The New World War

2000-12-1 00:55:00

I have been trying to get the group to focus on the principles which will assist in bringing in the new age of peace. Unfortunately, many of the aspects of the new age will be much different than what has been taught.

The Trinity of key words representative of the New Age will be Service, Responsibility and Freedom. These three principles can only operate on maximum efficiency through the plane of the mind.

As we leave Pisces - the most emotional of all the signs, we enter into Aquarius an air sign - a symbol of the mind. Many there are who, instead of working to advance humanity into mind, seek to take them deeper into emotional polarization which takes people back into the past just as much as a fire and brimstone preacher does.

As far as America goes, there are four great wars to assist her emergence into the new age - and other countries, and the world as a whole, has their correspondences here.

(1) The Revolutionary War. This freed up a nation from the emotional dependence on a strong authority to reliance of mentally created laws that restrict government to allow a great release of freedom.

(2) The Civil War. In many ways this was a war between those who saw beyond slavery with the mind and those who were emotionally attached to tradition and beliefs of the past which included the acceptance of slavery.

(3) World Wars I and II. This affected the world and the triumph of the Allies did much to defeat emotional based thinking and restrictions, and bring the cold clear light of the mind on the principle of good and evil.

(4) The Current World War.

What current world war?

Yes, my friends there is a great war being fought, which is perhaps the greatest struggle of all, but instead of being fought out on the physical plane it is being fought out in the astral and mental planes. The current struggle between Bush and Gore for the presidency is very illustrative of emotional technique verses mental.

In almost every case, one of the Trinity of Principles of Service, Responsibility and Freedom are at stake. Often all three are on the table.

Geoffrey brings up one of the issues being fought out in the current great war with the question to Larry:

"Is there anyone else on this list that would agree with the Right to keep and bear arms? Where would you rather live, America or Britain? In America you think that it is necessary to carry a gun because others carry guns. In Britain it is not necessary to carry a gun as nobody has one as all guns were outlawed last year. Think about it.:-) By the way, I have owned a rifle and I know the power that it does give you, but that energy is confined to the lower aspect of a person. I would not want one now as I have tried to raise my consciousness, but then, what good ever came out of the end of a barrel."

JJ
My answer to this question is that I always support the principle of freedom unless that freedom turns into some type of boomerang that takes away more freedom than it gives. Because the right to bear arms helps the principle of freedom (as well as responsibility) more than it hurts I wholeheartedly endorse it.

But, one may ask - wouldn't there be less crime if guns were banned?

Statistics do not bear this out. The three areas in the United States where there is the greatest push for gun control are Washington DC, New York and California.

Now, Washington DC has the strongest gun control laws in the country yet has the highest murder rate. The most recent crime statistics I could find are 1998.

In the nation's capital the crime rate per 100,000 from 1990 - 1998 are:

Washington DC
Murder - 71
Robbery - 1143

New York State
Murder - 10.4
Robbery - 453

California
Murder - 10.8
Robbery - 340

Idaho
Murder - 3.1
Robbery - 19.8

Now, what is interesting here is that Idaho is probably the most vocal state in the Union for the right to keep and bear arms and may have the highest number of guns per person in the country. A lot of people here have half dozen guns in their house and a gun rack in the back of their truck.

But here's what really irritates people in Idaho. Washington DC, with an average murder rate of 71/100,000, think they have the right to tell us that we can reduce crime by following in their footsteps. Yet they have over 22 times the murder rate as we do.

The same goes for California and New York who would love to restrict us as their citizens are, yet they have over three times our murder rate per 100,000.

Now, guns are also involved in a high percentage of robberies yet Washington DC with strong gun control has 57 times as many robberies as Idaho!!!

New York has over 22 times as many and California 17 times as many.

Now my question is - Why in the hell should we peaceable people in Idaho with lots of guns listen to these other states with great restrictions on guns tell us how we can be safe????

My state proves beyond doubt that these arguments for greater restrictions of freedom in this area are based on pure unadulterated emotion.

Now, not everyone in Idaho has guns, yet even most of these people want the freedom to own a gun, if they should so choose.

As far as where I would rather live - England or the U.S.?

I have lived in England for over two years and I like both countries. I really like the people in England, but I like our system here much better as there is more freedom and opportunity, but not for long if we are not vigilant.

Question:

Where are other battles being fought out between emotion and mind?

"He that hath two navels is born again."