Photo, left: Fambul Tok International of Sierra Leone (http://www.fambultok.com) originated in the realization that peace can’t be imposed from the outside, or from the top down.  Nor does it need to be.  The community led and owned reconciliation process we support, witness and celebrate in Sierra Leone are teaching us that communities have within them the resources they need for their own healing.  We believe the Fambul Tok process has much to offer other post-conflict countries—and the western world.
[Note: Sierra Leone, once called the Athens of Africa for its splendid universities, has recently survived decades of brutal civil and other wars. The peace and reconciliation process has been demanding.]
THE FAMBUL TOK PROCESS  The very people and places most ravaged by war can also be the most powerful resources in the painstaking work of rebuilding lives, reknitting communities, reconstructing nations. And yet the people most impacted by war are often the least consulted by the international community in post-war rebuilding efforts. With Fambul Tok, we recognize the transformative power of what is often overlooked — the courage and grace of ordinary people; the communal impulse to be whole again and to move past the ravages of the war; the cultural wealth of traditions and practices of reconciliation. Recognizing and building upon these resources is at the heart of the Fambul Tok approach.
Fambul Tok is modeling a new, community-led approach to post-war reconstruction that walks alongside ordinary people, helping them reawaken cultural practices of acknowledgement, apology and forgiveness; rebuild their communities; and lay the groundwork for development and sustainable peace.  The work in post-conflict settings reveals the implications of the Fambul Tok process in any setting, and helps unleash the power of a “whole community.”
THE FAMBUL TOK PROCESS — WHAT WE DO
PRACTICE  We are dedicated to advancing peace by mobilizing ordinary people—entire communities ravaged by war—in the hard work of reconciliation.
See Fambul Tok in action in Sierra Leone.
STORYTELLING  The stories shared in these community “family circles” reverberate far beyond the light of the community bonfire. We partner with Catalyst for Peace to “expand the tok” — to help the world see these stories more clearly and learn from them more fully.  What’s possible in your community?  Let these stories inspire you to new possibilities.
Take your seat at a truth-telling bonfire through the Fambul Tok film or the Fambul Tok book.
EDUCATION  At the heart of the Fambul Tok approach is our commitment to sharing forward what we’ve learned on the ground with others interested in the practice of community reconciliation. We consult with individuals and organizations that want to practice community reconciliation.  And we partner with Catalyst for Peace to develop and implement curriculum that illuminates the broader applications of fambul tok in classroom and community settings.
http://www.fambultok.com  to request a Fambul Tok consultation or to arrange an educational presentation.
 
JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW
Co-host: Larry Kudlow, CNBC senior advisor; & Cumulus Media radio.  Steve Moore, Heritage Society chief economist.
 
