Sunday, November 29, 2015

The Empire According to Orwell (SOAPBOX PODCAST 11/29/15)

November 29, 2015

GUEST: Gilbert Mercier

TOPIC: The Orwellian Empire

This week, Cindy chats with Gilbert Mercier--author of 
The Orwellian Empire and Editor of News Junkie Post.



Dylan Avery

Loose Change re-release!


Listen to Dylan's Soapbox interview about
 his documentary, Black and Blue

Friday, November 27, 2015

Speaking Truth to Empire with Dan Yaseen (NOVEMBER)

On “Speaking Truth to Empire” on KFCF 88.1 Free Speech Radio for Central California Dan Yaseen interviews David Swanson, an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is director of and campaign coordinator for Swanson's books include War Is A Lie. He blogs at and He hosts Talk Nation Radio. He is a 2015 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee.

Sunday, November 22, 2015

Voices for Venezuela with Cindy Sheehan

Serendipity and Assassination (SOAPBOX PODCAST 11/22/15)

NOVEMBER 22, 2015

Today, on the 52nd anniversary of the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy, Cindy chats with actor/comedian/activist/author/raconteur John Barbour about his connection to the Kennedy assassination via his many conversations with New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison.

Cindy and John note many instances of serendipity that led to his new documentary (premiering today) about those interviews with Jim Garrison (JFK) and to this installment of The Soapbox.

Please listen to this show and then watch:

John Barbour's Last Words on the Garrison Tapes

Lonely by Anthony Freda

It sure is lonely being an antiwar activist in the age of Obama. 

If a Republican president were killing civilians all over the world, executing American citizens without due process and even bombing hospitals, would 

there be large scale antiwar protests as there were prior to the election of Obama? Would Democrats protest the war crimes that define current U.S. foreign policy if a Bush or Trump were the evil-doer?

Will the anemic peace movement be resurrected if a Republican is elected and simply continues on the current course,

or will Democrats make excuses for mass murder, chaos and failure as they do for their own candidates?

Moral consistency and objectivity seem anathema to partisanship.

So long as people choose party loyalty over moral conviction, establishment politicians will attempt to hijack the peace movement and use it solely as a tool for tribal division.

If we do not transcend the divide-and conquer paradigm, the peace movement will never claim it's true historic destiny to inspire the global awakening of conscience required to move humanity out of this dark age in which barbarism masquerades as humanitarianism.

Masterminds vs. Smart Bombs: Men Waging War | Mickey Z.

Black Ops Poster by Genius-MasterminD, DeviantArt (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)Black Ops Poster by Genius-MasterminD, DeviantArt (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Mickey Z. -- World News Trust

Nov. 22, 2015

Since the Paris attacks, I’ve noticed a predictable proliferation of the word “mastermind” in corporate media reports.

I say predictable because whenever the “good guys” take a hit, it’s essential to the narrative that their opponent be presented as some kind of evil genius who has dealt them a temporary setback that will only serve to bring out the best in them. In this case, of course, the masterminds are ISIS in general and was Abdelhamid Abaaoud, in particular. 

This is how males do things (sports, business, war, etc.). Even when we’re clueless or merely engaging in violence for sheer pleasure (translation: almost always), we have to present the illusion that we’re in the midst of some kind of epic, noble mission. This clip from Gangs of New York helps illustrate what I’m trying to describe:

You see, bad guys are to be respected if for no other reason than to make the good guys even more impressive for having taken them on. For example, heroic war criminal George S. Patton studied the strategies of vile war criminal Erwin Rommel and thus found a rival worthy of the name. It makes for iconic Hollywood moments, for sure:

Such self-delusion and denial has financial value beyond the box office. When facing off against an evil genius, it takes a benevolent (well-armed) genius to prevail. Enter the precision myth, the widespread belief -- all across the political spectrum -- that U.S. technology allows for “surgical strikes” and “pinpoint” bombing, all in the name of good.

This is where profit margins come into play. With roughly half of U.S. Federal tax dollars used to fund a global killing spree known as the U.S. Department of Defense (sic), this expenditure must be justified in order make certain the next fiscal quarter pleases investors.

