Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: A Bouquet Of Roses
OLD American Century / White Rose Society message boards > Political Discussion forums > Welcome New Members!
elspet
The Red Cross Knight of Gold?

Maybe you know something about that, Master Ben?

Yesterday, I found a transcript of a speech from 12/4/2001, by Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma, where he's quoted as saying about America's aggression in Iraq,

QUOTE
Make no mistake about it. This war is first and foremost a spiritual war. It is not a political war. It has never been a political war. It is not about politics. It is a spiritual war. It has its roots in spiritual conflict. It is a war to be fought to destroy the very fabric of our society and the very things for which we stand.


The title of the speech is An Absolute Victory and, in it, Sen. Inhofe justifies America's support for the State of Isreal.

I personally think such support is Treason against the United States.

On the other hand, I agree with Sen. Inhofe, that we are at spiritual war.

This is not new language on the American landscape. Upon receiving the surrender of the Japanese at the close of World War II, Gen. Douglas MacArthur had similar thoughts:

QUOTE
Men since the beginning of time have sought peace. Various methods through the ages have attempted to devise an international process to prevent or settle disputes between nations. From the very start workable methods were found insofar as individual citizens were concerned, but the mechanics of an instrumentality of larger international scope have never been successful. Military alliance, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war. We have had our last chance. If we do not now devise some greater and more equitable system Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advance in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh.

-General Douglas MacArthur-
Aboard the Battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay
September 2, 1945


I don't know how else to fight religious fundamentalism [or fundamentalism, in general] but within the context of the religion a fundamentalist claims to represent.

So, these days, doing that has become my main interest:

Calico Web

I am inspired by the courage of those behind the POAC site and I look forward to getting acquainted and making new friends.

Many blessings,

elspet
sky of mind
Elspet,

Judging by this first post, I look forward to your input!

Welcome!
elspet
I'm trying out the Fast Reply feature.

Sky of Mind,

I visited your blog and tried to comment on the quote by Ken Wilbur. His words were inspiring. From where did you take that quote?

eslpet
sky of mind
QUOTE (elspet @ Sunday, 13 February 2005, 6:23 pm)
I'm trying out the Fast Reply feature.

Sky of Mind,

I visited your blog and tried to comment on the quote by Ken Wilbur.  His words were inspiring.  From where did you take that quote?

eslpet

Shambhala Sun Online

From the Offical Ken Wilber site, a list of Ken Wilber books
ken Wilber Books

several Wilber Links
Who is Ken Wilber


Ken Wilber / Journal / July 1999
Liberalism and Religion - We Should Talk

Liberalism's objections to mythic forms do not apply to formless awareness. Thus liberalism and authentic spirituality can walk hand in hand.There are two major dialogues in the modern world that I believe must take place, one between science and religion, and then one between religion and liberalism.
The way it is now, the modern world really is divided into two major and warring camps, science and liberalism on the one hand, and religion and conservatism on the other. And the key to getting these two camps together is first, to get religion past science, and then second, to get religion past liberalism, because both science and liberalism are deeply anti-spiritual. And it must occur in that order, because liberalism won’t even listen to spirituality unless it has first passed the scientific test. (Showing how that might happen was a major theme of my book, Sense and Soul.)
In one sense, of course, science and liberalism are right to be anti-spiritual, because most of what has historically served as spirituality is now prerational, magic or mythic, implicitly ethnocentric, fundamentalist dogma. Liberalism traditionally came into existence to fight the tyranny of prerational myth and that is one of its enduring and noble strengths (the freedom, liberty, and equality of individuals in the face of the often hostile or coercive collective). And this is why liberalism was always allied with science against fundamentalist, mythic, prerational religion (and the conservative politics that hung on to that religion).
But neither science nor liberalism is aware that in addition to prerational myth, there is transrational awareness. There are not two camps here: liberalism versus mythic religion. There are three: mythic religion, rational liberalism, and transrational spirituality.
The main strength of liberalism is its emphasis on individual human rights. The major weakness is its rabid fear of Spirit. Modern liberalism came into being, during the Enlightenment, largely as a counterforce to mythic religion, which was fine. But liberalism committed a classic pre/trans fallacy: it thought that all spirituality was nothing but prerational myth, and thus it tossed any and all transrational spirituality as well, which was absolutely catastrophic. (As Ronald Reagan would say, it tossed the baby with the dishes.) Liberalism attempted to kill God and replace transpersonal Spirit with egoic humanism, and as much as I am a liberal in many of my social values, that is its sorry downside, this horror of all things Divine. Liberalism can be rightfully distrustful of prerational myth, and yet still open itself to transrational awareness. Its objections to mythic forms do not apply to formless awareness, and thus liberalism and authentic spirituality can walk hand in hand into a greater tomorrow. If this can be demonstrated to them using terms they find acceptable, then we would have, I believe for the first time, the possibility of a postliberal spirituality, which combines the strengths of conservatism and liberalism but moves beyond both in a transrational, transpersonal integration. The trick is to take the best of both, individual rights plus a spiritual orientation, and to do so by finding liberal humanistic values plugged into a transrational, not prerational, Spirit. This spirituality is transliberal, evolutionary and progressive, not preliberal, reactionary and regressive. It is also political, in the very broadest sense, in that its single major motivation, compassion, is pressed into social action. However, a postconservative, postliberal spirituality is not pressed into service as public policy, transrational spirituality preserves the rational separation of church and state, as well as the liberal demand that the state will neither protect nor promote a favorite version of the good life. Those who would transform the world by having all of us embrace their new paradigm, or particular God or Goddess, or their version of Gaia, or their favorite mythology, these are all, by definition, reactionary and regressive in the worst of ways: preliberal, not transliberal, and thus their particular versions of the witch hunt are never far removed from their global agenda. A truly transliberal spirituality exists instead as a cultural encouragement, a background context that neither prevents nor coerces, but rather allows genuine spirituality to arise.
But one thing is absolutely certain: all the talk of a new spirituality in America is largely a waste of time unless those two central dialogues are engaged and answered. Unless spirituality can pass through the gate of science, then of liberalism, it will never be a significant force in the modern world, but will remain merely as the organizing power for the prerational levels of development around the world.

