May 13, 2026

LIST of Articles DWF NEWS 5/13/26

Subject line: Provisional World Parliament and Emerging World Law  

Emerging World Law: The Transition from the World Constitution & Parliament Association to the Provisional World Parliament

Dr. Glen T. Martin    gtmartin.substack.com

U.S. Empire terrorist double-game: secretly supporting ISIS (Syria) and neo-Nazis (Ukraine)

Empire Engages in Criminality, Fabricated Plausible Deniability & Censorship as Instruments of Deception

Mark Taliano         Global Research

Like the Suez Canal for the Brits, Could Strait of Hormuz Spell Doom for US Empire?     

Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J.S. Davies    Common Dreams

Proclaiming AI as the power of God is a trillion-dollar marketing pitch

The AI Mythos: If We Can Destroy the World, Imagine What We Can Do for Your Hedge Fund

Jim Naureckas          FAIR

Debt-free Abundance: Reclaiming money from private bankers

Paradigm: Why AI Forces Rethinking Money Itself, Part 1

Ellen Brown       ScheerPost  

Humanity Wants a World of Peace and Justice

Julio Mas Estelles        DWF NEWS

EARTH CONSTITUTION WATCH

In "Emerging World Law" Dr. Martin argues that "the sovereign is the final decision-maker." This is very important because it potentially shifts final decision-making power from the undemocratic UN Security Council P-5 veto nations to the Earth Constitution's Provisional World Parliament. 

Ultimate "sovereignty" resides with "we, the people", not with the nation-state. This shift in authority provides a means to put an end to "criminal sovereignty" by rogue nations who use national sovereignty as a barrier from International Law or World Law. Israel's Netanyahu and U.S. President Trump cannot be arrested for genocide against the Palestinians because their nations provide a shield of protection using sovereignty to keep out the International Criminal Court.

AI CoPilot states:

Criminal sovereignty is not a standard term in international law, but it is used by some scholars and analysts to describe a very specific phenomenon:

A situation in which a state (or state‑like authority) uses its sovereign powers to enable, protect, or directly participate in criminal activity—often across borders—while shielding itself from accountability.

~ Roger Kotila, Ph.D. Editor, DWF NEWS.

***************************************************************

Emerging World Law: The Transition from the World Constitution & Parliament Association to the Provisional World Parliament

Dr. Glen T. Martin    gtmartin.substack.com

EXCERPTS

... the World Constitution & Parliament Association (WCPA) is an international civil society organization composed of people from around the world who see the absolute need for democratic world government. ... The WCPA has served both the creator and “guardian” of the Constitution for the Federation of Earth (aka "Earth Constitution").

A central question long debated both within and outside the Provisional World Parliament (PWP) is the question of what is the legal status of the PWP and its enacted World Legislative Acts? Is this simply a group of civil society persons gathering together to enact a “model,” a sort of dramatic “stage play,” at being a legislative body? Or does the Provisional World Parliament represent genuine emerging world law for the planet ...

The sovereign is the final decision-maker  

Nineteenth and twentieth century philosophies of law often declared that legitimate law derives from “the commands of a sovereign.” They emphasized that authority to regulate human actions had to stop somewhere, at some final locus of decision-making, and this locus was known as the sovereign.  

Kant astutely points out that the system of militarized sovereign nation-states is inherently a war system, since there is no enforceable republican law above the nations to keep the peace. The international situation is analogous to a society or large group of people without enforceable laws (sometimes referred to today as “a failed state”): it is a condition of de-facto war whether or not conflict is happening at any one time. For this reason, the system of sovereign nations is an immoral condition both for the nations and the citizens living within the nations. ...

By these standards, we can also see that the United Nations is a complete failure. It has no legislative body, and its General Assembly is anything but representative of the peoples of Earth: ... It has no judicial authority with the binding judicial powers of mandamus, and neither the International Criminal Court (ICC) nor the International Court of Justice (ICJ) even come close to this standard. ... Finally, because the UN Charter is merely a super-treaty of so-called “sovereign” nations, it has no credible enforcement mechanisms other than war, since war is an inevitable consequence of a fragmented world system of some 194 territorial sovereignties, recognizing no enforceable authority for the whole.

The people are the sovereign, not the nation-states

Of all the Constitutions that have been drafted for the Earth, the only one that comes close to being legitimate and viable is the Earth Constitution with its Provisional World Parliament. It recognizes sovereignty as belonging properly only to all the people of Earth. ...

Here is where we encounter the big question of this essay as to the legal status of the Provisional World Parliament ... We have seen that the laws of nations no longer carry legitimacy because they cannot possibly address the needs of their citizens, which include not only protecting their human rights and liberties, and their rights to decent food, health care, clean air, water, housing, and sufficient income to assure human dignity. Their rights also include the absolute imperative to end war and protect our planetary ecosystem. Nations spend their wealth on militarism and preparations for war rather than on protecting the environment and sustaining the Earth for future generations. ...

