THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IT IS TIME TO CUT THROUGH THE RHETORIC SURROUNDING SUSTAINABILITY.

06 Friday Oct 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Sustaniability

Tags

Capitalism vs. the Climate., Extinction, Sustainability, Technology versus Humanity, The Future of Mankind, United Nations, Visions of the future.

( A Ten minute read: That could change the world and all of us that live on it.)

For millions, 2017 is a year of unrelenting misery and fear, as governments and armed groups abused human rights in a multitude of ways.

Large numbers of people continued to flee conflict and repression in many regions of the world.

While billions of dollars are spent every year by the world’s space agencies, but does this money bring us any benefit, or should we pull the plug and spend it elsewhere?

Canada: $488 million, India: $1.1 billion, China: $1.3 billion, Italy: $1.8 billion, Germany: $2 billion, Japan: $2.4 billion, France: $2.5 billion, Europe: $5.5 billion Russia: over $7.7 billion, United States: $18 billion. Countries Who Spend The Most On Space Exploration

Some of these figures may seem mind-blowing when you take a pragmatic look at the current state of the global.

The standard list of threats/factors affecting the globe is getting bigger and bigger not smaller and smaller.

Why?

I suppose the simple answer is that us humans are incapable of acting as one, and if we do manage to do so its only in small groups in the short-term. For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.

Combine this with conflicting interests and you have a concoction of good doers all competing for limited funds to address what ever.

The problem is man is said to have evolved from monkeys and apes…but we still have monkeys and apes.

Take for instance Climate change which is now emerged as one of the most serious threats impacting on universal values.

With global environmental changes locked into our future you would think as intelligent humans we would act as one to avoid the obvious consequences.

Our best efforts to do us fall by the way side because of, not because what is obvious, but because of the costs to profit.

Hypocrisy is the Vaseline of political intercourse.

We are left with a world that is represented by what we call The United Nations.

Country names and little flags of identity rather than one unified group called humans. Perhaps if they we removed prior to passing any resolution’s that effect the Glob we might see humans acting as one.

But this will achieve nothing unless we get Capitalism to do the right thing when nobody’s watching. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of earth from space probes"

So here is a solution:

Why not impose an International legal world aid commission on all activities that produce profit for profit sake. (See previous posts)

AND.

While we are at it why not impose a 0.0005% commission on all tweets, on all smart phone inquirers, on all internet purchases, on all social media posts.

Either of the above would produce a perpetual fund of billions to tackle the coming natural disasters, the coming technology inequality, the malnutrition that is now the underlying cause of nearly half of all under-5 deaths worldwide. The list is endless.

There is no simple solution to creating a more equitable world.

The world community has accepted the need to limit the increase in the earth’s temperature to 2°C and initiate changes to achieve this objective.

This will require the world to move away from burning fossil fuels and effectively reach a stage of zero carbon emissions. This will require a radical change in the way humanity lives as we move forward.

The earth has limited resources. Also, there are limits on the renewability of some of its renewable resources. Humanity is using substantially more resources than the earth can renew. We all need to change the way we live to achieve a proper balance.

In order to face the challenges posed by these dual issues, the world has to act in unison.

TAKE TACKLING CLIMATE CHANGE. ( See previous posts)

There are a number of disparities to be addressed. There is a very wide range of per-capita emissions—generally, the wealthy countries having higher per-capita emissions.

There is a perception among the emerging economies that the world has reached the current situation due to the past emissions by high emitters and that they should be willing to share a higher cost of moving to low-carbon economy.

Further, different regions will be affected differently—some may not feel the consequences; at least immediately. Such countries may not want to join the worldwide efforts in a meaningful way. Getting all countries to follow a common path will be the biggest challenge in the years to come.

Doing nothing will not be an option.

Sustainability is defined as a requirement of our generation to manage the resource base such that the average quality of life that we ensure ourselves can potentially be shared by all future generations. … Development is sustainable if it involves a non-decreasing average quality of life.

For all our sake’s we need to get a grip.

We must deal with problems on Earth first, before we can leave it.

Sustainability is not “about” the integration of ecological, social and economic issues, nor is it “about” widespread consultation nor is it “about” improving quality of life.

It’s about maintaining or sustaining something called Earth.

Sustainability must be a destination, not just a journey.

It is worth noting that treating a sustainable state as a destination doesn’t mean that society cannot revise or refine its idea of what sustainability is at a future date.

Even with everyday destinations an initial intention to go to the fruit and veg shop doesn’t preclude a later decision to go to the bank as well or to go to the supermarket instead!

Space and the Higgs-Boson can wait, when every day, 17,000 children die before reaching their fifth birthday.

A future with no fresh water, clean air, energy and food, you can rest assured no one will remember the Internet, or artificial Intelligence.

So what price are we willing to pay for knowing that in the future, humanity can be saved because there are other planets out there capable of sustaining life?

Our priority surely is to take care of our planet before we go roaming around others.

For things that don’t matter we can please ourselves how we approach the sustainability effort (ie. as a destination, journey or both, or an issue of total disinterest!).

O! By the way if we did create a World Aid Commission there would be no need to stop any exploration. Today, both Voyager 1 and 2 are the farthest man-made objects in space.

Our message in a bottle was in the form of a gold-plated sonograph record containing compilations of music, images and greetings best representing Planet Earth, affixed on the outer surfaces of both the Voyager spacecrafts, if we are careful long before, “A billion years from now, when everything on Earth we’ve ever made has crumbled into dust, when continents have changed beyond recognition and our species is unimaginably altered or extinct, the Voyager record will speak for us.”

Carl Sagan’s declaration above without a doubt holds true, not just on the frailty of the ‘pale blue dot’ we call home, but also on the life it sustains.

All human generated comments appreciated, all like clicks chucked in the Bin

THE BEADY EYE RETURNS TO THE ISRAELI- PALESTINIAN PROBLEM.

01 Sunday Oct 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in THE ISRAELI- PALESTINIAN PROBLEM., The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., United Nations, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

THE ISRAELI- PALESTINIAN PROBLEM., United Nations

( A four-minute read.)

Are you “pro-Israel” or “pro-Palestine”?

It isn’t even noon yet as I write this, and I’ve already been accused of being both. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of israel"

These terms intrigue me because they directly speak to the doggedly tribal nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

You don’t hear of too many other countries being universally spoken of this way. Why these two?

Both Israelis and Palestinians are complex, with diverse histories and cultures, and two incredibly similar (if divisive) religions.

After World War II, Britain decided to let the United Nations decide what to do with Palestine.

The common representation of Israel’s birth is that the UN created Israel, that the world was in favor of this move, and that the US governmental establishment supported it.

All these assumptions are demonstrably incorrect.

The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.

The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.

In reality, while the UN General Assembly recommended the creation of a Jewish state in part of Palestine, that recommendation was non-binding and never implemented by the Security Council.

The General Assembly passed that recommendation only after Israel proponents threatened and bribed numerous countries in order to gain a required two-thirds of votes.

In 1967 it took still more Palestinian and Syrian land, which is now illegally occupied territory, since the annexation of land through military conquest is outlawed by modern international law.

Israel, which claims to be the “only democracy in the Middle East,” decided not to declare official borders or to write a constitution, a situation which continues to this day.

To this day it has continued this campaign of growth through armed acquisition and illegal confiscation of land.

So where are we?

To come down completely on the side of one or the other doesn’t seem rational to me.

It is telling that most Muslims around the world support Palestinians, and most Jews support Israel.

This, of course, is natural — but it’s also problematic.

It means that this is not about who’s right or wrong as much as which tribe or nation you are loyal to. It means that Palestinian supporters would be just as ardently pro-Israel if they were born in Israeli or Jewish families, and vice versa.

It means that the principles that guide most people’s view of this conflict are largely accidents of birth — that however we intellectualize and analyze the components of the Middle East mess, it remains, at its core, a tribal conflict.

By definition, tribal conflicts thrive and survive when people take sides. Choosing sides in these kinds of conflicts fuels them further and deepens the polarization. And worst of all, you get blood on your hands.

It’s still too early to call Israel an apartheid state, but when John Kerry said Israel could end up as one in the future, he wasn’t completely off the mark. It’s simple math.

Israel was carved out of Palestine for Jews with help from the British in the late 1940s just as Pakistan was carved out of India for Muslims around the same time. The process was painful, and displaced millions in both instances.

There are now only a limited number of ways a bi-national Jewish state with a non-Jewish majority population can retain its Jewish identity.

