Control the medium, Control the message

When the great Canadian media philosopher and public intellectual coined the phrase "the medium is the message", I wonder how far he saw into the future. It is even believed that he predicted the coming of the world wide web thirty years before its onset, and his visions of the future to a large extent have come true. But I doubt even he could have imagined the engineering of Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp etc. and the immediacy with which information is consumed, discerned and discarded today.

He was certainly accurate when he predicted that the medium by which information is delivered will define, alter and impact the message itself. But in what way, would have been hard to fathom by anyone. Today when everything personal, private, public and consequential is shared via  "social media" the impact is telling. While McLuhan did predict that communication technology would transform the world into a "global village", and shrink the planet in a meta-physical sense, it is  anyone's guess, as to how far that process will really push us over the edge.

Marshal McLuhan also predicted the end of the print medium as we know it. The newspaper and the book in its known physical form, will become a thing of the past. The early signs of which are already present as more and more people use tablets, phones and laptops to consume information. While the medium of delivery will continue to change at a rapid rate, the content creation will change as a result as well. But there will always be a need for good writers and journalists as an alternative to the rapidly diluted 140 characters or less way of sharing information. But those who control the medium, will always control the message.

On March 19, 2014 an excerpt from an upcoming book by veteran New York Times journalist Carlotta Gall was published in the New York Time's magazine section. The article titled What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden was an extremely well researched piece of journalism. It put you on the edge of your seat, exposing the complex and disturbing nature of a protracted war that has caused death and destruction on a massive scale. After a trillion dollars spent, leaders assassinated, countless innocents killed, the article concluded that nothing significant has changed.

The Taliban, the dubious Pakistani intelligence services, the politicians and the various rag-tag armies of terrorists from Al-Qaida to Lashkar-E-Taiba, are all intact waiting to rise again as soon as the American forces left Afghanistan. The article indicts everyone from the Pakistani Dictator Parvez Musharraf to his ISI companions and local bureaucrats, of knowing all along where Osama Bin Laden was being housed. He was free to roam as he pleased as protection was guaranteed from the highest levels of power.

This article was not published in Pakistan. 9000 copies of the International New York Times were printed and distributed in Pakistan with blank white space on the front page. The truth was censored either by intimidation or by exertion. The message was effectively erased by the people who exerted control on the medium.The people of Pakistan were yet again hoodwinked.

Next month, the largest democracy on the planet goes to the polls. Approximately 800 million eligible voters will take part in one the longest, most chaotic, colorful and controversial elections ever seen. Countless regional and national political parties will vie for power in the 543 seat parliament. It will take 272 seats to form a government, and there is no single party that has the wherewithal to garner an absolute vote. Therefore only a coalition government can come to power and thus votes will be bought for hard cash and deals will be made in a nation that is awash with corruption.

Corruption is a central issue in this election. A new national political party called Aam Admi Party (Common Man's Party) has chosen the eradication of corruption as its only political agenda/manifesto in this election. In any democracy, it is the free and objective press that guarantees a fair election. In India, in this election, the media/press has successfully been corrupted as well. Voters are being misled by what is being called "paid news". Where politicians and political parties are buying column space in respected news papers, and are having propaganda pieces dressed up as real news with no distinction. Even the editorial sections are being bought and turned into puff pieces. The divisive candidate Narendra Modi of the BJP party is the favorite to become the next Prime Minister of India. He is perceived to be "business friendly". Newspapers, TV stations and their owners who stand to gain from his victory, have steadily made him the media darling, consciously and carefully evading the tough questions and sugar quoting the uncomfortable ones to give him an edge.

With over 250 radio stations, 850 TV Channels, 93,000 registered newspapers and the social media networks buzzing the Indian media landscape is an influential juggernaut. Political parties own media outlets outright and war openly with little oversight. In this election the message is being dressed and distorted even more to influence the vote in a tightly contested election. Largely because the medium of delivery has changed and the control has fragmented in some cases or has conglomerated  in others.

According to the BBC radio documentary "Press for Sale" there have been over 1,400 cases where the Election Commission has detected alleged paid news over the last four years. Now the Indian parliament has been considering legislation which will outlaw the practice – although detecting and proving it is likely to be tough. Controlling the medium is definitely paying off for those who stand to gain. Most likely this could steal the election from a voting base, whose discerning capacity is limited.

