a concise but accurate & comprehensive account of the universe

PART ONE

“The Universe?”

“The Universe.”

With the resounding vigor of an apoplectic horse, the portly priest blew his nose and tossed the soggy ball of tissue paper towards a handwoven rattan wastebasket. He missed, though this escaped his notice and, wiping the tip of his nose with the back of a pudgy hand, he said:

“You will please excuse my cold. Even we physicians of the soul are not exempt from viruses, ha ha!” The laugh came from his throat and his face was still red from the effort. “Ah… what was the question again?”

“I asked what your conception was of the Universe, Father.”

“Yes, yes… but, my son, I have no conception. I am merely God’s instrument. I serve no purpose but that which He has determined for me. If you ask me for a conception of the Universe, I can only tell you that which I have learned from reading God’s Word.”

“And what is that?”

The priest carefully pressed the tips of his fat fingers together: “The Universe is God’s masterpiece in harmony. Everything that exists is purposed by its Creator. It is the sum-total of His infinite wisdom.”

“That’s most lucid, Father.”

“Good. And may I add, my son, since God is perfect, the Universe is perfect, too.”

“Perfect? But, Father, I don’t quite see how.”

“Ah, but you are young, my son, and only a mortal. For the day you can understand God’s mysterious ways you will be more exalted than the angels.”

“Do you mean to say, Father, even flies and bacteria that cause disease have a purpose; that even an asteroid traveling endlessly in the void of deep space has a purpose?”

“You have an eager young mind, my son. That is good. But as I told you, God is omniscient! Nothing He creates is without purpose; only you might not see that purpose in this earthbound plane of existence.”

“Then even death has a purpose, Father?”

“Death, and the process that follows it, is the initial step towards the ultimate understanding of God’s Perfect Plan.”

“Are you saying there can be no purpose in life but only in death?”

“No, my son, no, no… One can always try to lead a good, Godfearing life in order that death may be accepted as an occasion for rejoicing rather than mourning. Life, my son, is part of the terrible test God our Father has set for us, and the only way you can show your love and devotion is to do well in that… at… at… atchoo!” A deafening sneeze drowned his last words.

The priest dried his bloodshot eyes on the sleeve of his satin surplice, sniffing noisily. “I am sorry, my son, um, where was I?”

“Oh, it’s quite all right, Father. I want to thank you for answering my questions. I was very impressed.”

"Of course, my son. I enjoyed chatting with you. By the way, I don’t recall seeing your face in my church. Are you by chance a Presbyterian, perhaps?”

“No, I’m a student.”

“Good, good, very good.” He sighed and stopped a sneeze by inhaling violently. “Well, my son, go with God.”

PART TWO

“The Universe, dear boy, can exist only when all the cosmic forces are in equilibrium.”

“I’m afraid I don’t quite comprehend, sir.”

“Ah, I see.” The wizened metaphysician curled his silver goatee around a thin, graceful finger. “Ah, I see, I see.”

There was an uneasy silence as the student waited for the great scholar to continue. The metaphysician was preoccupied with trying to tie a knot in his goatee.

“Er… what I mean is, sir, well, I don’t exactly see what you mean.”

“Let me put it this way, my dear boy.” A sudden spark appeared in the old scholar’s eyes. “The entire Universe functions on a very fundamental basis of balance. In everything you can detect the same pattern, from the ultra-microscopic to the super-telescopic.”

“Pattern?”

“Yes. Definitely. Existence is possible as a consequence of the equilibrium produced by conflicting forces: Life and Death, Light and Dark, Black and White, Abundance and Scarcity, Good and Evil, Truth and Falsehood, Happiness and Misery, Male and Female, Mountain and Valley, High and Low, Large and Small, Hot and Cold, Yin and Yang… can you perceive the pattern?”

“Well, yes… vaguely.”

“Can’t you see? It is the constant conflict of all those Forces that results in the balance essential to the very existence of the Universe. The ultimate aim of every single existence is to attain that perfect state of equilibrium – inertia! Yes, inertia! The very basis of being is a ceaseless struggle to attain inertia. Continuity, perpetuity, coiling and uncoiling. The completion of the circle. Inertia.”

The metaphysician broke off in a spasm of dry, convulsive coughs. When the attack was over he took a long sip from the glass of sherry on his desk, muttering an excuse that it was good for his cough. Clearing his throat, he continued:

“Can you not grasp the inexorable pattern that governs the Cosmos? Does it not overwhelm you to merely think about it?” He broke off, coughing again.