Since Americans want so badly to believe their tax dollars are being used to crush evil doers but also would (usually) prefer that such crushing doesn’t (if possible) involve the wanton slaughter of, say, children and other civilians, the smart bomb myth is promoted through a variety of spins, e.g. U.S. weapons are the most technologically advanced and precise the world has ever seen. 

Like all spin, evidence to the contrary is not hard to find. So, please allow me to take you through a very brief and recent history of the masterminds behind precision bombing.

Define “Precision”
Good (sic) War Fun Fact: During World War II, Allied bombing raids killed 672,000 Japanese civilians and 635,000 German civilians.

U.S. bombers in the European theater initially stuck to a policy of daylight “precision” bombing but the risks of daytime runs did not pay off in accuracy -- only 50 percent of U.S. bombs fell within a quarter of a mile of the target. America soon joined its English allies in the execution of nighttime area bombing campaigns of civilian targets in Germany and later, Japan.  

Day or night, the number of shells falling where they were not aimed easily debunked the myth of precision. "In order to invade the Continent," says historian Paul Fussell, "the Allies killed 12,000 innocent French and Belgian civilians who happened to live in the wrong part of town, that is, too near the railway tracks."

Subsequent technological “progress” has offered no relief for those in war zones. What is euphemistically known as "friendly fire" or "collateral damage" is still a mainstay of war. In fact, as war became more technologically advanced, civilian casualties did not decrease. 

Delay the news until it no longer matters
All throughout Operation Desert Storm, the Pentagon and an acquiescent media sold the American public on the accuracy and efficiency of U.S. weaponry. 

"Although influential media such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal kept promoting the illusion of a 'clean war,'" write media critics Martin A. Lee and Normon Solomon, "a different picture began to emerge after the United States stopped carpet-bombing Iraq. The pattern underscored what Napoleon meant when he said that it wasn't necessary to completely suppress the news; it was sufficient to delay the news until it no longer mattered." 

That delay lasted from February 1991 until July 1996 when the General Accounting Office released a study that found the claims made by the Pentagon and its principal weapons contractors concerning the pinpoint precision of the Stealth fighter jet, the Tomahawk land-attack missile, and laser-guided smart bombs "were overstated, misleading, inconsistent with the best available data, or unverifiable."

"The accounting office concluded," wrote Tim Weiner in the New York Times, "that new, costly 'smart' weapons systems did not necessarily perform better than old-fashioned, cheaper 'dumb' ones." 

"When laser-guided bombs miss, it means that something got screwed up in the control mechanism, so they can go 10 miles away; they can go anywhere," adds Noam Chomsky. "No high-technology works for very long, certainly not under complicated conditions." 

“The public and the Congress were misled”
On Jan. 22, 1991, ABC-TV reporter Sam Donaldson reported on an alleged Patriot Missile intercept. "A Scud missile is heading toward Dharan in eastern Saudi Arabia," Donaldson said as the screen showed a bright object rocketing across the sky. "And rising to intercept it, a U.S. Patriot missile." After a beat, Donaldson gleefully cheered, "Bullseye! No more Scud!" 

"But on the screen," says Jennifer Weeks, a defense analyst with the Congressional Arms Control and Foreign Policy Caucus, "the Scud seems to continue right through an explosion on its path toward the ground."

The U.S. Army told Congress that Patriot missiles had intercepted 45 of the 47 Scuds at which they were fired. "Desert Storm provided gripping images of Patriots arcing across the night skies over Israel and Saudi Arabia to intercept Iraqi Scuds, and U.S. officials quickly claimed that the Patriot (originally designed to shoot down airplanes and slow-flying cruise missiles) was effective against ballistic missiles," says Weeks. 

President George H.W. Bush visited the Raytheon plant in Andover, Massachusetts, where the Patriot is made. "Patriot is proof positive that missile defense works," the president declared -- and the matter appeared to be settled.

