The best-friend family by Paula Bartlett

For generations, society sold adults a remarkably simple proposition, fall in love, get married, buy a house and have children. The sequence was presented less as one possible route through life than as the route. Yet increasingly, people are looking at the entire arrangement and asking a rather inconvenient question: why must romance be the foundation of a family at all?

The answer emerging in some households is surprisingly old-fashioned. Friendship. Across affluent societies, adults are experimenting with buying homes with their closest friends, sharing domestic responsibilities and, in some cases, raising children together without being romantically involved. Platonic life partnerships and co-parenting arrangements are becoming more visible, while the financial realities of housing have made friendship a surprisingly practical economic alliance.

This is not necessarily the death of romance. It is the end of romance's monopoly. The modern romantic relationship has been asked to do an extraordinary amount of work. One person is expected to be lover, best friend, financial partner, emotional therapist, co-parent, housemate, holiday companion and retirement plan. No wonder so many relationships buckle under the weight. We have turned the romantic partner into an entire social infrastructure.

Friendship, meanwhile, has been treated as the supporting cast. Perhaps that hierarchy was always backwards. A good friend may know your weaknesses without exploiting them, understand your irritating habits without pretending they are charming and remain beside you after the romance has lost its chemical fireworks. Friendship can be remarkably durable precisely because it does not require the permanent maintenance of sexual attraction.

Then there is money, that unromantic little tyrant. Buying a home alone has become increasingly difficult in many places. Pooling two incomes, sharing a mortgage and dividing household expenses can turn an impossible aspiration into a manageable one. For adults who have no interest in waiting indefinitely for Prince Charming or who have discovered that Prince Charming is financially useless, friendship can become a practical route to stability.

Children may make the argument even stronger. Parenthood is not fundamentally a romantic activity. It is a long-term exercise in cooperation, patience, reliability and sacrifice. A child needs adults who show up. Whether those adults kiss each other goodnight is rather less important than whether they turn up at the school gate, remember the doctor's appointment and remain calm when the child has painted the dog purple.

Platonic co-parenting challenges precisely this old assumption, that a child's family must originate in a love affair. Of course, friendship does not magically eliminate conflict. Quite the opposite. Property disputes, different parenting philosophies, new romantic partners, jealousy and changing ambitions can make these arrangements complicated. A friendship can survive a disastrous holiday; surviving a mortgage and eighteen years of childcare is another matter.

Yet the broader cultural shift deserves attention. People are increasingly separating the things previous generations bundled together: love, sex, companionship, property, parenthood and family.

That may ultimately be healthier. The family of tomorrow may not be defined by who sleeps together, but by who turns up for one another. And perhaps the most radical family revolution is not abolishing commitment. It is choosing it deliberately.

The dictator in absentia by Fahad Kline

There is a somewhat almost theatrically appropriate about Bashar al-Assad being sentenced to death in a courtroom he did not have the courage to enter. The dictator who spent years insisting that Syria was too complicated to be governed by anyone but him has discovered the simplest political lesson of all, regimes end, palaces empty, statues fall and eventually the paperwork catches up. A Damascus court has now convicted Assad of murder, torture, arbitrary detention and crimes against humanity, imposing the death penalty in absentia. He remains safely in Moscow, where Russia has given him the kind of sanctuary that dictators have historically mistaken for immortality.

The comparison with Nuremberg is tempting, though it should be handled carefully. Nuremberg was not merely punishment. It was an attempt to establish a principle: that sovereignty is not a licence to murder one's citizens, and that “I was only following orders” is not a sufficient moral defence when the orders themselves are criminal. Syria needs something similar—not because Assad is uniquely monstrous, but because the machinery that sustained him was extraordinarily ordinary. Ministries signed papers. Officers followed commands. Prison guards turned keys. Propagandists explained away the dead. Bureaucrats learned to make atrocity look administrative.