Controlling the medium in the digital age is challenging, lucrative and powerful. While the internet does create a highly democratic space, it certainly also creates a space that can be heavily surveilled. Edward Snowden revealed how the NSA was invading privacy of the powerless and the powerful, under the guise of fighting terrorism. In nations like China, Turkey and Egypt, the internet is seen as a real threat to the establishment and therefore is highly regulated.

The acquisition of fledgling companies like Instagram, Whatsapp, Occulus VR for exorbitant sums of money by giants like Facebook, reveals the desire of these companies to control the pipeline.

Comcast, an American company is all set to purchase Time Warner Cable another behemoth that controls what is known in the business as the "last mile". The last few feet of  physical cable that penetrates your wall into the TV Cable box in your living room. This is where it is predicted companies will fight for space to collect the most intimate data on the consumer, so they can advertise in the most narrow manner possible. Apple, Inc. is close to signing an exclusive deal with Comcast to launch its new gizmo directly into the living room to observe your every consumerist move. The cutthroat competition to control the medium of delivery is getting intense, and this will define what as consumers we end up seeing or not seeing, and in the process trading personal data.

While it seems as though technology is making the world a more open space, it is also doing exactly the opposite. On one level revolutions and peoples movements can be triggered and surged by social media, information can also be spied on, collected and controlled by dubious means. It is also that same media that dilutes the content by its very nature, compromising all validity and integrity. Living in a developed nation with unfettered access to the internet, with some education, one can sift through the noise and stunted information to find the essence of what is "real". For those who do not have that privilege, the alternative is perilous.

Marshal McLuhan also coined the term "surfing" meaning the rapid, irregular and multi-directional movement through a heterogeneous body of documents or knowledge. That word means something else these days. It means to endlessly bounce around, swimming and floating in a sea of information, sometimes in search of something very particular, most often to aimlessly wander in digital intoxication. So the next time you go "surfing" remember to ask yourself, who exactly is controlling the medium and what exactly therefore is the message that is being delivered?

It is what it is.

Bombay Bol

I spent time in India this month, attending a film festival in Bombay. Returning to the land I was born, is always enriching, exciting, visceral and exhilarating. The sounds, smells and visuals energize me making me come alive. I feel like I am entering a pulsating world where my senses ignite. Not to sound exotic but returning from a sterile and organized environment of the west, the experience is always heightened the first few days. While most of India takes you to another plane in many ways, Bombay does it more than any place I know. And for that reason it is called "Maximum City" and maximum it is.

The stark inequality that exists in India, has been written about and shown in every possible manner. From books like Shantaram to films like Slumdog Millionaire, the contrast that is seen in Bombay, visa vie India, has been displayed over and over again. Almost making classic imagery of poverty synonymous with India. I myself have written about it many times in my past essays. Every BBC and CNN report does not fail to mention this fact, while India booms and unimaginable wealth is created for a few. Having said that, there is no escaping it. In a city like Bombay, it is in your face all the time. To ignore it, is to deny it and to deny it is to degrade it. People live on many levels in India and there are many Indias that exist. Partly due to corruption and partly due to apathy.

India has always existed this way, even when it was ruled by opulent kings, the British and now the elite ruling class, who in many ways are the new colonizers of an economically and socially chaotic population, 1.3 billion in all, trying and striving to move up the ladder. Seventy years ago, Mahatma Gandhi expressed concern about this prospect, that a western industrial model would only tear at the new nation, making economic imbalances worse. His vision sadly seems to be coming true not just for India but the planet. There is no question modern technology and social programs have made a significant difference in pulling people up from dire misery, but the task at hand is massive. 2.7 billion people still struggle to survive on the planet, and malnutrition is a real problem even in many parts of the developed world.

As gigantic democracies, India and America are similar in some ways. Wealth in America gets more and more concentrated at the top, shrinking the middle class and squeezing the economy. In India it is the same, only the effects are blaring, detrimental and direct, as the economic separation between groups is vast.

Instead of writing my observations in prose, I thought I would give it a shot in rhyme. So here it is from 30,000 feet above, leaving Bombay on to Hyderabad.

BOMBAY BOL (speak to me)

Maximum city they call it and maximum it is,
through my taxi window it unravels as is

Naked children, mummified bodies on sidewalk,
a stove burns under an overpass, breakfast in bed, soupy stock

Givenchy, Prada, Skoda and Porsche, they are all here,
so are the bare feet, under heavy load and hot air

Towers rise into the sky, ever so high,
others fall lower and deeper only to sigh

Trains move millions like Sardine,

old black and yellow Fiats choke streets, almost unseen

The young energize the city,
the old stay home, can't go out, traffic too risky

Yachts park in the bay by the Gateway,
private jets in hangers, where would you like to stay?