Let’s face it, the land belongs to both of them now.

BUT Israelis and Palestinians remain caught in a sad, frustrating and vicious cycle that must be broken.

The Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands will turn 50 years old this year.

Some considerable time ago I wrote a blog on the subject.

Then as now I stated that the two state solution is not possible and that the only solution is for Israel to grant Palestinians full Israeli citizenship, creating one state for all.

Settlement expansion is simply incomprehensible. No one really understands the point of it. Virtually every US administration — from Nixon to Bush to Obama — has unequivocally opposed it.

It’s been almost 70 years since Israel came into existence.

There are now at least two or three generations of Israelis who were born and raised in this land, to whom it really is a home, and who are often held accountable and made to pay for historical atrocities that are no fault of their own. They are programmed to oppose “the other” just as Palestinian children are.

At its very core, this is a tribal religious conflict that will never be resolved unless people stop choosing sides.

With Israel now legalizing land grab is it not time to stop dealing with Israel as a country above the law and to make it responsible for systematic violations of international conventions and the rights of the Palestinian people.

There is no justification for it except a Biblical one which makes it slightly more difficult to see Israel’s motives as purely secular.

Let’s go straight to the point:

To end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, everyone would like a two-state solution.

This solution is impossible.

But if it Israel doesn’t work harder towards a two-state (maybe three-state, thanks to Hamas) solution, it will eventually have to make that ugly choice between being a Jewish-majority state or a democracy.

Nothing in the current situation excuses the abhorrent and immoral attacks on civilians, whether coming from Palestinians or Israelis, and any lasting solution must work to guarantee peace and security for everyone.

It’s high time we recognize that the Oslo Accords are as likely to bring peace to the Middle East as Donald Trump is to unite America.

From its conception, Oslo never required Israel to recognize Palestinian rights to statehood and has instead enabled Israeli encroachment on the West Bank.

Until now, the international consensus has been focused on a state-oriented resolution as a way to confer rights and stability to Palestinians and Israelis.

But what if that equation were flipped, if the focus were instead on enshrining full equality for everyone before even considering the creation of two states?

If this was supported by a larger Arab consensus framework, Israel would have little option as would Palestine but to come together.

This is the only realistic goal at this juncture.

To create interim arrangements to set the ground for a final agreement.

Of course both sides as in any conflict would have to want peace which now seems very unlikely.

On the Palestinian side, a lack of internal consensus remains challenging while security is the most important issue to Israel.

In such a context, nearly seventy years after the creation of Israel and the beginning of the conflict, whether the result of such an approach leads to one state or two states or 21 states on the land is immaterial.

We must put aside the concept of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement in favor of an Israeli-Arab agreement as the only realistic means to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The reality on the ground shows that the search for a two-state solution is a farce that suits those who aim at apartheid.

Although the entire world knows that a durable resolution to the conflict is imperative, not in the interests of justice but also in the pursuit of peace in the region. There is only one solution the creation of a single state, in which the safety and the right to the dignity of each one will be preserved.

There are 2,898,927 Palestinians living in the West Bank, 1,850,559 in the Gaza Strip, 1,471,201 in Israel, and a total of 12,365,761 worldwide.

Palestinian citizens of Israel struggle under a system that accords them fewer rights and opportunities than their Jewish counterparts. And regardless of what one thinks of Hamas, the siege that Israel imposes (with Egyptian collusion) on Gaza affects all of its inhabitants and is unconscionable.

According to the Israeli organization Gisha, over 70% of Gaza’s population relies on humanitarian aid, while 47% suffer from food insecurity. In the second quarter of 2016, unemployment was at 41.7%, and at a staggering 57.6% among young people.

(In fact, slim majorities of both Palestinians and Israelis still support a two-state solution.)

What matters is that we finally wake from the 23-year-old slumber induced by Oslo, the numbing half-century of occupation, and the nearly 70 years of Palestinian dispossession, to see that the only durable resolution to this conflict will be one that protects Israelis and Palestinians equally, with liberty and justice for all.

Israelis “deserve security” (and Palestinians don’t?)

Such a move would break with the political history of the United States and would run counter to the UN position, for which the status of Jerusalem, the Palestinian eastern part was occupied in 1967 and annexed by Israel in 1980, could be settled through negotiation.

A Confederation of Districts according to the historical name, defined by the good geographical and ethnic sense. As homogeneous as possible, they would necessarily include religious minorities.

Each have a Parliament and a Constitution which legislate on everything related to religion, taxation, police and education.

Insurance law, the management of national research institutes, diplomacy and the army remain the prerogative of the Confederation.

Thus, the cantonal tax authorities collect the tax and return a minority share to the central power, the wealth of each canton being largely the result of the labor of its inhabitants.

Each canton freely decides its name (in the image of Switzerland, where the Republic and Canton of Geneva, then the State of Vaud, and later the Canton of Valais, With whom everyone lives in peace).

Each district decides on the religion it wishes to inscribe in its Constitution (if it wishes to inscribe one … In Switzerland, the cases are very diverse). Image associée

Thus, Tel Aviv could decide that its official religion is Judaism, with a taxation in support of its religious institutions.

Many issues remain to be negotiated, including the division of districts, the question of return, the participation of the Palestinian populations in the army (with a staggering of the rules over several years), the creation of a national Constitution, a Constituent Assembly, etc.

From the outset, the state would be recognized by all the countries of the Arab world.

According to the initiative of Saudi Arabia in 2002, the benefits would no longer be counted: Disappearance of separation walls and checkpoints, development of very fruitful economic links, and especially the normal life, finally. For everyone.

So you really don’t have to choose between being “pro-Israel” or “pro-Palestine.” If you support secularism, democracy, and a two-state solution — and you oppose Hamas, settlement expansion, and the occupation — you can be both.

Again you don’t have to like what Israel is doing.

If Israel truly wanted to destroy Gaza, it could do so within a day, right from the air.

How can this possibly ever be in Israel’s interest?

When civilians die, Israel looks like a monster. It draws the ire of even its closest allies. Horrific images of injured and dead innocents flood the media. Ever-growing anti-Israel protests are held everywhere from Norway to New York. And the relatively low number of Israeli casualties repeatedly draws allegations of a “disproportionate” response. Most importantly, civilian deaths help Hamas immensely.

So please tell me — how can anyone conclude that religion isn’t at the root of this, or at least a key driving factor?

People have all kinds of beliefs — from insisting the Earth is flat to denying the Holocaust. You may respect their right to hold these beliefs, but you’re not obligated to respect the beliefs themselves.

It’s 2017, and religions don’t need to be “respected” any more than any other political ideology or philosophical thought system. Human beings have rights. Ideas don’t.

Denying religion’s role seems to be a way to be able to criticize the politics while remaining apologetically “respectful” of people’s beliefs for fear of “offending” them. But is this apologism and “respect” for inhuman ideas worth the deaths of human beings?

Muslims have woken up around the world but is it really because of the numbers?

Bashar al-Assad has killed over 180,000 Syrians, mostly Muslim, in two years — more than the number killed in Palestine in two decades.

Thousands of Muslims in Iraq and Syria have been killed by ISIS in the last two months. Tens of thousands have been killed by the Taliban. Half a million black Muslims were killed by Arab Muslims in Sudan.

The list goes on.

All comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY DOES THE UNITED NATIONS TOLERATE SPEECHES THAT ARE IN BREECH OF ITS CHARTER.

22 Friday Sep 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Climate Change., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Nuclear power., The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., United Nations, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Climate change, Greed, Inequility, The Future of Mankind, THE UNITED NATIONS, United Nations, Visions of the future.

UNITED NATIONS CHARTER.

PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES

To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
To be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.

The Rt Hon Theresa May MP Résultat de recherche d'images pour "Donald trump recent speech at the un"

A charter represents a document that describes a project, its rationale, its goals and its participants. The purpose of a charter aims at aligning the expectations of all the contributors so that their energy focuses on the project’s priorities.

The Charter is not to be confused with The Universal Declaration of Human rights adopted after World War 11. It is perhaps the closest thing we have to a global Constitution- categorically states that the right to life is humanity’s fundamental value. Death is a crime.

It would appear that from the speeches given by either of the above that they DO NOT fully comprehended the above charter.

In his Sovereignty – centric speech Mr Trump threatened to totally destroy North Korea, called Iran a corrupt dictatorship whose main export is violence.

