Zorra
Zorra's JournalTelepaths and telekinetics are working on a coordinated action to try to save the planet.
The problem is knowing exactly what to wish for, and then knowing exactly how to wish for it.
The dilemma has been unsolvable so far because no one has the clarity of omniscience. Trying to stop "evil" telepathically and telekinetically may result in something opposite the desired effect because of unknown/unseen factors.
How do we bring coordinated collective focused "thought" and "will" that is conceptually close to identical into alignment with universal patterns in order to manifest completely positive results? How do we "above all, do no harm"? It's something like the idea of not altering future reality by changing the past when considering what would happen if someone figured out how to travel back in time.
Any manifestation of significant power is potentially deadly if it is not tempered by extreme caution, and with exhaustive forethought and great wisdom.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, most especially in the manifestation of power. We, almost all of us, as individuals play god by making decisions that affect others every day. Leaders of government generally do this to a much greater extent and effect. All too often disingenuously, with deliberate malice, resulting in disastrous, catastrophic, deadly effect. Almost always for the sake of greed and power.
So the question here is:
Do we have the right to play god and neutralize the power of world leaders, corporate greeders, and other destructive entities, and manipulate events for our vision of what is good for human beings and the planet itself, when we figure out how to focus/align telekinetic/telepathic power in order to do so with minimal chance of unforeseen negative and destructive consequences?
Would this be generally preferable to most people to the extinction of all or most life on the planet, which is now the inevitable result of the current, unalterable trajectory of patterns of human endeavor?
Or would it be better to let the insane fuckers just eventually destroy it all?
When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will they realize that they cannot eat money.
~ Paraphrased from the words of Alanis Obomsawin
Unfortunately, the actions of my government and the MSM over the past 50 years
have caused me to believe only a small percentage of what I see, and nothing of what I hear, when an issue or event is related to politics.
When the the majority of the world becomes a "farm" for wealthy private interests to pick and choose what they wish to slaughter and harvest for their profit, and various wars and conflicts (and elections) are repeatedly based on conquest for power and/or profit, all motivations for action by governments naturally become highly suspect.
It's a crying shame, but until we take the profit motivation out of war, politics, and government, it will be this way.
Here are a few sources for you, so you can compare information in order for you to
better understand the phenomenon.
There's a lot of bullshit floating around about transsexuals, and being transgender. If you are serious about getting a relatively accurate understanding of this phenomenon, I suggest that you educate yourself by studying as many credible sources on the subject as possible, otherwise, you may very well end up believing total bullshit.
(First link below is pdf)
http://www.cpath.ca/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/COHEN-KETTENIS.DSM_.pdf
http://www.tsfaq.info/
http://www.transsexual.org/
http://www.tsroadmap.com/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transsexualism
Here are some thoughts:
We do not know what causes autism. Yet the phenomenon clearly exists. Autism is diagnosed by symptoms common to the phenomenon.
We do not know what causes transsexualism. Yet the phenomenon clearly exists. Transsexualism is diagnosed by specific symptoms that are common to the phemomenon.
I'm not saying that transsexualism is some type of pathology, or mental illness. I believe it is a natural condition, just like being gay, or cis hetero.
What I am saying is that the phenomenon exists, and although it is relatively uncommon, it is nevertheless a condition that manifests in millions of people on the planet, and appears to have manifested in populations throughout human history.
The phenomenon of intersex humans also exists. Some human have aneuploidies of sex chromosomes, such as XYY. Some human beings have both male and female variations in sex characteristics including gonads, and/or genitals. Some have all of the above.
Consider the possible that transsexualism is caused by some physical anomaly, possibly in the brain, caused by an uncommon anabolic event when a transsexual is in the womb.
Whatever, it is what it is, and I am quite happy to accept and allow cis/hetero sisters and brothers the space and understanding to be who they are. I just really wish that more of them would do the same for me and my LGBTI family.
Well done, trumad, thank you.
"Raven is a lesbian, my childhood is officially ruined."
Now substitute "Raven is Jewish, my childhood is officially ruined."
And then try to tell me how it's "all just in good fun", and that I shouldn't be worried about another holocaust occurring.