Material in this column appears in One Taste: The Journals of Ken Wilber, from Shambhala Publications Inc., Boston. © Ken Wilber, 1998.
elspet
Now that deserves a reference back to the original quote:

Just Do It

"And therefore, all of those for whom authentic transformation has deeply unseated their souls must, I believe, wrestle with the profound moral obligation to shout from the heart-perhaps quietly and gently, with tears of reluctance; perhaps with fierce fire and angry wisdom; perhaps with slow and careful analysis; perhaps by unshakable public example-but authenticity always and absolutely carries a demand and duty: you must speak out, to the best of your ability, and shake the spiritual tree, and shine your headlights into the eyes of the complacent. You must let that radical realization rumble through your veins and rattle those around you.
Alas, if you fail to do so, you are betraying your own authenticity.You are hiding your true estate. You don't want to upset others because you don't want to upset your self. You are acting in bad faith, the taste of a bad infinity.

"Because, you see, the alarming fact is that any realization of depth carries a terrible burden: Those who are allowed to see are simultaneously saddled with the obligation to communicate that vision in no uncertain terms. That is the bargain. You were allowed to see the truth under the agreement that you would communicate it to others (that is the ultimate meaning of the bodhisattva vow). And therefore, if you have seen, you simply must speak out. Speak out with compassion, or speak out with angry wisdom, or speak out with skillful means, but speak out you must.

"This is truly a terrible burden, a horrible burden, because in anycase there is no room for timidity. The fact that you might be wrong is simply no excuse: you might be right in your communication, and you might be wrong, but that doesn't matter. What does matter, as Kierkegaard so rudely reminded us, is that only by investing and speaking your vision with passion, can the truth, one way or another, finally penetrate the reluctance of the world. If you are right, or if you are wrong, it is only your passion that will force either to be discovered. It is your duty to promote that discovery-either way-and therefore it is your duty to speak your truth with whatever passion and courage you can find in your heart. You must shout, in whatever way you can."

-Ken Wilbur-

This reminds a lot of the work of Charles Sanders Peirce. He's best known as the Father of Pragmatism, though he distanced himself by calling his system Pragmaticism.

Given all these tools left behind us, why do we still cling to outdated, outmoded beliefs?

Ken Wilbur gives us a great big hint, "You don't want to upset others because you don't want to upset your self. You are acting in bad faith, the taste of a bad infinity."

I think it's fascinating that the Blessing of Christ Elizabeth Tudor gives depicts the numbers of Infinity, i.e., 101.

Here's a fitting quote:

Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of truth and falsehood,
For the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah,
Off'ring each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever
Twixt that darkness and that light.

