Slavery and the Eight Veils ~ by Don Harkins

Over the last several years I have evolved and discarded several theories in an attempt to explain why it is that most people cannot see truth - even when it smacks them in the face. Those of us who can see "the conspiracy" have participated in countless conversations amongst ourselves that address the frustration of most peoples' inability to comprehend the extremely well-documented arguments which we use to describe the process of our collective enslavement and exploitation. The most common explanation to be arrived at is that most people just "don't want to see" what is really going on.

Extremely evil men and women who make up the world's power-elite have cleverly cultivated a virtual pasture so grass green that few people seldom, if ever, bother to look up from where they are grazing long enough to notice the brightly colored tags stapled to their ears.

The same people who cannot see their enslavement for the pasture grass have a tendency to view as insane "conspiracy theorists" those of us who can see the past the farm and into the parlor of his feudal lordship's castle.

Finally, I understand why.

It's not that those who don't see that their freedom is vanishing under the leadership of the power-elite "don't want to see it" - they simply can't see what is happening to them because of the unpierced veils that block their view.

All human endeavors are a filtration process. Sports is one of the best examples. We play specific sports until we get kicked off the playground. The pro athletes we pay big bucks to watch just never got kicked off the playground. Where millions of kids play little league each spring, they are filtered out until there are about 50 guys who go to the World Series in October.

Behind the first veil: There are over six billion people on the planet. Most of them live and die without having seriously contemplated anything other than what it takes to keep their lives together. Ninety percent of all humanity will live and die without having pierced the first veil.

The first veil: Ten percent of us will pierce the first veil and find the world of politics. We will vote, be active and have an opinion. Our opinions are shaped by the physical world around us; we have a tendency to accept that government officials, network media personalities and other "experts" are voices of authority. Ninety percent of the people in this group will live and die without having pierced the second veil.


The second veil: Ten percent of us will pierce the second veil to explore the world of history, the relationship between man and government and the meaning of self-government through constitutional and common law. Ninety percent of the people in this group will live and die without having pierced the third veil.

The third veil: Ten percent of us will pierce the third veil to find that the resources of the world, including people, are controlled by extremely wealthy and powerful families whose incorporated old world assets have, with modern extortion strategies, become the foundation upon which the world's economy is currently indebted. Ninety percent of the people in this group will live and die without having pierced the fourth veil.

The fourth veil: Ten percent of us will pierce the fourth veil to discover the Illuminati, Freemasonry and the other secret societies. These societies use symbols and perform ceremonies that perpetuate the generational transfers of arcane knowledge that is used to keep the ordinary people in political, economic and spiritual bondage to the oldest bloodlines on earth. Ninety percent of the people in this group will live and die without having pierced the fifth veil.

The fifth veil: Ten percent of us will pierce the fifth veil to learn that the secret societies are so far advanced technologically that time travel and interstellar communications have no boundaries and controlling the actions of people is what their members do as offhandedly as we tell our children when they must go to bed. Ninety percent of the people in this group will live and die without having pierced the sixth veil.

The sixth veil: Ten percent of us will pierce the sixth veil where the dragons and lizards and aliens we thought were the fictional monsters of childhood literature are real and are the controlling forces behind the secret societies. Ninety percent of the people in this group will live and die without piercing the seventh veil.

The seventh veil: I do not know what is behind the seventh veil. I think it is where your soul is evolved to the point you can exist on earth and be the man Gandhi was, or the woman Peace Pilgrim was - people so enlightened they brighten the world around them no matter what.

The eighth veil? Piercing the eighth veil probably reveals God and the pure energy that is the life force in all living things - which are, I think, one and the same.

If my math is accurate there are only about 60,000 people on the planet who have pierced the sixth veil. The irony here is too incredible: Those who are stuck behind veils one through five have little choice but to view the people who have pierced the veils beyond them as insane. With each veil pierced, exponentially shrinking numbers of increasingly enlightened people are deemed insane by exponentially increasing masses of decreasingly enlightened people.

Adding to the irony, the harder a "sixth or better veiler" tries to explain what he is able to see to those who can't, the more insane he appears to them.

Our enemy, the state

Behind the first two veils we find the great majority of people on the planet. They are tools of the state: Second veilers are the gullible voters whose ignorance justify the actions of politicians who send first veilers off to die in foreign lands as cannon fodder -- their combined stations in life are to believe that the self-serving machinations of the power-elite are matters of national security worth dying for.

Third, fourth, fifth and sixth veilers are of increasing liability to the state because of their decreasing ability to be used as tools to consolidate power and wealth of the many into the hands of the power-elite. It is common for these people to sacrifice more of their relationships with friends and family, their professional careers and personal freedom with each veil they pierce.

Albert Jay Nock (1870-1945), author of Our Enemy, the State (1935), explained what happens to those who find the seventh and eighth veils: "What was the best that the state could find to do with an actual Socrates and an actual Jesus when it had them? Merely to poison one and crucify the other, for no reason but that they were too intolerably embarrassing to be allowed to live any longer."

Conclusions

And so now we know that it's not that our countrymen are so committed to their lives that, "they don't want to see," the mechanisms of their enslavement and exploitation. They simply "can't see" it as surely as I cannot see what's on the other side of a closed curtain.

The purpose of this essay is threefold:

1. To help the handful of people in the latter veils to understand why the masses have little choice but to interpret their clarity as insanity;

2. To help people behind the first two veils understand that living, breathing and thinking are just the beginning and;

3. Show people that the greatest adventure of our life is behind the next veil because that is just one less veil between ourselves and God.

© The Idaho Observer

Impeach the Impeared!

CNN Report: Dennis Kucinich files House Resolution 333
on 24 April 2007 to impeach Dick Cheney


Impeachment Press Conference in Washington, D.C., 25 April 2007


Part One - Impeachment Rally: San Diego, 28 April 2007


Part Two - Impeachment Rally: San Diego, 28 April 2007


World Can't Wait: San Diego, 5 October 2006


World Can't Wait: Chicago, 5 October 2006


Guantanamo Witness Against Torture: Washington, D.C., 18 April 2007

Peace Rally: Seattle, 18 March 2007


Loose Change (2nd Edition) reaches new heights on Virgin Airlines!

