Syria Surrendering Its Chemical Weapons to International Control: A Landmark Peace Agreement?

Even though it still won’t halt the on-going bloodshed of Syrian civilians being decimated by conventional weapons, should the Assad government’s agreement to surrender its chemical weapons stockpiles considered a landmark peace agreement? 

By: Ringo Bones 

Let’s make it clear, Syrian strongman Bashar Al Assad now agreeing to surrender his military’s chemical weapons stockpiles to international control in the wake of overwhelming evidence that chemical weapons were used – though by which side is still under investigation – in the ongoing Syrian civil war back in August 21, 2013 is a clear violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol that prohibits the use of toxic and asphyxiating gases and chemical agents will not end the ongoing slaughter of Syrian civilians being decimated by conventional means. A “tentative” time-table has now been agreed by US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, to destroy surrender and put under international control all of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles by the middle of 2014. Given the alternative of the Obama administration launching Tomahawk Cruise Missiles with conventional explosive warheads as a punishment to the Assad regime of using Sarin gas on Syrian civilians not loyal to the regime, is the agreement of Bashar Al Assad surrendering chemical weapons to international control more or less a landmark peace agreement on behalf of the Obama Administration? 

A few weeks ago, US Secretary of State John Kerry somewhat “jokingly” suggested that the Syrian strongman Bashar Al Assad could avoid a military strike via conventionally tipped Tomahawk Cruise Missiles as a punishment for its alleged use of chemical weapons on Syrian civilians not loyal to his regime if he surrenders his military’s chemical weapons stockpiles to international control. Inexplicably, Russia – who as one of the permanent seat-holders of the UN Security Council and been blocking an international intervention against the Syrian civil war since it started two years ago – agreed with State Secretary Kerry’s suggestion. Unfortunately, right-wing Christian conservatives in America had always criticized this recent Obama Administration decision on not launching any retributive strike on the Assad regime since Kerry and his Russian counterpart agreed on this relatively peaceful settlement. 

From a political and philosophical perspective, the 1925 Geneva Protocol that prohibits the use of poisonous and asphyxiating gases and chemical agents and of biological methods of warfare during times of war – primarily born out of a painful tactical experience during World War I over the indiscriminate way chemical weapons kills everyone on the battlefield and the potential carnage it can inflict on unprotected civilians had never been easy to enforce under existing international law – then and now. During Nazi era Germany, fascist era Italy under the behest of Benito Mussolini and with Nazi top brass as observers used newly discovered nerve gases that were not yet invented during World War I on Abyssinian separatists with impunity. While back in March 6, 1988, Saddam Hussein ordered one of his loyal henchmen Chemical Ali to drop Sarin, hydrogen cyanide and mustard gas on the Kurdish of Halabja over their suspected loyalty to Iran while the then Reagan Administration never spoke out about the incident. 

Part of the difficulty of the enforcement of the 1925 Geneva Convention is that even though most countries had signed it back in June 17, 1925 on behalf of the United States and many other powers, the United States Senate has refrained from giving its full consent to the ratification of the 1925 Geneva Protocol and is therefore not binding to the United States. Even as relatively recently during the Vietnam War, the United States could be considered a non-signatory of the 1925 Geneva Convention. It wasn’t until April 10, 1975 that the United States was in full binding agreement with the 1925 Geneva Protocol. 

Sadly, even if Assad surrenders the entire Syrian military's stockpile of chemical weapons within the agreed timetable, he could still "exterminate" those Syrians not loyal to him by conventional means. And by that time, the death toll in Syria's ongoing civil war could exceed one million. 

Is Whistleblower Edward Snowden Guilty Of High Treason?

Despite leaking sensitive state secrets that allegedly revealed the unjust eavesdropping of the Obama administration on average American citizens, is the former NSA contractor Edward Snowden guilty of high treason?