Theodore A. Postol is professor of science, technology, and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "The current National Missile Defense interceptor tries to identify warheads and decoys by 'looking at them' with infrared eyes," Postol wrote in a June 15, 2002, Boston Globe op-ed, explaining:

"Because the missile defense is essentially using vision to tell which objects are decoys and which are bombs, this technique is no more effective than trying to find suitcase bombs at an airport by studying the shape and color of each suitcase."

A 1992 report by a House of Representatives Operations of Government subcommittee concluded: 

"The Patriot missile system was not the spectacular success in the Persian Gulf War that the American public was led to believe. There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War, and there are some doubts about even these engagements. The public and the Congress were misled by definitive statements of success issued by administration and Raytheon representatives during and after the war."

Even then-Secretary of Defense (sic) William S. Cohen, in January 2001 eventually confessed, "The Patriot didn't work."

A Bridge Too Fake
This pattern held during the 78-day bombing campaign over Yugoslavia in 1999. During the assault, Defense Secretary William Cohen declared: "We severely crippled the (Serbian) military forces in Kosovo by destroying more than 50 percent of the artillery and one-third of the armored vehicles."
One year later, a U.S. Air Force report revealed a different story:
Original Claim: 120 tanks destroyed
Actual Number: 14 
Original Claim: 220 armored personnel carriers destroyed 
Actual Number: 20 
Original Claim: 450 artillery pieces destroyed 
Actual Number: 20 
Original Claim: 744 confirmed strikes by NATO pilots 
Actual Number: 58

The report also found that Serbian military fooled U.S. technology with simple tactics like constructing fake artillery pieces out of black logs and old truck wheels. One vital bridge avoided destruction when a phony was constructed out of polyethylene sheeting 300 yards upriver. NATO pilots bombed the fake bridge several times.

There are no masterminds here
In advertising campaigns not unlike those hawking SUVs or cell phones, alleged American military technical superiority (and the related benefit to avoiding civilian casualties) is packaged, marketed, and sold to a far-too-willing nation. 

Fighter jets perform flyovers at sporting events. Hollywood deifies weapons of war. Politicians from all sides support "defense" spending. War toys sanitize the impact of such spending and desensitize children to the cause and effect of military action. 

In the end, however, it’s men who manufacture these weapons and men who utilize them. Men collude to delude themselves about how smart they, how advanced their weapons and tactics are, and how noble their intentions are. Their behavior is, in a word: pathological.

“Leadership positions,” writes Kathleen Barry in Unmaking War, Remaking Men, “are feeding ground for psychopaths, attracting as they do those cunning leaders who are indifferent to human life and absent of remorse.”

The mastermind we revere appears decisive and strong simply because he doesn’t give a shit about outcomes other than ego, profit, and personal power. His smart bombs aren’t smart. His precision is imprecise. His honorable intentions are dishonorable. There simply are no masterminds within such a predatory paradigm.

There can be no peace in a society like this just as there can be no peace as long as patriarchy reigns and the relentless war on woman continues to rage. The only mastermind worthy of the title would be someone, anyone who conjures up ways to smash the hierarchies and end the violence. 

My educated guess is that such a mastermind would undoubtedly be female.

Mickey Z. is the author of 13 books, most recently Occupy these Photos: NYC Activism Through a Radical Lens. Until the laws are changed or the power runs out, you can “like” his Facebook page here and follow his blog here. Anyone wishing to support his activist efforts can do so by making a donation here.
Creative Commons License
"Masterminds vs. Smart Bombs: Men Waging War" by Mickey Z. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at
  • Created
    Sunday, 22 November 2015
  • Last modified
    Sunday, 22 November 2015

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Activist wonders if he’s made a difference. What he discovers will break your heart | Mickey Z.

Photo credit: Mickey Z.Photo credit: Mickey Z.

Mickey Z. -- World News Trust

Nov. 18, 2015
“Reading the news and it sure looks bad. They won't give peace a chance. That was just a dream some of us had.” (Joni Mitchell)

I’ve written 13 books. My work appears in at least 25 anthologies (I’ve lost count), and has been translated into maybe eight or 10 languages. From print to web to chapbooks and far beyond, I’ve authored tens of thousands of articles, essays, poems, blogs, social media posts, etc. and I’ve helped produce a wide array of publications -- from photocopied zines to newsstand glossies.