That is the real significance of the verdict. Assad's greatest achievement was not that he remained in power for twenty-four years. It was that he transformed brutality into routine. The Assad system did not depend upon one man personally torturing every prisoner or ordering every killing. It depended upon thousands of people understanding what was expected of them and discovering that obedience was safer than conscience.

A death sentence, therefore, is emotionally satisfying but politically incomplete. Indeed, the awkward irony is that Assad's punishment may never actually occur. He is in Russia. Moscow has little reason to hand over a former client whose survival remains useful as a symbol of its influence and as a reminder of what happens to those who challenge authoritarian power. The Syrian court can sentence Assad; it cannot presently reach him.

But justice is not entirely measured in handcuffs. A verdict creates a record. It gives names to crimes and responsibility to perpetrators. It tells survivors that what happened to them was not merely the unfortunate turbulence of a civil war, not an inevitable consequence of sectarian hatred, and not the unfortunate collateral damage of a government defending itself. It says, instead, that a state crossed a line and that somebody was responsible.

That distinction matters enormously. Yet Syria's new rulers should resist the intoxicating temptation to turn justice into revenge. A country emerging from dictatorship does not become democratic merely because yesterday's prisoners become today's judges. Nor does justice become more legitimate because its verdict is popular. The new Syria will be judged not only by how firmly it condemns Assad, but by whether it can construct institutions capable of judging everyone, including its own allies.

That is the difficult part. Nuremberg mattered because it attempted to establish law above political convenience. Syria now faces the same test. If the court becomes merely an instrument for settling the accounts of one victorious faction, the Assad verdict will eventually look less like the birth of justice than the opening act of another political cycle.

The dead deserve better than that. For years Assad behaved as though Syria belonged to him. His final humiliation is that Syria has now put his name into a court record as a defendant rather than a president. He may remain in Moscow. His regime does not. And history, at last, has started taking attendance.

The podium gets quieter by Howard Morton

Karoline Leavitt’s departure from the White House press secretary’s office has been presented as a family decision and perhaps it is. She has two young children, recently returned from maternity leave and says plainly that the job demands more time than she can give while being the mother she wants to be. There is no reason to doubt that. But Washington has always been a city where perfectly respectable explanations can coexist with less comfortable political truths.

Leavitt is not merely leaving a job. She is stepping away from one of the most combustible platforms in American politics at an unusually revealing moment. Donald Trump has praised her extravagantly and says she will remain an outside adviser and influential Republican voice. That is the political equivalent of being given a golden parachute and told it is a family picnic. Perhaps it is. Perhaps it is also an exit ramp.

The White House press secretary is supposed to explain the administration to the country. Under Trump, the position has increasingly become something else: a daily exercise in combat. The briefing room is less a place where government policy is clarified than a stage on which loyalty is demonstrated, enemies are identified and the president's preferred version of reality is defended with the energy of a courtroom advocate who has already decided the verdict.

Leavitt understood the assignment. She was young, energetic, combative and unusually willing to turn the press briefing into political theatre. She did not simply answer reporters; she fought them. For the Trump movement, this was a feature, not a flaw.

But there is a peculiar danger in becoming too good at defending one man. Political careers are longer than presidencies, at least in theory. A spokesperson can spend years building a reputation for competence and then discover that the reputation has been swallowed by the personality she served.

That may be the more interesting question here. Is Leavitt leaving because the boat is sinking, or because she has realised that she does not want to be aboard when everyone else discovers the leaks?

The answer may ultimately be neither. Trump remains immensely influential, and Leavitt is hardly fleeing the movement. She is being repositioned, not exiled. Yet that distinction matters. From inside the White House, she has been the voice defending Trump. Outside it, she can become a voice defending Trumpism, which is a considerably more flexible and potentially more durable career.

That is smart politics. It is also smart personal branding. The most dangerous thing for a young political communicator is not controversy. It is becoming permanently associated with someone else's controversies. Trump has made political loyalty into a currency, but currencies fluctuate. The person standing beside the king during his triumph may become a footnote when the king leaves the palace.