John Kerry: WTC 7 Was Deliberately Demolished

Massachusetts Senator's conclusion directly contradicts 9/11 official story, multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit
By Paul Joseph Watson & Aaron Dykes
Monday, April 23, 2007

“... I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things, that they did it in a controlled fashion...”

At a recent speaking engagement in Austin Texas, Senator John Kerry responded to a question about WTC Building 7 by concluding that according to his information, the building was brought down as a result of a controlled demolition, directly contradicting the official line that the structure fell as a result of fire and debris damage.

WTC Building 7 was a 47-story building in the WTC complex that collapsed at 5:20pm on September 11. The building had been structurally reinforced and was not hit by a plane, yet it collapsed in a uniform implosion within its own footprint in a matter of seconds after sustaining relatively light debris and fire damage following the collapse of the twin towers.

News networks like BBC and CNN were reporting that the building had collapsed before it fell, indicating that the media were being handed a script of events that had yet to even unfold.

Ground zero EMT's, firefighters and police were all told hours in advance to clear a collapse zone for Building 7 as it was going to be "brought down."

Questioned on WTC 7 by members of Austin 9/11 Truth Now at a Book People event in Austin Texas, Kerry responded, "I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things, that they did it in a controlled fashion."

Kerry is basically saying that the building was intentionally demolished to prevent a random collapse from damaging nearby buildings, but that premise has never been explicitly admitted, with officials clinging to the notion that the collapse was expected but was not aided by means of explosive charges, because to admit to a controlled demolition would be to expose foreknowledge of 9/11 itself.

Whether Kerry is basing his response on inside knowledge or hearsay is largely irrelevant, the fact that a sitting United States Senator is openly contradicting the official 9/11 story as well as a multi-billion dollar insurance lawsuit strikes at the root of the controversy surrounding Building 7.

In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a payout of nearly $500 million, based on the contention that it was an accidental event caused by the fall of the twin towers.

EMT's, firefighters and first responders all knew the building was pulled, anyone with an ounce of common sense can watch the videos and understand that buildings don't commit suicide - and yet Silverstein, the government, and their propaganda arm Popular Mechanics, are wedded to the myth that the structure fell as a result of fire damage. They are beholden to this explanation because any revision on their behalf would undermine the entire sequence of events on 9/11 and call into question other aspects of the official story.

Their credibility rests on sweeping the issue of WTC 7 under the rug, which makes it our responsibility to keep beating the Building 7 drum.

Official reports from both NIST and FEMA state that they cannot explain why Building 7 fell, but maintain that it was related to a terrorist attack on the complex on 9/11. However, the FEMA report concludes that, "The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. The best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue."

NIST is currently undertaking a study of WTC 7 to determine if bombs or incendiary devices were used to bring down the building.

Controlled demolitions expert Danny Jowenko was shown footage and building schematics of Building 7 by Dutch television and immediately concluded that its collapse was a result of deliberately placed explosives.

Preparing to demolish even a moderate sized building takes weeks of preparation. A building as large as WTC 7, a 47-story skyscraper, must have taken at least as long. Therefore, the idea that the building was demolished in response to fires spread from the twin towers is not a satisfactory response, as the building could not have been set up for unexpected demolition in only a few hours, much less while fires burned inside. All personnel were withdrawn from the area very early, meaning the explosives which can clearly be seen in the videos were placed days or weeks before 9/11.

Kerry was also asked about the research of Dr. Steven Jones, who has tested both samples of steel from the twin towers as well as recovered dust, which have both tested positive for the chemical signature of Thermate, which is used to cut support beams in localized reactions during a controlled demolition.

Kerry stated that he was not aware of the research and is "open to hearing anything based in fact and evidence."

Since John Kerry is a fellow Skull and Bones member with President Bush, allied to the fact that he took a dive despite massive evidence of vote fraud during the 2004 election, we won't hold our breath on the possibility of Kerry being a torch bearer for a new investigation into 9/11, but his conclusion that WTC 7 was deliberately demolished adds substantial weight to a 9/11 enigma that officials are terrified will reach critical mass.


When confronted with hard facts and scientific evidence linking key government officials to the attacks of 9/11, ostensibly intelligent, levelheaded people angrily and defiantly reject said information without a moment's deliberation. Sincerely compassionate and peace-loving individuals support the criminal invasion of Iraq and close their eyes to the U.S. slaughter of 600,000 Iraqi civilians, choosing instead to believe in the myth of American supremacy, at the heart of which lies the notion that foreigners alone are capable of such atrocities.

As the Truth Movement gains momentum and amasses credibility, the fear profiteers have begun heralding yet another "threat" to National Security - inquiring minds. This is both good news and bad news. We are no longer ignorable. Fearing exposure, the Czars of Propaganda know that "Truthers" must be branded and discredited if government corruption and corporate fraud is to flourish unabated. This said, prepare for an intensified Smear-and-Fear Campaign. Any group or individual who vocally questions the official story of 9/11 or who exercises the right to demand Government accountability will be labeled "Anti-American and Anti-Patriotic." - Donna J. Thorne

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth…. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not..? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know it - now." - Patrick Henry, 1775.

Why Doubt 9/11?

Why Doubt 9/11?
by James H. Fetzer

As the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, I would observe that our members, building on prior research by earlier students of 9/11, have established more than a dozen disproofs of the official government account, the truth of any one of which is enough to show that the government's account - in one or another of its guises - cannot possibly be correct.

Overview of New 9/11 Research

1. The impact of the planes cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand them (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes that hit were very similar to those they were designed to withstand, and they continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects.

2. The melting point of steel at 2,800*F is about 1,000*F higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, so the fires cannot have caused the steel to melt, which means that melting steel did not bring the buildings down.

3. UL certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000*F for three or four hours before it would even significantly weaken, where these fires burned too low and too briefly at an average temperature of around 500*F - about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North - to have even caused the steel to weaken, much less melt.

4. If the steel had melted or weakened, the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt, and total demolition that was observed.

5. William Rodriguez, the senior custodian in the North Tower and the last man to leave the building, has reported massive explosions in the subbasements that effected extensive destruction, including the demolition of a 50-ton hydraulic press and ripping the skin off a fellow worker, a report corroborated by the testimony of around three dozen other custodians.

6. Willie reported that the explosion occurred prior to the airplane's impact, a claim that has now been substantiated in a new study by Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross, "Seismic Proof: 9/11 was an Inside Job", which demonstrates that these explosions actually took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds prior to the airplanes impacts.