“Forgive me, dear boy, I am at a loss for words. I cannot help choking with fulfilment each time I see the vast intricacies of the Universe fall so effortlessly into one immense, awesome, sublime pattern…”

“This is certainly most fascinating, sir. But what exactly do you mean by inertia? Isn’t it a continual state of being?”

“You may call it that if you wish. You see, an object that is immobile wishes to remain so; one that is in motion is reluctant to change its course or to stop. Similarly, a person who is alive desires to remain so, but once death puts an end to his life, he has entered a new state of being – or non-being – and will desire to remain dead. And since death is, to all intents and purposes, continual, death is inertia.”

“You said that everything in the Universe strives for inertia. Do you mean that everything desires death?”

The metaphysician uncurled his goatee and allowed it to spring back to its original position. He scratched his chin, and a thin smile crept across his ascetic face. He coughed goodnaturedly.

“That, my dear boy, is a good question… however, I’m afraid I don’t feel at all my usual self and shall have to interrupt this absorbing dialogue, much to my regret, and get some badly needed rest.”

PART THREE

“When we speak of the Universe, we are of course referring to the lifeforms that occupy it, no?”

“Lifeforms?”

“The Universe is nothing without Life. So don’t you agree that in considering the Universe as a Whole…”

“As a hole? I don’t really follow you there, doctor.”

“Jcchk, I mean to say… instead of considering the Universe as an abstract concept, we might be better off discussing LIFE, per se, ja?”

“But how about the billions of lifeless stars and other celestial bodies that comprise the Universe? Don’t they matter?”

“Definitely. You are assuming, no doubt, that there is no life outside of the planet Earth. In the study of biology that could be a most misleading assumption. We must think of life in other forms besides those familiar to us, you see.”

“Yes, I see what you’re getting at.”

“So you understand what I mean when I say we should think of the Universe in terms of the lifeforms that inhabit it, am I correct? Okay, good. Now, everyone knows that survival is the greatest aim of all living things, no? Nothing exists if Life does not exist. Therefore, Life is the most important urge in the Universe. You will further observe that in order to preserve Life by perpetuating their species, all living things undergo reproduction of some sort; and then, to ensure the survival of their offspring, these living things die, so that there will be no lack of space and the cyclical regeneration of nutritive matter can occur. It is a neverending process which has gone on, and will go on and on infinitely. Life… then death… and life again as a result of death. Astounding, no?”

“Astounding, yes!”

Clucking affectionately, the biologist focused his microscope on a glass slide where an amoeba was wobbling along determinedly, trapped within a drop of fluid. “Ah, my little Mabel – she is a veritable miracle of unicellulation, ja?”

The student bent over the microscope to take a look.

“And yet,” the biologist went on, “she is the unique epitome of Life itself! She need never fear age nor senility, for she merely splits in two, then four, then eight. She knows no death… unless, of course, the water bubble she is swimming in evaporates without warning.”

He reached for a glass of drinking salts which had ceased effervescing; a powdery white precipitate lined its bottom. “I have the acid in my system,” he remarked. Then he licked his lips, made a face, and carried on:

“Alas! With multicellulation, complexity, and what we call evolutionary sophistication, death has entered the picture. No complex lifeform can expect to live indefinitely; and, the fact is, its struggle for survival benefits not itself but its offspring. And the same goes for its offspring: they fight to exist for the sake of their offspring, and so on. Sad but true, Life cannot be without Death. This is the Universal Paradox.”

The biologist seemed pleased with this statement, and gulped down the rest of his drinking salts without a grimace.

“I’m sorry, doctor, but I don’t believe I understood that last bit. What you said about life being an offshoot of death. Is that what you mean?”

“Life springs from death. Death springs from life. Ach, but who cares, after all, ja? We limit our consideration to Life only. That is a much brighter prospect, no?”

“Yes, I agree, but I’m still puzzled by what you said about there being no life without death…”

“Or no death without life, put it anyway you like. It is the same, I think.”

“Let us talk about your conception of death, then, doctor.”

“Ach, ach, no, no, no! Remember, biology is the study of living things. If you wish to know about death, consult a mortician, ha ha ha!”

PART FOUR

The Professor’s face was crimson. He wasn’t angry. He had high blood pressure, and everyone kept saying he ought to take a rest. But he was an obstinate old coot. “My work is more important,” he insisted. He was fond of defining and measuring the importance of things.