Couples caress hiding in public
Big screens on cell phones flash and click

A movie set by a seaside setting
not for a movie, but a wedding

Where those who serve, will never eat
standing inside uniforms and behind plates of more and more meat

At a party, I am glitterati, wearing silk, looking Brooklyn, talking cinema,
over Mojito to people who claim they are the intelligentsia

It is confusing to walk this city,
yet it is alive, throbbing, moving and mourning without pity

From up above I see patterns, a golfing green next to a shanty,
that is how maximum, maximum is, in this city of plenty

Bombay Bol

Selflessness

To achieve complete selflessness is a remarkable thing. Especially in a world as self serving as ours. Consumerism in unthinkable ways pushes us more and more to invest in personal comforts and pleasures. A bigger house, a newer car, a bigger tattoo, the latest gadget and endless varieties of foods to consume. The purpose of progress seems to be only about personal gain. This makes us a citizen of our wants more than the needs of the world. Then there are doctors, nurses, relief workers and activists who work in selfless ways in the service of humanity. Some of us contribute to that effort every time there is a catastrophe and the images on TV become unbearable and the suffering of others questions our place in the world. Having acquired an obscene amount of wealth, a few super rich start foundations and give sustainably over a period of time as they are concerned about their legacy. There are those who achieve a level of selflessness that people like mother Teresa and others in her group have come to embody and symbolize. Driven by religion or some internal drive or passion they do good that leaves people in awe of their presence. Then there are those who have lived a loveless life and gain love by selflessly giving to others. The world is full of such nameless people who we seldom hear or read about.

Recently, bouncing from channel to channel on American television in search of something worthwhile to invest my time, I came across a documentary film on PBS titled "Blood Brother". The colorful images peaked my interest because the film was set in India, the country I was born in. Blood Brother tells a story of a young man named Rocky Braat and his time at an orphanage in a remote village in the southern state of Tamil Nadu. My initial reaction to the film was - here we go again, another story of a white person going to some impoverished and destitute part of the world to save "the children". I have seen this before. If it weren't for a white person and his/her compassion from a place of privilege, this film would never have been made. But as I began to watch the film, my cynicism began to shift. As I saw Rocky immerse himself in this world of children, who were abandoned and left on the edges because they were HIV positive, my impression about him and his journey began to change. Watching him care for these children, while they consumed a cocktail of drugs to stay alive and intermittently saw their companions fall to the horror of this disease was moving. Keeping hope alive was a daily struggle and Rocky had become the motivator of that joy and hope.

Rocky's motives for being in India were a bit puzzling. It was clear that he came from a broken family in Ohio, where his emotional needs were not met in any way. But the fact that he chose this route to express that deficiency and sought to fill that void by helping children with HIV was impressive. Walking barefoot, like the children and adults he had come to live and move with, he felt at home in this remote and drastically different place. The love he had found by putting himself in a place where most would run from, somehow grounded him. Through all the challenges India throws at you, he seemed to have come to appreciate the essence that truly makes Indian people, especially children, genuine through ever present misery, oppression and cultural imprisonment.

As we watch Rocky go through his motions, there are times you really wonder if his journey was being captured on film to make a spectacle of a situation that is dire, distraught and disturbing. But what turns the tables, is when he comes to care for a child who is on the verge of death. When a ten year old's entire body erupts into open wounds from the inside of his eyes to his toes, the doctors give him ten days to live. In an extremely hard to watch long sequence, we see Rocky attend to this child in the most selfless manner possible. Nursing every wound with extreme care, concentration and diligence, without leaving his bedside for a moment, ignoring the threat of infection, Rocky brings the child back from the brink. This scene in this film transforms the viewer and with the power of the documentary medium, one truly comes to appreciate Rocky and his unconditional devotion to this child. His selflessness is on full display via an observational camera. By saving this one child, you feel he somehow conquers the world and finds the meaning of life.

Most documentaries of this nature end with the protagonist returning to his/her country of comfort a changed and humbled person. Reflecting on this complex phenomenon called "humanity", he/she is transformed. Or some western agency or organization awards a medal to the protagonist for his/her charity. While the film has won many awards for the humanity it captures, it ends with Rocky making the village his permanent home. Marrying an Indian woman from the nearby village, he settles down in the service of these children. Whether his time there will be temporary only time will tell. But for now Rocky seems to have found a family and love that he was deprived in another world.