Leavitt is only twenty-eight. She has decades ahead of her. Leaving the podium now allows her to preserve something invaluable in Washington, optionality.

The family explanation may be entirely sincere. It can also be politically useful. In Washington, the cleverest exits are those that do not look like exits at all.

Leavitt is not abandoning Trump. She is simply making sure that, when the Trump era eventually becomes history, her own name does not disappear into the footnotes. That is not disloyalty. It is survival.

TECH – MIND – HEALTH by Prof. Anis H. Bajrektarevic

Beyond Technology: Preserving Humanity in the Age of AI

The unprecedented acceleration of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital technologies has fundamentally transformed the conditions under which humanity lives, governs, communicates, and understands itself – something this author was writing about extensively for more than two decades . Yet the principal challenge of the digital age does not lie in the increasing sophistication of algorithms, computational power, or autonomous systems. Rather, it lies in humanity's diminishing capacity to guide technological development through reflective awareness, ethical judgment, and responsibility.

Humans, technology, and nature exist within a relationship of profound interdependence in which every technological innovation reshapes the social, ecological, cognitive, and political conditions of human existence – thus confirming the central premise of the so-called anthropotechniques[1]. Consequently, the contemporary digital crisis is ultimately not a crisis of technology, but a crisis of consciousness – as this author noted long ago, describing the "cognitive deficit crisis"[2].

Human development can therefore no longer be measured solely through economic growth, productivity, or computational capability. It must equally be evaluated through the quality of human consciousness, mental well-being, ecological sustainability, social cohesion, cross-generational contents and solidarities, as well as other formats of equity and justice, to the very preservation of life in all its forms.

The chapters collected in this volume approach these questions from different disciplinary perspectives, yet they converge on one essential conclusion: technology must remain an instrument of human development rather than becoming the measure of humanity itself. The decisive question of our age is therefore not what technology can accomplish, but what humanity is capable of becoming through its responsible use.

More than seven centuries before the emergence of modern science, Jalal ad-Din Rumi reminded humanity that existence cannot be confined to the visible and the material, warning against the illusion that external forms alone constitute reality. Centuries later, Max Planck, whose discoveries inaugurated the quantum revolution, questioned the Newtonian mechanisticworldview of classical science (and social Darwinists), and argued that consciousness occupies a fundamental place in our understanding of reality. Although emerging from entirely different intellectual traditions and historical settings, Rumi, Planck and Buddhist philosophy converge in recognising that matter and consciousness cannot be understood as isolated or competing domains. To reduce one to the other—or to imagine that technology may ultimately substitute for human consciousness—is not merely philosophically inadequate but fundamentally contrary to the relational order of nature itself.

This understanding resonates equally with the humanistic philosophy of the post-Second World War European thought, most notably in the works of Erich Fromm, who argued that the highest achievement of civilization is not the accumulation of technical power or material possessions but the realization of the human person. The essential question is therefore not what technology can produce, but what human beings are capable of becoming. Technology derives its legitimacy not from novelty, speed or efficiency, but from its capacity to deepen freedom, cultivate reflective awareness, strengthen solidarity and enable the flourishing of individuals, communities and civilizations.

AI, as well as other forms of digital (over)exposure that is (over)stimulating us, should therefore be understood as nothing else but the latest form of anthropotechnique—one of the techniques through which humanity extends, cultivates and transforms its own capacities.This author has written several books on this.

The history of civilization is, in essence, the history of anthropotechniques. Their original purpose was survival (through the mechanical solidarity of the group); their ultimate purpose is human (group and individual) self-realization. Such realization is therefore both the purpose and the criterion by which every anthropotechnique—from the first stone tool to AI—must ultimately be judged.