Emerging World Law from the Earth Constitution and Provisional World Parliament

A new category of law has developed in history. Not illegitimate nation-state law. Not baseless and unenforceable international law. The new category can be termed “emerging world law,” not yet fully legitimate because it lacks widespread recognition, but nevertheless, more legitimate than anything deriving from nation-states, since they are not legitimately sovereign. Only the people of Earth are legitimately sovereign.

The World Constitution and Parliament Association as an international NGO has given birth to a new category of governmental legitimacy in human affairs—emerging world law. Our duty as world citizens is to recognize, promote, encourage, and empower the emergence of enforceable world law under the authority of the Earth Constitution. Human life teeters at the edge of a precipice: self-extinction through global war and/or self-extinction through climate destruction ...

Emerging world law is the lifeline that can save us. Let us embrace the concept and grow it as rapidly as possible into effective, enforceable, and genuine world law enacted under the sovereignty of all the people who live on Earth. Recognition of the emerging world law within the Provisional World Parliament as it grows in size, stature, and prestige, both enacts and empowers our absolute moral duty to ratify the Constitution for the Federation of Earth.  READ MORE

https://gtmartin.substack.com/p/emerging-world-law-the-transition?

U.S. Empire terrorist double-game: secretly supporting ISIS (Syria) and neo-Nazis (Ukraine)

Empire Engages in Criminality, Fabricated Plausible Deniability & Censorship as Instruments of Deception

Mark Taliano         Global Research

U.S. Empire and its agencies engage in perpetual Supreme International criminality and continued impunity beneath the subterfuge of “plausible deniability.”

To read this article in the following languages, click the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

عربي, Hebrew, Farsi, Русский, Español, Portugues, 中文, Français, Deutsch, Italiano, 日本語, 한국어, Türkçe, Српски. And 40 more languages.

During the war on Syria, plausible deniability was fabricated using the false dichotomy of “moderate terrorists” and so-called extremist terrorists. “Moderates” existed in name only, but in using this construct, Western propagandists created the false perception that U.S. Empire and its allies were somehow a benevolent force. Beneath the Big Lie, however, Empire supported all of the terrorists in Syria, including ISIS and al Qaeda, especially through Operation Timber Sycamore. In fact, once plausible deniability was established, terrorists on “terror lists” received even more support.(1)

Even when Empire successfully “changed the Regime” and installed a founder of al Qaeda/al Nusra front in Syria, (al-Jolani, now named al-Sharaa), the deception somehow survived. The fact that he was on a “terror list”, and that there was a bounty on his head, (even as the West supported and protected him all along) provided a convoluted “plausible deniability”.(2) The truth remains largely censored and whitewashed.

Whereas Empire seeks to conceal its support for al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria (and beyond), its challenge in Ukraine is to conceal its support for Nazism and genocidal ethnic nationalism [Israeli Zionists?]. READ MORE

https://www.globalresearch.ca/deniability-censorship-instruments-deception/5926034

Like the Suez Canal for the Brits, Could Strait of Hormuz Spell Doom for US Empire?     

Medea Benjamin & Nicolas J.S. Davies    Common Dreams

EXCERPTS

Empires rise and fall. They do not last forever. Imperial declines follow a gradual shifting of the economic tides, but are also punctuated and defined by critical tipping points. There are many differences between the Suez Crisis in 1956 and the US war on Iran today, but similarities in the larger context suggest that the United States is facing the same kind of “end of empire” moment that the British Empire faced in that historic crisis.

The Suez Crisis was the pivotal moment when the British government finally learned that it could no longer use military force to impose its will on less powerful countries. Like Americans today on Iran, the British public was way ahead of its government: opinion polls found that 44% opposed the use of force against Egypt, while only 37% approved. As Prime Minister Eden dithered over the UN’s ceasefire order, 30,000 people gathered at an anti-war rally in Trafalgar Square.

Britain charted a successful transition to a post-imperial future through its relationships with the United States and the British Commonwealth–an association of independent states that preserved British influence in its former colonies. On the domestic front, there was broad political support for a mixed capitalist-socialist economy that included free education and healthcare, publicly owned housing and utilities, nationalized industries, and strong trade unions.

Most Americans today have learned similar lessons from failed, disastrous US wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. But like the British people who opposed Eden’s invasion of Egypt, Americans have been repeatedly dragged into war by the secret scheming of leaders blinded by anachronistic, racist, imperial assumptions.

The crisis with Iran is at least as catastrophic for US imperialism as the Suez Crisis was for the British Empire. The question is whether anyone in Washington today is capable of grasping the gravity of the crisis and making the required policy shift.