By: Ringo Bones 

Currently trapped in international legal limbo in an airport transit terminal in Moscow, former U.S. National Security Agency contractor and famed whistleblower Edward Snowden has attracted runaway interest from the leading news providers, late night comedians and every average citizen of the world. Though he might seek political asylum in either Russia or those South American countries with belligerent diplomatic beef with the U.S. government, it looks like he might follow the Russian punk rock band Pussy Riot’s example in order to an almost permanently stay in Vladimir Putin’s Russia. Even though it’s rather disconcerting that no distinguished journalist or political pundit has compared him to Benedict Arnold and given the existing evidence – is Edward Snowden guilty of high treason? 

It would be a surprise to everyone that American comedian Wanda Sykes used to work for the U.S. National Security Agency, but unlike the high-school dropout Snowden who only, at present, has a high-school equivalency level education, Sykes had a doctorate before the powers-that-be at the NSA entrusted her with the U.S. government’s most sensitive secrets. And given that back in May 2013 there was a study conducted whose findings show that people of high I.Q. are less likely to commit violent crime (but the way they use their intellect to not get caught hasn’t yet been mentioned), the world’s top security analysts has been pointing out that narcissism is the most likely reason for Edward Snowden’s leaking of the U.S. government’s and the NSA’s most sensitive top secret data. And Snowden’s dissatisfaction with his beautiful exotic dancer wife and a rather comfortable lifestyle in a quiet suburb in picturesque Hawaii only reinforces the case of narcissism. 

Unlike late 1960s era RAND Corporation leaker and Vietnam War veteran Daniel Ellsberg who leaked sensitive top secret Pentagon documents pertaining to the U.S. government’s rather controversial involvement in the Vietnam War, Edward Snowden fled away from the United States and didn’t surrender to the authorities. While Daniel Ellsberg publicly surrendered to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts in Boston back in June 28, 1971 after Ellsberg shared top secret documents to New York Times correspondent Neil Sheehan back in June 13, 1971. While 21^st Century era leaker Edward Snowden remained on the lam until this day, Daniel Ellsberg was willing to serve the 115 year prison sentence for violating the Espionage Act of 1917just to expose the unjust and malfeasant way the Vietnam War was being run by the US government at the time which further earned the ire of then US Defense Secretary Robert s, McNamara and then US President Richard M. Nixon. 

The George Zimmerman Shooting Of Trayvon Martin: 21st Century Lynching?

Even though he got a not guilty verdict due to a quirky “Sand Your Ground” law in Florida, is the neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman’s shooting of Trayvon Martin tantamount to lynching? 

By: Ringo Bones 

The tragic, senseless and preventable shooting death of a young African-African teenage boy mistaken for a prowler by an overzealous neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman that happened back in February 26, 2012 in Sanford, Florida has surprisingly reached a not guilty verdict on the neighborhood watchman on all counts of murder and manslaughter due to a quirky and arcane “Stand Your Ground” law in Florida that allows any gun owner to shoot a perceived intruder committing a trespassing offense even if the intruder poses no immediate threat to the gun owner. Given that the U.S. Civil Rights Movement that gave equality to African-Americans is now over 50 years old, does the shooting death of an unarmed African-American teenage boy by an overzealous neighborhood watchman who was clearly stalking and spoiling for a confrontation with that said young man tantamount to a 21^st Century lynching? 

The Jena 6 incident during the Bush administration and the namby-pamby way it was handled by that administration only makes me wonder if African-Americans have truly achieved equality in the United States over half a century after the Civil Rights Movement. Such tragic incidents only makes the aging 78-RPM shellac of Billie Holyday’s Strange Fruit that I had been started to play since 2006 seems strangely up-to-date topical in our largely colorless and limp-sounding digital music download age. The only silver lining of the tragic Trayvon Martin shooting is that the demonstrations and rallies called by leading African-American leaders like the Rev. Al Sharpton in major cities across the United States against the unjust not guilty verdict granted to former neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman had been peaceful so far. Not unlike the not guilty verdict granted to those LAPD personnel in 1992 that were clearly caught on tape inflicting police brutality on Rodney King a year before that resulted in widespread rioting over 20 years ago. 