7. Heavy steel construction buildings like the Twin Towers, built with more than 100,000 tons of steel, are not even capable of "pancake collapse", which normally only occurs with concrete structures of "lift slab" construction and could not occur in "redundant" welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column were removed at the same time, as Charles Pegelow has pointed out to me.

8. The destruction of the Twin Towers in approximately 10 seconds apiece is even faster than free fall with only air resistance, which would have taken at least 12 seconds, which, as Judy Wood has emphasized, is an astounding result that would have been impossible without extremely powerful explosives.

9. The towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where the floors do not move, a phenomenon that Judy Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the concrete, the official account cannot possibly explain.

10. Pools of molten metal were found at the subbasement levels three, four, and five weeks later, an effect that could not have been produced by the plane-impact/jet-fuel-fire/pancake collapse scenario, which, of course, implies that it was not produced by such a cause.


Replay a few times and notice:

* The roofs dips inward
* Explosions are visible running up on the right side
* Explosions are visible in the front
* Simultaneous symmetrical collapse (all joints fail at the same time)
* Falls at free-fall speed
* Falls into its own footprint without damaging surrounding buildings

Learn more about World Trade Center 7!
_____________________________________________

11. WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM/ET after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to "pull it", displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions, including a complete, abrupt, and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, and so forth, an event so embarrassing to the official account that it is not even mentioned in THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT.

12. The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!


13. The Pentagon's own videotape does not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when it was shown on "The Factor"; but at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 71-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and visible; it was not, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

14. The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory - flying at high speed barely above ground level - physically impossible; and if it had come in at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the government has no way out, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

15. If Flight 93 had come down as advertised, then there would have been a debris field of about a city block in size, but in fact the debris is distributed over an area of about eight square miles, which would be explainable if the plane had been shot down in the air but not if it had crashed as required by the government's official scenario.

There are more, especially about the alleged hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly the planes; their names were not on any passenger manifest; they were not subject to any autopsy; several have turned up alive and well; the cell phone calls appear to have been impossible; on and on. The evidence may be found at 911Scholars.org.

James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
Founder and Co-Chair
Scholars for 9/11 Truth
email: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/
http://www.911Scholars.org (911Scholars.org)



I just received this email from archeocryptographer Michael Lawrence Morton which is self-explanatory:

This link details Dr.Judy Wood's filing of a 'Request For Correction' (on 16 March 2007) to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) regarding the 09/11/01 World Trade Center destruction.

Dr. Wood (pictured at left) has made a very compelling case that DEW (Directed Energy Weapons) were used to destroy Towers 1 and 2 of The WTC on 09/11/01. I highly recommend that you check this out.

Dr. Wood has a lot of very compelling photographic evidence as part of her analysis, by the way. Are you aware that: the rubble at the subbasements of Towers 1 and 2 was only 20 percent of what its mass should have been? That roughly 80 percent of the Towers 1 and 2 were completely pulverized into an extremely fine dust? That over a thousand automobiles in the vicinity were bizarrely 'toasted'? That Towers 1 and 2 were destroyed from the top down? AND MUCH, MUCH MORE ... Yes, there is good evidence that 'Beam Technology' was used on Towers 1 and 2.

-- MLM

[NOTE: In case you're wondering why I've been posting an entire series on 911 in recent days, it isn't because I have nothing else to blog about. I have a gut feeling that a massive breakthrough in 911 revelations is at hand - and when enough humans awaken to the grotesque horror of the evil scams being pulled on us, we shall snap out of our "cultural trance" - in the process reclaiming our individual sovereignty and breaking free of mental slavery - and the Orwellian nightmare of mass mind control will crumble, just like the Twin Towers of Mordor, into toxic dust, and be blown away by the winds of wholesome change.]

9/11: Who Gonna Take The RAP?

BIN LADEN DIDN'T BLOW UP THE PROJECTS
[Written & performed by Immortal Technique with Eminem, Jadakiss & Mos Def ]

All they talk about is terrorism on television
They tell you to listen, but they don't really tell you their mission
They funded Al-Qaeda, and now they blame the Muslim religion
Even though Bin Laden was a CIA tactician
They gave him billions of dollars, and they funded his purpose
Fahrenheit 9/11, that's just scratchin' the surface
Bin Laden didn't blow up the projects ...
Bush knocked down the towers ...

Here's the same song - different mix, different vid - in case you liked it enough to hear it one more time...




EMINEM


IMMORTAL TECHNIQUE

MOS DEF

JADAKISS

9/11 Truth Reaches The Tipping Point
Exponential growth secured by Rosie O'Donnell's public stance

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, April 6, 2007

9/11 truth has reached its tipping point, with the exponential growth of the movement secured following Rosie O'Donnell's brave public stance as well as numerous other high profile individuals, ensuring our numbers and influence expands on a weekly basis.

In early February we asked who the next 9/11 superhero would be. Rosie O'Donnell has answered that question and now is the time for more public figures to step forward and overwhelm the cultural zeitgeist to push 9/11 truth over the edge and make it go truly supernova... [Read the rest!]

And now... an iTech product exclusively for women!

More inspired madness from MadTV! What next from Apple?
The iBra and iPanty? The iCondom? The iLube and iDildo?
If you want to do some really serious business just use your trusty iPot! ;-)

Steve Jobs presents the very latest in iTechnology...

This video clip produced by MadTV has been a big hit on YouTube for weeks now. I'll just blog it here so I can look at it whenever I want. Good one, eh? [Embedding has been disabled, so you have to watch it by clicking on the YouTube link.]

And... oh, here's W's official response to the iRack vid ;-)...

Ian Xel Lungold explains the Mayan Calendar

Ian Xel Lungold isn't exactly a household name. But he found his way into my inbox a couple of years ago and I remember exchanging a couple of emails with him. All I knew was that he had teamed up with Swedish microbiologist, Carl Johan Calleman, and that the two of them were on a mission to demonstrate that José Argüelles (Valum Votan) had erred in his calculations for the Mayan Dreamspell Calendar.

My interest in the Mayan Calendar had initially been aroused by Argüelles's mindbending Mayan Factor: Path Beyond Technology (Bear & Co., 1986), and I couldn't really wrap my brain around the mathematics of it all, so I monitored Calleman and Lungold's efforts from a distance, without getting caught up in the controversy.