Hour One
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 1, Block A: Steve Moore, in re: Steve has just left University of Chicago (where he debated Austan Goolsbee) and got to airport: We could increase our output 0f gas and coal by $200 bil PA.  Historically, the Democratic Party really cared foremost about working-class people, about unions; to its detriment it’s been taken over by a radical envtl movement that wants to stop dvpt: oil, gas, coal, nuclear, fracking – that’s 90%of our energy. I favor solar, but we won’t immed power an $18 trillion economy with windmills and solar panels. Construction trades have no more place the Democratic Party because of the energy matters.   China and India are bldg 500 energy plants – every time we close one down here, we just export many more jobs.  On climate change: an Obama former asst secy of energy now at MIT wrote: Climate change exists; the models don’t work; we don't know how much is anthropogenic, Sun-induced, caused by ocean heating, or from rain forests. Under Pres G W Bush and Pres Obama, we’ve spent $150 billion over the last dozen years promoting solar; we now get 3% of our power from these.  Coal emissions have been reduced 60%  in the last thirty years.  We can produce way ore power than we need with zero emissions: nuclear. [“Too cheap to meter,” they promised Hah.]  Soon: nuclear micro-plants, safe for one neighborhood at a time.   California voting regs:  Charlie Munger, Jr,; Arnold Schwarzenegger, others, set it up so that 30% of seats in the State senate and above are all-Dem. In California, only 30% are registered GOP, and won’t be on the ballot, will become totally extinct. This is fundamentally anti-democratic; 51% of Republicans won't vote if they have no choice.
Water policy question:  Trump the other day took a position similar to yours – bld dams, desalination; be able to grow food.  The current regs are fixed: they pit farmers vs mfrg vs residents.  The way to fix it is to increase supply: at present, 50% of the water runs out to the ocean; we can correct that. Also, bld desalination plants.
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 1, Block B:  Tom Del Beccaro, candidate for US Senate from California, in re:   We had 2 million mfrg jobs and _ govt jobs; now we have _ private sector jobs and _ govt jobs,  We need a simple, pro-growth model and tax code; a pro-water policy, and get California working again. . . . The California jungle primary: if you're not one of the top two winners, you're not even on the ballot. Ergo, may be all Democrats, no Republicans. 
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 1, Block C:  Bill Whalen, Hoover, in re:  . . .   Back to Mrs Clinton: she clearly broke rules with her home-brew email server; no one in Cali is talking about it.  More about the Trump phenom. She’s soft with the youth vote; Trump has fence-mending to do here. He put out a list of 15 states; I think he lost Maine, and in Cali he’s just messing with the heads of Democrats.
..  ..  .. 
A new poll of California voters by Stanford University’s Bill Lane Center and the Hoover Institution shows an age divide in the Democratic Party and GOP voters slow to embrace Donald Trump. There were mixed views on the superdelegate issue and the state’s open primary system.  With California’s June 7 primary only a week away, a new Hoover Institution Golden State Poll finds Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump with large leads in their respective primaries but cautionary signs ahead, and good news for Democratic U.S. Senate hopefuls Kamala Harris and Loretta Sanchez.
..  ..  .. 
“STANFORD, CA: With California’s June 7 primary only a week away, a new Hoover Institution Golden State Poll finds Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump with large leads in their respective primaries but cautionary signs lay ahead and good news for Democratic U.S. Senate hopefuls Kamala Harris and Loretta Sanchez.
“Hoover’s Golden State Poll, administered by the survey research firm YouGov and designed in conjunction with Stanford University’s Bill Lane Center for the American West, finds Clinton holding a 13-point lead over U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (51 percent to 38 percent).
Trump receives 66 percent in the Republican contest. Why that lofty number is problematic: Mitt Romney, like Trump a nominee-in-waiting, received 79.5 percent of the vote in California’s 2012 GOP presidential primary.
“Clinton, meanwhile, continues to struggle with younger primary voters – Sanders leads 61 percent to 30 percent among Californians under-30 and shows weakness among “no party preference” voters, trailing Sanders by 40 points….”  http://www.hoover.org/hoover-institution-golden-state-poll  ;  https://twitter.com/tomdelbeccaro
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 1, Block D: Larry Kudlow, in re:   A “border-adjustable tax”; US exports to China are taxed at that border; Wwe have nothing like this, but to equalize trade we ought to. Wd yield a lot of revenues – Canada 1, China 2, Mexico 3, Japan 4 – in US trading partners.   Immigration: agents “catch and release” – bust them at he border and give htem a court date, to which no one shows up. This has go to stop.  Ion a policy basis, interesting how close Trump and Paul Ryan are: tax, regulatory and energy reform; they basically agree on trade reform. (Now can have targetted and temporary tariffs; e.g., if China keeps breaking the law).   . . . Andy Cuomo, NYS governor, and the Community reinvestment Act: hope that red-lined areas wd give poor people a better shot at buying a home; innocuous till the 1990s when Cuomo ordered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase e their portfolios of [nonperforming] land..  Took down payment from 20% to 3% to 0%.  Thus 97% financing. Also absurd leniency in documentation from borrowers.  Disaster.  When the crash came, poor people were stuck with bankruptcies, lost homes, will never get credit again.
 