“Oh, good morning, Professor.”

“Yes, yes, good morning, if you say so. It’s much too humid for pleasantries.”

“Er, Professor, I’ve done the research. Here’s the paper I’ve written.”

“Ahhh. Your thesis. Let’s have a look… Hmmmmm, a little on the short side, I’m afraid." He shook the paper in the student's face and continued: “Short indeed! A long way from what one might classify as verbose, hmmm. Extraordinarily compact, in fact. Hmmmmm, let’s see…”

The student self-consciously lit a cigarette and tried not to notice the strange expression on the Professor’s face as he read the essay. But he couldn’t help observing that the old man’s face had reddened even more. He half expected the Professor to explode with something like: “This puerile jest fails to amuse me!”

However, the Professor was quite restrained, knowing how important it was to keep calm. His white, brittle hair stood out in stark contrast with his flushed face.

“Aha! Aha! What’s this? Quote: There is no Universe without Life. Life is a glass of wine and death the dregs that await at the bottom. The Universe is the wine, the dregs, the glass, the drinker, and the Thirsty Soul that oscillates between ecstasy and despondency, replenishing her vessel in perpetuity. Unquote…”

The Professor’s wry smile was almost humorous. “Which reminds me, “ he said, looking up from the essay and reaching for a bottle of port from the tray beside him. “May I offer you a tipple?”

The student politely declined, clearing his throat somewhat neurasthenically. He had a maniacal urge to leap out the window and get away from the Professor and his stuffy office.

“Life is a glass of wine, eh?” said the Professor, lifting the glass of port to his lips with a raised pinkie. He let out a weary sigh. “Rather interesting, I must admit. Even poetic, but I’m afraid rather inconclusive and vague, to say the least. Hmmmmm…”

The Professor turned the glass round in his heavily veined hand, absently studying the ruby liquid. “You have omitted a very important thing no essay should ever be without. You have not specified the essence of your concepts relative to your allegorical argument, and this seriously weakens your thesis.”

The Professor sighed again, as though in pain, and said, more softly now: “Body… and substance… that is what’s lacking. Rather inconclusive, I’m afraid.”

Then he gulped down the port, which ostensibly cheered him, for he looked up at the student and smiled his usual sanguine smile.


Text & Illustrations © Antares, 1967 & 2015

Joseph F. Martino, Jr in 1968

Joseph F. Martino, Jr (who studied Literature at Cornell under the tutelage of Vladimir Nabokov) taught creative writing at West Essex High School, New Jersey, in the 1960s. 

As a 17-year-old exchange student I happened to enrol in Joe's class in the fall of 1967 and this was my first attempt at a short story. It now comes across as a naïve and pretentious foray into the nebulous domains of epistemology and ontology, but since Joe very generously gave me an 'A' for it, I'll be brazen and publish it here for archival interest - and as a tribute to a truly dedicated mentor I shall never forget.

[First posted 23 August 2015, reposted 4 July 2017 & 18 November 2019]

BRINGING DOWN THE 9/11 HOUSE OF LIES (reprise)

[In this blogpost I was going to summarize my years of research on the 9/11 atrocities, rounding up my personal campaign to expose the cynical masterminds behind the monumental sandiwara (which in Malay means a political Punch'n'Judy show); but my friend Dave Blackman just passed me a link to a superb article by Steve Bhaerman (aka Swami Beyondananda) which covers all the points I was going to make and much more - and does so scintillatingly! I can do no more than help the good Swami spread this cogent message by reproducing it here in full, complete with all the handy hyperlinks...]

BRINGING DOWN THE 9/11 HOUSE OF LIES ~ The Final 'Leg' Of The Journey
By Steve Bhaerman
16 April 2007

It's a bit of a mixed feeling to realize that millions and millions of people who didn't get this distinction two, four or six years ago now understand that the "political' issues we now face aren't about right and left, they're about right and wrong. On one hand, what took you so long? On the other, thank God and welcome aboard. Although the media has downplayed it - it doesn't fit with the general stupidization program of creating a lot of heat but very little light - more and more actual conservatives and even members of the religious right are coming to see the Bush-Cheney regime as a rogue administration and a thin cover for criminal enterprise. Such right wing stalwarts as former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr and Richard Viguerie (one of the architects of the far right wing) have formed an organization to protect our civil liberties from our own government. Chuck Baldwin, an associate of Jerry Falwell, has become an open advocate of impeachment and writes a very articulate column.