Throughout history, anthropotechniques have served humanity by strengthening its normative orders. Their legitimacy has never resided in technical sophistication itself, but in their contribution to the development of the human person and the advancement of civilization. Whenever technological development ceases to enhance human dignity, autonomy, wisdom, ecological responsibility and intergenerational well-being, and instead promotes dependence, alienation, domination, environmental degradation or the reduction of persons to objects of algorithmic optimisation, it fails its fundamental civilizational purpose. Technology was created to advance humanity; humanity was never created to alienate itself through technology.

At this critical civilizational juncture, humanity carries a responsibility extending far beyond the present generation. Our obligation is not merely to innovate, but to preserve the social and generational contract as well as the balance between analogue and digital, between efficient and human, between rational and empathic.

As this author have repeatedly argued in his writings, sustainable development is too often described as ‘any development that meets the entire needs of the present without compromising such needs of the future generations (deprived from hidden – societal, health or environmental costs)’, but maybe more accurate – while shorter, definition would be "any development aimed at the so-called 3Ms: the maximum good for maximum species, over maximum time-space span – comprehensive stewardship." This principle applies with equal force to AI and to every past, current or emerging anthropotechnique. The 3Ms are therefore not merely a sustainability principle; they constitute the normative criterion by which every anthropotechnique should be evaluated. Technology fulfils its civilizational purpose only when it secures the greatest good for the greatest number of species over the longest possible time-space horizon, while preserving the social contract between contemporaries and the generational contract between present and future generations.

From this perspective, Quantum Buddhism(connecting Technology – Mind – Health; for more, see the author’s works on Geopolitics of Quantum Buddhism) may be understood as one possible ethical-philosophical orientation that restores the missing bridge between matter and spirit, capability and responsibility, science and wisdom – a merge between Newton and Rumi, between Weber and Sartre, between the vehicle and the journey, between colour and rhythm, dharma and karma. It neither rejects science nor opposes technological innovation. Rather, it reminds us that technological progress acquires meaning only when directed toward the higher and longer-lasting common good. Science expands knowledge, technology expands capability, while philosophy cultivates wisdom. A sustainable civilization requires the harmonious balance of all three. And these three require an unrestricted and fair, yet analogue, horizontal and vertical transmission.

If technology is the vehicle through which civilization advances, ethical reflection remains the compass that ensures the journey continues toward humanity rather than away from it. The journey begins with the human being, and its destination is human self-realization.

Ultimately, the future of technology will not be determined by machines but by humanity's capacity to preserve wisdom alongside knowledge, responsibility alongside power and consciousness alongside innovation. The true measure of technological progress is therefore not whether machines become more intelligent, but whether humanity itself becomes wiser, freer, healthier, more compassionate and en route to its own self-realisation.

Technologyis humanity's greatest invention because of humanity's unique ability to deploy the mind for abstract thinking (a feature that significantly distinguishes humans from other (intelligent) forms of life on this planet). One exists only through the other. If we inherited this world from previous generations, then—even in the best of circumstances—we inherited only half of it; the other half is borrowed from future generations, of all.

Geneva/Vienna, March 2026
Prof. Anis H. Bajrektarevic, GAFG’s co-founder and ABC

---

Download or read GAFG's 4th eBook HERE!

---

[1]As anthropotechniques, we should assume the (precognitive and) conscious clustering of different experiences, knowledges, discoveries, patents and the like; its practical application in any human activity (including all modes of horizontal and vertical transmission) aimed at acquiring resources for consumption in space and time by variety of tools and weaponry. As the only compensation for the biological and neurological limitations of humans (inferior to other forms of life on the planet), the anthropotechniques were answering the central pre-cognitive concern of humans: Survival! This is a self-coined definition based on works of prof. Kulic from late 1990 and early 2000, that ever since this author further developed and extensively used in his lectures on the ‘Institutions and Instruments of Sustainable Development’ (chapter: Environmental ethics). As such, the definition is extensive enough to describe the event of first usage of the sharp stone/broken bone by early homo faber all the evolutionary way to the development and deployment of the nuclear bomb.

