Tuesday, 31 August 2010

Fings Ain't Always Wot They Seem Ta Be

News item of a couple of days ago:

The (Glasgow) Herald, 28/8/10 -'Swine flu drug is linked with sleep disorder'

"A flu vaccine widely distributed in Scotland is under review over a possible link to narcolepsy, it has been announced.

"The European Medicines Agency is investigating the swine flu drug Pandemrix after a number of those who received the vaccination in Sweden and Finland reported symptoms of the sleeping disorder.

"On Tuesday, Finland's National Institute for Health and Welfare recommended that vaccination with Pandemrix be stopped until the suspected link with narcolepsy had been thoroughly evaluated.

"As there have been no such cases reported in the UK so far, use of the drug will not be suspended in Scotland..."

Ah, yes. The old no-cases-have-been-reported-in-the-UK-so-far, so-use-of-the-drug-will-not-be-suspended-in-Scotland routine... That is to say: if it hasn't been reported...

That is to say: We only know what we've been told. Or actually, we only really know what we've experienced personally. All else has to come to us through various filters. And even our senses are filters...

Where am I going with this. Let me go there through telling a little story.

'So, Mr. Stardust, you've called a press conference here at the National Press Club, on 'Changes in the Status Quo', and a couple of us at least have turned up; what is it you would like to say to us?'

'Well, first of all, I'd like to appreciate you, and your organizations, for your turning up. I note that the turnout is a couple of reporters less than those who turned up for Larry Sinclair's press conference in this same venue; but I realise that there are many pressing issues of the day, and we all have to set our priorities. So let's begin.

'The purpose of this press conference is, firstly, to announce that the medical-pharmaceutical-government complex has two weeks to engage in some Confession-stroke-Reconciliation activity, particularly, but not exclusively, with respect to the damage done by vaccines, and then we will go from there.

'This has been occasioned by - '

'Hold it, hold it. What do you mean, "And then we'll go from there"?'

'I mean that I want to emphasize the Reconciliation process, not an assigning of blame. I want all those individuals who have had concerns about these matters - this particular matter, and others to be addressed - to have an announced window of opportunity to share their concerns. To set the historical record straight. Before our societal next steps.'

'I...see. I think. Are you meaning to do this sort of thing in a lot of other areas, too? This - Confession-time stuff?''


'I...see. And, why would anybody...take you up on it?'

'Because it's time.'

'...It's time for......?'

'For moving on.'

'...For moving on, from...what; precisely?'

'From a way of being that is not serving humanity any longer, and needs to give way, to a larger, more honest, more holistic way of being.'

'...Because... - '

'It's time.'

' - it's time; right....Can you back this up a bit, and give me - us here - a little more background, as to what you're on about?'

'Okay. Let's take fluoridation.'

'...Fluoridation. As in...'

'As in propaganda. The big sell. Back in the '40s it was proving to be rather a major problem, both as a toxic waste by-product of industry - particularly the aluminum and artificial fertilizer industries - but in particular to the secret atom bomb-developing project, known as the Manhattan Project. It was causing cattle to be ill and dying downwind from the atomic manufacturing plants, and farmers were starting to sue for their losses of income. The government authorities hushed the matter up as long as they could; but it all triggered some brain-storming as to what to do about the problem. A scientist hired by the aluminum industry hit on the idea of metering it into the water supply - because fluoride, albeit in a different form in nature, was at least there - and so its toxic form could be smuggled into the environment that way, rather than being emitted in the direct way, which was going to cost these various corporate sources a lot of money to clean it up before it polluted the environment. And 'the industry' even slipped one of their lawyers in to the federal government to head the US Public Health Service, to steer government policy in the 'right' direction. Which is how things are run down to our day as well.

'So the Big Sell started; as part, incidentally, of the new Public Relations 'science' that had started to be developed, looking into ways to sell people on things; products and ideas. The Nazis took it on. And so did shadowy corporate forces in America. And one of their great successes - right along with TV ads of doctors smoking Chesterfields - was the TV ad campaign for fluoridation of the public water supplies. People saw a respectable man in a white coat - obviously a scientist - explaining to an interviewer about this new substance being added to the water supplies, to cut the number of cavities in the American children's teeth. Never mind that what the fluoride was really doing, as an enzyme disrupter, was delaying the eruption of the children's teeth, so that it was a statistical chimera that made it look as though there were fewer cavities at a given age in children in the treated city, as opposed to those in the control city.'