The "off the cuff", "just the way things are" "all in good fun" nonchalant hatred in those posts is frightening. I see these types of posts in other places
on the internet frequently. Many times, on websites where expressing homophobia is, ostensibly, not permitted, these hate posts are constructed in such a way as to appear innocent, and may fool the more ignorant among us, and give the other closet homophobes a little giggle of satisfaction that one of their hateful kindred spirits got away with a subtle gay hating post. Websites with jury systems are particularly prone to this phenomenon. It is almost a daily occurrence on these websites.
To all the homophobes who are reading this:
You homophobes are no different whatsoever than the European Nazis who so nonchalantly persecuted, tortured, and murdered many millions of people, and supported that holocaust, during the 1930's and 1940's. It's obvious, by witnessing your hatred, that you would do the same thing or worse to the LGBT community right now if you had the chance, and would revel and rejoice in it.
And you damn well know you would. Because, like Emma-Jane says in the graphic above, Newsflash: your life was ruined when you were raised to be a homophobe, and you never took the time to try to fix your twisted little minds.
I hope he gets through the next four years without being killed, injured, or
psychologically damaged in a war.
And hopefully, he won't be forced to kill innocent people in another senseless Bush type of war. That seems to really cause serious emotional devastation to combat military who have hearts and consciences.
I have two female family members whose husbands saw action in Iraq, and one of them saw action in Afghanistan as well. Both have severe PTSD accompanied by violence, alcohol, and drug problems.
One no longer lives with his former family, the other is just a wreck, and the family is suffering terribly from his instability.
So many young people join the military, not realizing the devastating, life destroying consequences it will have on their psyche and their entirety of ther lives if they are unfortunate enough to be sent into combat. Especially in senseless wars for profit like we have been seeing since Vietnam.
I wish your nephew good luck, and hope he survives his stint in the military without it ruining his life.
Au contraire. "Policy-based" civil disobedience occurs when a person breaks the law in order to
change a policy (s)he believes is dangerously wrong.
There is no prerequisite that a person must go to jail for engaging in an act of civil disobedience in order for that act to be defined as an act of civil disobedience, and the paragraphs that you posted from the article in no way make it so, and do not even indicate that it is so.
The idea that one must go to jail for an action in order for that action to be considered an act of civil disobedience is astoundingly ludicrous.
From the same wikipedia article:
snip---
Ronald Dworkin held that there are three types of civil disobedience:
"Integrity-based" civil disobedience occurs when a citizen disobeys a law she or he feels is immoral, as in the case of northerners disobeying the fugitive slave laws by refusing to turn over escaped slaves to authorities.
"Justice-based" civil disobedience occurs when a citizen disobeys laws in order to lay claim to some right denied to her or him, as when blacks illegally protested during the Civil Rights Movement.
"Policy-based" civil disobedience occurs when a person breaks the law in order to change a policy (s)he believes is dangerously wrong.[19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience
: refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government
civil disobedience, refusal to obey a law or follow a policy believed to be unjust.
the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.
Notice that none of these dictionary definitions include getting arrested, being tried, or being incarcerated.
Someone revealing facts about wrongdoing, deceit, and corruption in governments and corporations
does not make them a negative nationalist, even in Orwell's subjective definition terminology.
Claiming that it does so is disingenuoulsy arguing for the stifling and silencing of legitimate dissent against a clearly corrupt authority.
And I believe that you are confusing "Americaphobia" with dissent against multi-national plutonomy.
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/01/this_man_is_still_lying_to_america/
According to the WikiLeaks website, its goal is "to bring important news and information to the public... One of our most important activities is to publish original source material alongside our news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth."
Another of the organisation's goals is to ensure that journalists and "whistleblowers" are not jailed for emailing sensitive or classified documents. The online "drop box" (currently not functioning) was designed to "provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to our journalists."