[2]"...our crisis cannot be environmental, as it was never a financial or security (...) – our crisis must be a moral one".

---

Anis H. Bajrektarevic, Vienna, Author is chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria. He authored three books: FB – Geopolitics of Technology (published by the New York’s Addleton Academic Publishers); Geopolitics – Europe 100 years later (DB, Europe), and the just released Geopolitics – Energy – Technology by the German publisher LAP. No Asian century is his forthcoming book, scheduled for later this year. 

AntySaurus Prick #135 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

Dino is a vegetarian virgin dinosaur and his best friend is Anty,
a carnivorous nymphomaniac ant.
They call themselves the AntySaurus Prick and they are still here
waiting for the comet to come!

For more AntySaurus Prick, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!

---

War that found the sea by Mathew Walls

Wars have a habit of escaping the map drawn for them and the Iran war is now doing precisely that. What began as a confrontation over Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional power is becoming a maritime war and maritime wars have an especially unpleasant tendency to turn local disputes into global economic problems.

The latest attacks should therefore be treated as more than another grim entry in the daily casualty ledger. Four crew members were killed in a Houthi attack on a cargo ship in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, while American forces struck a vessel in the Gulf of Oman that Washington said was attempting to reach an Iranian port. The geography matters. These are not the same battlefield. They are two ends of the commercial arteries connecting the Middle East to the world.

The danger is not simply that ships are being attacked. It is that the logic of the war is beginning to make shipping itself a weapon.

Iran's refusal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz unless America accepts its conditions is the clearest expression of that logic. Tehran understands something that military planners sometimes forget: a narrow waterway can possess strategic importance far beyond its physical dimensions. Hormuz is not merely a strait. It is a pressure valve for the world economy. Keep it closed and the consequences travel far beyond Iran, America or the Gulf.

The Houthis provide the other half of the equation. Their attacks around Bab el-Mandeb mean that even if vessels avoid Hormuz, they cannot necessarily escape the war by taking the longer route through the Red Sea. The world's shipping companies are thus being presented with an increasingly absurd choice: sail through one danger zone, sail around another, or wait indefinitely while diplomats discover new ways of saying that negotiations are progressing.

This is how regional wars become global ones, not necessarily through a dramatic declaration of war, but through accumulated inconvenience, insurance premiums, delayed cargoes, diverted tankers and nervous markets.

Washington, meanwhile, faces its own trap. If the United States permits Iran to determine which ships may pass, it risks conceding an extraordinary strategic advantage to Tehran. If it enforces a blockade aggressively, every vessel stopped, damaged or struck becomes another opportunity for escalation. The American argument that a ship is violating a blockade may be legally or militarily coherent; to a crew trapped in the middle of it, the distinction between blockade enforcement and maritime combat is rather less comforting.

Iran faces a corresponding dilemma. Closing Hormuz gives Tehran leverage, but leverage is useful only while it remains controllable. If the economic pain becomes too great, Iran risks turning international pressure into international hostility. If the closure continues long enough, countries that dislike American policy may nevertheless conclude that Iranian control of a global shipping artery is intolerable.

And the Houthis introduce an even more unpredictable variable. They are aligned with Tehran, but proxy warfare is rarely as tidy as its architects imagine. Once missiles are flying and ships are burning, escalation acquires its own momentum. One attack invites retaliation; retaliation invites another attack; eventually nobody remembers which escalation was supposed to produce the negotiating advantage.

That is the real danger now. The war is no longer confined to governments fighting governments. It is beginning to involve the infrastructure of global commerce itself. Tankers, container ships, ports and maritime chokepoints are becoming pieces on the chessboard.

Diplomacy therefore needs to move faster than the missiles. The tragedy is that every new attack makes compromise politically harder while making compromise strategically more necessary. Tehran wants concessions before reopening Hormuz. Washington wants security before relaxing pressure. The Houthis want the maritime battlefield to remain part of the conflict. Each side believes the other must blink first. But seas do not blink. They simply carry the consequences onward.