'You're saying...'

'Fewer teeth, fewer cavities.'

'Yes, I thought that was what you were getting at.'

'What I was really getting at, with this example, of how we get our information in life, was how little we really know about life, from personal experience. And, how easily we can be persuaded to believe things that aren't actually so.

'Take the Kennedy assassination. - '

'Hold it! - Where are we going now?'

'To Dallas. On that fateful day. A good example of what I'm getting at is from a book on that event, entitled Best Evidence, wherein the author soon realized that he needed to apply the philosophy of 'checking one's premises'. He - we all - had a premise that the body as seen in the Emergency operating room at Parkland Hospital in Dallas was the same, that is, in the same condition, as that seen later the same day (evening by then) in the autopsy room at Bethesda Naval Hospital outside Washington, D.C. Well of course it was, you might say.'

'Yes...And you don't?'

'I'm saying: Not necessarily. We jump to conclusions too soon in life, often. Especially when there are factors involved, that should cause us to be a little more cautious. As in the fact that there was a lot of corporate interest in selling the American public on the wondrous virtues of fluoride. When people have an agenda - or even just a possible agenda - the public should take care, that they are possibly being sold something. The way they were sold a pig in a poke for their president in the last election.

'But I'm getting a bit ahead of myself. - '

'Ah - yes. Yes, that would...You were talking about Kennedy's body...'

'Yes. The lesson here - the point I'm making, is: don't always believe what you 'saw with your own eyes', quote.

'The public saw, on their TV screens - this flat version of history, with its projected images - a casket being taken out of Parkland Hospital in Dallas, and then being loaded onto Air Force One at Love Field; and then sometime later - in the night - that casket - or at least a similar-looking one - being unloaded at Andrews Air Force Base, into an ambulance; and then, sometime later - it was about forty-five minutes later, as I recall the chronological report - an ambulance unloading a casket at the dock at Bethesda Naval Hospital. Now, did you notice my change of words?'


' We saw 'an' ambulance, and 'a' casket at Bethesda. But the premise was that it was 'the' ambulance, and 'the' casket. That's all it was. A premise.'

'...You're saying...'

'I'm saying that there is good reason to believe that it was not necessarily the same ambulance, and - shockingly - not the same casket. That something happened between the time the public saw a casket coming off the plane at Andrews, and then saw, some forty-five minutes later, a casket coming off an ambulance at Bethesda, and sitting on the dock briefly.

'I won't go into all that in detail here. But the author of the book does an excellent job of walking this matter through its possible permutations. Including how the switch could have happened, that allowed the perpetrators - and you can spell that with a t-r-a-i-t-o-r-s at the end if you want - time to smuggle the body itself, in a body bag, out of the far-side front door of the plane, while all the cameras and lighting were trained on the near back door, where the casket had been loaded onto the plane and then came out from. It is even part of the historical record that there was a bogey ambulance that night, ostensibly to keep the reporter pack from being too intrusive in this sensitive matter, which led them on a wild goose chase, while the 'real' one delivered the body to Bethesda. But the 'best evidence' is that it was delivered elsewhere first, in a body bag, for a quick operation to try to 'fix' the facts to fit the policy - do you recall where you have heard that sort of expression, in our day and age?'

' - What? Wait - I was trying to follow you. You said...'

'That there is evidence that the body was taken first to another hospital, the caper under the control of the (very politically powerful) perps,* and operated on - to make it look as though there were only rear-entry wounds, in order to assign the assassination to Oswald and only Oswald - then zipped back up in its body bag, loaded into a casket, and sent on its not-so merry way. Just a couple of problems here, for the perps.'


'Being that the body was not in a body bag when it left Parkland Hospital in Dallas. And that the casket on the loading dock at Bethesda was not the clearly-identifiable bronze casket that left Parkland, and came off of Air Force One at Andrews.'

'Can this all be? Both factors? Body bag, and casket?'

'Read the literature. Not that of the scoffers. They play a game with their readers. It's an old lawyer's trick: If you can't argue the facts - the true facts, as opposed to the facts that you distort for your adversarial argument - engage in bluster. Don't buy into it. Painstakingly follow the evidence; including the evidence that the wounds seen at Bethesda didn't match those reported by the surgeons at Parkland.

