white, 15% are black, and 8% are Latino. But the Department of Justice reports that among those imprisoned on drug charges, 26% are white, 45% are black, and 21% are Latino.
(Read More: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/lawenforcementterrorism/tp/Against-Racial-Profiling.htm)
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Fri Jul 12, 2013, 06:26 AM (34 replies)
Our Founding Fathers, who were inspired by the age of enlightenment, laid down a fundamental framework designed to advance the human race. They created a basic outline of democratic governance highlighting fundamental human rights and liberties.
The problem is this:
Our Founding Fathers handed us a timeless framework of governance, but the system, that, was designed specifically for their time, not ours. The American system was originally designed around the priorities of wealthy, landowning -- and often slave-owning -- white men.
Although the framework was designed to eventually accommodate others, the system itself was not; that task was left to us. Over the past 237 years, the system has changed very little. Our goal must be to create a system that is authentic in living up to the timeless framework of governance we have inherited.
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Wed Jun 26, 2013, 12:19 AM (0 replies)
The Republican party has been working overtime trying to stir up one manufactured scandal after another. They are just so-so at manufacturing scandals because their real talent lies is in ...fear-mongering. For days now, the Republican party's focus has been on the NSA's surveillance program, causing sales of the book, 1984, to soar.
In fact, Rand Paul (R-KY) is considering bringing the NSA surveillance program before the Supreme Court, which is reasonable. But, there's some doubt as to whether he's the best representative to do so, considering he does not care much for their opinion anyway. Rand Paul has said, "...a couple people on the Supreme Court declare to be 'constitutional' does not make it so."
By now, it's no secret the GOP specializes in producing perpetual fear. In recent weeks, the GOP has caused sales of the book, 1984, to soar, and a 10% shift in younger voters from supporting Democrats to Republicans. But, stranger than this is how Rand Paul ended up parroting Dick Cheney's claim that the president has lost all credibility. Apparently, he's trying to distract from the fact that Congress still has only about a 10% approval rating.
Bait And Switch
The Tea Party is gearing up their campaign. Yet, they are not out in force protesting GITMO, weapons to Syria, or even the NSA program. Their main concern, today, was not any part of the 9/11 framework of wartime powers they helped Neoconservatives craft, over a decade ago. No, they were, instead, much more concerned with gathering in Washington to protest ...the IRS, again. The country has officially become dysfunctional.
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Wed Jun 19, 2013, 09:25 PM (1 replies)
House Republicans have sought to balance the budget with offset spending for everything including natural disasters like: Hurricane Sandy Aid, Tornado Disaster Relief, etc.
Since Republicans are suddenly so concerned with being spend thrifts, where's the House Republican's plan to offset the taxpayer money they're spending on their list of investigations?
Darrell Issa (R-CA) said he had a list of things he wanted to investigate before he even took office, did he also have a list of things to cut in order to offset spending millions of taxpayer dollars on this list of things he wanted to investigate?
Since nothing is getting done without offset spending, why have House Republican's gotten away with wasting tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, by repeatedly voting, in a futile attempt, to repeal the Affordable Healthcare Act?
Better yet, while House Republicans are consumed with spending offsets and sniffing out scandals, where's the House Republican's plan to offset the billions of taxpayer dollars being spent on Gitmo?
Since Gitmo was first conceived by Republicans as a Constitutional loophole for human rights abuses, shouldn't it fall upon House Republicans, to find an offset?
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Tue Jun 4, 2013, 06:23 PM (0 replies)
When Darrell Issa (R-CA) took over, he said he had a long list of things he wanted to investigate.
Did Republicans using Gitmo as a Constitutional loophole for human rights abuses ever make it to that list?
Also, as House Republicans look for ways to cut spending, they are looking high and low for money to offset spending: Hurricane Sandy Aid, Tornado Disaster Relief, etc.
While they're looking for spending cuts, why don't they see it costs nearly $975,000 more to house a single detainee in Gitmo, than here, in America?
1) Why isn't using Gitmo as a Constitutional loophole scandalous?
a) Because Republicans approved it; therefore, they own it?
b) Because of the can of worms it would open for Republicans?
2) Why isn't simply spending enormous sums on Gitmo not scandalous enough for Issa's list?
3) Why is a Republican push to increase, rather than cut, spending at Gitmo not scandalous?
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Tue Jun 4, 2013, 03:24 PM (1 replies)
If our nation had been focused on working together on important issues of substance, rather than on manufacturing political scandals and facilitating jockeying for political power, together we could have addressed the red flags left by militant extremists, formulated a more effective strategy against attack, taken appropriate measures in a timely fashion, and even possibly prevented the sequence of events that eventually culminated in 9/11.