The populists repair shop by Thanos Kalamidas

There is a temptation, when comparing Nigel Farage and Adonis Georgiadis to treat them as variations on the same political animal, the professional provocateur, fluent in grievance, delighted by cultural combat and happiest when politics becomes a theatre of enemies. Both have prospered in political climates where fear travels faster than evidence and where the promise of national restoration is often more emotionally satisfying than the tedious business of governing.

But there is a distinction that matters. Farage's damage, however considerable, is largely political. Georgiadis's has been institutional.

Farage has spent decades turning immigration, Europe and national identity into an endless British argument. His great talent is not necessarily persuasion but persistence. He can keep a subject alive long after other politicians have tired of it, returning to the same anxieties with the determination of a salesman who knows the public never runs out of buyers.

This is the populist gift, taking genuine frustrations and attaching them to convenient villains. The technique is politically effective because it offers something complicated societies rarely provide, a simple explanation. It is also dangerous because simplicity becomes an alibi. If everything that has gone wrong can be blamed on foreigners, Brussels, elites or some metropolitan conspiracy, there is little reason to examine the less glamorous failures of administration.

Yet Britain possesses an enormous capacity for institutional repair. Governments change. Civil servants remain. Courts remain. Professional associations remain. Universities, councils, newspapers and citizens continue to argue. Even after political damage, the machinery of a state can, with enough patience and money can be repaired.

Health systems are different. A health service is not merely a collection of buildings, budgets and bureaucratic charts. It is accumulated knowledge, professional trust, staffing, training, waiting lists, procurement systems, primary care networks and the habits of millions of patients. Once those foundations are weakened, rebuilding them is not a matter of announcing a new reform at a press conference. It is a generational undertaking.

This is why Georgiadis deserves a harsher standard of judgement than the familiar theatrics of populist politics. A minister can survive a television quarrel. A health system cannot survive indefinitely on political confidence.

The danger of his style of politics is not simply that it is abrasive. It is that confrontation can become a substitute for diagnosis. Doctors become opponents. Critics become enemies. Institutional warnings become political attacks. The minister's first instinct becomes defence of the government rather than defence of the institution.

That is where populism becomes particularly corrosive. It teaches politicians to measure success by applause while public services must be measured by outcomes. A hospital does not become healthier because its minister wins an argument on television. A nurse is not less exhausted because a politician has called his critics irresponsible. A patient does not leave a waiting room faster because a government has produced another slogan.

Greece has suffered enough from this confusion between political performance and administrative competence. Its public health system needs something unfashionable: continuity. It needs sustained investment that survives elections, respect for professionals that survives criticism and reforms designed around patients rather than headlines.

Farage may leave Britain with a political hangover. Another government can reverse policies, rebuild alliances and change the national conversation. Georgiadis's legacy after leaving major Greek institutions like healthcare, definitely weaker than he found them, is more stubborn. You can replace a minister overnight. You cannot manufacture a trained doctor, rebuild professional trust or restore a neglected institution with a speech.

That is the uncomfortable difference. Populism can damage a democracy's mood. Bad stewardship can damage its machinery. And machinery, unlike rhetoric, takes years to repair.

Ovi Pulp Vortex #eMagazine - Issue 3

You are looking at the third issue of Ovi Pulp Vortex, a gateway to worlds where imagination outruns the speed of light, where tomorrow's mysteries are waiting to be discovered, and where the only limit is the edge of human curiosity.

From the golden age of the rocket ship to the farthest reaches of alien galaxies, science fiction has always carried a promise: that somewhere beyond the familiar horizon lies a universe stranger, wilder and more astonishing than anything we have dared to imagine. This issue continues that grand tradition with ten explosive journeys into the unknown, ten tales of cosmic adventure, scientific wonders, impossible inventions and unexpected laughs from the great carnival of the cosmos.

Prepare yourself! Because the universe has a few surprises waiting.