'And don't ever take anything in life for granted. Especially not the evidence simply of your senses. Or the information that is fed to you in your mainstream media. You may not be getting a true picture of things. And especially not, when there are forces at wok, to get you to believe certain things, because they have an agenda.'

'Which is...'

'To enslave you. Into believing what they want you to believe About a lot of things.'

'...So...What does one do.'

'There's only one thing you can do, to be certain.'

'And that is...'

'Go inside.

'And even that is not certain.'


'So: Do your best. Check your premises. Doubt anything given to you to believe. Listen deeply. And you'll get there. Sooner or later.'

'...And in the meantime...'

'Know that it's time, for a major shaking of the status quo, for a brighter tomorrow to come out of the whole process. With just one basic motivation, and intention.'

'..Which is...'

'To give of your best, to each other, out of gratitude to your Creator for life with meaning.

'And if you do, all else will be added unto you. Including knowledge, finally, of the truth. The whole truth. And nothing but the truth.

'Now, about the rest of the changes in the status quo that are about to take place...'

'Hold it! I'm still just trying to digest the fact that such key details about the Kennedy assassination could have been overlooked at the time and in all these years. It's..outrageous.'

'If you think that's outrageous, let's look at what we were led to believe about 9/11. A cover-up right before our very eyes. Well, that is, images on our TV sets; and commentary to suit an agenda. Including from supposedly random eyewitnesses.'

'Are you linking the two events?'

'Not necessarily. Except through the common denominator of events that were not what they appeared to be. Or were sold to us to be.

'Think for yourself, friend. Collect all the information you can about a subject, before making up your mind. And even then, keep an open mind. New information may come along. And actually, it usually does.

'But back to what we've been sold about vaccines...'

(N.B. A little on that subject, to close this blog with. These comments of mine, on a Comments thread to an online article in the UK Guardian headed 'MMR -The vaccine damage myth that will not die':

1 September 2010 11:26PM


"There are two approaches: vaccinate, or don't vaccinate."

Rather oversimplified, wouldn't you really say? Do you really not understand that another "approach" is to acknowledge the adverse effects of various vaccines - the true total, as near as can honestly be determined - and respond by making them safer? And another being to acknowledge said adverse effects, and do the research to understand why some children are genetically predisposed to be damaged by vaccines - and so should be excused from having to take that risk?

Some such research has already been done - triggered by parents determined to try to get the bottom of the damage done to their children by various vaccines; no thanks to the health authorities, who have tried to stonewall this eminently sensible approach to this matter from the beginning - and it has been found eg that some children have a genetic polymorphism to be low in glutathione. Thus they can't clear heavy metals/toxins as readily as other children; thus they should be spared being injected with these substances. And so forth.

'And so forth' also means the disturbing information that the UK government gave the MMR provider immunity from liability; so the parents of those cases trying for justice for their children in the courts didn't realise that they were trying to sue the wrong party. And what does such an arrangement say about the responsible government bodies being impartial in this matter?

In sum - and to paraphrase Dr. Peter Fletcher, former CSO [Chief Science Officer]: 'This is a scandal of major proportions.' It needs to be aired, and as quickly as possible. Justice deferred is injustice.

2 September 2010 7:58PM


Good points, but in relation to peanut allergies et al, it is not a matter of our immune systems "attacking harmless food proteins". It is attacking them because either they themselves are in various vaccines - and so the body is just doing its job BY attacking them, along with the vaccine's other immune-system-triggering substances, all recognized as 'foreign' - or there are similar-weighted proteins in them, that the body attacks because of a recognizing process called molecular mimicry.

What in heaven's name are they doing in vaccines? Good point. The same question, and comment, as using squalene in vaccines; which is a substance found in the body. So the body is going to attack itself with its presence in a vaccine. The same as myelin basic protein (MBP) found as a contaminant in the MMR, via the chick embryo cells that the measles component is cultured on. And on. And on. And on.

Vaccines are hardly the product they have been touted as. They are extremely dangerous. This is what I meant, in my comment above, about a 'scandal of major proportions'.