Carl & Ian in Cancun

On 10 October 2005 I received an email from Carl Johan Calleman informing me that Ian Lungold was very ill with a tumour in his throat. Five weeks later, on 16 November, Ian left his body. He was only 56.

It was only recently that I found the links to Ian Xel Lungold's 3-hour lecture on Consciousness and the Mayan Calendar (thanks to Jean Hudon). After viewing them at one sitting, I felt compelled to pass this crucial data on to anyone who really wants to understand the transformations we are undergoing as we quantum jump from planetary to galactic citizenship. According to the Mayan Calendar, we have less than 5 years to sort ourselves out.

Here are both parts of Ian's well-crafted and engaging talk. Each part is about 1½ hours long - but I assure you it's time well spent...

Part One

Click on the "CC" button to hide subtitles

Part Two


In Lak'ech
(Mayan for "I am another aspect of you!")
7 Transformer


A 2-HOUR VERSION OF IAN XEL LUNGOLD'S TALK CAN BE VIEWED HERE

911 Truth Movement: The Third Stage

"The attack on 911 was planned, organized and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government." - Colonel Guy S. Razer USAF (ret.) / Pilots for 911 truth

"They promised you a 100-year war. We promise you they won't succeed." - 911 Truth Movement

[Videolink forwarded by Sunbear]

The Origin of Easter Eggs

Click to view juicy video.

Resurgam, folks!

"9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB" - Jim Marrs

[That was more or less my own take on it when I first learned about two planes crashing into the WTC on September 11, 2001. "Hmmm, the New World Order mob is getting real desperate, to pull a dangerous stunt like this!" was what I thought - and since that day I've been waiting for the American public to wake up from the hideous and hellish nightmare their Great Neo-Nazi Leaders have herded them willy-nilly into. Incredibly, almost half the U.S. population seems to have swallowed the CNN/Fox News spin lock, stock, and barrel. They actually supported Dick Cheney's plan to destroy the fictitious bogeyman "Al Qaeda" by bombing Afghanistan (and later Iraq) to smithereens. Perhaps the Moment of Truth is finally approaching....]



If you live in America, or have American friends, please click here, and alert them about this, thanks.

Google's a Giggle

Legend has it that the Google name itself was a misspelling of Googol (a nonsense word meaning 10 to the power of 100, coined in 1920 by 9-year-old Milton Sirotta, when asked by his mathematician uncle, Edward Kasner, to think of a way of expressing an unimaginably long series of zeroes after an integer).

Larry Page and Sergey Brin, founders of Google, Inc

Two computer science students at Stanford University, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, became obsessed with the problem of trawling through rapidly increasing masses of documents to retrieve specific data. Their prototype search engine would be named Googol - but, as luck would have it, neither knew the "correct" spelling of the word, hence Google, Inc - which, in less than a decade, has enhanced the net worth of Larry Page and Sergey Brin, both only 34, to US16.6 billion, ranking them the 26th richest humans on Earth.

It's amazing how Google has insinuated itself into our virtual lives in just nine years. When a brandname becomes a commonly used verb, you know it's here to stay. Gone are the days when you had to go to your nearest library to look something up. These days you simply Google it.

I remember my very first email account on Hotmail, circa 1998. Then Yahoo! came along and lots of folks switched. In those pre-spam, pre-pps days, nobody even thought about mailbox capacity. Along with broadband came obese files and all it took was one inconsiderate friend to send you a 3MB file - and that was enough to jam your inbox. Then Google introduced Gmail with the incredible offer of one free gigabyte of storage space... and before long we had all these Google AdSense wordlinks popping up on every webpage. One of the most exciting ideas presented by Google is, of course, Google Earth - a program that allows you to zoom in on your own house from an earth-orbiting altitude (remember that poignant scene in Men In Black when Agent K decides to look in on his long-lost wife via live satellite feed on his computer?)

What's Larry Googling for?

What I personally like about Google is that they have managed to retain the quirky sense of humor that sets the best and brightest computer wizards apart from run-of-the-mill nerds. If you look to the right of Google's famous search bar and click on "Preferences" you'll be offered a vast choice of interface languages - including Esperanto, Pig Latin, Serbo-Croatian, Quecha, Scots Gaelic, Sundanese, Telugu, Tatar, Uighur, Xhosa, and Zulu. Just for the sheer hell of it, you may also opt for Bork, bork, bork!, Elmer Fudd, Hacker, and Klingon.

When George W. Bush, "the worst president in history," bombed Baghdad in March 2003, his tech-savvy political detractors decided to "Google bomb" the White House, crosslinking Congressman Dick Gephardt's infamous description of Dubya as "a miserable failure" with the official White House website bio of President George W. Bush. 

Emails circulated the Internet urging people to key in "miserable failure" on Google - and then click on "I'm Feeling Lucky." It was absolutely brilliant and everybody was mystified by this remarkable show of quasi-omniscience by the #1 search engine. Pressure from the White House forced Google to fix the problem; and now when you key in "miserable failure" and hit "I'm Feeling Lucky" you get directed to a BBC news story, dated 7 December 2003, with the headline: 'Miserable failure' links to Bush, and the subheading: George W Bush has been Google bombed.

Indeed, internet guerrillas had a field day Google bombing Bush. Run a search for "weapons of mass destruction" and you'd hit on a spoof webpage announcing: "These Weapons of Mass Destruction cannot be displayed." You then had a choice of exiting the site gracefully - or typing the name of any country you wished to attack and hitting the REGIME CHANGE button. The site included a wry admonition: "If you are George Bush and typed the country's name in the address bar, make sure that it is spelled correctly (I-R-A-Q)."

 

Larry Page seems very pleased with his search results 😎

Hey, Ma, I've Joined The Secret Service...

From Anarcho-Communist to Born-Again Entrepreneur

I've done a lot of crazy things in my life. A few days ago I did another. I acted on a spur of the moment decision and became a member of the Secret Service. That's right, friends, I'm now a Secret Agent. And if you're among the millions who have been shown The Secret - the sensational smash-hit DVD that's now #1 at Amazon.com, you'll know what this really means. That's right, I'm now a born-again digital-age capitalist entrepreneur!