These folks are far bolder than the Democrats in this regard, and they will play a key role when impeachment happens - and it will. Now some of you reading this who have a deeper spiritual understanding of love, forgiveness and the ways in which we do indeed create our own reality might be wondering "Gee, this whole impeachment thing seems pretty 'anti'. Shouldn't we be focusing on what we want instead of what we don't want?" Indeed, the point can be made that the failure of the Democrats in 2004 - aside from the minor issue of voting fraud in Ohio and Florida - had to do with John Kerry's approach of "Vote for me, I'm not as bad as George Bush," and failure to articulate any compelling positive vision. However, the real issue goes much deeper.

Ending The American Hostage Crisis

It has nothing to do with loving or hating George Bush, whose policies have educated and awakened more Americans than all of the "progressive" leaders combined. It does have to do with what we need to recognize as the American Hostage Crisis. The American people - and particularly our soldiers in Iraq - are being held hostage by a ruthless criminal cadre (this is not hyperbolic invective; the definition of "criminal" is "one who commits crimes"). The people up until now have been blackmailed into supporting a war of choice with the cynical cry, "Support our troops." As if our troops sent themselves over there and now we have to rescue them.

The people of America are now at a crossroads that will determine whether the world continues hurtling down the highway to hell, or whether we change course in the direction of our true human potential, what Swami calls "humanifest destiny." I say the world because if the United States honors the intentions of our founders and accepts the evolutionary role of genuine self-governance, the entire world will cheer - and breathe a sigh of relief. Under the guise of true moral authority, we will be able to isolate the sociopathogens in the world and deal with them as criminals instead of what we're doing now - killing the people the criminal elements are holding hostage, and creating new converts for the criminals.

There is something positive to be built, but it cannot be built on a foundation of lies. That is why the so-called "surge" or any other policy to "stay the course" in Iraq will not succeed. The entire structure -- why we're there, what's been happening since we got there, what our future intentions are -- all lies. Those troops we are "supporting" are being sent in as surrogate targets for George Bush and the American empire, an empire that isn't even ours but belongs to a slew of multinational corporations that could care less whether America lives or dies. That's what American soldiers are discovering, sadly, that their most ardent "supporters" at home have been unwilling to face. Until now.

America's next step - and only step - that can take us forward is to bring the Bush-Cheney regime to justice. This isn't about vengeance, it isn't about punishment. It's about truth. That element that has been so lacking in our political environment that it has caused a spiritual, psychological and political heartsickness in the heartland. This basic lack of integrity - that even those who overtly believe the lies still feel deep down in their guts - is why we have the Don Imuses and the Ann Coulters. Those are the people who keep us occupied with weapons of mass-distraction, who help us aim our rage at the wrong targets.

Their brand of free speech is what Caroline Casey calls a "toxic mimic" of the real thing. The freedom of speech and freedom of press the American revolutionaries risked life and fortune for wasn't so our "commonest" of commentators could sling invectives like "faggots" and "nappy-headed ho's" but to empower citizens by letting them know what's going on. In this regard, the record of our so-called "free press" is dismal, if not traitorous. Try initiating a real conversation about the unanswered questions and unquestioned answers regarding 9/11. There you will find a stone wall of silence, or loud screaming to drown out the truth. While up until now, very few have wanted to "go there," more and more people are awakening to the tragic truth that "there" has already come "here."


Cutting the Legs Out From Under Their Story

Just over two years ago, after what many of us realized was a stolen election (with Barbara Boxer the lone Senator to stand and raise the issue), I wrote a piece about the wall of lies. In the midst of the frustration and despair that many of us felt, I predicted the wall of lies would crumble. It wasn't a difficult prediction to make. In these times when the veil is being lifted everywhere, the "irony curtain" is no exception.

I wrote that the illegitimate "legitimacy" of the Bush-Cheney regime rested on a three-legged stool. The first leg was the belief they were fairly elected in 2000 and 2004. The second was the Iraq War and the reluctance of people to "change horse's asses in the middle of an extreme." The third was 9/11, and the official account of what happened that day.