If more of us exhibited selflessness, when asked to do so, the world would change. Today there are 9 million internally displaced refugees in Syria. There are another 2.4 million who have been driven from their homes and are living in squalor in camps in Jordan and other neighboring countries. United Kingdom has agreed to give asylum to a few hundred, those who have been subjected to the most horrific violence. As the Geneva talks falter, there is a great need for nations around the world to act in selfless ways to stop the suffering. There is ample room in the world for many, but very little space in our hearts it seems.

This week we lost a giant in America. An inspirational figure to all through music and valiant acts of defiance and demanding justice in a democracy. Pete Seeger once said "the key to the future of the world, is finding the optimistic stories and letting them be known." Rocky's story is of optimism and hope. We can all find such stories in our minuscule lives to share. Sharing is caring, and to care is to change. It is what it is.

Invincible

About a year ago I was called in to edit a video obituary on Nelson Mandela for BET (Black Entertainment Television) News. He was in the hospital and the world's attention was on South Africa. A few days later he emerged and went home and the world breathed a sigh of relief. On December 5th this year, I was called back to finish the job. "Madiba" as he was lovingly known in his country, was finally free. The long years spent on planet earth, most of them in torment, had come to an end. As President Obama pointed out, Nelson Rollhlahla Mandela now belonged to the ages. The long road traversed, had come to an end.

As a film editor I look at many hours of footage to condense it to the most essential elements. Moments that would inform, entertain and take the viewer on a journey of discovery and exploration in an effortless way. I guide the viewer's gaze and make the story flow with music and visual juxtaposition. And from the endless hours of footage, emerges a coherent story. What I gain in the process, is a wealth of knowledge and an insight that is perceptive and enriching.

While I sat in a dark edit room at 2 AM in Manhattan, watching the live feed of the memorial and funeral of Nelson Mandela coming in from South Africa, it placed me right in the moment in real time. I became a part of history in an infinitesimal sense. I was there grieving, celebrating, learning and enjoying the passing of a man who like many before him had left an indelible mark on the timeline of humanity.

When Nelson Mandela was released from prison in 1990, invincible and unbowed, his story became an international event. Very soon movies, documentaries and books began to be made about his life and the birth of a new nation (the latest one being "Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom")  Western nations and leaders that called Mandela a terrorist and propped up his enemy, made him their hero. For Americans, especially Black Americans he became a personification of their own struggles. He joined the ranks of their hallowed leaders who fought to end the other Apartheid not too long ago. At the memorial service President Obama paid homage to his legacy by saying that his own ascent was partly inspired by Mandela's journey.

The defeat of an entrenched, oppressive and brutal Apartheid regime, and the emergence of a democratic nation based on tolerance, compromise and reconciliation, set an example for the world to appreciate and emulate. Mandela gained freedom at 71, and within a decade created a nation which in principle put aside retribution to create a society that would have a chance to grow and evolve in the long run. Unlike many other African leaders, some his friends, he relinquished power and allowed his colleagues to build upon his vision. With his departure that vision stands in the balance, as poverty among the majority black population ravages the nation and corruption grips the ruling class, and the fear of reprisals among the white population rises to the surface.

Revolutions, violent and non-violent, are not fought and won alone. Many die along the way, others sacrifice much if not more, but the "chosen ones" who see the big picture prevail, persevere and get immortalized. Nelson Mandela certainly fit that mold. His story is of fortitude and courage, his sacrifice makes his story that much more powerful. With out his colleagues Steve Biko, Walter Sisulu, Oliver Tambo, Chris Hani and other unnamed foot soldiers nothing could have been achieved. But it is the emergence of his voice of reason that bore fruit. Nelson Mandela's transformation from a  violent approach to a non-violent one, is a journey of not just self realization but of strategy and insight. While he did take lessons from his predecessors (Gandhi and King) his struggle was very different from theirs. His true genius lies in the fact that he negotiated and executed the demise of a regime from a place of incarceration and then followed through with his vision against the will of his compatriots and brothers in arms.

Those who become symbols of struggle and then freedom, run the risk of being deified. Mandela in his halcyon days made every effort to avoid that by openly reflecting on his personal failings, missteps and inadequacies. Despite his efforts he has joined the exclusive pantheon of the saintly. As time goes on his cult of personality will only grow. South Africa inaugurated an imposing statue of his likeness the very next day he was interred. In the million obituaries that were written and spoken, he was elevated to having an aura around him. In reality he was a man who saw the big picture and knew his place in time. He was a resilient man of strength and tenacity. As quoted in his favorite poem "Invictus" he was "the captain of his soul" but not as much a "master of his fate".