But we're getting there. Thanks to so many parents, who are not going to give up the battle for justice to be served for the damage done to their children - autoimmunological and neurological - without a fight.


* See the testimony of LBJ's mistress on YouTube video.

Wednesday, 25 August 2010

On the Subject of Fools, and the Fooled

Two things of particular note have just come up in my life: one on the 'macro' level, and one on the micro. First, on the macro:

I weighed in on a conversational thread on the ronpaul.com website, on the subject of the proposed Muslim cultural centre near Ground Zero in NYC, thusly:

"137 responses to “Ron Paul to Sunshine Patriots: Stop Your Demagogy About The NYC Mosque!”

"August 23, 2010 at 7:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

"Good points, Dr. Paul (although you did misunderstand the Nancy Pelosi comment, as someone here has pointed out). Yes, people can be stampeded, by people with an agenda (in this case, neocons & their corporate buddies pushing for Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace). But it’s all a matter of perspective, isn’t it. And there is a perspective here that Muslims will be getting one on America by slipping an if-not-an-outright-mosque-at-least-a-Muslim-dedicated building into the Ground Zero meme (for which many of them feel they have been unfairly blamed & framed). Which feeds into the ‘average’ American’s uneasiness that some changes are afoot that they don’t like or trust.

"One of them is the rise of Islam – and its Sharia law – over and against the basic western Christian/Judeo-Christian cultural position. That is a major threat to their way of life and institutions (already under ‘attack’ by the rise of secularism). And that sense of a threat has been exacerbated by their uneasiness over the man who made his way into the presidency, by charisma, and other impulses going for him, like a desired change in the body politic from what had been going down. But: Is he a Christian or a Muslim? What about all the questions about his background? Why won’t he clear up all those questions, about his birth, and his passport, and his school records, etc. – in sum: Who is he, really? It all has fed into a spirit of paranoia. And then the Muslims come along and want to build something (perceived as) ‘on’ hallowed ground – hallowed to the American experience…

"In short: I feel you were insensitive to these serious and sincere feelings, Dr. Paul. It’s not really about freedom of religion at all, or your vaunted property rights. It’s about sensitivity – and more. If the Christians built their churches on the ‘heathen’ sites they superseded, and the Muslims have done the same sort of thing…

"I trust you see what I am getting at, and what others have tried to convey, also: that you missed the essential point.

"You may feel that your son is not aware enough of the ‘agenda’ of the neocons in stirring up this sort of brouhaha, to serve their own ends. But at least he doesn’t have a tin ear on the matter. Please take another look at this matter, and consider a wider perspective on it than the one you took. Yes, there is truth in what you shared. And there is also error.

"Which there is plenty of on both sides of the issue. A little more light, and a little less heat, would go a long way in moving through this confrontation of two cultures. A dialogue held by a neutral moderator, anyone??"

And what did I get for my pains? One written response, 4 thumbs up, and 40 thumbs down (and maybe counting). The written response:

"Stan, you are a moron."

While we're on the subject, a word about causation: specifically, about the roots of 9/11. Such roots are always all intertwined; but the tap root was, and is, capitalism, and, in this instance, capitalism's imperialistic bent, in its search/voracious hunger for resources, that antagonised the Muslim world in the first place. Was a stick to a hornet's nest, in a piece of the dialectical process unfolding with such culmination in our time.

Capitalism, to give it its due, was a good way to distribute scarce resources; having them go to the resource-ful, first in a free-enterprise mode (until Monopoly began to rear its ugly head, out of that nurturing nest). But it was not the only way that that end could have been accomplished. And, it was, in the event, accomplished in a way that seeded the current global crisis, with the creation of interest-bearing money (needing endless growth to pay off the debt money), and fueled by the concept of fractional-reserve banking. That is, with and by merely materialistic means. Means, which became an end in itself, when 'money' took on a life of its own, and moved from being simply a medium of exchange - in regards to scarce resources, with varying degrees of value - to an object of glorification.

The Christian tradition has a 'take' on this subject, with its parable of how it would be easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

What is that all about? On to my micro level experience.

Last night I was with a small group of 'fresh' (as in freshmen) members newly on their way into 'my' community - the 'spiritual' community I belong to - whom I am being a mentor of sorts to, where the member of the group who was holding the evening's meeting led a meditation on the subject of forgiveness. It brought up some fundamental feelings for me.