I’ve done talks and lectures and workshops and panels and teach-ins from coast to coast in eclectic venues from tiny community centers to major universities -- with audiences ranging in size from single digits to several thousand. I’ve also appeared on TV, radio, web-based media, and have been live-streamed more times than even the NSA knows.

People have written plays about me, poems about me, term papers about me, scathing critiques about me, and some have traveled hundreds of miles just to witness me give a 40-minute talk.

From 2011 to 2014, I attended (and photographed) more NYC-area protests, demos, rallies, marches, sit-ins, teach-ins, die-ins, parades, outreach events, occupations, etc. than any other activist. Hands down. No contest. And it would be frighteningly fruitless to attempt listing the full range of social justice issues and concerns those events covered. 

On a personal level, I’ve followed a plant-based diet for more than two decades and haven’t owned a car for nearly as long. I rarely (if ever) fly, don’t have children, try to shop “responsibly” (and often rely on used goods), and generally do my best (in vain) to line up my behavior with my values.

I could go on. Trust me. The incomplete list I just typed out is the proverbial tip of a privileged iceberg, but this is not a bragging session. Not even close. Rather, I offer the above catalogue solely to help drive home my primary point: All my activist work has made no sustainable difference at all.

Before any of you go into reassuring mode, let me say thanks in advance and also add this: All your activist work has made no sustainable difference at all.

Of course, I’m not saying that absolutely nothing has been accomplished. Many of us, on a micro level, have made a difference but if that’s what you wish to focus on and debate, please count me out. Start your five-hour flame war someplace else.

What I am saying is that all the signs, songs, petitions, costumes, puppets, performances, chants, holding hands in the shape of a peace sign, memes, videos, conventions, banners, meetings, articles, books, forums, photographs, candlelight vigils, conferences, symbolic arrests, being the change we wish to see, and so on have not created the spark needed to ignite a successful, viable movement for social change. 

As a result, we (read: all life on earth) are losing. We are getting wiped out, figuratively and literally. We are fast running out of time.

If you’ve read any of my work, you already know I could go all hyperlink on you right now -- offering endless documentation to back up my downbeat diagnosis. But if my relentless self-education hasn’t helped create change yet, why choose that tactic now?

Nope, all I’ve got this time is a question: When will we collectively admit we’ve been tragically ineffective in our efforts and transparently self-sabotaging in our unwillingness to confront our failures? 

The moment we consider finally trying something new -- for starters, critical introspection -- I believe we’ll finally stand a chance of seeing the situation for what it is: an emergency, a crisis, a time for bold new ideas and immediate action. And that tactic has the potential to make all the difference in the world.


Mickey Z. is the author of 13 books, most recently Occupy these Photos: NYC Activism Through a Radical Lens. Until the laws are changed or the power runs out, you can “like” his Facebook page here and follow his blog here. Anyone wishing to support his activist efforts can do so by making a donation here.
Creative Commons License
"Activist Wonders If He’s Made A Difference" by Mickey Z. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at

Thursday, November 12, 2015

Bernie Sanders: Hire Me as Your Copy Editor! | Mickey Z.

Mickey Z. -- World News Trust

Nov. 12, 2015

Rev·o·lu·tion - revəˈlo͞oSH(ə)n (noun): a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system.

The word on the street (and by “street,” I mean the internet) is that a 72-year-old white male career politician named Bernie Sanders has started a revolution

Nothing riles me up quite like the sound of revolution, so I immediately clicked over to Bernie’s official website -- ready to join a hardcore rebellion. I had been assured by so many smart activists that Sanders was a genuine revolutionary. I came looking for revolt, insurrection, mutiny, and insurgency. What I found instead was a website in desperate need of a copyeditor.

Feel The Bern excerpt #1: “The American people must make a fundamental decision. Do we continue the 40-year decline of our middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else, or do we fight for a progressive economic agenda that creates jobs, raises wages, protects the environment and provides health care for all? Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class, or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy? These are the most important questions of our time, and how we answer them will determine the future of our country.”

While this might arouse HuffPo readers, it’s hardly “revolutionary.”