While Mrs May in her speech threatened withdrawal of funds.

This is not the first time not will it be the last that a World leader has used the UN to criticize other nations. Mr Bush with the axis of evil. Mr Khrushchev trumping the table and calling Filipino some obnoxious name in Russian.

Both Mr T and Mrs M appear to think that the yard stick to measure a nation’s success is GDP. This kind of thinking is driving humankind to make happiness a second goal for the twenty-first century which is highly unlikely unless inequality, war, and climate change disappear.

Surely the UN is not the platform for sovereign selfish nations to be expressing treats to other nations. Stirring up hornets nest is not what the world needs.

Here a few examples from each of their recent addresses to the UN.

MR D Trump first:

“The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. “Rocket Man” is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime.”

” It has just been announced that we will be spending almost $700 billion on our military and defense.”

Then a raft of contradictions:

” In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch.”

” We are celebrating the 230th anniversary of our beloved Constitution, the oldest constitution still in use in the world today. This timeless document has been the foundation of peace, prosperity and freedom for the Americans, and for countless millions around the globe whose own countries have found inspiration in its respect for human nature, human dignity and the rule of law.”

“But we can no longer be taken advantage of, or enter into a one-sided deal where the United States gets nothing in return.”

“As long as I hold this office, I will defend America’s interests above all else.”

“The United States is one out of 193 countries in the United Nations, and yet we pay 22 percent of the entire budget and more. In fact, we pay far more than anybody realizes.”

“The United States of America has been among the greatest forces for good in the history of the world and the greatest defenders of sovereignty, security and prosperity for all. Now we are calling for a great reawakening of nations, for the revival of their spirits, their pride, their people and their patriotism.”

“Our hope is a word and (sic) world of proud, independent nations that embrace their duties, seek friendship, respect others and make common cause in the greatest shared interest of all, a future of dignity and peace for the people of this wonderful Earth.”

“This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world wars to help shape this better future. It was based on the vision that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their sovereignty, preserve their security and promote their prosperity.”

The success of the United Nations depends upon the independent strength of its members.

“We do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties: to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation.”

“Today, if we do not invest ourselves, our hearts and our minds in our nations – if we will not build strong families, safe communities and healthy societies for ourselves – no one can do it for us.”

“This is the beautiful vision of this institution, and this is the foundation for cooperation and success. Strong, sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect. Strong, sovereign nations let their people take ownership of the future and control their own destiny, and strong, sovereign nations allow individuals to flourish in the fullness of the life intended by God.”

We want harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife. We are guided by outcomes, not ideology. We have a policy of principled realism rooted in shared goals, interests and values.

And just as the founders of this body intended, we must work together and confront together those who threaten us with chaos, turmoil and terror.

“We will fight together, sacrifice together and stand together for peace, for freedom, for justice, for family, for humanity and for the almighty God who made us all.”

“Are we still patriots? Do we love our nations enough to protect their sovereignty and to take ownership of their futures? Do we revere them enough to defend their interests, preserve their cultures and ensure a peaceful world for their citizens?”

The UN relies on the independent strength of its members.

Theresa May:

“We face challenges that go right to the heart of who we are as nations.”

“I believe that the only way for us to respond to this vast array of challenges is to come together and defend the international order that we have worked so hard to create and the values by which we stand. For it is the fundamental values that we share, values of fairness, justice and human rights, that have created the common cause between nations to act together in our shared interest and form the multilateral system. And it is this rules-based system which we have developed, including the institutions.”

This statement in the light of Brixit is total hogwash and on we go.

“Indeed, the defining purpose of the UN Charter is to maintain international peace and security, to develop friendly relations among nations, to achieve international cooperation in solving problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character; and to be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of those common ends.”

“An outward-looking global Britain and the second biggest funder of the UN the UK will remain committed to spending 0.7% of GNI on development and humanitarian support. And that is why we will remain generous in our funding but set aside 30% to be paid only to those parts of the UN that achieve sufficient results.”

It is true to say that the UN needs reform, but it can only become relevant if it is financed to tackle world problems. ( See previous posts)

Both Speeches ignore Climate Change and the need to address inequality that is the spawning bed of all terrorism, driven by the technology of the smart phone.

The world is changing and we don’t have to be prophets to see if we as its intelligent guardians don’t address its underling problems there will be problems that will put all our technology, all our unsustainable greed, all our power of destruction, into the shade.

All comments appreciated, all like clicks chucked in the bin.

THE BEAD EYE SAYS; IT TIME TO GET A GRIP, IT’S NOT ALL A LIE.

04 Thursday May 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Post - truth politics., Social Media., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Democracy, Post - truth politics., Social Media, United Nations, Visions of the future.

( A seven minute truth read)

IN A WORLD THAT IS LOSING ITS GRIP THE TROUBLE IS KNOWING WHAT TO GET A GRIP OF.

There is nothing new about this, other than the manner and the pace it is happening at where facts are deemed less important than beliefs.

For Example: In an age of Post – truth politics we now have a President of the USA that appears not to care whether his words bear any relation to reality.

The declining societal respect for facts, the rise of deceptive partisan media outlets are creating an echo chamber effect in public discussion.

If people only knew the truth, we wouldn’t have the problems of global warming, economic recession, poverty, War, any Famine.

Most people now get their news about the world around them pre-digested and customised by social media. They do not get the breadth of information supplied by an even moderately impartial news source.

Material is allotted them not by whether it is true but by whether they might like it.

Which is institutionally biased, and more vulnerable to the dissemination of lies.

Something must be surely be done about this.

Our post-truth era, in short, need not be an obstacle to taking common action.

Feelings trump facts and the power of truth as a tool to solve problems is being diluted by False News. For example the EU is now in danger of breaking up due to a campaign of blatant misinformation.

The lost of truth has many roots, and indeed it is a human failing not to seek it out. Life at this juncture is practically unimaginable without the technology we enjoy today.

A large amount of social media feeds on getting strangers to follow each other’s random thoughts or tracking our idle page visits to target advertising, and as a society we seem more than happy to provide.

If you OK-ed the latest update for your Facebook app on your phone, you’ve given Facebook permission to read your text messages?

Everybody knows Google has questionable privacy rules, but Gmail is a really good email provider, and most people don’t tend to make their Twitter private.

Today it is almost heresy to suggest that scientific knowledge is not the sum of all knowledge. Unorganized knowledge is the king, driving Climate Change, down to the survival of the cutest.

The continued societal focus on economic growth, both personally and as a society driven by algorithms for profit are all forcing a consumer society.

With the continued societal focus on economic growth, privacy is now arguably subject to consumerism. Critical thinking is sacrificed in favour of having feelings, reinforced by soundbite.

The problem is that Facebook (which has somewhere in the region of 2 billion users) and other so-called net works do not see themselves as media companies and are for the most part run by algorithms that have put artificial intelligence in charge of spreading False News.

As capitalism really gaining a grip on everyday life technology is a society constant. The majority of the Facebook users tend to share every mundane detail of their lives.

The inverted distinction between public and private.

What can we do about it?

We’ve built an awesome, sprawling web of technology with a astonishing bit rates entering the human mind and emotions through eyes, ears and even noses, all creating an accelerating escalation of intensity which is now out of control.

In a world increasingly devoid of person to person contact we are becoming more and more attached to morally ambiguous technologies. Given such biases it is no wonder we are unable to even agree on facts.

Precious little is said about the human, societal and environmental impact of such intense and increasing post-truth politics.

Are we more or are we less?

What is happening to our relationships, to our sensitivities, to our abilities to be moved, to our abilities to perceive?

Content is no longer a fixed format so there is no provenance as to what is true or false. With countervailing views filtered it is no wonder we get like clicks or news to boost hits.

Most of us now get our news on social media with anyone becoming a publisher. This information revolution can now play havoc with political falsehood.

So when Trump says we need to go to war now. We won’t know if he’s telling the truth.

What then?

We might even see this proliferation of belief systems and worldviews as an opportunity for human development. We can agree to disagree and still engage in pragmatic action in the world.

Modern democracy is not indeed flawless, but so far it is the most advanced political system the human kind could come up with. However the features of modern democracy for which we consider it as the most ‘human’ form of governance now comes with shortcomings.

These shortcomings like poor access to institutions, low-level of participation, rising level of elitism, ossification of state authorities, etc., are often the root of discontent among the public. Such reasons are making the discontent more than just and as a matter of fact.