Hour Two
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 2, Block A:  Stephen F. Cohen, Prof. Emeritus of Russian Studies/History/Politics at NYU and Princeton; also Board of American Committee for East-West Accord (eastwestaccord.com); in re:  The anti-missile shield deployed by the US in recent weeks.  Response from Putin: If those people in Rumania don't know what it means, we’ll have to [clarify].   . . . Dugashvili of Georgia; Stalin then and Stalin now.
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 2, Block B: Stephen F. Cohen, American Committee for East-West Accord (eastwestaccord.com); in re: . . . Stalin ruled by terror and murdered tens of millions of Soviet citizens.  Russians, when thy feel under dangerous pressure from the outside, revert in some ways to wishing for Stalin’s [nationalism, in effect; no longing for the mass murder].
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 2, Block C:  Stephen F. Cohen, American Committee for East-West Accord (eastwestaccord.com); in re: . . . The problem is that it's a problem for Putin. Myths of US mainstream media: that “Russians don't know the horrible history of Stalin” They do It's published, the archives are open. Also, there’s nothing remotely like Stalinism going on in Russia today Whatever‘s going on in the Kremlin, it's not Stalinism. Finally, there’s zero evidence that Putin is a Stalinist – it's under him that the Stalin Gulag Museum has opened.  However, Putin needs to be careful in trying to put the Russian state back together. Any ruler needs a consensual history.  Trying to stitch it together. “During our terrible civil war between Red and White, both sides sinned; now it's time for both sides to confess and make amends.” Some think Stalin was great because under him the Russian state was strong.  – Distorted nostalgia.   A month ago he launched a fatal attack against Lenin – the faded Uncle Volodya whom people no longer are angry at. However, Putin said, “It was Lenin’s concept of a federated USSR that eventually blew apart.   . . . Ergo, don't look at me or Yeltsin; look at Lenin.” S0me want Volgograd to revert to its earlier name, Stalingrad. Putin pushes back. 
..  ..  .. 
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru  The Georgian on their mind: Why Russians still approve of Stalin
Public opinion surveys show that today support for Stalin in Russia is the highest it has been since the fall of the Soviet Union. More than half of Russians believe that he played a positive role in the history of the country and the Communist Party is even planning to use the image of the Soviet leader in the next parliamentary elections.
     Valery Solovei, a political analyst and professor at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, is convinced that "when people say that they like Stalin, this does not at all mean that they would like to live under his rule. Everyone wants Stalin for his or her neighbor, but not for himself."
    Statistics confirm Solovei's words. Levada's survey showed that despite the large number of Stalin sympathizers, only 23 percent of Russians would personally like to live and work under such leadership.
    Modern Russian Stalinism, experts believe, is in many ways a form of protest.
   "The image of Stalin is one of a leader who is modest in life, walking around 'in one overcoat.' With the corrupt elite everywhere many people see Stalin as an example of honesty," added Makarkin. Solovei agrees: "The expression of one's love for Stalin is a symbolic protest, the desire for a strong arm that will create order."
..  ..  .. 
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 2, Block D: Stephen F. Cohen, American Committee for East-West Accord (eastwestaccord.com); in re: . .  .Everywhere in Russia is riddled with corruption – medical treatment, entering universities  anything. “Stalin killed hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats so we need him back today.”  Ooops.  . . . “Had Stalin not brutally collectivized, they might not have been able to industrialize the country. So there was no other way to prepare for war.”   Another school rejects this, says the waste was horrible; there’s an evolutionary way.   Stalin’s thirty-year rule is still debated; but in popular discussion it becomes raw and accusatory.   Putin has been strong in sponsoring anti-Stalin activities.   Powerful Kremlin insiders demand that Putin stand stronger against what they see as Western depredations.  The rise of pro-Stalinism makes this tougher for him. Making clear to Obama that he’s crossed a recklessly dangerous red line in aiming NATO missiles at Russia from Rumania.
..  ..  .. 
Surveys show Russian nationalism is on the rise. This explains a lot about the country's foreign and domestic politics.  Richard Arnold is associate professor of political science at Muskingum University, where he teaches classes on Russian politics and works on a number of projects related to Russian nationalism. His book, Russian Nationalism and Ethnic Violence, is due out from Routledge in June 2016   [Charts here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/30/surveys-show-russian-nationalism-is-on-the-rise-this-explains-a-lot-about-the-countrys-foreign-and-domestic-politics/]
Is nationalism what really drives Russian politics?
Unusual:  http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-28/how-russia-preparing-wwiii
[More material on Russian discussions at end of this schedule]
..  ..  .. 
Stalin:
-  It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.
-  Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.
-  Death is the solution to all problems. No man - no problem.
..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..
 
Hour Three
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 3, Block A:  Dr Lara M Brown, George Washington University, and Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, in re: First Read: “Yes, Hillary Clinton is just 72 delegates away from crossing the 2,383 magic number needed for a majority of delegates to win the Democratic convention. Yes, she’s likely to hit that milestone before polls even close in California (due to the New Jersey primary and its 126 pledged delegates). And, yes, even if she loses in California by 10 points, her lead over Bernie Sanders in pledged delegates would still be twice the size of Obama’s lead over Clinton in 2008.”
“But here’s the reason why Clinton needs to beat Sanders in California next week: She doesn’t want to give him any legitimate rationale to remain in the race beyond June 7 or June 14 (the final primary in DC). Why? Because… the moment Sanders exits the race, her poll numbers against Trump will increase… Maybe that’s why Clinton has canceled an event in New Jersey this week to spend more time in California.”  A new Hoover Institution poll shows Clinton leading Sanders by 13 points, 51% to 38%.
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 3, Block B:  Dr Lara M Brown, George Washington University, and Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (2 of 2)
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 3, Block C:   Scott Sagan, Senior Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Stanford, in re: Would the U.S. Drop the Bomb Again?   Public opinion supported the strike on Hiroshima—and, if provoked, many Americans might well back nuclear attacks on foes like Iran and al Qaeda   The White House’s recent announcement that President Barack Obama will be the first sitting U.S. president to visit Hiroshima has sparked an intense debate among politicians and pundits over what he should or should not say there. The president’s advisers insist that he “will not revisit the decision” to use nuclear weapons on that city in August 1945.  http://www.wsj.com/articles/would-the-u-s-drop-the-bomb-again-1463682867?mod=trending_now_2
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 3, Block D:  John Bolton, AEI, in re: . . . Retrospectively, critics argue that Japan was incapable of winning the Pacific war, thereby invalidating any arguments favoring dropping the bomb.