In an interview as part of the American television program The Colbert Report, Assange discussed the limit to the freedom of speech, saying, "[it is] not an ultimate freedom, however free speech is what regulates government and regulates law. That is why in the US Constitution the Bill of Rights says that Congress is to make no such law abridging the freedom of the press. It is to take the rights of the press outside the rights of the law because those rights are superior to the law because in fact they create the law. Every constitution, every bit of legislation is derived from the flow of information. Similarly every government is elected as a result of people understanding things".[36]
The project has been compared to Daniel Ellsberg's revelation of the "Pentagon Papers" (US war-related secrets) in 1971.[37] In the United States, the "leaking" of some documents may be legally protected. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Constitution guarantees anonymity, at least in the context of political discourse.[37] Author and journalist Whitley Strieber has spoken about the benefits of the WikiLeaks project, noting that "Leaking a government document can mean jail, but jail sentences for this can be fairly short. However, there are many places where it means long incarceration or even death, such as China and parts of Africa and the Middle East."[38]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks
Do what is right, and no one can blow the whistle on you.
Corruption, lies, deceit, and criminal activity perpetrated against American citizens invalidates the contract; all bets are off after that, the loyalties of decent women and men will always be to the People in the face of corrupt and unjust authority.
Nah...there's actually a bit more to it all than just that. Acting Assistant Secretary Michael Kozak
has had some fascinating adventures since he began his career way back in the Nixon Administration.
WASHINGTON, April 25— A senior State Department official said today that a document introduced at the trial of Oliver L. North had incorrectly accused the Reagan Administration of trading increased American aid to Honduras for that country's support of the Nicaraguan rebels.
The official, Michael G. Kozak, told Congress that the State Department had killed a 1985 White House plan under which a ''discreet'' emissary was to be sent to Honduras to explain the conditions surrounding the American aid.
The plan, which was approved by President Reagan, was disclosed in a 42-page stipulation of facts that lawyers for the prosecution and the defense had agreed on as a substitute for classified Government documents that could not be made public. Mr. North is on trial for 12 criminal counts in connection with aiding the Nicaraguan contras in a period in which it was forbidden by Congress. Testimony Before House Panel
snip---
Mr. Kozak's testimony came before a House appropriations subcommittee. In an interview, Mr. Kozak said he based his statement about the Honduras plan on his review of the classified documents in the case. ''I don't know who killed it, whether it was Secretary of State Shultz or who, but what happened is it didn't get done,'' he said, referring to the former head of the State Department, George P. Shultz
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/04/26/us/north-trial-document-called-faulty.html
WASHINGTON, May 24— The chairman of an influential House subcommittee today accused a State Department official of misleading the panel on whether the Reagan Administration made a secret deal with Honduras in 1985 to aid the Nicaraguan rebels.
The letter by Representative David R. Obey, Democrat of Wisconsin, to Secretary of State James A. Baker 3d cast doubt on remarks made last month by Michael G. Kozak, Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Central America.
Mr. Kozak assured committee members that a reading of classified documents of the period showed that no foreign aid money had been used by the Reagan Administration to entice Honduras's support for the rebels, or contras.
After Mr. Obey made the letter public late this afternoon, telephone calls to Mr. Kozak's office and home were unanswered.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/25/us/state-dept-aide-accused-of-misleading-panel.html
WASHINGTON, June 3— A State Department official has backed away from his testimony that the Reagan Administration scrapped a 1985 plan to link aid to Honduras to that country's help for the contras, a Congressman says.
snip---
Mr. Kozak testified on April 25 before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, which is headed by Mr. Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat, that the ''plan was disapproved at the objection of the State Department on the grounds that conditionality,'' that is, the link between American assistance and Honduran support for the contras, ''was contrary to U.S. policy.''
snip---
Mr. Obey said he believed ''there's absolutely no question that it was carried out,'' adding, ''The documents laid out the plan. The additional assistance we know did arrive.''
Mr. Kozak did not respond to messages left at his home telephone Friday night and this afternoon.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/04/us/state-dept-backs-off-from-view-that-contra-aid-plan-was-killed.html
I wonder if he ever had the chance to blow the whistle on Reagan.
This one is kind of fun ~
snip--
General Noriega said his real problems began when he refused requests from American officials ''at the height of Iran-contra to participate in aggression against Nicaragua.'' 'Dignity of Panama'
snip---
He described his weakened political opposition here as upper-class servants of the United States whose souls had been bought.
A month of negotiations between the general's representatives and a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Michael G. Kozak, broke down Wednesday after renewed reports of an impending agreement circulated through Washington.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/27/world/noriega-charges-us-invented-crisis.html
Yikes!