Should The Philippines Have Its Own Version Of Jon Stewart?

Egypt’s version of Jon Stewart has been grabbing headlines earlier this year after being accused of insulting Egypt’s President Morsi and Islam, does the Philippines ever had its own version of Jon Stewart? 

By: Ringo Bones 

Earlier this year, Egyptian political satirist Bassem Youssef – more popularly known to the rest of the world as “Egypt’s Jon Stewart” – became famous beyond his home country after the Egyptian government issued an arrest warrant against him for allegedly insulting Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi and Islam. After embroiled in such hot water, Bassem Youssef got invited by the real Jon Stewart to appear as a guest in The Daily Show With Jon Stewart. As a former heart surgeon turned host of his very own political satire show titled The Program, Bassem Youssef is only one of the countless activists in Egypt choosing to use political satire to inspire change to a government that still seem to be trapped in the quagmire of the over 30-year Mubarak dictatorship. Given that Egypt has its own version of Jon Stewart, isn’t it high time for the Philippines to also have its very own version of Jon Stewart? 

Back in the early 1990s, the closest thing for the Philippines of having its very own version of Jon Stewart was a then very popular political satire show – now largely forgotten – titled Mongolian Barbecue where a self-styled Mongolian host named Mr. Shooli poked fun at the topical political issues of the day – especially the day’s buzzwords and sound-bytes. Mongolian Barbecue fans today will likely remember the “Political Wheel” – used to poke fun on Filipino politicians of the early 1990s who lacked political will. And every self-respecting Mongolian Barbecue fans will probably still remember those “Behest Man” jokes. Given that dysfunctional Filipino politicians are litigious as Hell, a Doonesbury  like cartoon strip called Pugad Baboy was sued by a Estrada administration crony back in 1999 after it poked fun at widespread nepotism and cronyism in Philippine politics that was then still alive and kicking years after the Marcos dictatorship. 

So is it high time for the Philippines to have its own version of Jon Stewart? Young folks today – as in Filipino millennials – would probably say: “Hell Yes!!! Well, I mean there is a lot of that contemporary dystopia we lovingly call the Philippine society to poke fun and satirize about. The Philippine educational system alone has been begging to be poked fun at after it has became a parody of itself by voluntary electing itself to be run like a 13^th Century Catholic / Abrahamic theocracy since the mid 1990s. I mean the Philippine Department of Education only respects one’s belief system if it revolves around a Middle Eastern charlatan that lived centuries ago and then ruthlessly evangelized by a bloodthirsty Medieval-era European warlord or a variant thereof.  Belief systems revolving around healing crystals and enlightened technologically advanced extraterrestrial beings capable of interstellar travel need not apply in the Philippines Department of Education for starters. This alone is not bad for a first episode for your very own political satire show.  Sadly, if a Filipino comedian reminiscent of Mr. Shooli was around in the Philippines these days and is as active and as “civic minded” as him during his heyday in the early 1990s, he – or she – would be immediately targeted for extra-judicial killing or threatened with ex-communication by the Philippine Vatican Princes just for “telling like it is”.  

Margaret Thatcher: A Mixed Legacy?

Despite being Britain’s first – and only (so far) – woman prime minister is the late Baroness Margaret Thatcher leaving behind a mixed legacy of her supposedly illustrious tenure as prime minister? 

By: Ringo Bones 

As the former prime minister of Britain, Baroness Margaret Thatcher recently passed away back in April 8, 2013, the myriad tributes and the criticisms of her tenure as the first and only woman prime minister of the UK seems just to prove that she’s leaving behind a mixed legacy of her “illustrious” tenure as prime minister during much of the 1980s. Many a protest march were planned to be staged for her April 17, 2013 funeral for her policies that destroyed Britain’s working middle class during the 1980s. For better or for worse, love her or loathe her, anyone with more than the passing interest of the Cold War era geopolitical power-plays of the 1980s will be hard-pressed to be a mere fence-sitter when it comes to the way the “Iron Lady” wielded her power back then. 