But being unable to win is not equivalent to surrendering in defeat. Truman pursued Roosevelt’s goal of “unconditional surrender” because recreating the prewar status quo, with a belligerent Japanese military again threatening international peace, was simply unacceptable.

Truman wanted to end World War II and save American lives, and also lay the basis for sustained international peace. Before Obama casually trashes Truman’s courageous decision, he should reflect on what the alternative would have been.


John Bolton, now at the American Enterprise Institute, was the US ambassador to the United Nations from August 2005 to December 2006.
 
Hour Four
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 4, Block A:  Rachel Glennerster, Stanford, in re:
Reconciliation in Sierra Leone  Since the end of World War II, there have been 259 armed conflicts in 159 locations. Sierra Leone's civil war began 25 years ago, at a time when roughly 25% of all countries worldwide were experiencing civil war. How can individuals and groups recover from such violent conflicts? On page 787 of this issue, Cilliers, et al., provide rigorous evidence on the efficacy of one postwar reconciliation strategy that was implemented in 100 communities in Sierra Leone.  http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6287/766.full  http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6287/787
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 4, Block B:  Rachel Glennerster, Stanford; in re: Abstract  Civil wars divide nations along social, economic, and political cleavages, often pitting one neighbor against another. To restore social cohesion, many countries undertake truth and reconciliation efforts. We examined the consequences of one such effort in Sierra Leone, designed and implemented by a Sierra Leonean nongovernmental organization called Fambul Tok. As a part of this effort, community-level forums are set up in which victims detail war atrocities, and perpetrators confess to war crimes. We used random assignment to study its impact across 200 villages, drawing on data from 2383 individuals. We found that reconciliation had both positive and negative consequences. It led to greater forgiveness of perpetrators and strengthened social capital: Social networks were larger, and people contributed more to public goods in treated villages. However, these benefits came at a substantial cost: The reconciliation treatment also worsened psychological health, increasing depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder in these same villages. For a subset of villages, we measured outcomes both 9 months and 31 months after the intervention. These results show that the effects, both positive and negative, persisted into the longer time horizon. Our findings suggest that policy-makers need to restructure reconciliation processes in ways that reduce their negative psychological costs while retaining their positive societal benefits. (2 of 2)
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 4, Block C:  Robert Zimmerman, behind the black, in re:  Blue Origin builds engine test facility in only 7 months - The competition heats up: Blue Origin has completed construction of one of two new test cells for the development of its BE-4 rocket engine, only seven months after the company made the decision to build them.
Next New Shepard flight to test a failed parachute - The competition heats up: The next New Shepard test flight will try to land the capsule with only two of three parachutes. No date for the flight was announced. http://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/next-new-shepard-test-flight-to-test-parachute-failure/
-  SpaceX lands another first stage while successfully orbiting commercial satellite
-  Layoffs at XCOR, end of Lynx
-  BEAM expands successfully
-  Rocket Lab tests second stage engine
- China to fly sample return mission to Moon
-  Rosetta almost lost this weekend
-  Rosetta finds organic compounds at comet
-  Pluto's best close-up from Lost Horizon
-  Juno enters Jupiter's gravity well
Tuesday  31 May 2016   / Hour 4, Block D:   Robert Zimmerman, behind the black (2 of 2)
..  ..  ..
Anent Russia:
The West’s actions:
First on this list is, obviously, the conquest by NATO of all of Eastern Europe. I speak of conquest because that is exactly what it is, but a conquest achieved according to the rules of 21stcentury warfare which I define as “80% informational, 15% economic and 5% military”. Yes, I know, the good folks of Eastern Europe were just dreaming of being subjugated by the US/NATO/EU/etc – but so what? Anyone who has read Sun Tzu will immediately recognize that this deep desire to be ‘incorporated’ into the AngloZionist “Borg” is nothing else but the result of a crushed self-identity, a deep-seated inferiority complex and, thus, a surrender which did not even have to be induced by military means. At the end of the day, it makes no difference what the locals thought they were achieving – they are now subjects of the Empire and their countries more or less irrelevant colonies in the fringe of the AngloZionist Empire. As always, the local comprador elite is now bubbling with pride at being, or so they think, accepted as equals by their new masters (think Poroshenko, Tusk or Grybauskaite) which gives them the courage to bark at Moscow from behind the NATO fence. Good for them.
Second is the now total colonization of Western Europe into the Empire. While NATO moved to the East, the US also took much deeper control of Western Europe which is now administered for the Empire by what the former Mayor of London once called the “great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies” – faceless bureaucrats à la François Hollande or Angela Merkel.
Third, the Empire has given its total support to semi-demonic creatures ranging from al-Khattab to Nadezhda Savchenko. The West’s policy is crystal clear and simple to the extreme: if it is anti-Russian we back it. This policy is best exemplified with a Putin and Russia demonization campaign which is, in my opinion, far worse and much more hysterical than anything during the Cold War.
Fourth, the West has made a number of highly disturbing military moves including the deployment of the first elements of an anti-missile system in Eastern Europe, the dispatching of various forms of rapid reaction forces, the deployment of a few armored units, etc. NATO now has forward deployed command posts which can be used to support the engagement of a rapid reaction force.
 