The object of the meditation was to think of someone in our lives whom we needed to forgive, for whatever seemingly good reason, and then to move on to trying to access what we may have to forgive in ourselves, as having given fuel to that process. I don't remember the precise steps of the meditation, but I remember what came up for me. And what came up for me was on this subject of, in a word, money; and in the synchronistic context as well of a book that I have been reading recently.

My sharing with the group afterwards went along the following lines. The person I thought of, for the sake of the exercise, that I needed to forgive for something was a person in the community who was constantly harping about money, in the sense of the community not paying its members enough. Brief background. The community of which I am a member - known as the Findhorn Foundation - is an international, nondenominational spiritual community structured as a nonprofit charitable trust, with a trust-deed purpose of engaging in educational programmes of a (roughly) 'religious' nature, with a particular connection with Nature. Our basic motto is Work is Love in Action, ie, our very purpose for being is in the spirit of Service - Service to all those attracted to come here and experience the place, and, through them returning to their daily lives, Service to the Planet, in whatever way they 'land' that intention, in common unity (community) with us. We call ourselves a centre of Light and demonstration, assisting in the transformation of human consciousness on Earth. Our whole reason for being, then, is to Serve; first the individuals who come through here, and through that service, the planet.

It is not to 'make money'. To have a comfortable lifestyle, and existence. To be, then, part of the problem: the rapacious plundering of the planet's resources. Unmindful brutes, soiling our nest. We are here, not to be motivated in our lives by money, but by the principle of Service. And this fellow's constant harping about 'not having enough' personally has been, then, a threat to my belief system - that the answer to the future of life on Earth is to do away with money, ie, with the 'principle' of profit-making, and replace it with the principle of Service. And if we will (once we will??), 'all else will be added unto us' - that mind-shift will open the doors to sufficiency, if not abundance itself. Because people will not be motivated, to give of their best to one another in goods and services, by the opportunity for personal aggrandisement, but by the concept of service to others, in gratitude to our Creator for life with meaning.

So we here in 'my' community are modeling the way of the future, if we can keep the snake of 'money' out of our Eden, and stay true to our roots in Service. And this guy...this - harper... -

simply stands for something in me. I realise.

The part of me that doubts. That we can really do it. On this planet. On this level of existence.

Do 'it': bring spirit to bear, in such a way that we can create an Eden, and take next steps as a race of beings, yes with one foot in the animal world of our nature, but also with a part of our being in connection with the higher realms. As, essentially, spiritual beings having a human experience.

And does that reach exceed our grasp...

So I recognised that that fellow is just a part of me. That I created him in my experience. For a reason.

Not just to recognise that anything 'out there' is just a reflection of something in me.

But to practice forgiveness.

As the final frontier.

To forgive him. (Because he's not really real. Is just a projection.)

And also, finally - ultimately - to forgive myself.

For what.

And that's where the book comes in. Because its message is that we will not gain our immortal reality until we have forgiven ourselves - for the unconscious guilt we carry in our being for separating ourselves from our Source.

For which we have already been forgiven.

Because it wasn't ever real, anyway, to have to be forgiven for.

Was an illusion.

Just part of the process.

Of experiencing the sense of separateness.

In order to return home.

The wiser for the experience.

And thus does the Christian parable of the Prodigal Son come to mind.

Can we do it?

Oh, yeah.

But can we do this other? This superseding of the training wheels of interest-bearing money on the one hand and fractional-reserve banking on the other? This rickety device we are relying on, all unmindful of the Tao?

Remains to be seen.

I think we can.

And I would bet my life on it.

But I see that that fellow is still a part of my reality......

P.S. And I trust that people realise that the population question will take care of itself, once people grok that they will be secured in their old age - as part of the New Order of the Ages (Novus Ordo Seclorum) - and so don't need to propagate to the numbers that they have in the past. So we don't need to resort to population culling scenarios like wars, and famine, and pestilence.
But then what do I know. I'm a moron.
But perhaps we can learn something from The Fool.