Those who have known me since my youthful days of transcendental rebellion will recall that my political stance was a solipsistic variation of anarcho-communism. I strongly believed in the value of Individual Freedom - while powerfully drawn to vague notions of egalitarianism, universal justice, and plain honesty. Lao-tzu said the best government is the least government. I still say self-government is the only tolerable form of government.

In later years this became a robust belief that one achieves the most by embodying one's ideals: that, essentially, we can only change from within. My life strategy was to minimize overheads and maximize my independence from compulsory routine and wage slavery; aspire towards a minimalist ecological footprint, attain optimum elegance and grace as I journey through life. In other words, consume less and produce more, give back as much as I take, at the very least. From that perspective I viewed a big fat bank account as irrelevant - even antagonistic - to my evolution as a conscious soul. Like many others mystically inclined, I valued the metaphysical above the physical. I embraced the abstract idea of limitless wealth without equating it to money, per se. Wealth means well-being, and I like the concept of "commonwealth" - wherein we instinctively recognize the synergetic advantages of win-win scenarios over win-lose or no-win - and therefore spontaneously choose to cooperate rather than compete.

But I was constantly frustrated by never having enough cash to fund my dreams.

In my more hot-headed days I could empathize with the militant anger of all those forced to play the part of "loser." It was easy to understand why some opt to destroy the stagnant Status Quo - rather than focus on creating a more dynamic, organic, and wholesome one.

I still feel it's far more aesthetic - and ethical - to find our pleasure in creative passion rather than consumptive greed. But folks who have to constantly worry about where their next meal is coming from are more likely to start evolving aesthetically and ethically only after their basic creature comforts are secured. In effect, once people feel truly abundant and fulfilled, it naturally follows that they will be attracted to nobler and subtler qualities.

Along comes the runaway success of The Secret - and, inspired by it, the Secret Science of Getting Rich. A few years ago, the idea of "getting rich" would have struck me as pretty vulgar. I'd have been embarrassed to even admit I was involved in some slick permutation of MLM. But the deed is done, the cash investment made. I can no longer blame Society, Bad Government, or Human Stupidity for my unimpressive bank balance. Net worth unknown. Potential unactualized. Dreams unfulfilled. Enough of that!

And so it makes perfect sense for me to consciously shift to a tack I have never before attempted: that is, to initiate income-raising ventures, rather than merely subsist on a few crumbs swept from the banquet table of the Rich, Famous, and Privileged. As Osho once sagely pointed out: communism and capitalism are two ends of the same stick. Or, rather, two ends of an energy loop. Without capital, what can a red-blooded commie share with his or her comrades - apart from doctrine and ideology? Any true-blue capitalist will tell you the only way wealth can be sustained is to keep redistributing it and let it circulate freely through the system. In that respect, the consummate capitalist becomes the ultimate communist.

Next time you bump into me, you'd better run - cause I'm gonna look and sound like an American snake-oil salesman. Nah.... just kidding. The only change you'll find is that I'll be a lot more aware of the thought-forms I'm running in my operating system ;-)

Bob Proctor presents "The Secret Science of Getting Rich"!

Bob Proctor is undoubtedly among the most charismatic and persuasive public speakers alive. I bet he can sell sand to a thirsty man lost in the Sahara! Bob was in Kuala Lumpur yesterday, presenting his soon-to-be unveiled pet project: The Secret Science of Getting Rich home seminar program (or SGR for short). Priced at $2000, this state-of-the-art home seminar program certainly doesn't come "cheap" - but some folks are quite happy to fork out $100,000 for a fancy car, or spend $1 million on "educating" their kids abroad. Look at it this way: for 2000 bucks you can buy this program for your kid and maybe it will prove precisely the high-powered, high-tech tool he or she requires to become a millionaire before the age of 25! That's what I'd call a damn good return on your investment ;-)

I spent the first five decades of my life deliberately choosing to be indifferent to money (after all, I prided myself on being a "starving artist" :-)... and somehow I always had just enough to scrape by. However, two years ago, I suddenly realized that "scraping by" was no way I wanted to spend my "retirement"... I started looking at "successful" people in a kinder light, deciding I had a great deal to learn from them.

In other words, although I've been very fortunate to have so many good friends always offering to buy me lunch or dinner (and even breakfast ;-), it's about time I changed my mindset about money and started generating enough personal income to buy all my friends dinner instead. That's right, it may be a blessed thing to receive... but I feel it's far more blessed to be in a position to GIVE. Don't you agree? Find out more about SGR by clicking HERE!

"The Secret" and the Science of Getting Rich

"We need to make a game out of making money. There is so much good we can do with money. Without it, we are bound and shackled and our choices become limited." ~ Bob Proctor

Have you seen or heard about a DVD called The Secret? Well it isn't such a big secret anymore. The DVD was released in March 2006 and, according to Time magazine, The Secret sold 500,000 units within the first 6 months. It now sells well over 5,000 copies a day! It ranked among Amazon's Top-5 sellers over the Christmas week, and in the early weeks of 2007 it rose to #1 on Amazon.com. A tie-in hardcover book just entered the Top 10 on the New York Times bestseller list.

The amazing thing about The Secret is that you won't find it in your local Kinokinuya or MPH.* It's selling briskly through new-age bookstores, online book distributors and the official website at www.thesecret.tv. "The Secret has become the biggest selling item in the 30-year history of our store," says Harmony Rose Allor, a buyer at West Hollywood's popular metaphysical bookshop, The Bodhi Tree. That's "word-of-mouth" marketing at its best.

So what is the secret to The Secret's success? It's a "transformational movie," where a person's view on life and the laws of living, giving, and forgiving will no longer be the same after watching this movie. In a sense, it has created the same kind of effect as The Da Vinci Code and the 2004 hit cult movie What the Bleep Do We Know?. The Secret has created such waves it was recently featured on the Oprah Winfrey Show, Larry King Live, and the Ellen DeGeneres show.

At the core of the movie is a central philosophy called the "Law of Attraction." In fact, the movie itself was inspired by this very same law when the producer read a book called The Science of Getting Rich by Wallace D. Wattles. This book was written in 1910!

This philosophy states that we create our own reality, both good and bad. The message is delivered through 24 "teachers" - including success gurus, chiropractic healers, relationship counselors, life coaches and motivational speakers — who together constitute one clear, cohesive voice. The movie is a "must watch" for anyone interested in taking charge of their own life and realizing their dreams.