My edit: “The American people must revolt. Do we continue the 40-year decline of our middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else, or do we defy the Blue Bloc, take the fight to the streets, and take the liberty that is rightfully ours? Are we prepared to incur massive casualties and the sacrifice of almost all our beloved creature comforts? These are the most important questions of our time, and how we answer them will determine the future of all life on our planet.”

Feel The Bern excerpt #2: “The United States must lead the world in tackling climate change, if we are to make certain that this planet is habitable for our children and grandchildren. We must transform our energy system away from polluting fossil fuels, and towards energy efficiency and sustainability. Millions of homes and buildings need to be weatherized, and we need to greatly accelerate technological progress in wind and solar power generation.”

This is fine… if you’re Al Gore. But I’d say #FeelTheBern needs to embrace a much, much darker shade of green.

My edit: “The people of the United States -- not its corrupt, so-called ruling class -- must lead the world in recognizing that climate change is just one of countless eco-issues to address. It’s not just about making certain that this planet is habitable for our children and grandchildren. We must defend all forms of life and accept that ‘going green’ is a liberal panacea. Do you realize that 93 percent of the large fish in the ocean are already gone or that 78 percent of old-growth forests are already gone? What about the 150 to 200 plant and animal species that go extinct every single day? ‘Sustainability,’ you say? Are you fuckin’ kidding me?”

Feel The Bern excerpt #3: “The United States must do everything it can to make certain that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon, that a nuclear Iran does not threaten Israel, and to prevent a nuclear arms race in the region.”

Bernie baby, do you wanna incite a rebellion or line up for AIPAC money?

My edit: “Hold on a minute, why is anyone seriously listening to the country that purposely dropped atomic bombs on Japanese civilians, irradiated half the fuckin’ planet with subsequent nuclear tests, and is using depleted uranium weapons as we speak? Yeah, there’s a nuclear rogue nation and it’s called the United States of America! Who the fuck do we think we are trying to pretend that anyone is safe as long as we have enough nukes to kill 20 Earths and have demonstrated the willingness, the eagerness to use ‘em? As for Israel, please don’t even get me started. Elect me and watch the unconditional military aid dwindle.”

Feel The Bern excerpt #4: “It is an outrage that in these early years of the 21st century we are seeing intolerable acts of violence being perpetuated by police, and racist terrorism by white supremacists. A growing number of communities do not trust the police and law enforcement officers have become disconnected from the communities they are sworn to protect. Violence and brutality of any kind, particularly at the hands of the police sworn to protect and serve our communities, is unacceptable and must not be tolerated. We need a societal transformation to make it clear that black lives matter, and racism cannot be accepted in a civilized country.”

I dig the BLM reference but why differentiate between “racist terrorism by white supremacists”  and “intolerable acts of violence being perpetuated by police”? Regardless, dude, let’s make it more clear: There’s a huge difference between your “societal transformation” and a revolution. Let your rad flag fly!

My edit: “Violence? You wanna talk to me about fuckin’ violence? Our entire culture is founded on and maintained by violence. Talking about non-violence in 2015 America is like debating wetness as your ride the Titanic to the bottom of the goddamned ocean. What I wanna know is when the fuck are we gonna name the problem? In the United States, 85 percent of murders, 90 percent of violent assaults, 95 percent of domestic and dating violence, 95 percent of child sexual abuse, and 99.8 percent of rapes are committed by men. Elect me and my administration’s top priority will be to recognize and end Male Pattern Violence.”

That’s as far as I got. But before I do any more work, I’m reaching out to all of you to find out who can put me in touch with Bernie’s campaign. I need a job. He needs a copy editor. It’s a match made in revolutionary heaven!


Mickey Z. is the author of 13 books, most recently Occupy these Photos: NYC Activism Through a Radical Lens. Until the laws are changed or the power runs out, you can “like” his Facebook page here and follow his blog here. Anyone wishing to support his activist efforts can do so by making a donation here.
Creative Commons License
"Bernie Sanders: Hire Me as Your Copy Editor!" by Mickey Z. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Why? by Anthony Freda

Why are so many brave soldiers and veterans killing themselves?
Are they coming to the realization that they were never fighting for freedom and democracy as they were told?