'Your Immortal Reality' by Gary Renard

'The Financial Oligarchy Reigns: Democracy's Death Spiral From Greece to the United States' by David DeGraw; ampedstatus.com

Sunday, 22 August 2010

The Devastating Corruption of the Profit Motive

As steeled as I try to make myself against the horror stories of our time and place - in order not to lose my objectivity, to keep my equanimity, to change the things I can and let the others go - I come up against a wall sometimes. Cases in point.

* Email notices recently of a return of the swine flu shot for the coming 'season' - this time to be included (buried) in the seasonal shot, whatever all it contains. Of flu strains, and other possible constituents. Which need to be investigated in depth. Since 'they' seem to be making major moves now for people control.
The public has not been told the whole story about the side effects of the last H1N1 shot, especially including how 'they' tried to put an adjuvant named squalene in it - which would make the body produce antibodies to its own supplies of this substance; as if 'they' didn't know that (another of the myriad autoimmune effects of vaccines) - and how one (already suspect) company sent shipments of a particularly toxic form of (bird) flu virus that would have found its way into formulations for vaccines except for an alert health authority in one country in Europe that tested it on ferrets, which were killed by it, and which fortuitous event stopped its use. (A mistake? Hardly; especially not in the context of what is going down in our day and age.) And now here we are again, with this renewed opportunity for The Authorities to inject whatever all into the populace at large - including pregnant women, for whom proper safety testing has not been done; and babies, a class of persons for whom the flu vaccine has been demonstrated not to be effective; and ditto retirees.

* And speaking of vaccines: the to-and-fro continues, seemingly ceaselessly, about their connection with autism or not. The more I read about this matter, the more anger-inducing it is, how The Authorities and their acolytes continue to stonewall on this matter. (No, correlation is not causation; and you can get off your high horse when you keep saying that, and continue merrily to cite epidemiological studies paid for by the drug companies. We're talking about children here, not widgets. If there is evidence that suggests even a possible correlation, let alone causation, it should be explored. Stat.)

* And speaking as well of the 'tool' of vaccines: Notice how there is action afoot to take away children from parents who don't submit their children to their recommended shots, via the rationale of 'child abuse'. And as for that rationale:

* Notice how there is action afoot to take away children from parents who want to homeschool them.
Could there be real cases of child abuse going on here, which don't see the light of day because the children don't attend public schools and thus can't be monitored for tell-tale signs? Very possibly. But again: consider the current context. Any government that wants exclusive power to educate the children under its jurisdiction can be up to no good; for no true good government would be up to such a thing. Total control is the marker for totalitarianism.
In America, the Left, under the Obama administration, would like to take over the raising of the children, and release them from the responsibility and control of their parents, in order to free them from their parents' religious beliefs, and for other 'socializing' purposes. (This is the purpose behind the UN Convention On the Rights of Children, which the US government has so far refused to adopt. For good reason.) Unfortunately, this same clique would also like to have a national health insurance system in order to further similar control desires (thus the idea, which has basic merit, is agenda driven). And unfortunately, that also extends to a desire to force all children (or as many as possible as can be corralled into their holding pens) to be subjected to mandated vaccines; under the same rationale, of 'child abuse'; also, as being 'in the national interest'.

* The danger is not just from the Left (in this dialectical process working its way out to a higher level). Email notices that I take from various sources indicate how the western world is still up against major economic woes - woes which are eliminating a strong, independent middle class, and strengthening the power of the elite over their populaces.
It is a scandal of major proportions that the banks are still sitting pretty, with their same corrupt practices that caused 'the system' to nearly collapse in the first place. But that's part of 'their' agenda - ie, the elite wanting to run the world.
Look at it. Look - at - it. America was seduced into going hugely into debt, at the same time as its manufacturing base was stripped, and shipped overseas, by the corporations running things these days, in cahoots with 'the bankers'. And then the plug was pulled, on 'toxic mortgages', and the populace was conned into bailing out the banks. Not the people. But the creators of the problem in the first place. Putting 'the people' further into debt to them; and with less of an ability to recover, now, with a smaller economic base. Thus being wholly in 'their' grasp - at long last. The system to collapse, in order for the elite to create a world safe for corporatism - ie, them.

News flash. Let the system collapse. It needs to. It is reflecting the level of corruption of the human spirit that was inherent in it in the first place. A system founded on the concept of service to self. Not service to others.