Though the cause of evil prosper,
Yet 'tis truth alone is strong;
Though her portion be the scaffold,
And upon the throne be wrong:
Yet that scaffold sways the future,
And behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow
Keeping watch above his own.

-James Russell Lowell-

Thanks, sky,

elspet
elspet
What happened to everyone's Avatar images?

I can only see mine.

elspet
fons_castaliae
QUOTE
The Red Cross Knight of Gold?


Well I certainly know something about the Red Cross Knight. Redcrosse is the protagonist in the first book of the Faerie Queene by Edmund Spenser. I'm not sure how gold works in the story. It's been some time since I've read it.

QUOTE
The title of the speech is An Absolute Victory and, in it, Sen. Inhofe justifies America's support for the State of Isreal.


An absolute victory?
We know this person isn't living in the reality based community at all.
Israel's interests and American interests are not the same.
Britain's interests and American interests are not the same either.
Such support has become treasonous because it has caused us to act in ways that are inconsistent with our founding documents and culture.
Conservatives say they want to avoid entangling alliances. They've said it for more than 200 years.
Liberals say the infrastructure of our country must be attended to. They've been saying that for more than 200 years too.
We are not a sacred society or a secret society. We are secular.
We don't brook secrets well here, and we should be particularly aggressive in our reactions to those kept by people who are "elected," elected, and appointed to their positions.

A spiritual war? Not in the sense that Imhofe would have us believe. Our spiritual war is not with the rest of the world but with ourselves. It's only a matter of time before the words become more than words. This country is divided and the divisions will become only more bitter over time. Spiritual war today, civil war tomorrow. Mark my words it will come to pass.
Panda
QUOTE (elspet @ Sunday, 13 February 2005, 11:03 am)
The Red Cross Knight of Gold?

Maybe you know something about that, Master Ben?

Yesterday, I found a transcript of a speech from 12/4/2001, by Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma, where he's quoted as saying about America's aggression in Iraq,



The title of the speech is An Absolute Victory and, in it, Sen. Inhofe justifies America's support for the State of Isreal.

I personally think such support is Treason against the United States.

On the other hand, I agree with Sen. Inhofe, that we are at spiritual war.

This is not new language on the American landscape.  Upon receiving the surrender of the Japanese at the close of World War II, Gen. Douglas MacArthur had similar thoughts:

QUOTE
Men since the beginning of time have sought peace. Various methods through the ages have attempted to devise an international process to prevent or settle disputes between nations. From the very start workable methods were found insofar as individual citizens were concerned, but the mechanics of an instrumentality of larger international scope have never been successful. Military alliance, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war. We have had our last chance. If we do not now devise some greater and more equitable system Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advance in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh.

-General Douglas MacArthur-
Aboard the Battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay
September 2, 1945


I don't know how else to fight religious fundamentalism [or fundamentalism, in general] but within the context of the religion a fundamentalist claims to represent.

So, these days, doing that has become my main interest:

Calico Web

I am inspired by the courage of those behind the POAC site and I look forward to getting acquainted and making new friends.

Many blessings,

elspet

user posted image elspet!

Hahaha.....I assumed the Calico link was going to be about Ashcroft's fear of Calico cats. wink.gif

Be sure and check out some of the information on Moon. http://oldamericancentury.org/bb/index.php?showtopic=803

(We were hacked and lost a lot of good information but I'll gradually repost all of it. When time permits. Moon is THE dangerous religious nutjob we need to watch the most.)



Interesting links you provided.
IMO Inhofe is an asshole.
But "treason" works for me too. twisted.gif


You might find this of interest,

http://www.awakenedwoman.com/duarte_demon.htm
elspet
QUOTE (fons_castaliae @ Monday, 14 February 2005, 8:49 am)
The Red Cross Knight of Gold?  Well I certainly know something about the Red Cross Knight.  Redcrosse is the protagonist in the first book of the Faerie Queene by Edmund Spenser.  I'm not sure how gold works in the story.  It's been some time since I've read it.


This is a funny thing. The Gold has meaning relative to the Red Crosse Knight from the First Booke of the Faerie Qveene, i.e., relative in the sense of Holinesse; but, also, in a contemporary way, in that there is an existing secret society whose members believe, of course, that they are the true inheritors of Nature's secrets. I used to link to them but just discovered that they've password protected their homepage.

Should we be surprised?

They call their order The Red Cross Knights of Gold.

I once appealed to them for help. But, I was brushed off as a subordinate. Kindergarten Fools!

I guess they have yet to understand Luke, xi:

"33": No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a secret place, neither under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that they which come in may see the light.