The Russian reaction
So let us now examine the Russian reaction to Empire’s stance.
First, the Russians want to make darn sure that the Americans do not give in to the illusion that a full-scale war in Europe would be like WWII which saw the US homeland only suffer a few, tiny, almost symbolic, attacks by the enemy. Since a full scale war in Europe would threaten the very existence of the Russian state and nation, the Russians are now taking measures to make darn sure that, should that happen, the US would pay an immense price for such an attack.
Second, the Russians are now evidently assuming that a conventional threat from the West might materialize in the foreseeable future. They are therefore taking the measures needed to counter that conventional threat.
Third, since the USA appears to be dead set into deploying an anti-ballistic missile system not only in Europe, but also in the Far East, the Russians are taking the measures to both defeat and bypass this system.
The Russian effort is a vast and a complex one, and it covers almost every aspect of Russian force planing, but there are four examples which, I think, best illustrate the Russian determination not to allow a 22 June 1941 to happen again:
•    The re-creation of the First Guards Tank Army (in progress)
•    The deployment of the Iskander-M operational-tactical missile system (done)
•    The deployment of the Sarmat ICBM (in progress)
•    The deployment of the Status-6 strategic torpedo (in progress
Escalation games continue:  Romanian President Klaus Iohannis voiced support on May 31 for the U.S. Aegis Ashore missile defense system, which Russia has criticized as an act of aggression by the United States, Sputnik reported. Moscow has said the defense system's true aim is to give the United State first-strike capability in the event of war, and a Russian commander said May 10 that Russia is working on developing missiles capable of penetrating the shield. Iohannis said the missile defense shield, a complex system designed to track and shoot down Europe-bound missiles, has nothing to do with Russia. 
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/28/europe/putin-threatens-romania/index.html   Putin issued his threat during a news conference Friday after meeting with Greek Prime Minister Aleksis Tsipras in Athens.  "If yesterday in those areas of Romania people simply didn't know what it means to be in the cross hairs, then today we will be forced to carry out certain measures to ensure our security," Putin said. 
NATO, which operates the missile defense system, said the missiles could not be used offensively as they don't include explosives and are designed to simply "punch" targets out of the sky. 
"Any threats from Russia are unjustified and irresponsible," said NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu. "Russia knows full well that our Ballistic Missile Defense system is defensive and neither designed nor directed against Russia."
The NATO-run system is housed at a U.S. naval support facility in Deveselu, Romania, the site of a Romanian military base. An additional anti-missile platform is planned in Poland.   "It will be the same case with Poland," Putin warned. "We will wait until Poland takes certain action. We won't take any action until we see rockets in areas that neighbor us."
..  ..  .. 
In short, Russia is either on a dangerous path, or not. It is either primed for change from below or through a coup. Or neither. The consensus of experts suggests that change is unlikely. Predicting Russia’s future is particularly challenging because both theories have merit. The danger is to blindly follow one. Instead, observers need to keep an open mind about Russia’s political future.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2016-05-23/wh...

TIMOTHY FRYE is the Marshall D. Shulman Professor of Post-Soviet Foreign Policy and the Director of the Harriman Institute at Columbia University.
..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..