But without opposition and discontent, there can be no democracy.

We as an audience must take into account the nature of media and subsequently different sources before making any assumptions on the content itself. Things like lack of critical thinking, an absence of fact-checking before accepting statements, inability to put things perspective and so on, provide opportunities for the rise of unpleasantly phenomena like post-truth and post-truth politics.

The concept of ‘post-truth’ has reached a point of saturation in present-day popular discourse and media punditry. Driven by digitally mediatized representations of reality and social interaction. Resulting in many of our world organisation becoming irrelevant.

Democracy requires a citizenship that meets, deliberates and interacts without fear and hatred. It requires organisations that give people a “voice” and a feeling that they have a stake and some influence in the system.

The pervasiveness of presumed causal linkages between environmental degradation, violent conflict and human mobility has been utilized by policy makers and pundits to shape public opinion.

Democracy now needs online innovation.

When Microsoft created Windows, it created the possibility of multiple lenses or views of any issue. Why not build on that? Before we all become Twit’s.

The problem which remains is purely one of logic.

The world is populated by other people who aren’t you. This is one of the major tools of democracy.

What does post-truth tell us about the current and future state of democratic engagement and of democracy itself?

Truth must no longer legitimize the politics of Brexit and Trump. No matter how democratic it is, the rug must be pulled out from under Post – truth politics. We have lost our power to them; we cannot lose our truth too.

The pervasiveness of presumed causal linkages between environmental degradation, violent conflict and human mobility has been utilized by policy makers and pundits to shape public opinion about the predicament we are now in.

What can be done?

“Take back control”

The least we can do to make the United Nations a place where minds, hearts and nations connect for the sake of so many people all over the world.

Obviously, don’t vote for fibbers.

Bombard social media platforms to remove filters.

Create an Online Political platform for the Truth.

Remember that knowledge is power.

All comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: HOW WOEFUL HEINOUS,UNPARDONABLE, DISTASTEFUL,TO SEE ANTONIO GUTERRES THE UN SECRETARY-GENERAL HAVING TO BEG FOR FUNDS.

08 Wednesday Mar 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Humanity., Life., Modern day life., Natural World Disasters, Sustaniability, The Future, The Obvious., The Refugees, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., United Nations, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Aid., World Organisations., WORLD POVERTY WHERE'S THE GLOBAL OUTRAGE

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Capitalism and Greed, Climate change, Community cohesion, Distribution of wealth, Earth, Technology, The Future of Mankind, United Nations, World aid commission

( A three-minute read that could save millions of lives)

If you ever wanted proof that Capitalism is driven by greed just watch what can only be described in the above words the recent plea made by António Guterres to the International community for funds to tackle the declared famine in parts of Nigeria, South Sudan, and looming in Somalia, Nigeria and Yemen. africa

The estimated number of affected children is now 450,000, with 14 MILLION PEOPLE needing humanitarian assistance across the region.

Five years ago, more than a quarter of a million lives were needlessly lost, 130,000 of them children. We simply cannot have a repeat of that tragedy. The only way to prevent this devastating loss of life is for donors and international leaders to act now.

Global hunger levels are at their highest for decades. There are currently 70 million people in need of food aid. The reality of life for a fifth of the world’s people, on a planet which produces enough food to satisfy everyone is that humanitarian aid to Africa has been shrinking.

Rich countries have been giving money to poor ones for many decades and for many reasons — from geopolitics to post-colonial guilt to altruism so there is little point here in reiterating the reasons why the world is in such a mess.

What is needed in the long run is a fully funded Humanitarian Affairs United Nations. Not a begging Institution.

Rather than boasting our compassion with wasteful foreign Aid there is only one course of action:

To make the Greed / Profit for profit’s sake segment of Capitalism system Pay.

This can be achieved with modern-day technology by Placing a World Aid commission of 0.05% on all. High frequency Trading, on all Foreign Exchange transactions over $ 50,000. on all Sovereign Wealth Funds acquisitions, on all gambling winnings.

This would create a Perpetual fund of billions.

The real question, though, is (with climate change and technology) is whether aid will remain relevant, and if so how.

The answer boils down to this: solutions.

Governments in developing countries will seek assistance only when they have a problem that they cannot solve by themselves.

They know how to build schools, hospitals or ports, and can pay for them. But they will look for other countries’ experiences when reforming educational curricula, designing health insurance systems, or regulating private suppliers of infrastructure.

They will want to avoid the mistakes of others, and learn from their successes.

At times, they may ask for support in implementing particularly tricky projects, mostly as a way to keep graft, pollution or displacements at bay.

This can only be achieved if the United nations see themselves more as partners than as donors. This will stop Aid countries of exporting their own way of thinking.

Donors would be sought after, rather than just accepted.

They will be those that can deliver ideas, experiences, expertise, lessons, evidence, and data.

In other words, what will make future aid relevant will be knowledge, not dollars.Development aid will be a more difficult business — for you will need to operate at the technical cutting-edge — but a more useful one.

To the extent that there are internal leaks in Africa–As a first order of priority, the leaks should be plugged to ensure that the little aid that comes in, stays.

In politics, no good deed ever goes unannounced.

It’s is very hard to feel hungry and not to be able to do anything about it.

Contributors to United Nations aid and development programs have provided slightly more than half of the $800 million requested in 1999 for African countries suffering from “complex emergencies”–the term applied when war and failed institutions, often combined with a natural disaster, leave vast numbers of people homeless and starving.

The reasons for the decline are not hard to find.

Donor nations are and will be more so under pressure to attend to problems at home rather than foreign assistance that is wasted by bloated aid agencies pouring money into the pockets of corrupt African governments, senseless civil wars, wasteful military expenditures, capital flight, and government wastes–Pouring in more foreign aid makes little sense.

However if asked we all want a more prosperous and equal world that will serve everyone’s best interests.

To create a less threatening world beyond our borders we must tackle inequality head on.

We are on track for a tipping point of Inequality with the web only speeding up this process through digitization and universal access. We’ll be postulating about social media’s impact on the more long-term future of the world.

Aid can be fearful of the future – but it can also be a force for good.

No transformation will occur overnight.

The debate on aid comes down to lack of imagination. We have cemented in our minds the idea of a hierarchy in the world’s nations: the developing world is below us and we need to help them, preferably to our advantage. But we do not want them to rise above us.

Catastrophe evokes a human response to help fellow creatures.

All comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

Here is who to donate to: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (Ocha), Care, Oxfam, British Red Cross, Cafod, Tearfund, Christian Aid, World Vision, WFP, Unicef.

THE BEADY ASKS: WHERE IS THE VOICE OF THE WORLD’S YOUTH ?

12 Thursday Jan 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Brexit., Capitalism, Climate Change., Communication., Education, European Union., Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Modern Day Communication., Natural World Disasters, Nuclear power., Paris Climate Change Conference 2015, Politics., Privatization, Sustaniability, Technology, The Future, The New year 2017, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., USA Presidential Election, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Capitalism vs. the Climate., Extinction, Social Media, Technology, The Future of Mankind, United Nations

( Eight minute read.)

When you look at the state of the world you have to ask yourself have we all lost our marbles, and where is the protest voice of the Young.

You could say that we are well along in the process of causing our own extinction and the planet has officially entered its sixth mass extinction event.

Such a view is now beginning to occasionally find its way into mainstream consciousness.

The situation is already so serious with so many self-reinforcing feedback loops already in play it seem we are on a rolling coaster, incapable of acting,or if we do, it will be after the event, if there is anything left to save.

We have a vast choice of the end-of-humanity scenarios to pick from, to derail life as we know it.

For example:

A self-induced catastrophe such as nuclear war or a bioengineered pandemic. Disruptive innovation and technological changes, Solar storms, Cosmic collisions, Super volcanoes, Rising sea levels, overcrowding, denuded resources to mention just a few.

We’re driving to extinction at least 150 species each day.

Nuclear power plants require grid-tied electricity, cooling water and people getting paychecks. Without all these, they melt down, thus immersing all life on earth in ionizing radiation.

As if the above is not enough we are now selling or most valuable resource – Intelligence.

So what can be done?

First of all, internal and external issues are more linked than ever. Now, more than ever, we need principled leaders with an understanding of history.

Freedom and the rule of law are under threat.

Why?

Because while the world teeters on a precipice of being plundered by Capitalist Artificial intelligence. A new reality is taking shape: war is called peace, a bloody victory is a step towards reconciliation, and a terrorist regime is a legitimate power.