As the year comes to an end and we remember those who left their mark on the speck of humanity, his name will definitely lead the pack. Whether his legacy will influence people in power, only time will tell. As Mahatma Gandhi famously said "My life is my message" so is Madiba's . That is all. It is what it is.

JFK

On this day, half a century ago, three shots rang out in downtown Dallas, Texas. Time stood still, a president was dead and a nation was left in shock. A bright and cheerful Dealey Plaza turned chaotic, and the city of Dallas was scarred forever. A lone shooter and a rifle is all it took. Fifty years on, that day remains fresh in the minds of those who were old enough to grapple with the aftermath. For those of us who were born after, the story of John F. Kennedy has been seared via countless books, films, buildings and memorials. Much like the untimely deaths of Abraham Lincoln, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Salvador Allende, Patrice Lumumba and many others are mourned everyday, John F. Kennedy is remembered as a man who stood for universal values of peace, democracy, equality and human rights.

When assassinated, Kennedy had served just over a thousand days as president. In that short period he had captured the imagination of people all over. The three alphabets, JFK, came to symbolize someone larger than life. His youthfulness was seductive. He was the first president brought to the American living rooms via the mass medium of television and he knew how to use it to his advantage. There was an instant connection and the romance that emerged, lasts to this day. His charisma was enhanced by his wife, children and wardrobe and the whole package was endearingly branded "Camelot" for many Americans.

The 1950s were a very prosperous time in America. There was a respite from the wars and while Europe was rebuilding itself from the carnage, America was intact, and therefore had a lead. For the first time ever middle class families owned homes, cars and refrigerators. Schools, highways, shopping malls and libraries were being built at breakneck speed. Families had leisure time and extra money and wanted to be entertained. Movies, television, music and car companies all fed this thirst and a new America began to take shape. The suburbs were birthed and the cities were transformed. Kennedy sensed this shift and knew he could be the one to lead America into the sixties as a man of the times. So when he defeated Richard Nixon in a televised presidential debate (many concluded he lost in the radio version) he arrived on the scene. He was inaugurated on January 20th, 1961 to become the youngest, the first to be born of the century and the first Catholic president. His election was no land slide victory though, it was a photo finish. He won by 119,000 votes in the popular count.

Even though Kennedy was somewhat of an outsider to the style of politics of the time, his pedigree was as elite as elite can be. Born into a wealthy family one of nine children, his father Joseph Kennedy was a tough Irishman who wanted all his sons to be president. Harvard educated, with an impeccable war record, he had all that he needed to make a run for the highest office in the land. The Kennedy's, infamously had made their money during prohibition bootlegging liquor and since had multiplied their money to buy into power and privilege. Kennedy paid his dues as a politician by serving as a congressman for six years and a senator for seven and when the time came, was ready to fulfill his father's dream.

What made Kennedy appealing to many, was his youthful appearance. The sixties in America were just beginning to get interesting. Elvis Presley, Marlyn Monroe, Bob Dylan, Frank Sinatra and others were in vogue. Hollywood was exploding and a sense of sexual liberation and freedom that would define a generation was laying its foundation. The young were setting the mood, away from the conservative and puritanical mode of the past. Kennedy fit right in and was certainly part of that milieu and consciously wanted to be associated with its evolution. He fraternized with the glitterati from Gore Vidal, Tennessee Williams, Frank Sinatra to Walter Cronkite. He was known to be a serial philanderer, had questionable connections to the mafia and some of his adventures were quite un-presidential. He was lucky to have lived and died in a time when privacy was respected and the media was interested in only what mattered to the public at large.

Kennedy even today is the poster boy for the liberals as Ronald Reagan is to the conservatives. Kennedy certainly lifted the stature of the Democrats and single handedly steered the black vote solidly their way, which up until then was Republican. By coming to Martin Luther King's aid when he was arrested in Atlanta at a sit in, he became popular among African Americans who were in the thick of fighting for civil liberties. While Kennedy was perceived to stand for modern, liberal, secular values which many Democrats still harp about as the foundations of the party, in reality he was a moderate. In comparison to his brothers Ted and Bobby, he was borderline conservative. As a chief executive he was fiscally cautious and constrained. Even though the black population favored him, in reality he was hesitant and timid about civil rights, and frustrated many of the civil rights leaders until finally articulating his vision in June of 1963. When the Russians launched "Sputnik", the first satellite into space, it de facto triggered the space race, arms race and the cold war. In response it is often imagined that Kennedy was the one who dreamed of putting man on the moon to shame the Russians. But in fact he wanted to send astronauts to Mars and had to be talked out of it because it was impractical. Kennedy was perturbed by the cost of space exploration and actually said "Why should we spend that kind of dough to put man on the moon?" He even spoke to the Russian premier about ending the space race and establishing a joint Soviet-Russian partnership for a moon landing.