For what she had done good, then UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher managed to will her political capital into Number 10 Downing Street back in a time when the proverbial glass ceiling was sturdy enough to withstand a 15-inch artillery shell fired from a naval destroyer. Prospects for women in positions of power were still few and far between during the late 1970s despite a global feminist movement and yet Thatcher successfully established herself in what seems to be a “boy’s only” clubhouse of Number 10 Downing Street.  Probably the same reason why she got disenchanted working as a chemist in a plant after graduating from Oxford with a Chemical Engineering degree and then decided to explore her prospects in the British political arena. 

And lets not forget during the first half of 1982, her decisive action to take back the Falkland Islands after being unlawfully annexed by a military junta then running the country of Argentina really transformed her political fortunes – as in the “Falklands Factor” that allowed Number 10 to recapture the Falklands by June 14, 1982 only secured her incumbency as prime minister for the entire 1980s. After all, before the advent of 21^st Century era social media, the only viable way to “kick military dictator ass” is via a large scale military operation. 

Compared to what she did good during her tenure as prime minister many Britons old enough to experience first hand “Thatcherism” still loather her. Margaret Thatcher had been compared to both former US President Ronald Reagan and Adolf Hitler – as both were notorious for drastically curbing the power of labor unions. While still many praised the underlying economic policies of Thatcherism that allowed scores of Britons to cash in the benefits of Reaganomics during the economic boom of the go-go 80s, many loathe Margaret Thatcher for making greed acceptable on British soil during her tenure as prime minister.  

The late Baroness Thatcher will forever be remembered by some as the one responsible for the death of Bobby Sands, an IRA political prisoner, after he died by staging a hunger strike back in March 1981. And many also blamed then PM Thatcher for driving teen age British Catholics to join the IRA during that time. Her Section 28 legislation was hard on Britain’s gay community despite a global consensus of London being seen as the world’s most gay friendly city since 1976. To Britons with more liberal politics, the late Baroness Margaret Thatcher will forever be seen as a “Tory Radical”. 

Papal Resignation: A Not So Unprecedented Move?

Even though the last time an incumbent pope resigned was almost 600 years ago, are there other popes that have voluntarily stepped down?

By: Ringo Bones

Speculations and conspiracy theories aside, the other still to be divulged reasons on why Pope Benedict XVI resigned might be reserved for posterity, but what is now considered common knowledge is that the decision for Pope Benedict XVI's resignation is not a so unprecedented move because there are other popes before him that have resigned. Though the last time it happened was almost 600 years ago, Pope Benedict XVI's resignation is still a not so common Vatican event for the rest of us who still gawk at ecclesiastical matters and the over a billion Catholics, both young and old, around the world.

Believe it or not, it was due to the Papal Decree of  Pope Celestine V that made possible for popes to resign voluntarily while their decision still respected by the Vatican's Holy See. Back in 1294, Pope Celestine V issued a solemn decree declaring it possible that a pope can resign during his tenure if he so wishes. After only serving five months as pope, Pope Celestine V abdicated but not before issuing a papal decree to end any debate over whether a pope can justify standing down during his lifetime. After his resignation, Pope Celestine V lived the rest of his life as a hermit and was later canonized. Thus he became known as Saint Celestine V and some books on the list of popes used this canonized title.

Strange as it seems, before Pope Celestine V issued his papal decree to allow incumbent popes to voluntarily step down, there are two other pontiffs who have done so. Our current outgoing pope's namesake, Pope Benedict IX, stepped down in 1045 and his successor Gregory VI the year after in 1046.

With Pope Benedict XVI resignation to fully take effect in February 28, 2013, the last time a pontiff resignation occurred was almost 600 years ago when Pope Gregory XII resigned in 1415. Pope Gregory XII stood down to end the "Western Schism" which threatened to shatter Roman Catholicism. Pope Gregory XII's resignation helped unite the Church at the Council of Constance in 1415.