At this writing, one leg is completely gone and another is severely splintered. More than two thirds of Americans now see the Iraq War as an unmitigated disaster, and a large portion of our armed forces are demoralized and angry. It is now being termed "an unpopular war," a phrase that begs the question, "And when exactly was the last 'popular war'?" Wait a minute ... I think I have it. The last popular war was the Battle of the Groups at the Brooklyn Fox Theater ... Dion and the Belmonts vs. the Drifters. I think it was 1960.

As for the legitimacy of the "elections", that issue broke through the soundless barrier a year ago when RFK, Jr. published his article in Rolling Stone. Timing is everything, and the timing of that article coincided with a general "upwising." Having seen mounting evidence of lying, cheating and stealing on the part of Rove and company, a critical mass of Americans (or at least Democrats) were able to accept the inconvenient likelihood that the Republicans cheated to win the election too. This awakened awareness and the voter mobilization that followed helped the Democrats win control of both Houses of Congress, despite any shenanigans. As lame as you may think the Democrats are, this was the first important step of restoring the balance of power and the rule of law. I contend it could not have happened without the widespread awareness that the Republicans were getting set to steal elections again.

So here we are. The "leg" called the Iraq War is gone. The "leg" called "these people were elected legitimately" is badly compromised. And yet, like the mad monk Rasputin, Bush and Cheney are still standing behind their stone wall. Subpoenas notwithstanding, they've entrenched and have no intention of giving in one iota. Because as soon as they do, the avalanche of revelations will cause their downfall. How long can this holding pattern go on? It can definitely go on indefinitely.




Unless we as a nation allow the 9/11 story to break through the soundless barrier. When this leg gets chopped off, Bush and Cheney will be gone.

More importantly, the truth will be revealed so that we can collectively "face the music" and set a new course. Never has any nation been in this position. Nazi Germany was forced to face their heart of darkness only by military defeat. Soviet Russia collapsed under the weight of its own unworkability. But now, for the "land of the free" to finally earn that name and claim our true inheritance, we must face what is perhaps the most profound betrayal in our 200 year history.

A Straussian Waltz Down a Slippery Slope

Although we would like to believe that the principles that guided America's founding fathers are still in operation, the sad truth is that the principles of truth, justice and transparency have been overridden by a new operating system called "neo-conservatism" which is neither "neo" nor conservative. The "neocon" is actually a very old con called "the end justifies the means." And that brings us to Leo Strauss, the man considered the "founding father" of neoconservatism.

Leo Strauss, who was born in Germany and who taught at the University of Chicago from 1949-69, brought Machiavelli into the machine age. He unabashedly believed in manipulation and deception, all of which he deemed necessary to rule the unruly masses. According to Shadia Drury, author of Leo Strauss and the American Right, Strauss believed that "those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and there is only one natural right -- the right of the superior to rule over the inferior."

Strauss was a strong believer in religion - as a way of imposing "moral law" on the populace, who would otherwise be out of control. He would have agreed with Marx that religion was the "opiate of the masses," only he had no qualms about being a drug dealer. The rulers, of course, didn't have to live by the rules of religion. Says Ronald Bailey, science correspondent for Reason magazine: "Neoconservatives are pro-religion even though they themselves may not be believers."

In the tradition of Thomas Hobbes, Strauss believed humans are inherently evil and need strong external control - and an external enemy. As he once wrote, "Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed. Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people."

According to Drury, Strauss believed that "if no external threat exists, one has to be manufactured." Interestingly enough, Strauss's neocon disciples William Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle (along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld) helped found a think tank called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) in the 1990s. A PNAC document, Rebuilding America's Defenses has been a guiding force for the Bush-Cheney White House. According to PNAC, the only way to assure America's safety in the 21st century is by being the only superpower on the block, what they referred to as Pax Americana. Of course, since the Iraq War many around the world are calling it a "Pox Americana."

Perhaps the most telling quote in the Rebuilding America's Defenses document refers to needing a "catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor" to mobilize the masses for this undertaking (pun intended). The neocons insist this was an innocuous quote taken out of context. However, when seen in the context of Leo Strauss's core beliefs, it's easy to make the connection and see the 9/11 attacks as the "catalyzing event" that launched the so-called "war on terror." In fact, author and theologian David Ray Griffin called his sober account debunking the official 9/11 story The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11. Whether or not the attacks were an "inside job," they were certainly used in classic Straussian fashion to create national unity and control through perpetual war.