Following on the success of The Secret, two of the key teachers - namely Bob Proctor and Jack Canfield - have collaborated to produce a wealth building program called the Secret Science of Getting Rich Seminar. This program is based on the book that inspired the movie and is set to make history as the fastest-selling personal development program in history.

What is the Secret Science of Getting Rich about? Well, in the words of Wallace D. Wattles: "The ownership of money and property comes as a result of doing things in a certain way. Those who do things in this certain way, whether on purpose or accidentally, get rich. Those who do not do things in this certain way, no matter how hard they work or how able they are, remain poor. It is a natural law that like causes always produce like effects. Therefore, any man or woman who learns to do things in this certain way will infallibly get rich." The Secret Science of Getting Rich effectively teaches you how to do things in this "certain" way to create boundless health and wealth.

The success of this program is built on a rock-solid foundation, not the least of which is the phenomenal success of The Secret; the timeless concepts from The Science of Getting Rich by Wallace D. Wattles, the charisma and credibility of three of the most successful personal improvement teachers of our time... and the Internet as THE marketing and distribution medium of the 21st century.

Click here to learn more about the Secret Science of Getting Rich Seminar and how you can profit from the distribution of the program.

* No longer the case. A few weeks ago I was in MPH Bangsar Village II and saw The Secret being sold in vast quantities!

DEPROGRAM YOURSELF

GOD moves in mysterious ways, the sneaky bastard.

Did I push any buttons? Did someone gasp and call me “extremely rude” or even “blasphemous”? If you responded with a spontaneous guffaw, congratulations, you’re CLEAR! You’re not required to read this - except for the laughs.

Are some of you frowning? What’s bothering you? The word “bastard” or the word “sneaky” or the word “mysterious” or the much-abused three-letter word “God”? Or are you feeling indifferent? Because you worship some concept that goes by the name of Wakan Tanka or Hunab K’u or Ahuramazda or Allah or Avalokiteshvara or Arumugam or Subramanian or Brahma or Vishnu or Shiva or Krishna or Ishwara or Paramapurusha or Sugmad or Sangyang Licin or Sangyang Widi or Pater Omnipotens Aeternae Deus or Tua Pek Kong or Zeus or Caesar or Kaiser or Führer or Pharaoh or Jesus Christ or Buddha or Sai Baba or Babaji or Baal or Marduk or Yahweh or Waheguru or Ptah or Enki or Tiki or Miki or Moto or Quetzalcoatl or Kukulcan or Tlaloc or Tezcatzlipoca or Odin or Votan or Dow Jones or Amex or Forex or GNP or Wang or Wong?

Wong moves in mysterious ways, the sneaky bastard.



Not quite the same somehow. But let’s take a good look at a few of these potentially troublesome words, beginning with bastard (bas’-tard) n. a child born out of wedlock; an impure, coarse brown refuse product of sugar-refining, used to color beer... (Old French bastard, from fils de bast, son of a pack-saddle). Well, forget about the brown sugar. It’s the “child born out of wedlock” definition that warrants our attention. Jeez, what a fuddy-duddy word “bastard” is! The truth is: anyone with parents feisty and free-spirited and passionate enough to enjoy a bit of societally unsanctioned coitus ought to be called “lucky.”

The way I see it, we are ALL immaculately conceived, regardless of who our parents happen to be - even if Dad came in the form of a dove or a black panther or pollen from outer space. Some women just happen to be kinky - but if the union is genetically sound, it will bear fruit.

Who on earth knows if God’s own parents (Mr & Mrs Prime Cause) were properly wed. Probably not. Which makes Him or Her or It the Bastard of Bastards. So we might as well delete the word “bastard” from the dictionary. No one’s going to miss it - except perhaps as a convenient swear word with no specific meaning.

How about sneaky? To creep around in a suspicious fashion, not wanting to be caught, preferring a degree of privacy? Well, if you had a thing about impregnating virgins, wouldn’t YOU be a master of sneakiness? The cat considers the mouse sneaky. But the mouse is only being careful: survival mechanism. In a safe, friendly environment nobody has to be sneaky.

As for mysterious: the word presents a problem only for obstinately logical types who mistrust anything empirically unprovable, anything in any way “mystical” (and therefore purely “subjective” and statistically unquantifiable under strict laboratory conditions). The rest of us find the mysterious rather alluring: a mystery seeks to be solved, especially if it arises from the mists of antiquity straight out of the realm of myth.

Now for the word God. Humans tend to fall into three broad categories: monotheists who insist on addressing the Supreme Being by just one name; pantheists (who prefer several names for the One and Only Holy Being; and atheists who don’t believe in taking anything on blind faith. Whichever category you think you feel most comfortable in, remember it’s all just names. When it comes down to essentials, the Absolute Tao - the virtually incomprehensible amazing and amusing miraculousness and magnificence of It All is beyond names.

Calling God a “sneaky bastard” is really a term of endearment, indicating an affectionate intimacy, certainly not FEAR. Who wants to be feared? Only a horrible monster, to be sure. And God couldn’t possibly be as horrid as some folks make Him or Her or It out to be.

My daughters and I could never agree on the naming of our dogs. A black bitch I named Latipa they insisted on calling Smokey. The dog had no problem with any of this: she responded to whatever name we chose to call her, especially if food was involved. Even when “Latipa” evolved into “Tiparipati”, she still wagged her tail ecstatically when she heard any of her names. The point of the opening exercise was to demonstrate how easily we get entangled in semantic snares laid by our linguistic structures. I’m no antisemanticist, mind you, but I’m acutely aware of the limitations to clear perception caused by living exclusively in a reality defined and generated by language. How can one can escape from a mental prison constructed of word bricks? Recently I was re-reading Lila: An Inquiry Into Morals by Robert M. Pirsig and found an illuminating passage (among many) which deserves attention:

Eskimos see sixteen different forms of ice which are as different to them as trees and shrubs are different to us. Hindus, on the other hand, use the same term for both ice and snow. Creek and Natchez Indians do not distinguish yellow from green. Similarly, Choctaw, Tunica, the Keresian Pueblo Indians and many other people make no terminological distinction between blue and green. The Hopis have no word for time.

Pirsig goes on to quote Edward Sapir:

The fact of the matter is that the real world’ is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group... Forms and significances which seem obvious to an outsider will be denied outright by those who carry out the patterns; outlines and implications that are perfectly clear to these may be absent to the eye of the onlooker.