The further we removed ourselves from the world the worse will be our encounter with the world beyond.

Ignoring the unregulated introduction of Artificial Intelligence.

All causing disillusionment and confusion with the great visions of the future, all are demanding that we cope as one with the present reality with our ability to protest hijacked by Internet petitions sites that are ignored or focused on parochial problems.

An individuals future is shaped ultimately by environmental factors.

The year 2017 opens on a world laid to waste. Some areas are littered with mass graves and there doesn’t seem to be any big global rush to reduce emissions as a result of the Paris Climate Agreement.

In the end, no amount of research can do much to prevent permafrost melting realising, methane – a greenhouse gas 100 times more potent than carbon dioxide on a shorter timescale into the atmosphere, warming it further, which in turn causes more permafrost to melt, and so on.

Scientists estimate up to 13 percent of global carbon emissions come from deforestation – greater than emissions from every car, truck and plane on the planet combined.

Because Globalism is an ideology, and its struggle with nationalism it will shape the coming era.

Donald J. Trump five months short of seventy-one will take office on January 20. His election tips us into the unknown threatened disengagement from the world.

Mother Teresa in the Uk wants disengagement from the EU.

Both are successful alpha personalities. Both work in progress—“Everything is negotiable”—both displaying a single-minded determination to impose their vision on the world, an irrational belief in unreasonable goals, bordering at times on lunacy.

From Brexit to Trump to the rise of nationalist parties across Europe, the old division between left and right is giving way to a battle between self-styled patriots and confounded globalists.

For decades, trade, industrialization and demographics produced a virtuous circle of rising prosperity. By the 2000s, globalism was triumphant.

IT IS NOW OVERREACHED AND BLIND to the nationalist backlash, not to mention the new form of Globalisation – Artificial Intelligence.

Many globalists now assume that the discontent is largely driven by stagnant wages and inequality. If people are upset about immigration, they reason, it is largely because they fear competition with low-wage workers and not the technological Revolution that is replacing their need to work in the first place. Yet their faith in open borders remains unshaken.

That crisis has woken up globalists to the flaws of globalization but not it seems to me the pending exploration of Apps run on Algorithms that are designed to create profit for the Monopolies of the Internet. Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, to mention a few.

Many of the tech industry’s biggest companies, like Amazon, Google, IBM and Microsoft, are jockeying to become the go-to company for A.I. In the industry’s lingo, the companies are engaged in a “platform war.”

The company that controls A.I. will steer the tech industry for years to come.

In fact, much of the backlash against immigration (and globalism) is not economic but cultural: Many people still care about their own versions of national identity and mistrust global institutions such as the EU.

These voters are bothered less by competition from immigrants than by their perceived effect on the country’s linguistic, religious and cultural norms. About how changes to “the composition of the local population” would affect “their neighborhoods, schools and workplaces.”

They might have their priorities slightly wrong.

Is the new nationalism a cloak for ethnic and religious exclusion?

New nationalism often thrives on xenophobia.

Globalists should not equate concern for cultural norms and national borders with xenophobia.

There must be some sort of middle ground between a nationalist and globalist approach. In short, there is ample reason for skepticism about whether the new nationalists can prove themselves a genuinely secular, democratic alternative to globalism.

If globalists are to regain the public’s trust, they will need to re-examine their own policies. Political capital might be better invested in preserving existing trade pacts, not passing new ones. Many European globalists blame the euro’s crisis on too little integration, not too much. But pressing for a more federal Europe could further alienate voters who “do not share our Euro-enthusiasm,”

Borders use to mean something, but this version of civilization is the least sustainable of them all. We cannot sustain the unsustainable forever in a world more interconnected.

In fact, 2017 is looking pretty bad…Russia dominating the world order. But it too will pop. New cyber attacks.

In this context, the basic principles of democratic life in both Europe and the U.S. — truth, fact-based reality, justice and the rule of law — are being gradually eroded.

The most important thing is to understand what might steer us towards a more secure world order, where respect for the rule of law and for international bodies are granted their proper place.

European powers may choose to find strength in their union. Brought together by the need to combat those who threaten fundamental European values, Paris, Berlin, Rome and the Benelux countries could launch new initiatives to bring about real European cooperation.

Should these institutions find themselves unable to take a stand and act according to global interests and basic values, there is no reason why 2017 should not continue in the same vein as 2016, and the consequences may be irreversible.

It’s time to abandon our usual pessimism about the state of the planet and the course of history. We’ve got many challenges to overcome, but it might be a good idea to adopt a bit of youthful optimism when it comes to confronting them.

We need to create a hope insurgency.

Despite half of the world’s youth living on less than two dollars a day.

A social media revolution is unfolding before our eyes, forever changing the way we connect. This generation, the most interconnected generation ever, continues to grow rapidly, but its voice is diluted by Social media making the challenges they face are ever more daunting.

We need to ask ourselves:

How can we can empower youth to drive social progress. From crowd-sourcing initiatives and mobile-projects to innovation jams and social media campaigns.

Whatever changes you would like to effect in our society has to begin with you.

The best leaders the world has ever known are the reformers who were accountable and responsible for their own change.

The commitment for change has no days off, does not allow for excuses, does not allow for pardons. If you want to see change you must first start within.

It’s that simple and it’s that profound.

So where is the Global YOUTH Outrage?

Before there were blogs and tweets – even Wikipedia – to turn to, the mainstream media held a monopoly over knowledge and news which was hard to challenge. Now all knowledge is being collected by Google to feed Artificial Intelligent Algorithms.

THE world must change to meet the wave of popular uprising which catapulted Donald Trump to power and brought about Brexit. The world can be changed as much by education as by being harangued. It’s time for international leaders to bury their liberal attitudes and address the concerns of the masses. It is time for government to act in the long-term interest of the people, even if they do not agree in the short-term.

The twin pillars of liberalism and globalisation which have dominated politics over the past generation must adapt to a “world transformed”.

Society is changing rapidly and I fear that many organisations are failing to notice and are being left behind. I suspect that the scale of such a change can only really be appreciated in hindsight.

In the rich world, particularly, the first generation that has rung up a huge national debt and established a huge unfunded pension scheme is about to retire. The interesting, to say the least, question is whether the next generation will be willing to carry this burden and peacefully pay the debt and peacefully pay the pensions. I think not.

WILL THE WORLD OF 2052 BE A BETTER WORLD?

It’s important to note that people 35 years from now will judge their circumstance more on how it has changed from their own recent past than from our vantage point of today.

Billion will have some level of Internet access, be much better informed, and be increasingly helped by local solar energy. They will have many fewer children. They will be largely urban (except for the minority still living off the land). They will grapple with overall effects of climate damage, but those in dense urban areas will likely have little firsthand experience with the damage caused by the erratic weather (though plenty of secondhand information via electronic media). They will live with the unpleasant knowledge that even more climate impacts lie ahead.

There will be huge differences between people and Artificial Intelligence.

There is be no such thing as the Free Market.

People power hopefully will have transformed the world. From a psychological perspective, probably no, because the future prospects in 2052 will be grim.

University is where such simplistic notions are supposed to be challenged, but they now educate for the market place and not for Intelligence.

The winners of tomorrow will be those organizations with strong leaders who demonstrate agility, authenticity, connectivity to their talent, and sustainability.

By 2018, at least 50 percent of developers will include A.I. features in what they create. The goal is to capture all human knowledge and turn it in saleable AI. It’s where the capitalist market is headed.

No worries, you might say: you could just program it to make

The superintelligent machine manufactures some as-yet-uninvented raw-computing material (call it “computronium”) and uses that to check each doubt. But each new doubt yields further digital doubts, and so on, until the entire earth is converted to computronium.

When a computer became capable of independently devising ways to achieve goals, it would very likely be capable of introspection—and thus able to modify its software and make itself more intelligent. In short order, such a computer would be able to design its own hardware.

If this sounds absurd to you, you’re not alone.

I am one protesting voice in the wilderness of the virtual reality, but I am sure there are billions.

The problem is unifying them into one collective protest to demand that the United nations pass a people’s resolution to give all artificial Intelligence and technological advances a stamp of human approval.

All comments, suggestions, welcome, all like clicks chucked in the bin.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS:WHAT IS IT ABOUT US THAT MAKES US WHOLLY INCAPABLE OF RESPONDING? TO CLIMATE CHANGE- IS IT GREED OR ARE WE JUST PLAIN STUPID.