Are they learning that the pretexts they are given as justification for endless war are actually warped, historical narratives designed to manufacture their consent?

Have they accepted the fact that the true, imperial geopolitical strategies at play are hidden from them and that their sense of patriotism

has been cynically manipulated by those who benefit from enriching and empowering the military industrial complex?

Are they becoming aware that a complicit media uses psychological techniques to promote endless war as the inevitable solution to every crisis,  

ignoring and hiding the fact that these wars accomplish nothing but death, chaos and the empowerment of the very enemy they have ostensibly been sent to destroy?

Are they killing themselves not only because they have experienced the horrors of wars, but also the even greater horror of knowing that their criminal government 

sent them into harm's way on false pretexts and that those in power place No value on their sacrifices or even their lives?

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

If I had been alive in the days of slavery ...GUEST BLOG by Martin Gugino

The 174th Attack Wing at Hancock must stop
President Obama is not a lawful combatant. Therefore, under the Laws of War, he is not permitted to kill people or order people to be killed. Those in the military who cooperate with their Commander-in-Chief in targeted executions are obeying orders they should know are illegal, and are violating their oath of office to uphold the Constitution. The Commander of the 174th Attack Wing at Hancock is Colonel Semmels. He needs to know.

It is ironic to note that all the men at Guantanamo were denied POW status (aka professional courtesy) because our lawyers easily saw that men not in uniform are unlawful combatants.  Will Obama attempt to claim POW status, if he is captured?

Commander in Chief powers
The unenumerated “Commander-in-Chief powers” are as follows: The heads of the military must obey his lawful orders. That’s it. The reason for having the military obey a civilian is obvious: General Curtis “there are no innocent civilians” LeMay.   

The President’s duty
The president’s duty, according to his oath of office, and the Constitution, is to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.

Must the President preserve the United States?
No. Our Declaration of Independence explicitly recognizes “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.” A President may not sacrifice the Constitution to “save” the country.  

The Bill of Rights is a Bill of Human Rights.
The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights were written by revolutionaries, who knew first hand that for a just society, the people’s voice must be heard; knew that without that feedback, those in power will become isolated, coming to believe in their own natural righteousness, and fall into patterns of abuse. The only purpose for the Bill of Rights was to place a fence around the exercise of power of the Federal Government. The Fifth Amendment is a check on governmental action, whenever and wherever governmental action is claimed to be Constitutional. No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.

State of War
International Law recognizes something called a  “state of war” to limit atricity, not to facilitate it. Only lawful combatants can participate in fighting, non-combatants must be protected, and certain acts and weapons are not permitted.

Are we at war?
For the US to be at war, congress must declare war. But a declaration of war may not create a “state of war”. There must be sufficient valid reason for the declaration of war. International law is not based on fantasies. When the justification for the declaration of war against Iraq was shown to be false, the continuation of the war became illegal. The declaration of war against Afghanistan because of their unwillingness to extradite Osama bin Laden does not rise to the level of sufficient cause for a just war.

War is characterized by fog. As technology clears away the fog, the justification for international recognition of something called a “state of war” becomes more problematical. With few pitched battles, the “theater of war” concept is difficult to accept, where the theater has a functioning civil society, the “fighting” is a bombing, followed by strafing, and the main activity in the “theater” is rescuing the wounded.

What we must do.
Wars are becoming less intense, barely impinging on daily life, no rationing, no bond drives, but they are lasting longer, and wars often erode civil liberties.  The drone war must stop now. The Wing Commanders must be engaged in order to help them overcome their presumption that orders from above are legal. The notion of war itself must be examined. The right to petition the government for redress of grievances must be taken seriously and defended by the police. Those in power who see what is going wrong must put their lives in jeopardy to save the nation. We must be prepared to support them.
Martin Gugino hangs out with Witness Against Torture in DC, and Burning Books in Buffalo. His heroes are Dr. Paul Farmer,  Fr Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Fr Jerzy Popielusko, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Jesus Christ. He is a retired computer analyst.

Inline image