Griffin, a well-respected mainstream theologian who has written and edited 30 books, contends that the official 9/11 story has been given the "halo of religious mythology." Like the infallibility of the Pope in the Church or the primacy of matter in scientific materialism, questioning the official 9/11 story is taboo. Consequently, most people fail to see the red flags that are literally in plain sight:

The official story was in place within 48 hours of the event, before any investigation was undertaken.

The official "remedy," the so-called Patriot Act (a 342-page document that many legislators signed without reading), appeared as if by magic and was ratified in an atmosphere of panic - right on the heels of Democratic legislators receiving packets of deadly anthrax, a crime that has never been "solved."

No satisfactory explanation has ever been given as to how and why the world's most sophisticated air defense system "stood down" in the most deadly attacks ever on American soil. And no one was held accountable.

Transcripts of testimony released at the insistence of 9/11 families - from firefighters, police and eyewitnesses - mention over and over again a "series of explosions" and the towers coming down in their tracks, "just like a planned demolition."

When there finally was an investigation, only testimony supporting the official version of the story was allowed. Imagine, if you will, a court case where there was no conflicting evidence ... case closed.

Time to Face Our Own Not-Seeism

The fact that these blatant contradictions have never been officially addressed stands as stark testimony as to how well weapons of mass-distraction have been used to keep the official story in place. Yes, the mass media has been complicit in failing to present an alternative view, and in marginalizing anyone suggesting otherwise as a "conspiracy nut." But it goes far deeper than that. The persistent "invisible belief" in America's intrinsic goodness makes it incomprehensible that the government in the "land of the free" would perpetrate something that horrendous against its own citizens. Like the Germans who heard about the death camps and were told it was "American propaganda," most Americans won't question the official story because the horrendous implications are too awful to contemplate. But the "Not See" era is about to end.

I'm going to apologize in advance for using a distasteful metaphor that many of you will find repugnant. But since this is the image that keeps coming to mind, I'm going to have to risk it. Think back when you were in college. You were at a party and had a little too much to drink. You're feeling wobbly and a bit nauseous. You are on the teeter-totter of a decision - to throw up or not to throw up. Throwing up. Ugh. You don't want to do it, it's disgusting. But then you realize, you have to do it. It is something the body is telling you to do, and you also know that when you've expelled the mess you will feel so much better.

That is where our body politic is today. We've literally had it up to here. But we've been reluctant to expel the toxins for all to see. Last year at this time, I had contracted to write a story on David Ray Griffin called Unquestioned Answers: A Non-Conspiracy Theorist Takes Aim at the Official 9/11 Story for a local mainstream publication. In the six weeks from the time the editor reluctantly okayed the story until the time I handed it in, she had undergone a change of mind. She told me, "I have come to believe the American government did indeed have something to do with the attacks, and the very thought of it makes me sick to my stomach."

Having to swallow what we've been asked to swallow over the past several years, purging might be the very best cure. So now the question is, what to do and how to do it?

There seem to be two approaches to the 9/11 issue. One involves jumping into the details of the mystery itself and trying to figure out specifically what happened. The problem here is what has already occurred - squabbling about the details, one group of believers in one conspiracy theory accusing another of spreading disinformation.

The other approach is the one I took with the David Ray Griffin article I published last year. Focus on stepping outside the official story, removing its "halo" and asking if indeed, it is the likeliest story. Here's why. No amount of "evidence" will convince anybody unless they are open to the possibility of the premise. The breakthrough will occur when a critical mass of people begin to put it together for themselves.

What opened me to a premise I was - like David Ray Griffin - initially closed to was reading about the "false flag" operations done by NATO during the Cold War and those like Operation Northwoods that was proposed but not initiated here (you can read brief accounts about those in the above-linked article on David Ray Griffin). When I combined this information with the realization I'd already come to - that Bush, Cheney, Rove & Company were capable of anything they could get away with - I had bridged the gap.

Time to Cut Off the Tale That's Been Wagging the Dog

What we face right now is perhaps the greatest opportunity for freedom yet experienced in America. It is an invitation to become "political adults" and step outside the puppet show called electoral politics and take a look at the inner workings behind the "irony curtain." It is here - and only here - that transformational change can take place. It's as big a step as our Founding Fathers made "eleven score and eleven" years ago by declaring themselves sovereign and government a servant.

We do this by educating ourselves and taking heart that so many people are awakening a new field of understanding now. There are many sites but here is a good one to start with because it offers a surprising list of well-known people in all areas of endeavor who question the official tale that has been wagging the dog for the past five years. Another excellent educational site is Mark Robinowitz's Oil Empire site because he offers some very sharp distinctions for sniffing out the truth when there are many different stories.