Pulp Vortex - Issue 3
Ovi Pulp stories eMagazine
August 2026
Ovi eMagazines Publications 2026

Pulp Vortex - Issue 3

Read the Ovi Pulp Vortex eMagazine online HERE!
View, read it online or download it in PDF/epub format HERE!
And enjoy viewing & reading it online or download in PDF format HERE!
All Ovi eMagazines and eBooks downloads are FREE!

Berserk Alert! #117 #Cartoon by Tony Zuvela

 

Tony Zuvela and his view of the world around us in a constant berserk alert!
For more Berserk Alert! HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!

---

Ma-Siri & Co #128 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Ma-Siri is a mother, a grandmother and a very active social life,
searching for the meaning of life among other things and her glasses.

For more Ma-Siri & Alexa, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!

---

Humanity in Search of Peace, Security and Global Order by Mahboob A. Khawaja, PhD.

Global Leaders and Political Wickedness

Every day is fast becoming a killing day as if there is no morally conscientious humanity, no responsible leaders and no legitimate systems of political governance accountable for wrong actions. Evil and insanity are not imaginary but real and happening across the globe, be it Gaza, West Bank Palestine, Lebanon, Ukraine-Russia unwarranted war and must be stopped to protect innocent human lives. The US administration supports bombardments of civilian in south Lebanon, occupation of Palestine, crimes against humanity and Israeli genocide. Do the Arab leaders have deafening minds, eyes and ears?

All global institutions of peace, security and conflict resolution appear broken and sidelined by egomaniac politicians. Mankind feels helpless as its freedom and future is at stake. The increasing impacts of the US-Iran war depicts an insecure Arab Middle East without public institutions and responsible leadership. Daily bombardments, forced displacements of Palestinians affirm the planned operation and working of Greater Israel with American supplied weapons and complicity.  Shamefully, Arab-Muslim leaders failed to protect their people and culture from Western instigated aggression. Comparative analysis often unfolds hidden truths about human nature and its wickedness. Are there any global leaders of human conscience to extend security and protection of life to the masses of Gaza? There is a vital issue of ethnicity and Arabs were and remained colonized by the Western world. Are there any international organizations to help avert the catastrophic bloodbath in progress across Gaza and the occupied West Bank? Were the Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Laws just paper-based, dry inked narratives without any power to serve the cause of humanity? How come the Arab-Muslim leaders are nowhere to be seen on this planet to defend the cause of Faith and protect Palestinians from Israeli-American sponsored war of extermination? 

The Earth (A LIVING ENTITY) being bombed is the earth given to mankind by God as a "TRUST." DO YOU NOT SEE IT FLOATING IN SPACE JUST BY THE COMMAND OF GOD? WHEREVER THERE IS A TRUST, THERE MUST BE ACCOUNTABILITY. When evil-mongers and wrong-doers violate the sanctity of the Laws of God, they are held accountable - history tells without any prejudice. This author has walked through the ancient graveyards of so many nations used to claim being the "most powerful “on this earth - dead bones and silent forever and nothing else.  The succeeding generations CURSE them for their crimes against humanity.  THE GLOBAL INSTITUTIONS APPEAR BROKEN AND DYSFUNCTIONAL TO STOP THE INSANITY. If you don’t believe in the encompassing truth, just view the real “genocide pictures” presented by Editor Rosa on Transcend Media, September 8, 2025: https://www.transcend.org/tms/2025/09/genocide-in-pictures-worth-a-trillion-words-66/

Mike Adams (“Dystopian Nightmare: Ten Unbelievable Things that Will Happen Soon if We Don’t Stop the March of Tyranny and the Enslavement of Humanity.” (Transcend Media), warns of dire consequences to mankind.(https://www.transcend.org/tms/2023/06/dystopian-nightmare-10-unbelievable-things-that-will-happen-soon-if-we-dont-stop-the-march-of-tyranny-and-the-enslavement-ofHumanity now faces a critical choice: We either choose the path of total enslavement under an authoritarian, techno-fascist dictatorship, or we choose to instead embrace decentralized finance, free speech, rationality and the rule of law.