Despite all of it, in the short time Kennedy was president, he inadvertently lay the foundation for important things to come. He established the Peace corps, successfully steered out of a nuclear confrontation with Russia during the Cuban Missile Crisis, pushed for racial desegregation and women's rights and started the Vietnam war. His vice president and successor Lyndon Johnson, actually saw many of his plans bear fruit. He managed to pass the civil rights bill through congress despite monumental opposition. He landed the first man on the moon. Created programs such as food stamps, Medicare and Medicaid to tackle poverty, but took America deeper into the Vietnam war.

As we remember JFK on this day, his legacy and enigma is strong as ever among Americans, partly because like Elvis he died young and because the aura of his lineage still endures. As a testament to that, his daughter was recently appointed the Ambassador to Japan and despite individual failings and mishaps among family members, the weight of the Kennedy name is powerful and influential to this day.

If one were to visit the site of the assassination one is appalled by how small an area Dealey Plaza is and how close Lee Harvey Oswald was to the president when he fired the shots. The chances of him missing his target were very slim. Since that day Americans have wrestled with that reality, never finding satisfying and conclusive answers or never wanting to believe the official version. Conspiracy theories are abound and to this day keep a window open to a revelation. In 2017 the sealed Kennedy assassination papers will be released to the public and maybe then the suspicions will settle. Until then, movies will be made, like the new film opening this month titled  Parkland and more books will be written, as the Kennedy story still sells.

What Kennedy's assassination reveals, is that all men are mortal, no matter how mighty they are perceived. Presidents are ordinary people pushed into extraordinary positions. They are flawed like us and sometimes are good at what they do, for all of us. History paints their portrait for us to examine, but not to deify or distort.

In his inaugural address in 1961, John F. Kennedy said

"If a free society cannot help the many that are poor, it cannot save the few that are rich".

With 80% of the stocks on Wall Street owned by 5% of the population and the wealth of the Wal-Mart family equal to the bottom 30% of Americans, his words ring true louder than ever today. In some ways he is still a man of the times.

It is what it is.

Phones and Drones

President Obama swept into power beating all odds, riding on a wave of impressive support and enthusiasm. It was mainly a reaction to a dismal performance by the previous administration that had all but shredded the constitution in the name of security. President Obama promised change. A promise to restore America's standing in the world. A return to a value when a nation and its people would be judged for being fair, transparent and respectful of all those who are mighty and not so mighty. For that he was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. His early overtures were seen as historic and his nascent charismatic diplomacy was refreshing and filled many with pride. A sense of optimism filled the air. Today if one were to look back at his presidency, despite many accolades, two things stand out as controversial and contentious. The issues of Phones and Drones.

The promise that was offered to the American people, twice, was of real change. Which included an end to an indiscriminate and open ended "global war on terror". Torture as a policy would stop, and its most decisive and divisive symbol "Guantanamo Bay" would be shuttered for good. There would be transparancy and openness and George Bush's signature Patriot Act would be rolled back and America would adhere to principles of international law and human rights as the leader and police of the free world.

The ground wars have figuratively ended, but Guantanamo Bay remains open, invisible and marooned. The war on terror has taken to the skies in an ominous way, piloted by the president himself. Drone strikes in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan have escalated beyond measure. Yemen, seen as a fertile ground for terrorists has been a victim of the hi-tech executioner as well. And this week Somalia joined the club, when a car allegedly carrying "suspected Al-Shabab militants" was suddenly blown up. President Obama has earned the dubious destinction of becoming the first president to authorize more drone strikes than any before. Even his predecessor who brought drone warfare to the forefront, was allegedly weary of this technology. Drone warfare has sparked a new arms race. China and other countries are trying to manufacture or procure drones, while the rules of engagement remain ambiguous.