Finally, we must address this undressing of the cloak of secrecy with healing intent. In other words, we must be able not just to picture but to "feel" what it will feel like to no longer have to fear our own government. We must allow ourselves to see those inside the military, government and intelligence services who have not been "ethically-cleansed" coming forward with the missing pieces of the true story. We must begin now to create a "container" for truth, reconciliation and healing.

Every indication is that there are individuals at all levels of government and influence who are waiting only for a critical mass of Americans to be able to "hold" the true story. Once there is a "listening" for the truth, the truth will out. We encourage the truth through our own courage, and by speaking about politics outside the box as matter-of-factly as the media speaks about politics inside the box.

The simple secret to bringing down the wall of lies is this. When enough people see through the wall, it will cease to exist.

May "Good" bless us all.


Swami Beyondananda © 2007

[First posted 17 April 2007, reposted 11 September 2014]

May 13, September 11... and Altantuya! (reprise)

I finally got hold of Dr Kua Kia Soong's latest book, May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969. More to the point, I read it all the way through with interest, and it was an exercise that set off quite an elongated train of thought. When the violence erupted 38 years ago I was living in the quiet southern town of Batu Pahat where nothing untoward happened, although I remember people were tense and uneasy, and the streets were unusually deserted. My severely pregnant wife was almost due then and I would take her for a spin around town every evening - and not once did I sense we were in any danger whatsoever. Our first daughter, Moonlake, was delivered at home on May 28, in the same house where I had been born and - believe it or not - by the same midwife who had delivered me 19 years earlier!

In other words, I had a lot else on my mind at the time. Local politics and vague reports of mayhem in the faraway capital and a few other towns didn't seem as significant as becoming a father for the first time. The news reports were muted, to say the least, and rumors flew around - but I don't recall paying any attention to them. The general feeling, however, was that some folks are bad losers. Politics seemed to me just like a poker game played by a bunch of testosteronal types and, just like it always happens in the Hollywood westerns, some unshaven cowhand will start a gunfight when down on his luck at the saloon.

I didn't believe for a moment in May 1969 that the "race riots" had flared up spontaneously - and declassified documents unearthed by Dr Kua from the Public Records Office in London among other sources clearly testify to that. Well, thanks, Kua! What you've done carries profound significance. It's on more or less the same scale of importance as having some reputable scholar dig up long-buried evidence that, after 44 years, finally resolves the JFK murder mystery and names everyone involved in the plot. Bye-bye, Lone Shooter Lee Harvey Oswald theory. Boo, Warren Commission! What sort of punishment would befit folks who would go to such lengths to snuff three members of the Kennedy clan? Remember what happened to John F. Kennedy, Jr - just as he was on the verge of announcing his presidential candidacy?

By the same token, I'm closely monitoring the unstoppable build up of grassroots support for the 9/11 Truth Movement. Ironically, the people who really ought to know better have mostly turned out to be aggressive deniers of what's plain as day to anyone with unclouded eyes and unclogged nostrils - why do they find it so goddam hard to acknowledge that all governments are perfectly capable of doing unthinkable things just to stay in power? Of course, the blame always has to be pinned on some useful bogeyman like the Communists or the Terrorists. Haven't they read Machiavelli? Actually, I've never even SEEN that oft-quoted handbook on how to win elections and influence history - but we all know what "Machiavellian" means, right? Machiavellian... Orwellian... Cartesian... Antaresian.... nah, doesn't quite do the trick, that last one!

Just consider this: why would the Roman Church, say, be so rattled by the popularity of a Dan Brown potboiler that it would get into damage control mode and begin to debunk instead of debate the distinct possibility that Yeshua (better known as Jesus the Christ) and Myriam of Mygdala (better known as Mary Magdalene) were a royal couple descended from a very ancient and revered bloodline? The answer is obvious: it would shatter the very foundations of a 2,000-year-old belief system and totally undermine the moral authority of the Pope - and, by extension, the entire Vatican. And when the faithful realize that the Church they have supported all these generations has actually been actively engaged in destroying, or at least suppressing, inconvenient truths - and that it is, in fact, the dreaded "Anti-Christ" incarnate... well, there goes another House of Cards, so what?