13 Saturday Aug 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Climate Change., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Paris Climate Change Conference 2015, Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Capitalism vs. the Climate., Climate change, Climate change and Intelligence, Climate Change Solution's., Environment, The Future of Mankind, United Nations

It’s a beautiful hot day, 34 celsius.

The Olympics are in full swing with its opening message long forgotten by those how win a medal.

The world since the first farmer grew two carrots has had its winners, losers, wars, famines, rich, and poor, you name it the World has weathered all. Afficher l'image d'origine

You could be a faitheist and say “What happens happens” but as Lone Man ( Isna la wica) ( late 19th century Teton Sioux said ” I have seen that in any great undertaking it is not enough for a man to depend simply upon himself.”

I have written on Climate Change before the Paris Agreement and after.

Since then every day of the week there is some new evidence that the climate is changing.

The global meltdown has begun.

Long predicted and long denied, the effects of climate change are arriving faster than even the gloomiest prophets expected.

The earth is dying, yet those who spread this message are treated as dangerous and mad.

This week we learnt that the Arctic ecosystem is collapsing.

Three weeks ago, marine biologists reported that almost all the world’s coral reefs could be dead by the end of the coming century.

One month ago, the Red Cross reported that natural disasters uprooted more people in 1998 than all the wars and conflicts on earth combined.

The demographer Dr Norman Myers calculates that 25m people have already been displaced by environmental change, and this will rise to 200m within 50 years.

The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine reports that nine of the 10 most dangerous diseases carried by insects and other vectors are likely to spread as a result of global warming.

You would think that with our combined World Intelligent we would be by now well beyond the point of discussing the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

Not on your Nelly.

And yet, far from addressing this coming catastrophe, we curse or mock anyone who draws attention to it.

What is it about this pattern of living that demands that those who challenge it must be treated as if they were dangerous or mad?

Is it just plain stupidity or that we have found the key to undying happiness, the transactable elixir of life?

What is it about this crisis, what is it about us, that makes us wholly incapable of responding?

Is it the drive to make more money than you could possibly need, to buy more goods than you could possibly enjoy, is a species of mental illness. Success in this system brings not happiness, but, at best, an alleviation of the pain required to sustain it. Even its beneficiaries are also its victims.

Climate change is perhaps the gravest calamity our species has ever encountered. Its impact dwarfs that of any war, any plague, any famine we have confronted so far. It makes genocide and ethnic cleansing look like sideshows at the circus of human suffering.

To date we have not reached the necessary number of countries to represent 55% of global emissions to sign up to the agreement to implement the Paris Agreement. (Which I advocate will have little effect as the agreement has no means of enforcing anything agreed.)

Negotiations and meetings have been marred by special interest groups trying to prevent effective action to combat climate change. In addition, there has been a lack of political will to take effective steps and measures.

Many large corporations, have opposed climate change treaties seemingly afraid of profit impacts if they have to make substantial changes to how they do business.

All countries are affected by, and contribute to, the buildup of greenhouse gases, and should be willing to join in the effort to stop it. However, it is far from easy to agree what to do, and how to do it….

Because : Poor countries face the brunt of the problems caused by global warming, and point out that most of the current global warming are the results of the rich countries’ pollution.

Current consumption patterns also see far more greenhouse emissions per person in the rich countries than the poorer ones.

As evidence of climate change mounts the impacts will be worse for more vulnerable people around the world, and could destabilize the world economy.

However, some are ( Donald Trump) still trying to undermine climate change action through deception.

The EU is in crisis, and the USA will be soon.

Brazil’s “interim” government, led by Michel Temer, signed an emergency loan to the State of Rio de Janeiro to help finance infrastructure for the 2016 Olympics. The bailout was conditional to selling off the State’s public water supply and sanitation company, the Companhia Estadual de Águas e Esgotos (Cedae).

What will it take to persuade us to stop using the world as our punchbag?

Many are agreed that climate change may be one of the greatest threats facing the planet.

All the words, pledges, agreements mean nothing without the political will, and financial backing.

There is only one way to make any difference worthwhile happening world-wide and that is to tap into World Greed.

Profit for Profit sake. Afficher l'image d'origine

By placing a World Aid commission of 0.05% on all High Frequency Financial Transactions, on all Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisitions, on all Foreign Exchange transactions over $20,000, on all Lottery wins over $100000, on all gambling.

This would create a perpetual Fund of trillions to tackle Climate Change.

Will it happen.

Not without all of us demanding it of the United Nations.

The Earth is the mother of all people and all people should have equal rights upon it.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES: PART TWO.

28 Thursday Jul 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Humanity., Politics., Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, World Aid., World Organisations.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Fair Political System., Political ignorance, Politicians, Politics of the Future, The Future of Mankind, The Lethargy of our Political leaders, United Nations, Visions of the future., World Politics

IN THE FIRST PART ON THIS BLOG I ATTEMPTED TO SHOW THAT TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING THE WAY WE VIEW DEMOCRACY AND AS A CONSEQUENCE POLITICAL PARTIES WILL OR ARE BECOMING OBSOLETE.

For those of us who still think that because we support a particular party AND that it will deliver on its pre-election promises I can only say we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Governance use to be understood as ‘a system of values, policies and institutions by which a society manages its economic, political and social affairs through interaction within and among the State, civil society and the private sector.

This for now holds true for the most part but it is changing as we enter the Technology Revolution.

Why?

BECAUSE MOST SOCIETIES ARE NOW A MIX OF SEVERAL CULTURES DRIVEN BY A WORLD MEDIA THAT HAS TURNED EVERY FORM OF GREED AND VIOLENCE INTO AN ENTERTAINMENT.

POLITICIANS ARE NO LONGER CAPABLE OF REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR THEM.

THERE IS NO LONGER ANY LONG TERM PLANNING ONLY KNEE JERK REACTIONS.

INDEED WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE BEAR TRUTH- THEY ARE ALL DRIVEN BY DATA ON THE ECONOMY, AND MANIPULATED BY BIG MONEY OR THE LACK THEREOF.

Where does this leave us.

Just look at the current USA presidential election. Two candidate that are viewed as a threat to world peace.

There is an urgent need not just in the United States to invest in cultural diversity and dialogue.

Culture is increasingly recognized as a cross-cutting dimension of the three economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainability.

We must strengthen social cohesion and provide sources of inspiration for renewing forms of democratic governance if we are to put a break on governance for the sake of money rather than for the values we all cherish.

We must places more emphasis on ‘unity in diversity.’

Indigenous knowledge can direct us towards more sustainable modes of living.

Similarly, ignoring the increasingly multicultural makeup of societies would amount to negating the existence of large sections of the population, which compartmentalizes society and damages the social fabric by creating competition between the different communities over access to resources (for education, health, social services) rather than promoting a sense of solidarity.

The expansion of digital networks, for example, has sometimes helped to revitalize endangered or even extinct languages; and the development of new technologies has greatly increased the possibilities of communicating and exchanging cultural content in time and space. Moreover, in certain cultural contexts, global cities in particular, the varied cultural flows and sometimes unexpected encounters produced by globalization are reflected in a growing range of consumer habits and trends.

You might ask why more emphasis on ‘unity in diversity.

Because Cultural diversity, characterized as it is by space-time compression linked to the speed of new communication and transportation technologies, and by the growing complexity of social interactions and the increasing overlap of individual and collective identities — cultural diversity has become a key concern, amid accelerating globalization processes, as a resource to be preserved and as a lever for sustainable development.

Intercultural dialogue must be seen as a complex and ongoing process that is never completed.

Unfortunately Globalization is NOT ACHIEVING THIS but is leading inevitably to cultural homogenization. Facebook, Twitter, Linked In etc.

While it is true that globalization induces forms of homogenization and standardization, it cannot be regarded as inimical to human creativity, which continues to engender new forms of diversity, constituting a perennial challenge to featureless uniformity.

Digital technology has drastically changed the modes of producing and disseminating cultural products, and cultural industries that previously were kept separate by analogue systems of production (film, television, photography and printing) have now converged.

We can’t hold a computer program like Google hostage to our demands.

We must move away from elite level deal making by allowing diverse interests to influence and design our own debating and decision-making rules.

Take for instance the eradication of world poverty, which is an intolerable violation of human rights in terms of both the hardships and the loss of dignity it causes – must be approached in terms of each specific social and cultural setting.

No amount of money is going to make any long-term worthwhile difference.