"34": The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.

"35": Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness.

"36": If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when the bright shining of a candle doth give thee light.

-Luke, xi.-
King James Version
The Holy Spirit of The Holy Bible

Nor, apparently, have they comprehended the Apostle Paul's Letter to the Thessalonians, where he writes:

"14": For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:
"15": Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:
"16": Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.

-St. Paul's Letter to the Thessalonians-
1 Thessalonians: ii.
The Holy Bible
King James Version

Simply put, Enlightenment is about visibly seeing the inner light of our mind's eye. I believe the Illuminated Manuscripts were indicative of this awareness. The knowledge is universal [meaning catholic] to all religions.

And, discovering that bright inner light we recall as gold is a part of the process.

QUOTE
An absolute victory? 
We know this person isn't living in the reality based community at all.
Israel's interests and American interests are not the same.
Britain's interests and American interests are not the same either.
Such support has become treasonous because it has caused us to act in ways that are inconsistent with our founding documents and culture.
Conservatives say they want to avoid entangling alliances.  They've said it for more than 200 years.
Liberals say the infrastructure of our country must be attended to.  They've been saying that for more than 200 years too.
We are not a sacred society or a secret society.  We are secular.
We don't brook secrets well here, and we should be particularly aggressive in our reactions to those kept by people who are "elected," elected, and appointed to their positions.


This is why I respect George Soros' emphasis on Open Society. No one man or one group holds a monopoly on the gifts of Nature.

QUOTE
A spiritual war?  Not in the sense that Imhofe would have us believe.  Our spiritual war is not with the rest of the world but with ourselves.  It's only a matter of time before the words become more than words.  This country is divided and the divisions will become only more bitter over time.  Spiritual war today, civil war tomorrow.  Mark my words it will come to pass.


I agree. The spiritual war is against the daemons within ourselves, as individuals, i.e., the microcosm, and against our very own neighbors here in the U.S., i.e., the macrocosm. In this way, the war in Iraq [extending the macrocosm] can and should be seen as a failure on the part of the American people.

When I first got on the Internet in 1999, I began to realize what a powerful tool the computer is for expanding awareness. For a while, I really hoped and advocated for its use, in terms of promoting dialogue, to prevent future wars. Then there was 9/11 and all the mess that's followed. I despaired for many months and even succumbed to hatred of George Bush and everyone who follows him. I'd never hated a president before.

Still, I do hope we can rise above a civil war. But, I wouldn't be surprised if your prediction holds true.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply,