Early this month Human Rights Watch released a detailed report which placed America's controversial drone program front and center as missing its mark and taking an indiscriminate toll on innocent civilians in Yemen. The report found America in direct violation of the laws of war. Amnesty International has called drone strikes a "war crime". Many Yemeni's today fear Al-Qeada as much as they fear the terror of America raining down from the skies. According to the report America so far has carried out 81 targeted drone strikes inside Yemen, killing at least 473 combatants and civilians.  Jeremy Scahill's book and documentary "Dirty Wars" which came out earlier in the year, exposed the  nature of this war, that causes unspeakable horror in the name of keeping America safe. In response to the Humans Rights Watch report the White House spokesman Jay Carney said  

"We are reviewing these reports carefully. To the extent these reports claim that the US has acted contrary to international law, we would strongly disagree. The administration has repeatedly emphasized the extraordinary care that we take to make sure counter terrorism actions are in accordance with all applicable law."

The denials and debate over numbers are endless. The math of how many innocent versus "bad-guys" killed, does not absolve anyone. It might make sense politically to not have troops on the ground and kill "terrorists" with so called surgical strikes from the sky. But what the report clearly exposes is that there is no such thing as a surgical strike. And in the eyes of the law, an innocent Afghan, Yemeni or Somali life is as precious as an American one. Where you live should not decide whether you get to live or die

The American drone program is largely run by the CIA, who rely on human intelligence on the ground to identify targets to destroy. On many occasions the intelligence has been faulty and innocent people have died and the US government has acknowledged that fact in the past. For that they have a term "Collateral Damage". Collateral Damage is a war crime. If one has to kill innocent people in poor desperate nations to keep America safe, then one has to wonder if this war is worth fighting like this, or can this war be won like this. There are real dangers out there, and there are people who are motivated to cause mayhem like recently witnessed at the Westgate Mall in Kenya. But taking innocent life to secure a planet or a nation, cannot be justified by a state under any situation. But then again by definition war is the taking of innocent life in one form or another. Ongoing case in point, Syria.

While the CIA is America's premier agency tasked with keeping the nation safe by relying on human intelligence on the ground, the NSA (National Security Agency) is tasked with doing the same using technology, the technology of eavesdropping. By using a sophisticated global grid of computers, satellites, listening posts and human analysts, the NSA listens to chatter on phones and the internet. It then filters millions of intercepted emails and phone calls using complex software, to foil or warn about terrorist attacks, or simply gather information that might be useful to the nation. With Edward Snowden blowing the cover on the NSA and exposing its over reach, there is high anxiety. It is perceived that the agency has gone above and beyond the law and has lost its bearings violating constitutional rights to privacy. The fact of the matter is, with the ongoing war on terror the nation signed away the right to privacy via the Patriot Act, which President Obama reaffirmed and endorsed. The president called it a minor inconvenience in exchange for national security. The argument is, if you are not doing anything that is deemed "wrong" or "dangerous" by the state apparatus, then there is nothing to worry. This was the same logic used by the Stasi when it spied on its citizens in East Germany spreading a veil of fear that defined an entire generation. The difference being, for now I can still write this blog without fear, hoping to be protected by the first amendment enshrined in the American constitution. Now that it has been revealed that even Google and Yahoo were violated by the NSA, one wonders whats next.

This week it was revealed that it was not just US citizens who were spied on, but citizens of other countries and their heads of state were also included. Thirty five world leaders had their phones tapped and the list could be longer. As a result an uneasy and embarrassing diplomatic situation has pushed the president on the back foot. Much like he was unaware of the kinks in the roll out of his signature health care plan, he denied knowing about the extent of NSA's activities. When the NSA chiefs were ordered up to congress to explain, they all defended their program by saying it was business as usual, no one should be surprised, all nations do it, even among friends, to gain an upper hand in the doggy dog world of espionage in social, economic, political and security arenas.

The Europeans, who have lived through the cold war grip of the KGB, Stasi and its ilk, do not see it as business as usual. They see it as a grave violation of their trust and rightfully so. I am sure they acknowledge that spying does go on among friends, but the tapping of phones at the highest of levels of government is something they don't see as normal. America will have to respond to this shameful behavior decisively and forcefully otherwise risk isolation and loss of camaraderie amongst allies.

When the airplanes rammed into the twin towers in Manhattan, they caused lasting damage the effects of which are still being felt a decade later. That ghastly event psychologically turned America inward transforming it into a hawkish fortress. The most telling example in addition to the phones and drones, are the twelve hundred or so security agencies, private and public, that have mushroomed in and around Washington since 9/11. It seems the madness of keeping America safe is causing more harm while it does some good. In the 2010 book titled "Top Secret America" Dana Priest and William Arkin, raised the alarm of a state security apparatus gone out of control, whose unraveling we witness today. What is even more telling is the acknowledgement by the president of America of being out of touch with what is going on under his watch.