Many seekers have tried STILLNESS and SILENCE as therapy, embarking on voluntary programs of non-action and non-verbalization for days or weeks or even twenty or thirty years. I must admit that I have never managed to shut my mouth up for more than 24 hours (due to laryngitis), and as for shutting up the mind - 24 minutes is something to brag about (and after the first 10 minutes, I may have dozed off). Yet I don’t doubt that Stillness and Silence are a powerful way to cut through the crud and crap of our sociocultural conditioning and achieve true seeing, feeling, and knowing.

If ever you have the opportunity - and the determination - to carry out such a programme, you will be rewarded with the gift of direct perception: beyond words, beyond personal egoic constraints, and beyond preconceptions. Watch it, though: seeing the halo around your head, people might just laugh at you in their usual vulgar manner. And in that elevated state it would not be an appropriate response to say "Fuck you!”

No, you’d simply have to expand your heart chakra (the glowing dynamic energy field in the middle of your chest that pulses with unconditional love just like ET or popular pin-ups of Jesus) and cherish your detractors to death, resurrection, and ascension.

Take heart. There are MODERN ways to deprogram yourself. But most of these come with a price tag - especially in this “new age” of marketing when even the most arcane teachings of the ancient mystery schools have been streamlined, simplified, updated and cleverly packaged into painless seminars and workshops that run from a single weekend to over a week. Count on paying anything from $100 to $5,000 - but bear in mind that the costlier programmes don’t necessarily “work better” than the more affordable ones; they just have slicker brochures and a more professionally organized planetary network.

I’m not about to endorse any specific deprogramming approach (“belief management technologies” is what a few of these systems call themselves) - though I would encourage you to go for it if you find yourself in urgent need of "ontological refocusing" and some quick positive reinforcement - and if you’re one of those who normally wouldn’t think twice about a $150 hair restyling exercise or an impulsive visit to an Italian boutique. For sure you’ll come out feeling as good as if you’d just bought yourself a $2,000 Zegna suit (I wouldn’t know, I’ve only ever worn a second-hand pair of fancy Italian shoes and driven a fourth-hand Alfa Romeo - but even those tiny indulgences perked me up considerably.)

Those who are too cheap to consider spending wads of cash on any sort of therapy - not even getting your car fitted with genuine eelskin upholstery or treating yourself to ten sessions in a samadhi tank - good stuff, you’re just like me! So you’ll just have to trust your native intuition and follow your nose (or gnose) wherever it leads you. I did. And I can promise you one thing - the universe always looks after one of its own, regardless of your bank balance or reputation. Don’t expect me to compress 30 years of private research into a 2500-word blogpost. I only want to drop enough hints to get you going - or at least confirm that you’re doing perfectly fine just the way you are. But did I hear someone ask:

What’s the purpose of “deprogramming” yourself?

Boy, do we really have to go all the way back to basics? Well, why not? It’s a pretty good place to start. When was the last time you sat back and said to yourself: “There MUST be more to life than the mind-numbing, soul-dehydrating daily routine I’m caught up in!”? Not too long ago, right? THIS IS A POSITIVE SIGN THAT YOU’VE BECOME A PASSIVE CONSUMER OF REALITY. Which means: you believe that there’s someone “out there” who’s running the whole show and who decides everyone else’s “destiny.”

Don’t feel too bad about it. Most of us probably feel this way most of the time. It’s really just a bad case of overprogramming you’ve got. We inherit two sets of “hardwired” beliefs from our parents - who got theirs from their parents and so on - and some of these beliefs work in our favor, and some used to but don’t anymore. Dig around your so-called subconscious and you’ll uncover a whole lot of rotting furniture and other junk that would make a beautiful bonfire in the backyard of your being. You don’t want all that “karmic baggage” impeding your further evolution. It’s a good idea to travel light if you want to reach insights you’ve never had before.

Approximately 95% of this “junk programming” serves as Inhibitions. Society doesn’t want you behaving too differently from your neighbors. In the Industrial Age it has been very convenient to keep entire populations happily and mindlessly conforming to statistical “norms.” It makes marketing all kinds of energy-depleting stuff a lot easier. If you’re someone who believes that everything is simply hunky-dory the way it is, it’s perfectly okay. On another level, you’re absolutely right. But be sure you’ve taken the cellophane wrapping off your Reality Sandwich before you sink your teeth into it.

Sooner or later everybody gets the urge to deprogram himself or herself. It’s inevitable. You can’t stop water from flowing just by throwing a heap of rubbish in the drains. Eventually a major downpour will occur, causing a huge flood that will blast away the debris and sweep it all out to the ocean (the “ultimate solution” as Frank Zappa called it). In a single glorious moment, your vital force will break through the layers of encrusted ego programming - and you’ll be absolutely perfectly okay, the way we were all intended to be. Meanwhile, I suggest you attempt this simple visualization:

Picture yourself in front of your computer. On the monitor screen is a series of icons....

(a) a stern-faced, white-bearded patriarch, looking like some kind of judge

(b) a voluptuous Venus emerging from the sea, stark naked

(c) a ferocious-looking martial-type in full military regalia

(d) a Dick Cheney clone in a dark suit sporting a red tie and a cold-blooded grimace

(e) a cherubic woolly-haired old lady with a merry twinkle in her eyes

(f) a grinning juju-man, black as the night sky, togged up like a Zulu chief

(g) a serene old sage blissed out in lotus posture

(h) a thick book full of incomprehensible utterances and sonorous exhortations

(i) a chubby child of three, smiling as in a cereal ad

(j) an extremely compassionate, white-robed, maternal figure smiling benignly upon you

(k) a brilliant ball of neon blue light, pulsating with vitality and intelligence

(l) a gruesome giant reptile, velociraptor or tyrannosaurus rex, ready to snap your head off

(m) a life-sized bust of Marx - Karl or Groucho

(n) a wild-haired scientist pointing at a flipchart covered with algebraic workings

(o) a dazzling, energetic/synergetic, everchanging, kaleidoscopic, mandala pattern that represents perfect geometric integrity

(p) a glossy poster of Elvis Presley, Bob Marley, Jim Morrison, Madonna, Marilyn Monroe, Michael Jackson, James Dean, or the artist formerly known as Prince

(q) a monumental tree that seems to tower endlessly into the heavens

(r) a gargoyle-like stone statue weighing 850 tons

(s) a fairytale treasure chest overflowing with precious stones

(t) an archaic torture device with a pathetically bony and very nearly expired person nailed to it

(u) a flotilla of disc-shaped lifeforms radiating an other-worldly light

(v) a sleek seladang or cape buffalo, muscular torso glistening with sweat

(w) diamond-like galaxies orbiting one another eternally

(x) your grandparents in a formal portrait

(y) your favourite photo of yourself

(z) a bold question mark

NOW...Select your image of God. Move the mouse around till you find an icon you favor and click twice.