To follow Britain’s Suez example would mean closing US military bases around the world; renouncing the illegal threat and use of military force as the main tool of US foreign policy; and relying instead on multilateral diplomacy and UN action to resolve international disputes. READ MORE

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/suez-canal-strait-of-hormuz?     

Proclaiming AI as the power of God is a trillion-dollar marketing pitch

The AI Mythos: If We Can Destroy the World, Imagine What We Can Do for Your Hedge Fund

Jim Naureckas          FAIR

Futurism (12/16/26): “At NeurIPS, one of the big AI research conferences…visions of AI doom were clearly on the mind of many scientists in attendance.”

You ever wonder why people who make AI talk about how AI might destroy humanity—but still keep making AI? Brian Phillips of the Ringer (5/6/26) has a plausible explanation.

Writing about Anthropic’s announcement that it wasn’t going to release a new product, Claude Mythos, to the public because it was too dangerous, Phillips notes:

The AI industry has been driven from the beginning by wildly overwrought claims, many of them pertaining to the destructive potential of its products. Too dangerous to release to the public is a move the industry has pulled before….

It may seem like a strange tactic for companies to scaremonger about their own products. When Ford rolls out a new pickup truck, the CEO generally doesn’t go around giving keynote addresses about how much more lethal it will make American highways. But the AI industry is selling a narrative—a mythos, if you will—as much as it’s selling a product, and that narrative is one of revolutionary, transformational power. “Our product can make your life a bit easier, although there are still a lot of kinks to iron out” is not a trillion-dollar sales pitch; “we’ve invented something so powerful that it has the potential to destroy humanity” is.

In this read, apocalyptic narratives about AI are largely if not entirely designed to justify more investment in a technology that has already sucked up so much money that analysts wonder if it will ever show a profit:

Think about the way the industry talks about itself. AI isn’t just another tech gizmo. It’s bigger than the internet. It’s bigger than the smartphone. It’s going to reshape human society. It’s going to put millions out of work. It’s going to eliminate money. It’s going to surpass human intelligence. It’s going to replace humans altogether. It’s going to kill all humans. It’s going to be profitable beyond your wildest dreams, at least at some point, although definitely not today.

And this is why it makes sense for Anthropic to talk about how their latest creation could destroy the internet: If it’s that powerful, maybe it’s worth giving its creators $1 trillion (which is what it’s hoping to raise in an IPO), in hopes that you’ll own a piece of that power:  READ MORE

https://fair.org/home/the-ai-mythos-if-we-can-destroy-the-world-imagine-what-we-can-do-for-your-hedge-fund/

EDITOR'S NOTE: For a universal high income to be successful (for everyone in the world) it will require a world constitution to replace the obsolete UN Charter. The Earth Federation must take over from private international banking.

The USA could be used as a demonstration project to test on a smaller scale the plan's effectiveness. In the spirit of world citizenship and global family, the Earth Constitution's financial section requires the world federal government to regulate and control the world's currency and credit. I had proposed we call the new money "'Earth Dollars," but this plan was voted down in favor of labeling the money as "Earth Hours," -- this latter name for earth money I believe would be confusing to the public. -- R. Kotila, PhD  

World currency and credit banking should change from private to public control

The Abundance Paradigm: Why AI Forces Rethinking Money Itself -- Part 1

Ellen Brown       ScheerPost  

 A Universal High Income would replenish the shrinking tax base by replacing the lost wages of unemployed workers. But where will the money come from to pay the UHI? The only sustainable solution is for the government to issue it interest-free. That does not mean through the Federal Reserve, which creates money in the same way banks do: it buys federal interest-bearing securities with accounting entries. The Fed collects the interest, which it is supposed to return to the Treasury after deducting its costs. But since 2008, its costs include paying interest on the reserves of its participating banks, which consumes its profits. (See my earlier article here.)

The only interest-free, debt-free solution that will actually increase the money supply sufficiently to match the projected productivity of AI/robotics is for the money to be issued directly by the Treasury.

This is not a radical new idea. It is authorized in the U.S. Constitution, which provides in Article 1, Sec. 8, that “The Congress shall have Power To … coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof .…” Abraham Lincoln used government-issued “Greenbacks” to avoid a crippling debt to British-backed bankers. Debt-free government-issued money was also the funding mechanism by which the American colonists succeeded in creating a thriving economy and liberating themselves from the oppressive yoke of the British Empire.

In his 1729 pamphlet “A Modest Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper-Currency,” Benjamin Franklin argued that a lack of currency was a tax on industrious farmers and producers, and that a reliable, locally issued paper currency was the “oil” for the gears of trade. The “Nature and Necessity” of this currency was to facilitate the movement of goods between neighbors. Franklin observed that the British strategy of keeping the colonies short of cash was a method of economic suppression.