Are the American - Israeli Leaders above International Laws and Accountability?

The besieged 2.5 million people of Gaza by Israeli forces blocking food, fuel, water, medicine and bombed hospitals portray clear pictures of tormenting pains, horrors and massive devastation planned and carried out as the global community witnesses in deaf silence as if the masses of Gaza are not normal human beings. The world is not infinite but subject to time and destiny. God, The All Knowing and Merciful has defined the roles and responsibilities of its creations. Would the Western nations hold Israeli PM Netanyahu and President Trump accountable for their insanity against the people of Palestine? The women and children of Gaza cry out loud asking for humanitarian help if there are any Arab, Muslim or Western leaders to rescue them from extreme deprivation, starvation and planned extermination. Their cries end-up in deaf silence as no Western, Arab or Muslim leaders respond to their pains and horrors inflicted daily by the Israeli forces. Remember! Those challenging the Laws of God are chastised by the Laws of God without exception. Are they waiting to meet the same end as did Pharaoh at the Red Sea? The Egyptians, Qataris, the UAE’s and Saudis and others carry no strength or political value in global context and appear morally, intellectually and politically bankrupts a scum floating on a torrent of naive puppets and discredited leaders. Please see more:https://realovi.wordpress.com/2025/03/14/howarab-muslim-leaders-betrayed-the-people-by-mahboob-a-khawaja-phd/

Israel so far, has dropped more than 70,000 ton of bombs on Gaza- more insane than what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War 2. The earth is living and spins at 1670 km per hour and orbits the Sun at 107,000 km per hour. Imagine, if this spinning fails, what consequences could occur to the living beings on Earth. Think again, about the average distance of earth from the moon is 238,855 miles (384,400 km), equivalent to 0.002572 Astronomical Units. Earth is a “trust” to mankind for its existence, sustenance of life, survival, progress and future-making. The Earth exists and floats without any pillars in a capsule by the Will of God, so, “Fear God Who created life and death.” Is human intelligence still intact to understand this reality? Wherever there is trust, there is accountability. All human beings are accountable for their actions. The Divine warning (The Quran: 7: 56), warns: Do no mischief on the Earth after it hath been set in order, but call on God with fear and longing in hearts; For the Mercy of God is always near to those who do good.

The Divine Message (Quran:40:64), clarifies:

It is God Who made for you the Earth as a resting place and the sky as a canopy; And has given you shape and made your shapes beautiful, And has provided for your Sustenance, of things pure and good; Such is God your Lord. So Glory to God, The Lord of the Worlds.

The Jewish people (progeny of Jacob), followers of Moses  were warned  and prohibited of killing of innocent people as enshrined in the Ten Commandments (Torah):

'Thou shalt not kill' (Exod. 20:13; also Deut. 5:17). Jewish law views the shedding of innocent blood very seriously, and lists murder as one of three sins (along with idolatry and sexual immorality), that fall under the category of yehareg ve'al ya'avor - meaning "One should let himself be killed rather than violate it.

---

Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international affairs-global security, peace and conflict resolution and has spent several academic years across the Russian-Ukrainian and Central Asian regions knowing the people, diverse cultures of thinking and political governance and a keen interest in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including: Global Humanity and Remaking of Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution for the 21st Century and Beyond, Barnes and Noble Press, USA, 2025 https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/global-humanity-and-remaking-of-peace-security-and-conflict-resolution-for-the-21st-century-and-beyond-mahboob-a-khawaja/1147150197 and We, The People in Search of Global Peace, Security and Conflict  Resolution. Kindle Direct Publishing-Amazon, 05/2025 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F6V6CH5W

---

Check Mahboob A. Khawaja, PhD. eBOOK,
Wars on Humanity:
Ukraine, Palestine and the role of Global Leaders
HERE!