Mr. Helms is unhappy that the Central Intelligence Agency, apparently at the prodding of the State Department, funneled $600,000 in support of exiled contras who backed the candidacy of Mrs. Chamorro over conservative Nicaraguans more to the Senator's liking. Mr. Dodd is upset because he and Administration officials had made a deal to bury the hatchet and work together on Central America, as long as the Bush Administration ended covert financing for the contras that was not specifically authorized by Congress.
The two Senators are demanding to know what Michael G. Kozak and Joseph G. Sullivan, who have been designated for the El Salvador and Nicaragua embassies respectively, knew about the covert program when they served in senior positions in the State Department's Latin America Bureau.
Mr. Helms is not talking to reporters while he recuperates from heart trouble, but one aide said, "It's an issue of breaking the law."
The State Department is furious, noting that a report by the department's inspector general established that neither nominee broke any laws. (The Senators' aides call the report a whitewash.)
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/07/28/us/washington-talk-anger-unites-dodd-and-helms-the-oddest-couple.html
AP , Associated Press
Apr. 29, 1991 1:57 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AP) _ Michael Kozak, a top aide in the State Department's Latin America bureau, is expected to be named U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, according to administration sources.
Kozak, a deputy assistant secretary, would replace Ambassador William Walker, who has served in El Salvador for three years.
http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1991/Kozak-Heading-for-El-Salvador-As-Part-of-Diplomatic-Shuffle/id-4f765c1652471ae0f293b756cb77495c
This could not have been fun at all.
WASHINGTON - Two ambassadorial appointments in Central America have been blocked by allegations that the nominees helped secretly funnel U.S. money to Nicaraguan president Violeta Chamorro's winning campaign three years ago.
The nominations of career foreign-service officers Joe Sullivan to Nicaragua and Michael Kozak to El Salvador have languished for months as two prominent senators have demanded information about a covert State Department program launched in 1989.
According to the allegations, Sullivan, Kozak and other ranking diplomats secretly paid about $530,000 in CIA money to former contras and other Nicaraguan exiles in Miami to return to their homeland and campaign for Chamorro and opposition groups.
snip---
Neither Kozak, a top Latin policy adviser, nor Sullivan, a specialist on Central America, returned phone calls requesting comment Thursday.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19920628&slug=1499425
On August 2, 2013, at least 36 Members of Congress will jointly introduce legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives, that would suspend operations at the School of the Americas (SOA/WHINSEC), and mandate investigations into the connection between U.S. foreign military training and human rights abuses in Latin America! The original co-sponsors of the Latin America Military Training Review Act have responded to the demands of their constituents, who don't want their tax dollars to be wasted on the training of repressive militaries at the SOA/WHINSEC.
Has your Representative not signed on yet? We write at least 36 because there will be more legislators that come on board before August 2. Your Representative needs to hear from you in order for them to be added to the list of original cosponsors. Is your Representative one of the original 36? If so, please take a moment to thank them for standing up to the Pentagon and for human rights. Either way, PLEASE CLICK HERE to send your Representative an email.
Already emailed? Please take a moment to call your Rep right now!
Here are our 35 (so far) Congressional Champions, with Reps. Jim McGovern and John Lewis leading the charge. Click on the pictures to send your representative a thank you message through your Twitter account!
Don't y'all forget to email or call your congress critters!
Ah, sorry. You see, I recall Assistant Secretary Kozak being involved in
several affairs in the Caribbean, and Central and South America.
Allow me to explain further...
I believe this sporadic involvement spanned 5 republican administrations, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II.
I believe that he was Legal Adviser for the Dept. of State under Ronald Reagan from 1982 to 1988.
(Iran-Contra, Nicaragua, El Salvador Civil War, military presence established in Honduras to aid the contras, etc.)
I believe that he was Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Inter-American Affairs, from 1988-1991 under Bush I.
(Invasion of Panama)
I believe that Bush I nominated him to be Ambassador to El Salvador in 1991, before the end of the Salvadoran Civil War.
I'm just sayin'...
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleCurrent location: Earth
Member since: Tue Sep 23, 2003, 11:05 PM
Number of posts: 27,670