Prime example. Pharmaceutical companies are in business in order primarily to make money. For their stockholders, but in particular for their management. And their partners in their crimes, the members of the allopathic medical profession that they have seduced into doing their bidding, in exchange for cushy incomes.

Cushy lives, on top of the heap of humanity...

* ...and some 200,000 Indian farmers are estimated to have committed suicide, after going so far into debt, after contracting with the likes of Monsanto to attempt to increase their yields, and getting terminator seeds in the faustian bargain, that they saw no other way out.

Well, there is a way out, humanity.

Which is to release the control of the concept of 'profit' over your lives.

And replace it with Love at your core of being. In gratitude to your Creator for life with meaning.

And when we sort out our global community after the evolution, and really take off on this planet - ultimately to soar out into the further space of our material realm - remember one thing.

Well, two things.

One: Remember how it was, in the bad old days.

And two: Don't get too comfortable here.

It's a school.

The point is to graduate.

Friday, 20 August 2010

America is For a Reason

At an early stage of my spiritual journey in life - starting to be engaged with in earnest during my junior year in university - I spent some time looking into the curious historical reports of a wise white male Teacher appearing in the Americas, and instructing the peoples in agriculture, and living in harmony with each other and the earth, and so forth. What was that all about? I wondered. It apparently well predated the time of the Spanish conquistadores, and the Catholic Church priests that accompanied them, in their conquest - attempted conquest - of the New (to them) World. One theory was that the prototype for such a personage in what has become present-day America and for Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan in Central America (and to some extent Viracocha in South America; although he was much more of a creator god) was an early apostle, having traveled to that part of the world to 'save' the heathen. (How he would have known about it was a further question.) Another theory was that espoused by 'the Mormons' - the church I was born into, and researched more closely due to my 'awakening' in university, and finally left on the basis of my research: that it was in point of fact Jesus Himself, having transported Himself (somehow) to this part of the world to spread His message further. (And left them with the sense that He would return. And walked away on the water. For how else could He have gotten there?...) For whatever actual historical reasons for the reports from the indigenous peoples themselves, it was an intriguing 'message'. And its investigation caused me to come across the idea/concept of Aztlan: the home base for the peoples who became known to the wider world culture as the Aztecs.

No one knew precisely where this land/area was; at least according to all the books on these matters that I read. But there was a general sense that it was from north of present-day Mexico, somewhere. And I see (from reports out of Arizona, where 'the radicals' are gaining a firm foothold in the school system; that initiative now under major governmental reactive response) that the present-day movement called La Raza places it precisely: the larger part of southwest America, stretching over several states (including my growing-up state of California). Which the more radical of the adherents of the concept of La Raza - The Race - want to take back over, and incorporate into a Larger Mexico. (Somewhat akin to the Israeli-Zionist concept of Eretz Israel.)

Thanks, no thanks.

It's fine to have pride in one's roots. And I have pride in my roots as an American by birth; so I know the feeling. But there's a larger picture, here. One vaguely assumed under the concept of time; of progress; of, in a word, development. Historical, social, economical, political - and spiritual - development.

America is for a reason, folks: for The People to be free - in line with their essence, as being free moral agents - from unlimited government, and as an example thereof. Also, to be free from its control by vested interests; as the military-industrial complex, and the pharmaceutical industry, and other corporations, are engaging in today.** That's why the American constitutional system of government - a federal form of government - was set up to have elections for the lower legislative House every two years: to try to help keep The People in charge of their government, in a more hands-on way than with longer terms of governmental service for representatives of The People. Unfortunately, things haven't quite worked out that way. But that is, and was, the purpose of the template. Government 'of, by, and for The People', as Lincoln intoned so meaningfully, and clearly, at Gettysburg; that such government "shall not perish from the Earth".

Too many people today are in too great a rush to break down the American experiment in self-government - from both the Left and the Right. Those voices should not be listened to - or rather, should be listened to, for the awareness of that presence in the human psyche; but not acted on. America still has a work to do.

Help it be about that better business; and we will all benefit from the experience.

* Interestingly, one 'take' on His departure was that it was on 'a raft of snakes'. Not a bad descriptive attempt to convey a sense of a craft with fire plumes coming out of it...Now, they could have figured that their great Teacher, appearing as if out of nowhere, came to them from the sky in the first place, and went away the same way. But with the added description of something like snakes....
Chariots of the Gods, anyone??
And Zecharia Sitchin's learned 'take' on all this???...