For a start, history would have to reconsider herstory. Because the central tenet of Patriarchy is that the female is subjugate to the male. Women would finally have a say in matters economic and geopolitical - and that would spell the end of a cruel and ruinous era of constant warfare ruled by "naughty boys with dangerous toys." In short, humanity would enjoy the very real option of envisioning Heaven on Earth - instead of in the Afterlife!

May 13 and 9/11 have one common feature: they were cunningly and ruthlessly crafted public traumas designed to concuss, confuse, and confound the masses - and, while the voters were in temporary shock, they would be robbed of any control over their own future. That's right, folks: the name of the REAL game is "Hand over all your power!"


Dr Kua's straight-talking book confirms for many of us that May 13 was, in actuality, a coup d'état wherein a core group of ambitious Malay bureaucrats and politicos had conspired to seize control of the country using the pretext of a national emergency - and thereafter, in the absence of parliamentary opposition, bulldoze constitutional changes that would legislatively install an ethnocentric doctrine of "Malay dominance" in perpetuity - even if nobody has ever successfully determined what defines a Malay. Couldn't be the songkok and the kain pelekat, surely, or a penchant for sambal belacan? The fear that such racial violence could erupt again anytime the non-Malays begin to assert themselves beyond certain boundaries has been effectively used to ensure that the incumbent government keeps getting re-elected with its two-thirds majority (which, for the first time, it had lost in the 1969 general election, hence the resort to the atavistic politics of blood-in-the-streets).

Imagine the consequences of an unforeseen shift in what the mainstream media considers "newsworthy" that incontrovertibly reveals the hand of Dick Cheney behind the 9/11 atrocities. And following swiftly upon this, the public unmasking of how secret societies and Old Boys' networks have, since time immemorial, been deceiving and dividing humanity along artificially pumped-up ethnic and religious fault lines to maintain their power base on this planet, which they view as their private property, bequeathed them by a barbaric tribal deity. Not likely to happen in our lifetime, huh?

And what about Altantuya Shaariibuu, the 28-year-old Mongolian beauty who got a bit out of her depth in political intrigue and ended up in smithereens? The thing that truly mystifies me: how come we've only ever seen ONE official photo of her? She was said to have occasionally modeled. A few glam images found on the net were quickly dismissed as belonging to some popular Korean songstress.


Anyway, all Altantuya really wanted was what she saw as her rightful share of the booty. Her business partners probably didn't expect her to be so pushy; they thought she'd accept what was offered and leave well enough alone. They thought wrong. Altantuya was no angel. She felt she deserved top money for the extraordinary services she rendered. She was certainly a poor judge of character. Big boys involved in multibillion dollar arms deals don't like being pussywhipped by their mistresses.

Scene of the gruesome murder

It just got nastier and messier than anybody expected. It might have been a perfect murder if nobody had heard the loud bang in the middle of the night. I'm told some Orang Asli encamped in the vicinity were the first on the scene and they lodged a report... oh oh... tough shit! Somebody had already instructed some immigration officer to delete the computer record of Altantuya's arrival in the country. Somebody had authorized assigning ministerial bodyguards to do the dirty work. Somebody had also signed for the release of some C4 explosives.

But... could it somehow have been a form of Mongolian suicide? After all, the Japanese are fond of eviscerating themselves... maybe Mongolian women are adroit at blowing themselves up in dense jungle? Nice try, kiddo.

Stuffing money in the pockets is routine political behavior and most folks would avert their gaze and shrug it off as par for the course. However, shedding blood incurs heavy karmic consequences that inevitably bring down the high and mighty.

This is indeed the Time of Reckoning for the entire human race. Skeletons tumbling out of closets wherever you look. The CIA's role in the assassinations of JFK, RFK (and, I expect, JFK, Jr too) has recently come to light. That dirty business will sooner or later implicate George H.W. Bush (who joined the CIA during JFK's presidency and subsequently became top dog in the Agency under Gerald Ford). Long-term plans to seize the Iraqi and Iranian oilfields were being laid even then by George H.W. Bush - but their implementation would have to await the ascent to ultimate power of the Idiot Bastard Son.

Conspiracy theories and dynasties are fascinating, aren't they? Lee Kuan Yew and his son Hsien Loong. Abdul Razak (the "evil genius" behind May 13) and his son Najib. George H.W. and George W. Bush. Fascinating indeed. But what are we going to do when we discover they aren't just "theories"?

[First posted 1 July 2007]