Reigning in America's security apparatus is a gargantuan task. Billions of dollars are at stake, and like everything else, it is economics. Its a big job creator and a money maker for lobbyists and contractors. And politically since America has not seen a serious attack on its soil since 9/11, the security expansion is seen as a success. But the fact of the matter is, if it is not reigned in, it will do irreversible damage. And freedom if it not already is, will only be an illusion.

One of the founding fathers of America, Ben Franklin, eloquently said "Those who give up their liberty for more security, neither deserve liberty nor security". That holds true even in the violent times that we live in.

It is what it is.

The Unraveling

It is final. Us humans are pushing the only planet we have, over the cliff. For those with doubts, the recently published United Nations' guarded report, is a resounding revelation. Global warming is real and is here to stay. One did not need a report to validate it. All one needed is an open eye and an understanding of how the human species has come to exist with that which gives it sustenance. Islands of garbage, balding forests, depleted wastelands and smog filled skies, that is how we have returned the favor. For the skeptics who think and say that global warming is a phenomenon that has been ongoing for millions of years and it is only engine earth going through its motions, there is enough scientific evidence to prove otherwise. Even for a moment if we were to side with the skeptics, it is hard to debate the fact that human activity is accelerating the warming process.

The recently released IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report states with 95% certainty, that humans are the dominant cause for global warming, at least since the 1950s. The report says that in the span of the last 1400 years, the decades between 1983 and 2012 have been the warmest in the Northern Hemisphere. That means, in those years more than ever, ice sheets lost more mass, glaciers rapidly shrunk and the spring snow cover continued to fall in extent. Going forward the sea levels are expected to rise at least 26 cm on the low end to 82 cm on the high end, relative to the emissions of this century.

The report says atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by 40% since pre-industrial times, leading to warmer oceans and erratic weather patterns. It is "virtually certain" the report says, that most places will see more hot and fewer cold temperature extremes as the warming increases. And it is very likely heat waves will occur more frequently than occasional winter extremes.

One of the most damning aspect of the report was the conclusion that some 15% to 40% of released carbon dioxide will remain in the atmosphere longer than 1000 years after the emissions have ended. Raising the concern that some aspects of climate change are irreversible.

So now what does humanity to do? How does it cope? How do we save whats left for future generations? All of the above data has been published, parsed and tossed in documentaries, books and media reports feverishly over the past two decades. As a result summits have been convened, symposiums have gathered and every few days alarms have been raised, but very little has been achieved in tangible behavioral change. In this latest UN report, four possible scenarios with varied emissions controls were presented. With strict controls we could possibly limit the temperature rise by as little as 0.3 degree celsius by year 2100. This was the best case scenario if we made some monumental changes today. The scientists who published the report expressed hope, albeit faint.

Humanity is no monolith. We have one planet, but everyone sees borders everywhere all the time. No two nations can agree on anything, let alone climate change. Even genocide by Sarin gas is disputed even when the evidence couldn't be starker. The developing nations see it as their right to burn their way to an affluent lifestyle. The developed ones cant stop consuming like there is no tomorrow. As there is always that next new gadget to be had and a virgin market to dump it on.

Human appetite for energy is insatiable. And energy consumption is the primary cause for green house gas emissions. Either we reduce our energy consumption or find ways to create clean energy. There is no doubt that the human addiction to all fossil fuels is not going to taper for another fifty or hundred years. There are still large reservoirs in the deepest oceans that are being readied to exploit. Clean energy is not yet sustainable to compete with conventional sources of energy. Unless and until this equation is resolved, any hopeful scenario the scientists foresee will be morphing into an impossible dream and a possible nightmare.

This month Japan turned off its last nuclear power station. All the fifty reactors of the nation are now offline. The nuclear disaster that resulted from a massive Tsunami that struck Japan in 2011, prompted the nation to rethink its energy production. Now there is a 30% shortfall in their energy sector. This has pushed Japan to rapidly peruse renewable energy like no other nation. But it has proven unsustainable. One square meter of land devoted to wind power generates just two watts of power. For solar power an equivalent area produces 20W. Nuclear power generates about 1000W per square meter. Therefore Japan has no choice but to turn to oil, gas and coal to make up for the nuclear deficit, thereby generating more green house gasses than it did in the past. It is what it is.