Saturday, September 18, 2010

Principles or Power?

Starting September 24, 2010, several world's leaders will speak at the U.N., demanding their rights to nuclear power. They want equality, and believe their right to nuclear power is the application of the principle of equality. Presidents Ahmadinejad of Iran and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela are two of those standing on their rights. The question is, are they standing on the principles of fairness and equality or grabbing for power?

Standing on the principles ends oppression. Grabbing for power comes from the belief that you lack power, and the ultimate conclusion of that belief is a complete loss of power.

Power doesn't come from nuclear capacity or nuclear weapons. Power comes from assuming responsibility to undo the damage you have done, and you rise and fall in power by the choices you make.

Our organization is making it possible for every president to be equal. No one has the right to tell another what to do. Our plan for world peace creates a level playing field, with each person and each nation finding its niche. There is no need for competition. No need to grab for power. And, disputes between nations will be handled in court rather than the battlefield. There is no need for expensive weapons. The monies spent on war will be used to enable the people to prosper.

The world's leaders are making their choices whether to stand on the principles or the power. Standing on the principles allows everyone to function on a higher level.

Both of these men have a history of denying rights to others. They must stand on the principles of fairness and equality to others, including their own peoples, before anyone will trust them. They must address the issues of conflict resolution, just as the United States must do to end the wars we are waging. Grabbing for power, prestige or natural resources only leads to the loss of power, prestige or natural resources, as proven by the occupation of Iraq.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for the games to end. The grab for power doesn't work. It never did, and it never will. It just seemed to work because it took so long for the backlash to hit.






Monday, September 13, 2010

"World Peace"

The first 8 issues of our embassy newsletters have now been sent to the foreign embassies in Washington, DC. The first volume addresses the nations that have been judged by other nations, and offer solutions to their problems based on how the proposed international government will handle the crisis.

The first issue offers the United States a proposal to create the proposed international government through a constitutional amendment. The timing couldn't be better for it to be accepted, because of the growing discord between the Democratic and Republican parties. The November elections are imminent, and things are getting tense for the Democrats. The problem is, no one seems to have a plan that everyone will agree to...

Except us.







Monday, January 18, 2010

Kuwait's Vulnerability Sets the Stage for Court System

Our proposal to Kuwait entails the creation of a legitimate, internationally recognized court system. Their vulnerability to the drive of Saddam Hussein that led to the Gulf War, and now their proximity to the crisis in Iraq, sets the stage for the creation of a Local (continental) Court system.

Nations do not have to be a signatory of the International Criminal Court, and so disputes between nations are not resolved. For conflict resolution, both sides must be considered equal, and when one side believes it has all the power, and the other has none, disputes will continue, and even escalate.

Our January embassy newsletter offers Kuwait the solution to their problems. They do not have to fear entanglement in regional disputes, nor relying on "mercenary" defense. By participation in the proposed international government, there is a higher source to go to to end conflicts.

Karen Holmes,
Principal