REALITY WILL IMMEDIATELY CONFORM TO WHICHEVER CONCEPT OF DIVINITY YOU CHOOSE!

If you later decide to alter your concept of God, you must first exit the current paradigm before repeating the procedure. You are free to change icons as often as you wish. Whichever icon you pick will prove completely valid.

If you clicked on the Question Mark, it means you’re always seeking new inputs and keeping your mind open, which is lovely.

If you clicked on your own image, that’s excellent too. But please remember at all times and places that there might be a couple billion other individuals on this planet who did exactly the same. So don’t get too bloody bigheaded.

East-West Dialogue: A Dangling Conversation

Shanghai University class photo, 2006

Colorado University class photo, 2006

WHEN THE TWAIN FINALLY MEET AND MERGE IT WILL SIGNAL THE DEMISE OF DUALITY. 

ANY QUESTIONS?

[Images kindly supplied by Sunbear]

The Blinking Idiot Who Ruined Iraq!

Mossad has leaked a photograph of the sneaky twirp who fueled deeper hostility between rival sects in Iraq by recording Saddam Hussein's hanging and uploading the footage on the web.

[image courtesy of Mossad via Judy Mezen]

TAK BOLEH BOGEL (NO NUDITY) IN MALAYSIA!

Another unpublished Letter to the Editor...

It’s been ages since I felt moved to write a letter to The Editor. The urge to air my views in print has been building up since the Nude Squat furore erupted (seems like the only “legitimate” way you can see people naked is to arrest them first). City Hall’s declared intention to penalize folks caught smooching or even holding hands in public was irksome news to me (some of my fondest memories involve exactly that). But the final straw was the email I received announcing that free screenings of international films organised by Kaki Kino at FINAS have been suspended till further notice, after a shrill complaint about uncensored “babak lucah” (nude scenes) appeared in a leading Malay daily.

Imagine a lush lagoon, festooned with giant ferns and flirtatious mermaids. A man and a woman, both well-tanned, are strolling hand-in-hand along the sandy shore, gloriously naked. Is that not a veritable vision of paradise? Granted, the couple could also be modeling chic beachwear by Jean-Paul Gaultier (but that would be too much like a glossy magazine ad).

Now imagine a fast-motion sequence showing Tokyo commuters at rush hour – all respectably dressed in office apparel and suffering from gastritis. Or a slow-motion montage of KL traffic after a heavy afternoon downpour. Cut to the gory aftermath of a car bomb attack in Baghdad and then crossfade to a wide-angle closeup of an American-made Israeli bulldozer, demolishing a Palestinian neighborhood, as terrified women clutch babies to their hearts and wail in despair. Hellish scenes, for sure – but they would get past the censors, no problem.

Why is this so? Are we being indoctrinated to perceive pain as okay and pleasure as not? Is it any wonder that crime reports are getting more gruesome by the day? Maybe it’s time to reassess what sort of messages we’re being programmed with.

There’s no way I can conceive of a kiss or a hug, regardless of who’s doing it and where, as being indecent or offensive. These are signs of love and affection. Are these warm feelings WRONG? Folks who react negatively to romance and sex were probably deprived of cuddles as kids. They’re likely to inflict corporal punishment on their own children as a matter of routine. Those who express alarm and outrage at the sight of female nipples are undoubtedly some inorganic lifeform in human disguise that never experienced the life-sustaining comfort and nourishment of mother’s milk. How do you think a baby would react to seeing a bare breast or two on the screen? Lodge a self-righteous report with the religious police... or gurgle with happiness?

All it takes is a bit of common sense and reason. There’s nothing shameful about our bodies. Fat or sinewy, hairy or baby-smooth, the body is our sovereign domain, our physical home. Naked or adorned with sparkling gems, bodies are magnificent by divine design. Everybody loves being naked. In the bathroom or the bedroom, being naked means you’re enjoying a hot shower or some hot sex. Or maybe you’re just relishing a good poop or your private space after a marathon immersion in public affairs. What’s so scandalous about that?

We live in the hot and humid tropics. The sort of place where clothing is merely a fashionable option. You won’t find too many nudist colonies in Alaska or Tibet. Arab women have traditionally had to cover up to protect themselves from desert sandstorms, camel farts (possibly radioactive since Gulf Wars I and II) and temperature extremes. Were it not for fear of their control-freak husbands, don’t you think they would celebrate being in their own skins if they were magically transported to a balmy beach in the South Seas? Talk about “inappropriate attire”... being wrapped in thick cloth from head to toe on a sweltering day in the city sounds like a portable sauna to me. But to each his or her own - I’m happy in my sarong and flip-flops.

I have to be honest with myself. I love looking at beauty, and women are embodiments of the Great Goddess, deserving of admiration, love and respect. If a naked woman walked past me in the street, I would certainly turn my head for a second look. And I’d feel absolutely no guilt or shame about doing so. Nor would I - uncontrollably overcome by animal lust - drag her by the hair off to my cave and show her my etchings. Unless, of course, she handed me a perfumed note with precisely such a request. Even so, I’d rather she walk back to my cave on her own two feet than drag her all the way. I have a different concept of exercise.

Immaturity has its place, I grant that. However, let it not be exalted as the arbiter of our behavior and our moral code. There’s no immorality in portraying the human form in various stages of dress or undress in the adult cinema. What’s truly immoral is imposing on others our own limitations and limiting beliefs. Do we really value the grotesque hypocrisy censorship encourages? Are we to blinker our cinematic vision (like the proverbial katak under a tempurung) in a knee-jerk reaction to the poisonous outpourings of a pusillanimous prude?

Sincerely,
Antares
Kuala Kubu Baru
27 April 2006