elspet

P.S. If you follow the links, I like using symbols in this way. To me, it adds a breath of idealistic realism to the fundamentalist, literal, authoritarian interpretation of the Christian Faith and religion in general. Carl Jung comes to mind, as well as, Ken Wilbur, the Elizabethans, and others.
fons_castaliae
I understand your one-time hatred for GW Bush. At one time I hated him too, but now, I feel more pity for him than hatred. I know that one day, either after he is dead or after he is reborn as whatever creature, he will remember what he did in this world, at this time, and shudder endlessly. Yes, his memories of life as scion of a powerful family, governor of Texas and usurper of the office of president of the United States will sicken him horribly. He will know the depth of the evil he embraced at that time, and he will take responsibility for all his crimes. He does not know his error now.
Why?
Last summer, I read a psychiatrist's or psychologist's new-agey evaluation of the mental and moral state of GW Bush. He concluded that Bush is a man unable to face himself, a man unaware of all his thoughts and feelings and whose perceptions of himself, his history and his aspirations are horribly distorted by fear. He projects all of this fear onto the outside world. Instead of facing his own demons, he chooses to externalize them into the nations he would wish to fight, and into his own domestic political enemies. To control the world's resources, to say he owns the land, is his substitute for taking responsibility for himself. He knows not who he is, so he decides to live in a small part of his mind, a small part of his soul to keep from learning. His identity and advancement are all external. He has created none of his own success.
He is a man ill-equipped to live in a democratic society, let alone lead one.
The reason I pity rather than hate Bush is that I was like this for the first 25 years of my life.
I had a certain perceptual handicap I was denying. I lied much to other people, was angry most of the time, and generally very unpleasant to be around.
I didn't want to see myself, hear myself or even touch myself.
And even though I've faced my problem and finally started to rehabilitate, I still feel awful at times. Totally undignified, beyond love and all respect. This feeling of worthlessness won't leave me, and I truly shudder to think of my past.
The thought of confronting the people who knew me before is terrifying. I invested them with so much wisdom you see. All the wisdom I didn't have. It's common for the handicapped to do that.
So if Mr. Bush is reading-- I'm the wave of your future. Enjoy the discomfort, it will be with us for a long time.
sky of mind
QUOTE (fons_castaliae @ Wednesday, 16 February 2005, 12:08 am)
I understand your one-time hatred for GW Bush.  At one time I hated him too, but now, I feel more pity for him than hatred.  I know that one day, either after he is dead or after he is reborn as whatever creature,  he will remember what he did in this world, at this time, and shudder endlessly.  Yes, his memories of life as scion of a powerful family, governor of Texas and usurper of the office of president of the United States will sicken him horribly.  He will know the depth of the evil he embraced at that time, and he will take responsibility for all his crimes.  He does not know his error now.
Why?
Last summer, I read a psychiatrist's or psychologist's new-agey evaluation of the mental and moral state of GW Bush.  He concluded that Bush is a man unable to face himself, a man unaware of all his thoughts and feelings and whose perceptions of himself, his history and his aspirations are horribly distorted by fear.  He projects all of this fear onto the outside world.  Instead of facing his own demons, he chooses to externalize them into the nations he would wish to fight, and into his own domestic political enemies.  To control the world's resources, to say he owns the land, is his substitute for taking responsibility for himself.  He knows not who he is, so he decides to live in a small part of his mind, a small part of his soul to keep from learning.  His identity and advancement are all external.  He has created none of his own success.
He is a man ill-equipped to live in a democratic society, let alone lead one.
The reason I pity rather than hate Bush is that I was like this for the first 25 years of my life. 
I had a certain perceptual handicap I was denying.  I lied much to other people, was angry most of the time, and generally very unpleasant to be around.
I didn't want to see myself, hear myself or even touch myself. 
And even though I've faced my problem and finally started to rehabilitate, I still feel awful at times.  Totally undignified, beyond love and all respect.  This feeling of worthlessness won't leave me, and I truly shudder to think of my past.
The thought of confronting the people who knew me before is terrifying.  I invested them with so much wisdom you see.  All the wisdom I didn't have.  It's common for the handicapped to do that.
So if Mr. Bush is reading-- I'm the wave of your future.  Enjoy the discomfort, it will be with us for a long time.

I don't hate anybody alive today.
Though there are a very few people I do thoroughly despise.
Bush? I don't like him, I despise his policy. The Man is just a puppet. A completely aware puppet that is completely culpable and guilty of Impeachable crimes, but just a puppet.

That means
If and when Bushco gets pulled down,
PNAC won't be touched! angel.gif
It will survive and lie waiting for another opportunity to seize power!
elspet
QUOTE (Panda @ Tuesday, 15 February 2005, 1:10 am)

Hahaha.....I assumed the Calico link was going to be about Ashcroft's fear of Calico cats.


Ya...ah...haaa.... You noticed. When I first read that Ashcroft was superstitious of calico cats, I about fell off my chair. I figured I must be onto something, so I nailed the poor misled soul:

Sons of Light (Clue #1 - Click there; and, there again. Notice the 'Alt Tags'. Then follow the Hand.)

QUOTE
Be sure and check out some of the information on Moon. http://oldamericancentury.org/bb/index.php?showtopic=803


I read the whole thing and will return to follow the internal links. Meanwhile, the spell has been cast for the Reverand Moon to be transformed into a Toad.

QUOTE
(We were hacked and lost a lot of good information but I'll gradually repost all of it. When time permits. Moon is THE dangerous religious nutjob we need to watch the most.)


I'm so sorry to hear this. In my own experience, this sort of disruption breaks the flow of continuity, or momentum, causing us to get disconnected somewhat from our memories. I suspect those at the center of the disruptive ripple have some concept of these effects.

QUOTE
You might find this of interest,

http://www.awakenedwoman.com/duarte_demon.htm


Oh, I did! She's sensational! I've grown skeptical of the intentions and approaches of most psychologists/psychiatrists [people who call themselves healers, in general]. But, this lady has her stuff together. I'm going to link back to that article from a few places at my site.

Panda, thank you for the kind welcome. I've been having so much fun since I discovered this place. It feels so good to laugh again.

Peace and Love,

elspet wink.gif
elspet
fons_castaliae, I didn't mean to send that PM. I'm sorry.