** Thanks, Ike, for the early warning on this front. A young American living in Southern California at the time heard you, and opened his eyes a little wider in response, at what all was going on in the world in his time and place.

Saturday, 14 August 2010

Further on Obama's Eligibility

I have just come across the site of one Steve Beckow, a Canadian who is doing good work in apprising his readers of aspects of the changes going on in the world, for the better. (sbeckow.wordpress.com) But he got my 'concern' up when he spoke/speaks "unabashedly" of his admiration for Barack Obama. My response, on the thread of one of those blogs of his:

"I have just come across your site, Steve, and though I find it very interesting, and am ‘simpatico’ with much of it, I have to say that I am glad to read on this thread some concerns about Obama (and that you allowed them). Maybe, being a Canadian, you don’t understand some of the basic concerns here, and have assumed that the concerns about his eligibility and motives are just sour grapes from ‘the political opposition’, or racist, or whatever. But you should know that there are serious and legitimate questions about his eligibility for that office – and therefore a legitimate feeling that the country is being hijacked.
And it doesn’t even have to do with the questions about his original, vault-copy birth certificate, ie, whether he was actually born in Hawaii or not. He was not eligible for that particular office from the beginning, according to the historical definition of a ‘natural born’ citizen (as opposed to just ‘native born’), which involves both ‘blood’ and ‘soil’ – is a person born of citizen parents (plural) on the land (or its equivalent). His father (if indeed Obama Sr. was in fact his father; another worm in this can) was a British subject – the country that was uppermost in the minds of the Founding Fathers when they agreed not to allow a person of potentially mixed national loyalties to hold that particular office (it’s not a requirement of other federal offices). He should never have been allowed to run for the office in the first place – and in fact there is some evidence that the person responsible for signing off on his eligibility to be the Democratic Party’s candidate, one Nancy Pelosi, even KNEW there was some question about this matter (she changed the wording on the legal form sent to Hawaii from that sent to the other states). But some politicians in America play a little fast and loose with ‘the law’, apparently operating with the philosophy that the end justifies the means. Which, as we know from sad experience, is the philosophy of tyrants down through the ages.
And I use this analogy intentionally. It was, after all, Hitler who famously declared, “I am the law”; and look where that attitude got the world. I am saying, in effect, that there is something of the darkness about Obama’s administration; and therefore, how can this be unequivocally of the light?
There’s something wrong with this picture. I don’t care what Mathew, SaLuSa, and David Wilcock say about this man. They have some explaining to do. And I encourage you to go inside, and get your own message from Spirit on this matter; not rely on them for your take on it.
I have my take on it. But this is your blog. And GENERALLY, I encourage you to keep up your good work."

There is an issue here that goes as well to Obama's two nominations for the Supreme Court - and signals the danger that the American Republic faces with people in positions of power who are relative about the law. Not that George W. Bush didn't also play with that same set of matches. But it's getting out of hand, now, as time passes, and with the precedent set by the Republicans (who should have known better), with the Democrats philosophically eager to drive a coach and horses through such an opening; and with the acceptance now of Elena Kagan onto that Court.

Kagan had signaled in her past writings her admiration for an Israeli judge - indeed, describing him as her "hero" - who wrote on the matter of not letting the wording or intention of the law stand in the way of modern interpretations of it. That is, that judges are, apparently, supremely qualified to substitute their own socio-political proclivities for the law. Thus negating the necessity of having anything like a democracy, or a republic; to say, a legislative branch of government. Why bother? Let the judges decide the law.

A notion that the likes of Thomas Jefferson decidedly warned the American people about.

And thus the apparent major reason why the niceties of the law regarding the legal definition of a 'natural born' citizen to be eligible to run for the American presidency was no real impediment to the candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama. What does it matter what the 'original intention' of the matter was? All that matters is the here and now, and who has the power to determine what the meaning of the law will be.

So much for contracts, and the rule of law. So passe, in the day and age of what one of Clinton's flunkies commented on - presciently, as it has turned out - when William 'Wild Bill' Jefferson signed yet another Executive Order: "Stroke of the pen; law of the land. Kinda cool."


For tyrants.