This can only be done with massive investment in Education.

Without education we are blowing in the wind, because rights and freedoms are exercised in very varied cultural environments and all have a cultural dimension that needs to be acknowledged so as to ensure their effective integration in different cultural contexts.

Education is a fundamental human right to which all children and adults should have access, contributing as it does to individual freedom and empowerment, and to human development.

We must escape National dialogues and engage in collective world mandates, that have legal status, and are independence from the government.

We must re- invent the United Nations changing it from a gossip shop on world problems to an Organisation that is fully funded with total transparency.

Irrivalent of the changes in technology quit hoc resolutions diplomacy is not enough.

Human beings relate to one another through society, and express that relationship through culture.

New technologies have not yet rendered the older technologies obsolete.

If we are to respond to the challenges inherent in a culturally diverse world, we must develop new approaches to intercultural dialogue, approaches that go beyond the limitations of the ‘dialogue among civilizations’ paradigm. Too often, dialogue events have stressed collective identities (national, ethnic, religious) rather than identities of individuals or social groups.

We must ensure a level playing field for cultural encounters and guaranteeing equality of status and dignity between all participants in initiatives to promote intercultural dialogue involve recognizing the ethnocentric ways in which certain cultures have hitherto proceeded.

The founding Vetoes in the United Nations must be scraped by give all nations an equal voice.

While virtually all human activities are shaped by and in turn help to shape cultural diversity, the prospects for the continued vitality of diversity are crucially bound up with the future of languages, education, the communication of cultural content, and the complex interface between creativity and the marketplace.

Recent decades have witnessed an unprecedented enmeshment of national economies and cultural expressions, giving rise to new challenges and opportunities.

The emergence of genuine ‘knowledge societies’ implies a diversity of forms of knowledge and of its sources of production, We are creating Internet technological Sahara Deserts that are and will drive millions to seek a better life or wars.

Communication networks have shrunk or abolished distance, to the benefit of some and the exclusion of others.

To address the problems that derive from the grotesque inequalities and structural poverty of our world which is at the foundations of 90% of the mess we now find ourselves in. We must recognise that successful intercultural dialogue lies in the acknowledgement of the equal dignity of the participants… based on the premise that all cultures are in continual evolution and are the result of multiple influences throughout history.

All rights and freedoms have a cultural dimension that contributes to their effective exercise. It is precisely this dimension that forms the link between the individual, the community and the group, which grounds universal values within a particular society.

All communities do not experience and respond to phenomena such as globalization in the same way.

As migration flows have intensified with globalization, they have significantly modified the ethno-linguistic makeup of a number of countries and have created new linguistic and translation needs, especially in administrative, legal and medical circuits worldwide.

Characterized as it is by space-time compression linked to the speed of new communication and transportation technologies, and by the growing complexity of social interactions and the increasing overlap of individual and collective identities — cultural diversity has become a key concern, amid accelerating globalization processes, as a resource to be preserved and as a lever for sustainable development.

Finally, forms of democratic governance can be renewed by deriving lessons from the different models adopted by diverse cultures.

We the people of the world must make our collective voices heard which is becoming almost impossible due to all of the above.

If we don’t want to rule by Afficher l'image d'origine

AI has officially made its way into Google’s search algorithm.

(The artificial intelligence of RankBrain comes in the form of mathematical entities called vectors that can be understood by computers. When presented with an unfamiliar word, RankBrain will help formulate a guess at what the query was about and filter accordingly.)

There are many possibilities as to how Rank Brain could work into being a signal to direct your choice to making any decision.

Central to the many problems arising in this context is the Western ideology of knowledge transparency, which cannot do justice to systems of thought recognizing both ‘exoteric’ and ‘esoteric’ knowledge and embodying initiatory processes for crossing the boundaries between them.

Diversity of traditions and cultures has for centuries been one of Europe’s riches and that the principle of tolerance is the guarantee of the maintenance in Europe of an open society.

Take England’s recent referendum on the EU.

So far the English referendum has resulted in transitional period now represented by an unelected interim governments whose authority to press the out button and start negotiations to leave may lack legitimacy in the eyes of the public.

Political transitions are tumultuous processes that celebrate advances and suffer setbacks several times before they can conclude with a new, widely accepted constitutional order.

There is a whole new class of millionaires as the new generation takes control of banks, government, and other institutions. The stage is set for another depression and the collapse of the welfare state.

How this can be achieved I leave to you to suggest.

But I am convinced that with the smart phone we should create a new political platform where the voice of people would hold weight in decision taken by our political masters.

If every eligible voting age citizen had a phone, any project that cost over x billions could be electronically sent for approval or disapproval.

As how to finance the United Nations ( see previous post : A World Aid Commission)

Can any of what I am writing about be achieved. Yes it Can.

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S ITS TIME FOR PREVENTION NOT AID.

15 Sunday May 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in The Refugees, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, World Aid., World Organisations., World Politics, WORLD POVERTY WHERE'S THE GLOBAL OUTRAGE

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Capitalism and Greed, Distribution of wealth, Inequility, The Future of Mankind, United Nations, World aid commission

Currently we have in the region of 65 million people displaced in the world.

With the combination of climate change and inequality of opportunity this is set to grow.

It is time to address the root causeS not with Aid but with preventative action.

The analytical discussion, the comments on refugee causes still remain, sadly, unchanged. This has to change. If not we are provoking an unprecedented humanitarian crises that will plunge the world into an irreversible spiral for uncontrollable miserere for all.

The reasons why people become refugees are not necessarily due to individual persecution or fear of persecution.

We have to tackle the modern refugee problems and especially the problem on how to prevent new wars and situations arise. In an increasingly complex world, massive refugee flows will likely endanger international peace and security.

Above all there is a pressing need to change situations where refugees are exploited as a weapon in a political strife. (ie, situations in which people become refugees to serve specific strategic or political purposes.)

The states of the international community can no longer ignore the victims of specific practices (which amount to persecution and massive human rights violations) only because they are still in their countries of origin.

Take Yemen’s humanitarian situation.

It is arguably the worst humanitarian crisis in the world and the world is looking the other way. The United Nations reports that Yemen has more people — 21.2 million — in need of humanitarian aid than any other country including Syria.

The last 30 years, especially the early Cold War period, besides being directly and indirectly the cause for millions of refugees, seriously impeded effective preventive actions.

The average period of time for displacements globally has grown to 17 years.

The international community (If indeed such a thing exists) should move forcefully now, while almost global cooperation is still possible.

Now is the time for a progressive development of a global approach to the refugee problem.

The approach to prevent rather than to cure is gaining acceptance as the most desirable course of action. The preventive course is advancing towards a more proactive approach to promote human rights, democracy and peace. The call to respect human rights and humanitarian law can no longer be considered merely as lip service, but rather figures now prominently on international agendas.

It’s time to realize that we are all connected to each other and our lives are affected if terrible things happen elsewhere.

Because the United Nations is not an independently Funded World organisation we have hundreds and hundreds of UN resolutions that have all proved unworkable.

Donor fatigue is “jeopardizing its entire existing and aid programs.

“Humanitarian aid can staunch the dying, but it takes politics and money to stop the killing.”

It is obvious to all that can see that future violent conflicts will likely take the form of resource wars – which can be understood as those conflicts which are primarily waged over access to scarce resources such as rare minerals, water, or oil.

All the Aid in the world will be too late making the U.N. (if not already) powerless to further the international protection of human rights.

World politics is already going in the wrong direction.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SOLUTION. PREVENTION NOT REACTION.

To achieve prevention we must create a World Aid Commission on all transactions that are designed to create Profit for Profit sake.

A 0.005% commision on: All High Frequency Trading.

All Foreign Exchange Transactions over ($20,000)

All Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisitions.

These three Profit for Profit (on their own) would create a perpetual Fund of billions.

They could be complemented by all World Financial Institutions issuing World Aid bonds that are tax-free.

All suggestions much appreciated.

Keep your like clicks, comments only.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS ITS NOW OR NEVER FOR THE UNITED NATIONS.

19 Tuesday Apr 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

The Future of Mankind, United Nations

There is plenty of blame to go around for the state of the world we live in.

But to many decisions are now driven by political expediency instead of values.

Its is a sign of how perversely twisted the bureaucracy we have now in all our out of date World organisations that once had principles.

Personnel decisions are considered more dangerous than the responsibility to tackle a range of terrifying crises facing us all.