QUOTE (fons_castaliae @ Tuesday, 15 February 2005, 11:08 pm)
I understand your one-time hatred for GW Bush.  At one time I hated him too, but now, I feel more pity for him than hatred.  I know that one day, either after he is dead or after he is reborn as whatever creature,  he will remember what he did in this world, at this time, and shudder endlessly.  Yes, his memories of life as scion of a powerful family, governor of Texas and usurper of the office of president of the United States will sicken him horribly.  He will know the depth of the evil he embraced at that time, and he will take responsibility for all his crimes.  He does not know his error now.


I'm with you on the concept of Eternal Life [110 = Eternity]. It does disturb me, however, that these lucifer katz may not have any concept of what that means and, consequently, they believe they can, through digital physics, grant themselves eternal life. It's devastating, really. Science without Faith is deadly. Faith without Science is stupid. For some reason, I can't get the anchor to this direct link to work. But, if you click here The End of History; then, pull down to that same title; and, follow the links, therein, you'll have an idea of what I mean.

QUOTE
Why? Last summer, I read a psychiatrist's or psychologist's new-agey evaluation of the mental and moral state of GW Bush.  He concluded that Bush is a man unable to face himself, a man unaware of all his thoughts and feelings and whose perceptions of himself, his history and his aspirations are horribly distorted by fear.  He projects all of this fear onto the outside world.  Instead of facing his own demons, he chooses to externalize them into the nations he would wish to fight, and into his own domestic political enemies.  To control the world's resources, to say he owns the land, is his substitute for taking responsibility for himself.  He knows not who he is, so he decides to live in a small part of his mind, a small part of his soul to keep from learning.  His identity and advancement are all external.  He has created none of his own success. He is a man ill-equipped to live in a democratic society, let alone lead one.


I believe those at the center of the cell generating this wave of consciousness sincerely desire a tyranny. All the pieces of the puzzle I've been able to gather fit right into that sub-reality. They are deluding themselves because there is immeasureable power in the Truth; whereas, their power is limited to their delusional fantasies.

QUOTE
The reason I pity rather than hate Bush is that I was like this for the first 25 years of my life.  I had a certain perceptual handicap I was denying.  I lied much to other people, was angry most of the time, and generally very unpleasant to be around.  I didn't want to see myself, hear myself or even touch myself.  And even though I've faced my problem and finally started to rehabilitate, I still feel awful at times.  Totally undignified, beyond love and all respect.  This feeling of worthlessness won't leave me, and I truly shudder to think of my past.
The thought of confronting the people who knew me before is terrifying.  I invested them with so much wisdom you see.  All the wisdom I didn't have.  It's common for the handicapped to do that.


Me, too. I could say the same of myself. Like you, I remain penitent. We could say what we've experienced and are experiencing still is our own transformation. We're developing a conscience. The process is alchemical. Not everyone can do it. Bush may be one example of someone who cannot do it. On the other hand, he may very well be aware [along with those who surround him] of what he is doing and, if that's the case, the man represents pure, unadulterated, EVIL ...the frustrated magician to borrow a thought from Panda's link.

Imagine if Hitler had the military might available to George Bush. When it came down to his final hour, would he have committed suicide or would he have destroyed the world rather than face himself?

This is where we're at. I wish the Centers for Disease Control would have locked Georgie Porgie up when he started the war in Iraq. Anyone who's read Alice Miller's study of Hitler and the Nazi Regime will have a clue of what I mean.

QUOTE
So if Mr. Bush is reading-- I'm the wave of your future.  Enjoy the discomfort, it will be with us for a long time.


If only it were behind us now....

I don't hate him anymore. Hating just hurt myself. (Sky's latest message expresses that understanding.) I knew it would but I let myself feel it... to the ends of the earth... Alpha and Omega. I have a better comprehension of the meaning of Apocaplypse now. Time to begin again... to RE-CREATE... as the Angels would say... the E always follows the R. *smiling*

Get onboard or miss the bus... and pay the price.

Yipee-kye-aye, Mother-_ _ _ _ E R 's!

curtsy,

elspet
Dr. Left
Well girls I do hate him. I hate him for what he has done to my brothers and sisters in the military, I hate him for lying to the world to start a war that is killing young and old on both sides. I hate what he is allowing to happen to our envinorment, I hate him for being a deserter in the Air National Guard and then having the balls to send our kids over to fight and die...and mostly I hate him for what he has done to this country nationally and internationally. I and others before me were willing to fight and die for this country now he has taken those sacrfices and flushed them down his goldplated tolet, no hate fits exactly how I feel about this worthless piece of crap...

Doc
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.