 READ MORE

https://scheerpost.com/2026/05/10/the-abundance-paradigm-why-ai-forces-rethinking-money-itself-part-1/ 

EARTH CONSTITUTION WATCH

Humanity Wants a World of Peace and Justice

Julio Mas Estelles        DWF NEWS

Let us unite reason and effort.

We have a brand-new Universal Declaration of Human Rights that is massively violated at the global level, countless wars underway, and an unjust global governance system based on the force of the absolute national sovereignty of states, governed by a system of international relations that, years ago, Willy Brandt defined as “organized madness.”

Likewise, within that system of alienation, we enjoy an Organization, the United Nations, with good intentions and purposes, but which in practice has amply demonstrated its failure.

The problem, as always, is to specify and act in a world like the one a colleague of the Provisional World Parliament (PWP) recently highlighted in her article titled “The Soulless Republics and the Current Cruel Dystopia.” It seems as if even bad situations are capable of worsening when people with training and technological success propose a future of cruel struggle and competition far removed from the most elementary humanity values, even justifying and contributing with that cutting-edge technology to the perfection of weapons and to genuine processes of genocide.

Against this, some ideas emerge such as those of various World Federalist Organizations, that is the case with CEMERG (Mexican Center for Global Responsibility), whose Manifesto of 12-31-2023 recognizes the “sovereignty of Humanity” and the legitimacy of a constituent process for the transformation of the UN into a World Parliamentary System, proceeding with the same authority as the states that constituted it in 1945 and through the procedure of Article 109 of its Charter. The sovereignty of Humanity is also what gives birth to the World Constitution of the Earth Federation, in its current process of the Provisional World Parliament (PWP) stage. In both cases, their implementation would depend on massive popular support or on some state invoking Article 109 of the Charter.

Failing to comply with its own Charter

Throughout its existence, the United Nations has failed to comply with its own Charter. Examples of this include the Charter review procedure under Article 109, scheduled for before its tenth anniversary, ...

Another beautiful purpose transformed into horror, wars and suffering, it was the “decolonization process,” ...

And the height of it was the creation, to the UN’s discredit, of a new “colonization by occupation” in Palestine, as was the State of Israel in 1948. UN subsequent evolution confirms its actions: like bad politicians, it not only fails to solve problems but creates them.

Bureaucratic procedures overwhelmed Charter reform

After its “brilliant” evolution, world public opinion began to question the UN in the 1990s with much academic literature on its reform on the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary. Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1992–1996) tried, obtaining the result of being the only Secretary-General not re-elected for a second term. Subsequent reform attempts by Kofi Annan can be described as a bureaucratic mockery.

... in the UN’s Millennium Declaration of 2000 states: “We solemnly reaffirm, on this historic occasion, that the United Nations is the indispensable common house of the entire human family, through which we will seek to realize our universal aspirations for peace, cooperation and development. We therefore pledge our unlimited support for these common objectives and our determination to achieve them.” (1)

Hope for UN change not totally lost

Legally and democratically speaking, concrete and effective actions in the aforementioned areas are demandable. The legitimizing character of the Millennium Summit must be noted. The most important aspect of the Summit’s Declaration is not its nature as a UN General Assembly Resolution, but that it is signed by 147 Heads of State and Government and a total of 189 Member States, and “they assumed the collective responsibility to uphold and defend the principles of human dignity, equality and equity at the global level.” (2)

1) United Nations General Assembly. Resolution 55/2. 13 September 2000.

2) Report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization. General Assembly, Official Records. Supplement No. 1 (A/56/1). United Nations. New York, 2001.

------

The fact that some of the signatory States cannot be fully considered democratic does not cloud the unanimity of their signatures. From that same unanimity it also follows that, in addition to a global constituent legitimacy, there would also be another legitimacy of the same nature in any state in the world, given that said state also signed that Millennium Declaration.

And the only requirement would be that it uphold those general principles which, curiously, essentially coincide with the (theoretical) purposes of the UN Charter and of our World Constitution of the PWP.

If Article 109 is not achieved nor does the legitimization of the Millennium Declaration work, personally, as a Spanish citizen and, therefore, belonging to the European Union, I would be delighted if France renounced its membership in the UN Security Council. In that case, according to Article 23 of the Charter, the UN should disappear.   READ MORE

Julio Mas Estellés, Law Graduate. Diploma in Advanced Studies in International Relations. PhD in Legal Sciences and Sociology with the Thesis “The Democratic Principle and the Reform of the United Nations. Human Rights and Global Governance.” PWP Delegate to the Earth Federation and member of the Legislative Review, Ratification, and Peace and Disarmament Commissions.

Humanity wants a World of Peace and Justice Julio Mas Estelles DWF NEWS - Democratic World Federalists