Manufactured Political Scandal
In America, the season of manufactured political scandal is a predictable recurring theme. It involves those whose only concern is merely a perpetual political campaign and the aforementioned scandal. There will be problems, but if everything rises to the level of scandal, then nothing gets prioritized. Politicians should not only be required to have a set but limited period of time in which to campaign, they should also have an adequate period of time in which to govern; leaving campaigning behind completely.
In the past, I wrote about proactive measures and one vital but missed opportunity to have prevented 9/11. Here, with a brief outline of how it works, I address another part of the equation ...manufactured political scandals:
1) Clinton: obstruction --> lame duck session --> investigation --> impeachment
PROBLEM_1: Newt Gingrich led the charge to impeach Clinton for cheating on his wife, while doing the same thing himself!
LESSON_#1: When politicians are allowed to jockey for power, rather than required to resolve important issues amicably, we have a predictable pattern of dysfunction, distraction and detriment, leading to manufactured political scandals. The distraction provided by the jockeying for political power which leads to manufactured political scandal is a major reason that the first attack on the twin towers did not receive the attention it required.
2) Bush: nonexistent proactive 9/11 strategy, lost track of Bin Laden, unprepared for M.E. sectarian violence
PROBLEM_2: (POSTED: 01-07-2013) Defense Budget Accountability
What if, instead of ignoring the August 6, 2001 presidential daily briefing titled:
'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States'
which had contained very important proactive information provided by the FBI:
"...parallel activities tracked by the FBI consistent with preparations for hijacking..."
What if...someone had suggested the president take one very simple step: get on TV and make the case for increased airport security screening?
Instead, a network of expanded presidential powers and agencies consistent with Imperial Militarism have been created: growing the Military-Industrial Complex, the Pentagon, and the CIA. They have created: the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act, the Department of Homeland Security, the United States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba, indefinite detention wo/trial, torturing, spying, preemptive war, invasion, occupation, drone strikes, etc...
LESSON_#2: As a result of a series of manufactured political scandals, as well as the subsequent and costly investigations that followed -- and despite the red flags left by militant extremists -- our nation was left distracted and unprepared to understand let alone effectively deal with the events that would finally lead to 9/11.
3) Obama: obstruction --> lame duck session --> investigation --> impeachment?
PROBLEM_3: (POSTED: 06-21-2012) Don't Miss The Obvious
LESSON_#3: You can't claim 9/11 changed everything, create an expanded network of presidential powers, then expect a president NOT to use those powers in the name of national security; and call it a scandal when those powers are used.
With the above brief outline, I hope people will see how a predictable pattern of detrimental consequences results for our nation from focusing on manufactured political scandals instead of requiring real problems to be addressed amicably.
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Mon Jun 3, 2013, 06:20 PM (1 replies)
Jon Stewart on Spending for Education (6:12)
Kindergarten Stop - Wednesday March 6, 2013
-- or --
Stewart Applauds Rand Paul For Using Filibuster Over Drones Issue - Youtube (8:48)
-- snip --
Jon: To give you an example of just how far apart the two parties are, we need only look to the state of the union address.
Clip: POTUS: I propose working with states to make high quality preschool available to every single child in America.
Jon: Universal preschool. Seems like the sort of thing that's going to go over pretty good.
(sound bites of Republicans and Fox News personalities arguing against universal preschool)
Jon: Studies show that in general Head Start programs: boost graduation rates, lower crime rates, increase college attendance and increase income earnings.
(more sound bites of Republicans and Fox News personalities arguing against universal preschool)
Jon: Money, on children's education, are you mental? If these children want an education, they should get jobs and pay for it themselves. Oh, but that's illegal. Thanks, nanny state! So, the category is investing in the nation's future. Preschool? No. Any other ideas?
Clip: Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH): We know that China is continuing to invest in its military. Certainly, our relationship with Russia has changed, but we need to make sure that we have a strong military.
Jon: We have a strong military, we're number one by a mile. We already spend more on defense than the next 12 countries combined. Including China, including Russia. We're like the lady on Springer who can't stop getting breast implants. The truth is China's military budget would be a fine size for our figure. But, we're not satisfied until it looks like we're trying to shoplift soccer balls.
Jon: If you're looking to boost competitive rankings, you might want to take a look at literacy, math and graduation rates. Don't care? We'll you should because those new expensive weapons systems are pretty complicated.
Clip: CNN: A group of retired generals and admirals say that the state of America's youth is a threat to national security. And it claims that 3 out of 4 Americas between the ages of 17 and 24 couldn't join the military if they wanted to. Either because they haven't graduated high school, they have criminal records or are physically unfit. The brass is pushing for better education and early childhood development.
Posted by Peaceful Protester | Wed Mar 13, 2013, 10:38 AM (0 replies)