Terrorist breeding grounds in Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya,

Not to mention Climate Change and all its consequences.

I mean all of us the Rich, Poor, White, Black, Christian, Muslim, and the unborn.

The United Nations is failing and in desperate need of reform which can only be achieved by an outside examination that is Independent.

If this is not undertaken the UN should be scrapped and replaced with a new World Board that has the health of the earth and its people at its core.

Since the United Nations established its ﬁrst peacekeeping operation—almost 70 years ago—more than 3300 people have died serving the UN in the pursuit of peace.

Peacekeeping operations since 1948: 71
Current peacekeeping operations: 16
- Uniformed personnel: 104,503 (as of 29 February 2016)
  - Troops: 89,406
  - Police: 13,261
  - Military observers: 1,836
- Civilian personnel: 16,471 (as of 31 July 2015)
  - International: 5,256
  - Local: 11,215
- UN Volunteers: 1,804 (as of 29 February 2016)
- Total number of personnel serving in 16 peacekeeping operations: 122,778
- Countries contributing uniformed personnel: 124
- Total fatalities in current operations: 1,679
- Total fatalities in all peace operations since 1948: 3,454.
  - Approved resources for the period from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016: about $8.27 billion
  - Outstanding contributions to peacekeeping (30 June 2015): about $1.6 billion

Current operations

United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO)

In Western Sahara since April 1991
Strength: 495 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 242
- Troops: 26
- Military observers: 216
Civilian personnel: 241
- International civilians: 84
- Local civilians: 157
UN Volunteers: 12

Fatalities: 15

Approved budget (07/2015– 06/2016): $53,190,000

United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA)

In the Central African Republic since April 2014
Strength: 12,627 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 11,686
- Troops: 9,639
- Military observers: 164
- Police: 1,883
Civilian personnel: 760
- International civilians: 518
- Local civilians: 242
UN Volunteers: 181

Fatalities: 19

Approved budget (07/2015– 06/2016): $814,066,800

United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA)

In Mali since April 2013
Strength: 13,170 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 11,781
- Troops: 10,645
- Military observers: 39
- Police: 1,097
Civilian personnel: 1,246
- International civilians: 585
- Local civilians: 661
UN Volunteers: 143

Fatalities: 81

Approved budget: (07/2015– 06/2016): $923,305,800

United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)

In Haiti since June 2004
Strength: 6,092 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 4,750
- Troops: 2,368
- Police: 2,382
Civilian personnel: 1,245
- International civilians: 304
- Local civilians: 941
UN Volunteers: 97

Fatalities: 183

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $380,355,700

United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO)

In the Democratic Republic of the Congo since July 2010
Strength: 22,492 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 18,618
- Troops: 16,938
- Military observers: 454
- Police: 1,226
Civilian personnel: 3,470
- International civilians: 816
- Local civilians: 2,654
UN Volunteers: 404

Fatalities: 100

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $1,332,178,600

African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID)

In Darfur since July 2007
Strength: 21,022 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 17,453
- Troops: 14,345
- Military observers: 179
- Police: 2,929
Civilian personnel: 3,412
- International civilians: 811
- Local civilians: 2,601
UN Volunteers: 157

Fatalities: 230

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $1,102,164,700

United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF)

In Syria since June 1974
Strength: 928 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 788
- Troops: 788
Civilian personnel: 140
- International civilians: 50
- Local civilians: 90

Fatalities: 46

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $51,706,200

United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP)

In Cyprus since March 1964
Strength: 1,067 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 916
- Troops: 861
- Police: 55
Civilian personnel: 151
- International civilians: 33
- Local civilians: 118

Fatalities: 183

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $52,538,500

United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)

In Lebanon since March 1978
Strength: 11,369 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 10,521
- Troops: 10,521
Civilian personnel: 848
- International civilians: 257
- Local civilians: 591

Fatalities: 309

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $506,346,400

United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA)

In Abyei, Sudan since June 2011
Strength: 4,795 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 4,497
- Troops: 4,410
- Military observers: 135
- Police: 17
Civilian personnel: 202
- International civilians: 130
- Local civilians: 72
UN Volunteers: 31

Fatalities: 20

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $268,256,700

United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS)

In South Sudan since July 2011
Strength: 15,509 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 12,733
- Troops: 11,782
- Military observers: 185
- Police: 1,105
Civilian personnel: 1,973
- International civilians: 787
- Local civilians: 1,215
UN Volunteers: 435

Fatalities: 42

Approved budget(07/2015 – 06/2016): $1,085,769,200

United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI)

In Côte d’Ivoire since April 2004
Strength: 7,120 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 6,022
- Troops: 4,457
- Military observers: 185
- Police: 1,380
Civilian personnel: 961
- International civilians: 301
- Local civilians: 660
UN Volunteers: 137

Fatalities: 137

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $402,794,300

United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK)

In Kosovo since June 1999
Strength: 366 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 16
- Military observers: 8
- Police: 8
Civilian personnel: 328
- International civilians: 109
- Local civilians: 219
UN Volunteers: 24

Fatalities: 55

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $40,031,000

United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)

In Liberia since September 2003
Strength: 5,224 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 3,882
- Troops: 2,626
- Military observers: 77
- Police: 1,179
Civilian personnel: 1,159
- International civilians: 358
- Local civilians: 801
UN Volunteers: 183

Fatalities: 196

Approved budget (07/2015 – 06/2016): $344,712,200

United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP)

In India and Pakistan since January 1949
Strength: 116 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 44
- Military observers: 44
Civilian personnel: 72
- International civilians: 25
- Local civilians: 47

Fatalities: 11

Appropriation (biennium 2014-2015): $19,647,100

United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO)

In Middle East since May 1948
Strength: 384 total, including:

Uniformed personnel: 150
- Military observers: 150
Civilian personnel: 234
- International civilians: 88
- Local civilians: 146

Fatalities: 50

Appropriation (biennium 2014 – 2015): $74,291,900

Value for money in a smart phone world. You tell me.

	Marcela on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ARTIFICIAL…
	اغانى on THE BEADY EYE SHINES A LIGHT O…
	bobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SHINES A LIGHT O…
	Berchmans Gannon on THE BEADY EYE SHINES A LIGHT O…
	bobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WE ARE NOW…

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

Tag Archives: United Nations

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IT IS TIME TO CUT THROUGH THE RHETORIC SURROUNDING SUSTAINABILITY.

THE BEADY EYE RETURNS TO THE ISRAELI- PALESTINIAN PROBLEM.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY DOES THE UNITED NATIONS TOLERATE SPEECHES THAT ARE IN BREECH OF ITS CHARTER.

UNITED NATIONS CHARTER.

Chapter I

PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: HOW WOEFUL HEINOUS,UNPARDONABLE, DISTASTEFUL,TO SEE ANTONIO GUTERRES THE UN SECRETARY-GENERAL HAVING TO BEG FOR FUNDS.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS:WHAT IS IT ABOUT US THAT MAKES US WHOLLY INCAPABLE OF RESPONDING? TO CLIMATE CHANGE- IS IT GREED OR ARE WE JUST PLAIN STUPID.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES: PART TWO.

AI has officially made its way into Google’s search algorithm.

(The artificial intelligence of RankBrain comes in the form of mathematical entities called vectors that can be understood by computers. When presented with an unfamiliar word, RankBrain will help formulate a guess at what the query was about and filter accordingly.)

There are many possibilities as to how Rank Brain could work into being a signal to direct your choice to making any decision.

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S ITS TIME FOR PREVENTION NOT AID.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS ITS NOW OR NEVER FOR THE UNITED NATIONS.

Current operations

United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO)

United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA)

United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA)

United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)

United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO)

African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID)

United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF)

United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP)

United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)

United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA)

United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS)

United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI)

United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK)

United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)

United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP)

United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO)

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

UNITED NATIONS CHARTER.

Chapter I

PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

AI has officially made its way into Google’s search algorithm.

(The artificial intelligence of RankBrain comes in the form of mathematical entities called vectors that can be understood by computers. When presented with an unfamiliar word, RankBrain will help formulate a guess at what the query was about and filter accordingly.)

There are many possibilities as to how Rank Brain could work into being a signal to direct your choice to making any decision.

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Current operations

United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO)

United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA)

United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA)

United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)

United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO)

African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID)

United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF)

United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP)

United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)

United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA)

United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS)

United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI)

United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK)

United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)

United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP)

United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO)

Share this:

Like this: