1999 - WEEK 12 Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3524 From: Rick Audette Subject: Latest List Hi All, Lots of new members have joined us, this week. Be sure to visit Samu and Lisa's web pages, to get to know us all a little better. Even if you are not ready to join in the discussions, please send in a little introduction of yourselves so we can get to know you. If, by chance, you have joined this list, but have not yet read "The Immortal", you can download it, for free, at http://www.freeread.com We all look forward to hearing from you. Check out the list, below, it contains e-mail addresses, birthdays, geographic locations and web pages for everyone. If I am missing anything, please write and let me know. Love, Rick ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Keysters list 3/21/99 Adrian Bradley _______ United Kingdom Alex Appelman Amit Wadhwani Angela Buffalow Angela Hughes Anni Ida West [Dec. 2] _______ Aarhus, Denmark AntonioJosephMartin _______ http://www.collegeclub.com/~d055777c/ Aroonas _______ http://homepages.infoseek.com/~wizardgm/ars.html Atif Ahmad Roome Ben Thomas Becky Priddy Becky Ryan _______ Palestine, TX Benjamin Tang Betty L. Norem [March 1] _______ Panama City, Florida Boji Bogdan Brian S. Weis _______ Bucks County, PA Brian Loehr Bruce Tracy C.D.Hoit CariD _______ Sacramento, CA Carmen Cuadra _______ Connecticut Carole Jarrett Carolyn Elaine Mille.. Charles R. Luke Clive Culbertson [August 28] _______ N.Ireland Colin Walker _______ Canada http://mypage.direct.ca/c/cbwalker/index.html D. Dailey Daniel Kweku Olufemi David Curtis _______ Salt Lake City, Utah David Goddard _______ United Kingdom http://www.footdoot.force9.co.uk/ David Smith _______ http://www.starknowledge.com/ David Teller _______ New York,NY http://www.danwinter.com/the_gift Deborah Smith-Copado Debs mailto: Desiree van Dijk _______ Netherlands http://people.a2000.nl/dvandijk/index.html Diane Linen [November 21] _______ Austin,TX Dorian Dot Else Zaboski Estrellia Sheran _______ http://www.diamondgalaxy.com/ Faith NGod Gregory Pace Garrett Ward [September 9] _______ Flagstaff, Arizona Gary Richards _______ Australia Gay Avice du Buisson _______ http://www.icon.co.za/~entrance/ Gene Latimer Gerald de Heer _______ Honolulu http://www.inward.com Glenys Lowery [sept 1] _______ Wellington, NZ Gregory Anthony Grey Alien Harald Schmidt _______ Australia Heather J Schwebel-Knight _______ Lismore NSW Australia Irja Foley _______ Ireland Isabelle [April 5] _______ Mississipi Isabelle Charette _______ Ottawa,Canada J. David Stacy Joseph Valrose _______ http://www.spiritweb.org/Spirit/chhc.practitioner.net Jackie Leve [June 30] _______ LA, CA http://www.killerbutterfly.com Jacquelyn Walters Jalien Shandler James Austin Harrison _______ Bartlett, TN James Bryan (TwinStorms)[june 6] _______ New Kensington, Pa. http://members.xoom.com/TwinStorms/ James T. Lee Jennifer Hampson _______ Australia Jennifer Dale Dillar... Jennifer Hardin [June 25] _______ Irving,TX Jerry Ann Spruill _______ Milwaukee, WI. Jerry L. Harris [June 22] _______ Tucson,AZ Jill O'Hara Joel Cocks _______ Australia http://www.faroc.com.au/~stress/nea.html John E. Conner John M. Kosior [July 2] Joni Ferris Jose M. Paredes Jose Quinones _______ NYC Brooklyn Joseph Darwin Stevens _______ LIMA,Ohio Joseph J. Dewey [feb 6] _______ Boise, Idaho http://www.freeread.com Julie Visser _______ Australia Justin Brethorst Kirk & Louann Sorensen Kam Baya Karen Nielsen Karen Surface _______ Hillsville, Va. Karla Kathy Gucciardi Kemal "rsdemir Kerry Basden_______ Australia Kevin Shannon [September 28] _______ Federal Way,Washington,USA Kitty Chastain Klaus J Joehle _______ http://livingonlove.com Knight_Templar _______ http://members.tripod.com/star_aeuz/ Kost K. Lacey A. Lanezach _______ http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Villa/4789/index.html Larry Brady LeLona Hodges [june 13] _______ WICHITA,KANSAS Lia Duggin Linn Edward Jacobs Lisa Folk [July 26] _______ Taylor,BC,Canada http://www.naturalfolks.com _______ http://www.naturalfolks.com/keys/ Liz Montville Lois Fry Lois Smith _______ Australia Lynette McCauley _______ Brisbane,Queensland,Australia Lynne Giles _______ NE Tennessee Manuel Marques Margaret Hampson Margaret Eldridge _______ PleasantGrove,TX Maria da Conceicao L Marilyn H. Braunig Marilyn A. Maple [June 19] _______ Phoenix, Arizona Mary Dodd _______ http://www.synergycenter.com Mary S H Lee _______ Singapore Mary Shelton Marylin A. Adams [September 21] _______ Bonaire, GA Michelle Wilson Mira Gimon-Keeler Mistii _______ Australia http://members.tripod.com/~MistiMooN/index.html M_IxChel Nina Smith Noreen _______ New Zealand Patricia Roach _______ http://www.spiritweb.org/Spirit/http.//www.highfiber.com/~parfos Patrick Shawn Murphy paul yu Penny Hughes _______ Jacksonville, Florida Phillip Hertzke _______ http://www.spiritweb.org/Spirit/ Polly Wainwright Proserp _______ France http://www.multimania.com/proserp/index.html Random Rastislav Strieska _______ Bratislava SLOVAKIA http://www.biela-holubica.sk Rene K. Mueller _______ http://www.spiritweb.org/ Rev. Stanley B. Jon... Richard E. Audette [july 11] _______ Plano,TX http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ Richard & Sharon Hoffman _______ Arlington, Washington Rick Audette [july 11] _______ Richardson,TX http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/ Robert Byrd _______ Lubbock, TX Robert Rich Robin Bryant [Feb 22] _______ Cottonwood, AZ Robin Richardson Roger Earnshaw _______ Clarendon South Australia Ron Wallachy [October 20th] _______ Portland Or. Ruth Byrd _______ Lubbock,TX Samu Karlsson [march 4] _______ Porvoo,Finland http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3 _______ http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/KeystersPhotoAlbum.html _______ http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives.html Sanna Hanskala _______ Chapel Hill, North Carolina http://home.earthlink.net/~sannah/ Sebastian Schadler _______ Germany Shamus Webb Shania Nelson Shantul Nigam Sharon Jorgenson [March 13] _______ 50m E. of Dallas,TX Sharri Lorraine [Aug. 2] _______ Seattle, Washington http://www.skdesigns.com/internet/articles/healing/healing_keys.html Sheridan.j.le.Fanu Steven E. Graves Steve Mark _______ Arlington,TX Susan Susan Finucane Suzan Griffith T.Farris _______ Huntsville, Alabama Tatyana Koziupa _______ Canada Terrance R. Brennan _______ Milwaukee,Wisconsin Terrie Rosenthal Thomas Hill Toru Yamachika _______ Japan Tracey Hobson [October 20th] _______ LosGatos,CA Trish [October 29th] _______ Savannah, GA Vladislav Valicek _______ Hrvatska White Light _______ http://www.psynet.net/sacredgarden Wolfgang Matthews [April 8] _______ Ockham, United Kingdom Xavier Doll?ans _______ Paris,France Yvonne Pisz Zia Zolo Y. Total 168 members The following site will take you to Spiritwebs list of our members. You can click on the names and get more information and bios on those that have provided it. http://www.spiritweb.org/cgi/ml.cgi?list=keys-l&passwd=immortal&desc=1 Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3525 From: Rick Audette Subject: Virtue of the week Devotion A devoted person is dedicated to an ideal or a cause such as to the service of God. His interest, in the object of his devotion, is so great that, serving it is a joyful, untiring experience. Allegiance, faithfulness, loyalty, steadfastness and reverence are all part of devotion. The devotee is marked by his enthusiasm in service because he loves and feels a personal bond with the object of his devotion. The 12 Great Virtues http://www.ont.com/users/rea1/virtue.htm Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3526 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: Latest List oops, Just noticed I forgot to add Clive's new web page to the list. Here is the Url http://homepage.virgin.net/clive.culbertson It will be included in future revisions. Your blushing scribe, Rick Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3527 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Art of Seeing The Question of the day: Question: Is it harmful or helpful to be able to discern differences in our present reality? I am not talking about the acceptance of diversity here, but the discernment of differences. Actually, the process of seeing is accomplished through the discernment of differences or contrast and this principle of seeing operates on all levels. Let us start with the physical reality. We do not see because of light and we do not see because of dark. If there is light only you see nothing and if there is dark only you also see nothing. You only see when there is a contrast of light and dark or a discernment of the interplay of the two. In the blackness of space there is lots of light but no contrast therefore there is nothing to see. In ancient times a prophet who was able to see the contrast of light and dark beyond the physical was called a Seer. Most of us are not Seers because the only thing we register is the physical contrast of light and dark, but when we expand our vision to higher levels and use this same process that causes seeing in the physical then we will see on higher levels. One of the first steps to seeing on the higher levels is to go to the plane of the mind and register the contrasts and discern the truth within the contrasts by the use of the mind or good old common sense. I do not mention the emotional or astral world as the next step because it is built on the principle of illusion and no everlasting truths can be found there. The astral zone is a testing ground to prepare you for true seeing which begins on the plane of the mind and then goes on to higher spiritual levels including higher levels of feeling. The reason I mentioned the most controversial initiates on the left (Kavorkian) and on the right (Rush) is that this contrast, if gazed upon and registered, can produce a much more clear spiritual vision than less contrasting initiates such as Lincoln and Jefferson. Giving you what you think you know does not produce contrast and therefore, there is no enhanced vision. But if I give you that which you have never considered and you are forced to discern and contrast, higher vision is then available. I know I took the risk of offending many here. Between Rush and Kavorkian about 90% of any audience will be offended, but this is not new. Between John the Baptist and Jesus over 90% of the people in Jerusalem were also offended. Jesus had such a difficult time with offending people that he said: "Blessed is he who is not offended in me." Matt 11:6 It was the unusual person who did not get his feelings hurt by the Master. Several have questioned the value of some of the contrasts of conservative-liberal, the light and dark side, good and evil and so on, but the moment we cease considering such contrasts the evolution of our seeing comes to a standstill. We must develop seeing in the three worlds - the physical, astral/emotional and mental/celestial before we can move on to the higher formless worlds where a different type of seeing takes place. Aspirants are often anxious to move on to what they think are the highest worlds and skipping over the principle of seeing through contrast, but such is not possible. Such thinking merely causes many disciples to waste several lifetimes of drifting. We begin by physical seeing in the physical world then develop more sensitive physical seeing so etheric vision is accomplished, but this is merely the real part of the physical. Then we glide through the illusion of the astral, believing we see when we do not see any true reality, until we arrive at the seeing caused by mental discernment. This seeing through mind with the aid of the third eye dispels the illusion of the astral so a real step in vision is taken. No one has mentioned specifically the two things Rush has initiated that will benefit the world. Dr. Kavorkian's line of initiation is obvious, but Rush's is more subtle. Someone mentioned that he is leading us to more freedom in certain areas which may be true, but we want to be more specific here. Just in case you have a hard time with this, here is another question amplifying our earlier discussion on telling the truth. Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what? JJ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3528 From: Anni Ida West Subject: Re: Rush' philosophy Hi keysters Knowing Danish rightwing politics and reading JJ's long posting on Rush' philosophy I will make a go at what rightwing politicians initiate: They initiate laws and circumstances that give people responsibility toward themselves, others, their country and the earth. We cannot wait for "society" to feed us, nurse us and give us all we want. We have to do something ourselves - be architect of our own fortune (isn't that the wording in English?). We should not feel so sorry for the poor or the criminal that we by doing so take the responsibility away from them. So when the liberal way of thinking that the government should take care of everybody and everything goes too far, the pendulum swings back to conservatism and responsibility is placed with us - the people again. Just a few thoughts - probably not worth much - but I like to play this game :-))) Love and light to all of you Anni Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3529 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: Re: Rush, The Doctor, "Open" Minds, etc. This has become quite interesting. I just found out that I had a closed mind with regard to Rush. I used to say that my ex-husband and I were like the marrying of Rush Limbaugh to Jane Fonda (Jane is considered a liberal for those of you out of the US). He makes some intelligent points, and to think I've been making fun of him all this time! And here, I too, thought I had an open mind. JJ, one thing you said I have to question and it was with regard to people having control over their lives as much as possible (i.e. to go to Kervorkian or not) EXCEPT for the mentally ill. I've known people who have suffered so much psychologically that they are waiting for some brave soul to be the "Kervorkian for the mentally ill." I have even walked around in so much spiritual/ psychological pain that it actually became physically painful, so I know what these folks mean. Anyway, I just think that some mentally ill people should have the right to choose as well. Some of you know I am a member of AA, and the "HOW" of the program is Honesty, Open- mindedness, and Willingness. I was stunned to find out how very closed minded some of these so-called open minded folks are. (Yes, I can be a tad Pollyanna-ish, but that is not an entirely negative thing.) When some of them found out I was pregnant with a black man's baby, you'd have thought I had lit myself on fire in the town square. I was just rocked - stunned out of my mind - at some of their reactions. I subsequently miscarried (probably much to their collective relief!), but if you ever want a double dose of maternal instincts, ladies, think about protecting your child, and then think about protecting it from small minded racist morons! (Sometimes I think it is no wonder I miscarried!) Well, JJ, you've made clear what I already suspected, that I am, in fact, a liberal (I mean, how many people do you know that were born in Berkeley who are conservatives???). And when I read what you posted about Rush, I wonder if one can believe anything they hear anymore - EVERYTHING seems to have a "spin" on it. Seems to me we have become a nation of spin doctors! Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3530 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: Re: The Art of Seeing JJ: "Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what? " Sometimes it is the right thing to do to break a promise. To thine own self be true, for then thou canst be false to no man. (At least that's pretty close to the quote). We are human. We make mistakes, and promises based on all the information we have at a given time. I wasted a lot of time feeling guilty for breaking my promise of "til death us do part" to my ex-husband. I made the best choice at that time. As I grew up, it became apparent that "Rush and Jane" weren't meant to be together (unless we enjoyed a lifetime of the debating society - he did, and I didn't). Do I continue to bludgeon myself with a psychological baseball bat because I had to break a promise? Not hardly, and I won't spend a second letting some religious rightwing wacko tell me what a sinner I am - what a bunch of hooey that is! Anyway... About what Rush is initiating - I think it was John who said that he is initiating dialog and actual individual thought (imagine!) on many topics, rather than what I know I've been guilty of in the past which is the regurgitation of "facts" fed to me by the mainstream media. Is this not close to a correct answer? Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3531 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: Anni... on Art Bell Hi Anni, I have heard Art Bell before and I think he's on KGO, a San Francisco-based radio station. I'm not sure what time he's on here, but I'll bet my roomate would know so I'll do my best to remember to ask him. Thank you for your nice note. Hugs, Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3532 From: Karen Surface Subject: Re: The Art of Seeing "Snip.........JJ asks.......Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what?" I say..........One needs to be careful before making a promise. A promise is sacred and based on the only thing people really have, the value of one's word given in a promise. A promise is not to be given lightly nor disregarded once given. Discretion must be promised before the fact and not afterwards. Under His wings I am safely abiding; Though the night and tempest are wild, Still I can trust Him, I know He will keep me; He has redeemed me, and I am His child from the hymn, Under His Wings, by Ira Sankey. faith is based on Promise............. karen Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3533 From: Samu Karlsson Subject: OT- Updates For the information of ya Folks, :) A new picture, of Anni, placed in the Photo album at: http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/KeystersPhotoAlbum.html Please consider sending your picture to our evergrowing album! :) I have also updated JJ Archives at: http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives.html Brotherly hugs to All! Your buddy of Light (not to be associated with a certain american beer brand:D Samu :) Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3534 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: The Art of Seeing "Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what?" I think that, as long as we are responsible for what happens to us in the future, we are responsible for keeping a promise. If it were possible for us to keep a promise and we didn't, then that would be like a lie. If however, the actions of another caused the future to be other than what we were prepared to meet, then we could not meet the promise and would be off the hook. We are responsible for what we do, but have no control over others. Rick Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3535 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: PS on something I said With regard to doctor assisted suicide, I suppose part of the reason I don't have a problem with it is because I live with someone who suffers (and I do mean suffers) with chronic pain. It was much easier for me to make up my mind on this issue once I saw some-one really suffering. That's all. :) Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3536 From: (Richard/ Sharon) Subject: Breaking Promises I'm a little confused here, I agree that keeping a promise is a good practice; however, we sometimes are one person with one mind-set when we make a promise, and often a different person with a, possibly different mind-set when the time comes to keep the promise. How are we to handle this situation, should we be true to our "new" mind-set that may no longer believe in doing what we earlier promised to do, or do we ignore, what could be growth, in order to keep the promise? Thanks for any input, L&L Sharon & Richard ^I^ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3537 From: Samu Karlsson Subject: Re: The Art of Seeing JJ wrote: "Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what?" JJ, All :) I always thought a promise was sacred, and I have never made them lightly. When somebody has broken the promise they've made to me, that has hurt, but not nearly as much as the promises I've had to break, for one reason or the other. I can be really hard on myself, which is good when not taken to the extreme. I think I have learned to be easier on myself, but not too easy :) Well, I used to think that words like forever, really mean beyond time, eternally. Little did I know, and by saying that I mean that at the time I didn't understand that yes, it does mean forever, but like everything, that which is and will always be does change its face over time :) That can be the hard part, that certainly is the challenge, and that is also the beauty. When someone tells me something, I take it exactly as it is, I believe people really mean what they say. In that way I can be rather naive, because obviously I've learnt that some people say very sweet things but there's no substance behind it, none. I think it's sad that people don't actually mean what they say. That's a form of lying too. But darn, I am still too stubborn to change my ways, and I really mean the words I say :) If I tell someone I love them that comes from the heart. But Love is also so many things. Sometimes Love is grandest when it fully lets go. Well, Love is forever, it's just the mundane limiting patterns and forms we might give it that are temporary. The more we learn about unconditional love, the easier it is for have that love with us. Well, I've been only talking about promises related to love here so far :) Basically promises are made to be kept, that is how I look at it. One big thing that causes problems is that when a promise is made, one is not fully aware of the extent of his words. You might say yes I am gonna do this for you without even thinking that you're not really capable of doing so for one reason or the other, but you say yes, after all it's a good friend of yours, right? Well, if the situation is that you're not capable of keeping your words, then there's no idea in continuing with it trying to fake it but openly admitting how things are. Yes situations can change and this is many times not taken into consideration when promises are made. You might say for example, this is the way it's gonna be no matter what happens... But things do happen, and sometimes it might not be a good idea to make promises using those words, because you might be creating stillness while the world moves on. Sometimes it might be better to say, this is what I will do the best I can at. Many promises are broken simply because people want to get out easy, but sometimes the circumstances simply change so drastically that what make both partners who sealed the promise grow most is outside of that promise. It's a rather vast and often complicated subject (really?:) but I think promises are meant to be kept, what's being said is to be said sincerely, and one should pay attention to what really is being promised. As life goes on, the most loving and growing selfless choice can sometimes displace the former promise, as life is about 'growing bigger' :) But no-one should get intentionally hurt in the process, no. I can't emphasize this enough: Always mean what you say, understand it yourself, and never make promises lightly. That's what I try to do :) Hope that wasn't *toooooo* confusing, man am I tired or what! :) G'nite All! Samu :) Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-22/3538 From: "TwinStorms" Subject: Re: The Art of Seeing Hi Folks, It's been awhile since I last checked in from the land of Lurks-a-Lot. I have been following along intensely and trying to search within myself to find out not Who or What I AM. Rather, Where AM I? How am I progressing and do I know Where to go from here? Which brings me to JJ's latest post. "The Question of the day: Question: Is it harmful or helpful to be able to discern differences in our present reality? I am not talking about the acceptance of diversity here, but the discernment of differences." To be honest, I think both harmful and helpful. Depending on where a person is with respect to the Physical, Mental, Emotional and Spiritual aspects of their existence. Some one posted on another list that One mans Darkness is another mans Light and One mans Light can be another mans Darkness. Too much Light can be Blinding and a little Darkness can be revealing. How can I see the Good in you if I have no concept of Evil? What is the point in having courage if there is nothing to fear? What appreciation for Light is there, if I don't know I AM in the Dark. What is the point in learning to see, if you do not know what you are looking for? Just as the man who prays for patience will surely experience tribulation. So does the man who is in search of Light have to deal with darkness. Do you really want to learn the Art of Seeing. If so, you must deal with the opposite of Seeing. Oh my, I just realised what that is.......FAITH.....YES! The evidence of things not seen.....HEHEHEHEHEHE... I just got that. Excuse me while I do the Happy Dance! Before you can see, you must have FAITH! AS ABOVE, SO BELOW!!!!!! I have got to do this more often.... I was going to comment further, but I have to go Sing the Song and Give some thanks for the Illumination I just got, WOW! Later Folks! Light, Love and Power One for All and All for One! TwinStorms AKA James Bryan Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3539 From: J J Dewey Subject: To Thine Own Self Be True What two things is (or has) Rush initiating? The guesses so far apply to most conservatives. It is true that Rush and most conservatives stress individual responsibility and more freedom in financial affairs, but this type of thinking has been initiated for some time. A true initiate always brings something new to the world, or at least a new viewpoint. This will be a difficult question to answer for those of you who have not heard him more than once or twice. For those of you who have listened to him a number of times here is a hint: Have you ever heard anyone get the best of him in an argument? A second hint for the second initiation he has accomplished lies in this question: What is the difference in talk radio before Rush came to the scene and now? Has something been initiated in this regard? Then there is a third item initiated in which Rush played a part. In the United States and many other parts of the world the liberal element controlled legislation for over 40 years. The powers that be always force the wavelength to shift after a period of time, whether we like it or not, for in the contrast comes the greater seeing of the whole. It was destiny that someone like Rush would come along to assist in this shift. Later there will come a time that a powerful (and hated) liberal initiate will create another shift. The problem here with average seekers who are polarized on one side or another is that they will adore the initiates on their side of the fence, but completely miss what the Brotherhood is trying to accomplish with the opposing initiate. Thus 99% of the people who love Rush hate Kavorkian and 99% of those who love Kavorkian hate Rush. The handful of the enlightened who see with higher vision by allowing the contrasts to interplay will see the truth of the Middle Way and will see the virtues of high intelligence working on both sides of the spectrum. Should we keep promises? The difference between a promise and a lie is that a lie is an attempt to deceive others and with a promise we deceive ourselves. There is much truth in the words of the great Initiate Shakespeare: "To thine own self be true and as the night follows the day thou canst be false to any man." How is it that we are not true to ourselves if we break a promise? Does this also mean that if we keep our promises that we will not be false (lie) to any other person? Why? Do broken promises also increase the barrier between the personality and the soul? Should marriage vows be kept even if we fall out of love? I'll comment more on your comments and questions soon. I enjoyed James (Twin Storms) coming to enlightenment through his own interplay of thought. I'm sure all of us have done that from time to time. JJ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3540 From: Karen Surface Subject: Re: To Thine Own Self Be True JJ asked: "Have you ever heard anyone get the best of him in an argument?" I have never heard anyone get the better of Rush Limbaugh in any debate. The man is a master at presenting his views, screens his callers carefully and also has the advantage of a few second broadcast delay between what is being said and the few seconds later when it is broadcast. This transmission delay is common in an interactive radio situation, allowing for the censoring of inappropriate language, etc. I have listened to him for quite a while and he has never been bested. JJ asked "A second hint for the second initiation he has accomplished lies in this question: What is the difference in talk radio before Rush came to the scene and now? Has something been initiated in this regard?" Rush opened the flood gates for anyone with an opinion and the ability to articulate it in an understandable manner, to lay the foundations of their views, present them to people, actually feed the opinions to them in a manner where the receiver has only to sit passively and absorb. Certainly, now the people who are using the forum of talk radio are not the Gentleman that Mr. Limbaugh is , nor are they intelligent , and many seem to be just bumping their gums to make a dollar and/or get noticed. Dr. Kavorkian is also bringing the possibilities of human freedom and self responsibility to the front. His actions are aimed at the most basic level of choice . He is not an attractive man, his mission does not lend itself to glamour or illusion, it is too basic. Those of us who have lived during the Civil Rights movement, the Viet Nam War and it's accompanying protest realize that it is the people presenting opposition to the current paradigm by getting in people's faces with their views are the ones that get the ball rolling. This is what Mr. Limbaugh and Dr. Kororkian do, they force us to look into ourselves and decide what we believe on issued and face that belief system. JJ asks "Should we keep promises? and then asks...... Should marriage vows be kept even if we fall out of love?" Maybe I'm just trying to cover my own hind end on this given my record of marriage and divorce. I see the marriage vows as a contract. In the traditional ceremony, the question is asked in various forms; Do you promise to love, honor, cherish, in sickness and in health......and then the part "till death do you part". There's that word promise again and the promise seems to be setting up the conditions of the contract, I started looking at those vows when husband number 3 went looking for greener pastures, but am sore afraid that he only found deeper water. He returns often wanting to try to make another try at the marriage, but with the destruction of trust the contract broken, it is not a wise move, the losses on the investment in that relationship have already been too high. Love and Light Y'All karen Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3541 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: Re: To Thine Own Self Be True Thanks for the Shakespeare, JJ - I've always been envious of people who are really good at direct quotes. I mostly seem to get the general idea of what is being said. Should one keep marriage vows even if they fall out of love? Well this would seem the perfect opportunity to "should" all over myself for not keeping mine, and on those of you who found it impossible to keep your vows. But I'm not gonna do that 'cuz I spent too much time doing that in the past. But I have no idea what the correct answer is, so I'll just watch and wait. Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3542 From: Diane Linen Subject: Re: To Thine Own Self Be True J J Dewey wrote: "What two things is (or has) Rush initiating? The guesses so far apply to most conservatives. It is true that Rush and most conservatives stress individual responsibility and more freedom in financial affairs, but this type of thinking has been initiated for some time. A true initiate always brings something new to the world, or at least a new viewpoint. This will be a difficult question to answer for those of you who have not heard him more than once or twice. For those of you who have listened to him a number of times here is a hint: Have you ever heard anyone get the best of him in an argument?" No, I have not heard that. He can keep his cool and I've seen or heard him find the positive in a situation. He's passionate in his convictions. I have friends who ridicule him and I make no apologies for liking him. He has a quick wit and is quite intelligent. He uses humor to make many of his points which can defuse an otherwise difficult explanation of his presentations. Rush presents his side of an argument with facts and irrefutable logic. He respects his callers and does not ridicule them if their opinions differ from his. He loves to get opposing views because this helps him present his ideas from a different vantage point rather than just to a caller who staunchly agrees with him. "A second hint for the second initiation he has accomplished lies in this question: What is the difference in talk radio before Rush came to the scene and now? Has something been initiated in this regard?" Talk radio has never been larger. There are many new talk radio shows now and radio is more important than tv in that the length of time to present one's ideas is far greater, hours as opposed to only minutes on tv. They can reach a far greater audience with radio because you can listen to the radio almost anywhere. "Then there is a third item initiated in which Rush played a part. In the United States and many other parts of the world the liberal element controlled legislation for over 40 years. The powers that be always force the wavelength to shift after a period of time, whether we like it or not, for in the contrast comes the greater seeing of the whole. It was destiny that someone like Rush would come along to assist in this shift. Later there will come a time that a powerful (and hated) liberal initiate will create another shift." This reminds me a pendulum with a swing from side to side and it's swinging towards the more conservative side right now after swinging towards the liberal side for those 40 years. Rush has changed the focus from liberal to conservative pointing out the errors of giving people what the government wants them to have like public assistance and showing them that it's possible to do these things for themselves instead of the government. Taking seems to take away initiative. Doing or giving seems to create initiative. Instead of a government of and by the people, it's been a government that has grown overly large and has to continue to grow in order to "feed" itself. Rush shows that we must take back our own responsibility towards governing ourselves and making the persons elected work FOR us instead of us working FOR them. "The problem here with average seekers who are polarized on one side or another is that they will adore the initiates on their side of the fence, but completely miss what the Brotherhood is trying to accomplish with the opposing initiate. Thus 99% of the people who love Rush hate Kavorkian and 99% of those who love Kavorkian hate Rush. The handful of the enlightened who see with higher vision by allowing the contrasts to interplay will see the truth of the Middle Way and will see the virtues of high intelligence working on both sides of the spectrum." Thank you JJ for pointing out this point of what the Brotherhood is trying to accomplish with the opposing initiate. I had not looked at it in this way before. I don't hate Kavorkian. I understand what he is doing by his stance on assisted suicides. The judge last night told him that he may spend the rest of his life behind bars and he said... There's not that much left of it your honor." Whether a person agrees with him or not, *I* have respect for him because he adheres to his convictions regardless of the consequences. "Should we keep promises? The difference between a promise and a lie is that a lie is an attempt to deceive others and with a promise we deceive ourselves. There is much truth in the words of the great Initiate Shakespeare: "To thine own self be true and as the night follows the day thou canst be false to any man." This one is difficult for me. When I make a promise to someone I will do whatever I can to keep it. I do not give my word lightly. I also understand that circumstances do change and then there may be times when a promise can't be kept. When the marriage vow is broken and the two people are no longer in love with each other, they had every intention of keeping that vow but perhaps they no longer have need to continue with this part of their earths' lesson so I see no reason to continue the marriage and deepen their dissatisfaction with each other. If we are truthful to ourselves, then we will be truthful to others generally speaking. This correlation may not be true in all circumstances. I think every effort to keep marriage vows should be taken. When we have done all we could, we would not be true to ourselves if we keep the marriage but lost our respect for our partner or ourselves. By the same token, if we lie to ourselves or deceive ourselves easily what would keep us from doing so to others? Some people are glib liars and only make a distinction between the truth when it's in their interest to do so. Politicians fall into this category. "How is it that we are not true to ourselves if we break a promise? Does this also mean that if we keep our promises that we will not be false (lie) to any other person? Why? Do broken promises also increase the barrier between the personality and the soul?" I would think that broken promises would increase the barrier between the personality and the soul; to me it would be like clouding the contact and obscuring view of the soul. Continued loss of contact would keep that person from completing their life's lessons. It would make it more difficult to regain that contact with the soul, difficult but not impossible when that person regains their true focus in life. "Should marriage vows be kept even if we fall out of love? I'll comment more on your comments and questions soon. I enjoyed James (Twin Storms) coming to enlightenment through his own interplay of thought. I'm sure all of us have done that from time to time." Me too JJ. Diane Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3543 From: Zia Subject: Initiators R Limbagh & D Korvorkian Greetings to all, this is Zia. Rush Limbagh has shown me that the discomfort of conflict can often result in greater understanding. (I did not listen in the past for I did not like conflict.) Opposing views expressed often create discomfort if we're holding to our 'fixed' point of view. If my mind is open and flexible the conflict seems to create movement in my mind often resulting in an enlightening thought, or greater understanding. Speaking often causes those hidden understandings to be exposed, much to our astonishment sometimes. The other's words seems to cause our thoughts to move, to consider, to reflect, to dig. Now with JJ's questions my mind does the same thing, as though I were in a conversation with him. Therefore, to me Rush is the forerunner to having the conversations in my mind, he having them on the radio with another person that challenges his position, and all of us listening and moving with his mind, or even considering opposing thoughts. He is literally showing us how to do it. The beauty of the debate. And being comfortable at the same time, unless we choose to judge the appearance of conflict. My mind feels so vulnerable for my body when my body is exposed to the conflict. Consequently I see that the radio like the internet, keeps my body out of the way, allowing my mind to take on the challenge of conflicting thoughts, keeping my body safe and comfortable. So Rush gives me and all of his audience that cares to listen the opportunity to look deeply into both sides. Which side may not even matter, that he is on. It requires both. My understanding then often is beyond any polarity, seeming to arrive at the original thought creation or intent. Rush also shows us many people want to expand their mind and understand today. And perhaps remain nameless and unseen. Korvorkian challenges us to realize our 'choice to die' or choice to give up. We make that choice. Why...perhaps the conflict is too great, the discomfort too great, the fixed belief too difficult to consider changing, or too hidden. Since we make the choice to live or die, Korvorkian is making us aware of our conscious choice to die. Is this bringing the unconscious choice and the disease we create to conscious awareness for all? Perhaps these two guys show us how fixed we are in our own beliefs - their own convictions perhaps being a mirror of that in ourselves. They saw our discomfort (and shut-down) with conflict and brought it right out front, keeping us comfortable at the same time. Korvorkian brought to our conscious awareness the taboo of thinking we have a choice to live or die, that's God's choice some might say...so perhaps we hide our choice to die in a disease and then in the battle with our creation we become conscious of our choice. Korvorkian then is an initiator of conscious choice on life, death and maybe even taxes (lol), and Limbagh is also an initiator on individual responsibility and not giving it to someone else (like the government), and I as I look at this, they are both working for the same ideal, that we are indeed the creator of our reality and have choices in everything. Do I make 'God' responsible for life, death etc or do I be the God reflection responsible for my eternal life? Thank you JJ for this opportunity to see my hidden fear of conflict, and to overcome it with the delight of understanding. ZIA Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3544 From: xavier Subject: OT another web marvel completely without topic, but have a look at THIS :) http://members.aol.com/wjbgrafx/Confections/crystal.html try the directory /Confections too Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3545 From: Rick Audette Subject: RATE OF GROWTH Hi All, Last Feb. 15, I calculated that we had averaged 1.27 new members per day, since the list started. Lately, while making revisions to my list, it seemed like we were growing at a faster rate than before. So, today as I was cleaning out my inbox, I did the math again. Now I find that the rate has gone up to 1.42 new members per day. I really enjoyed learning that and thought I'd pass it on to the group. I also noticed that I'm beginning to see more people joining in the discussions. It just keeps getting better, all the time. Keep up the good work, Rick Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3546 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: I SEE DA LIGHT!!! How could I have been so blind? I know what Rush initiates. The idea that the death of old growth redwood forests is a good and viable thing to do... Sorry, I just couldn't stand it anymore. Please forgive my liberal, tree hugging drivel. :) Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3547 From: Brian Weis Subject: Rush and Dr. K. I just wanted to throw my few-cents-worth on the Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Kavorkian thing. To be honest, I was never impressed with Rush (until very recently), and Dr. Kavorkian didn't really elicit much of a response from me either. To me, the biggest difference between the two men was not their politics/beliefs; it was the way they carried out their politics/beliefs. You see, I saw Rush as pretty much a complainer. An articulate complainer, but nothing more because he did not offer alternatives. And you won't keep my attention long if you do nothing but whine about what's going on (and not give your own suggestions for improvements). Dr. Kavorkian, on the other hand, was a doer. He put his beliefs about assisted suicide into action. Very recently, I have changed my mind about Rush. I now see him as a mental catalyst. Someone whose purpose is to make you think so that you can come up with your own plan of action. Regardless of whether you buy into his brand of politics, he is a polished speaker and can present many different facts that other "well-meaning advocates" on either side of the fence have missed. ~B. =.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.= "I have always felt that violence was the last refuge of the incompetent, and empty threats the final sanctuary of the terminally inept." ~ the marquis de Carabas =.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.=.= Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3548 From: (Richards, Gary) Subject: Re: Digest No. 1999-03-23 of The Keys of Knowledge List Hi Folks, JJ said: "Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what?" As so many promises are broken it would seem that there is a flaw in the basic premise of a promise. A promise is made with an intent based on knowledge and circumstances at hand. If the basis for making the promise changes, it seems unreasonable to be held to that promise. As we cannot know what will be tomorrow then perhaps we should not make promises unless they are conditional. Many wedding vows are broken and it seems unreasonable to expect two people to remain unhappily together when they could be happy and productive apart. Love & Light Gary Richards Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-23/3549 From: Zia Subject: Breaking Promises Greetings to all, "Many people make promises and then feel justified in breaking them because later circumstances seem to make it necessary. Is breaking promises sometimes the right thing to do or should we keep them no matter what?" I discovered for me that when a promise was broken by someone else to me I considered them a liar, and when I broke a promise it was that I had created the circumstances in not wanting to keep the promise. So my own projection of not wanting to keep the promise, simply put the blame on another. I must always then be the liar. Assuming it was not my intent to lie in the first place, why would I make a promise? Why is a promise necessary...is my word the truth, or will I corrupt my word by creating circumstances as my excuse not to keep my word? Then what value is a promise? Somehow a promise sounds like an exchange, like a promissory note, good for redemption at a given time. When does a promise end? When paid out in full? The marriage vows, 'till death do us part' so what happens if there is no death? Could love ever end? A promise seems a commitment to a future event. It is bound in time. And in time it seems all things change. If I create a promise, and create no conflicting thoughts regarding that promise, the promise must occur in time. The same with my own words. How can we promise to love when we are ignorant of what that love really means? Thus perhaps the promise to learn the meaning of love together is a truer intent in making/breaking marriage vows. What causes us to 'change' our mind and want to revoke a promise? Perhaps it is something we value more than what we have promised. My young son believes that if he breaks a promise to save someone's life, it's okay. And through that I realised the difference. If the promise is made with the intent of deception, conscious or unconscious, then the promise is not being broken, the deception is being broken. When the deception is exposed, and it may be our own ignorance that is exposed, the promise is invalidated. An ignorant promise has no value. The marriage vows are often made not in unconditional love but in ignorance of what love is, and when it is found that the union is not based on love, a promise of love is invalidated. Also if there is a giving of a promise to get something in return, this is simply an exchange for which a promissory note would compensate. That is the purpose of our legal tender called money. Is a promise a way of putting off a decision now, to a future time, so that it will be easier to say no in that future time? And not face the conflict now of telling the truth of one's feelings? Children have a way of asking and getting us to promise followed by the question when? Men can have a way of promising something in order to get what they want now, but not keep the promise of the future? The politician makes promises now that he may or may not intend to keep in the future, even at the point of making them. These promises are of the personality in order to get something it wants, the exchange. And in hope of never having to pay, but still getting what is wanted now - votes. Hence the feeling of being lied to. And to me the soul records the lie, the instant the promise is made. And the feeling of the lie creates that black wall. Actions speak louder than words. Perhaps that is why Kavorkian has a greater respect in some people's eyes than Rush. Forget making promises, let your actions speak for you. That is living in the now. Again thank you all, ZIA Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3550 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Promises, promises I think the ability to keep promises is a sign of having personal integrity. People who make promises lightly and break them easily generally lack integrity in other areas of their lives as well. They often display a lack of respect for both themselves and others and can find it difficult to remain committed to anything for very long. The bible tells us that the promises of God 'changeth not' ie they are unconditional eg His love for us never ceases no matter what we do. However, I have found that whenever I make unconditional promises, I'm more likely to break them, resulting in disappointment in myself and regret For having made them in the first place. Therefore, I tend to make my promises conditional - I will do this for you to the best of my ability providing a) you do this for me, or b) certain conditions prevail at the time, or c) our personal circumstances don't change etc. That way there is less likely to be any disappointment, and responsibility for the fulfillment of the promise is shared, increasing the chances of success. Most marriage vows fall into this category. Generally speaking, if a marriage fails it's not because the partners haven't tried their best to make it work. People and circumstances change and sometimes separation is the only choice left to enable the two people involved to keep their promises to themselves, eg not to live a lie. Sometimes one promise takes precedence over another. And that's all I've got to say, folks.........promise! Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Friendship is a sheltering tree. - Coleridge Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3551 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Path of Truth We have had some good writings from members, especially on promises. There has been too much for me to comment on them on but I enjoyed reading every post and I'm sure many were stimulated by them. I see that Zia, a new participant, is jumping in with both feet. Welcome. In the past many of you have expressed a lot of interest in enhancing your soul contact and we covered a number of subjects that we hoped would help. Some, such as maya, glamour and illusion, are difficult to understand completely. Now we arrive at another subject that may help clear the barriers of that illusive contact, but the advantage here is that we are now on a subject that is fairly easy to understand. Outside of some politicians, most people know what a lie is and what a promise is. Thus we find ourselves dealing with principles that we already understand and basically accept. The basic principles behind lies and broken promises that interferes with soul contact is deceit. Lies deal with an attempt to deceive others and broken promises are caused by self deceit. If you make a promise believing you can carry it out, but then find that you are unable to fulfill it, then the promise was broken because you were self deceived about what you could or could not do. One of the basic differences between the Masters who have overcome death and us ordinary, mortals is that their word is always to be trusted and their promises are to be relied on. Let us suppose that you were visited by Christ himself, or a Master, who taught you certain things and made you certain promises. Doesn't it register with your soul that you should be able to trust His word? Well, why is it right that we should be able to trust His word but He cannot trust ours? This is not right. We must aspire to becoming as He is. The big question in everyone's mind is this. Complete honesty and one hundred percent accuracy in the fulfillment of promises is a fine ideal, but it is not realistic. All of us encounter situations where it seems we have to lie or break promises. The way to achievement in honesty and the keeping of our word among us human beings, as it is done in the kingdom of heaven, is an important key and the path is not as you may have been taught. The path to having a reliable word and BECOMING one with the WORD yourself is not a steel will or having such a hard heart that you would have told the Nazis where a loved one was hiding to avoid a lie. It is true that to attain honesty a certain amount of discipline is necessary, but to tread the path, wisdom is more important than discipline or will. The key to telling the truth at all times and fulfilling your promises at all times is the principle of conscious projection. This principle involves your conscious attention on a daily (and sometimes hourly) basis. The first thing you must understand before using this principle is your own ring-pass-not, or your own limitations, and we all have them whether we be a slug, a human or a God. All lives in the universe must find their limitations before they can become unlimited. If our limitations are not discovered, or known by us, then our limitations will find us and reveal themselves to us and embarrass us and sometimes cause great pain. To become totally honest and open wide the doors of soul contact we must first "know ourselves" and explore our inner resources and ask these questions. How far would I have to be pushed before I would lie? How much would circumstances have to change before I would break a promise? What type of promises am I likely to keep? Which ones would I be likely to break? How much pain would I have to endure physically or emotionally before I would lie or break a promise? Am I more likely to tell the truth or keep a promise to a loved one more than a salesman or an irritating relative? Ask yourself every question that you can think of that reveals the borders of your limitations. "But what if I do not know what I would do in a certain situation?" one may ask. This is where conscious projection comes in. Project yourself into this situation where you are not sure of your limitations and push yourself through it with visualization and if you are true to yourself and have the courage to face your own power of decision you will come to a knowledge of how you will react in any circumstance. Here is another principle. If two paths lie ahead and a new choice is to be forced upon you then you will always chose the easier path (usually the worst choice) if you have not used conscious projection to see yourself making the decision ahead of time. On the other hand, if you see the two paths approaching and analyze the benefits of the two choices ahead of time and you make the decision before the event occurs, then you will generally have power to follow that pre-made decision when the path approaches, even if the decision is a difficult one. Once we have discovered and understand our limitations then we must project our minds into the probable future on a daily basis. If we do this we will see close to one hundred per cent of the coming temptations to lie or break a promise. Once we see in advance the temptations to deceive we can just about always figure a way around them so we can be true to ourselves and others, yet at the same time follow the path of harmlessness. How about our marriage vows then? The group seems to universally believe that if things are not working out then these are promises to be broken. Actually we should be looking at this concept in reverse. The marriage vows as they exist in many countries are promises that should never have been made. Most of them contain the phrase to be faithful "until death do us part." Well, what if you find out a week after your marriage that you married an ax murdered? Would you feel justified in breaking your vows then? Probably so, but the problem of the broken promise lies not so much with the new information you have discovered (for this always happens to some degree in a marriage) but in the vow itself. The current marriage vows is like playing Russian Roulette with your word. Even as you give your word at the marriage ceremony there is about a 50-50 chance that you will discover that this person you seem to love will drive you to the brink of madness. Where will be your power to keep your word then? The key to keeping your marriage vows is not to become so self-sacrificing that you dedicate yourself to a miserable life just so you can keep your word. Instead, the key is to write your own marriage vows in such a way that you can keep them even if your spouse goes off the deep end. The marriage vows made by my wife and I are worded this way and I posted them not long ago. They commit us to work toward union, but not "to death do us part." For those of you who are new we discussed the Beast in Revelations at length earlier. The marriage vows as they are used today are the creation of the Beast and an instrument in the hands of the Dark Brothers to keep a barrier between human beings and their souls. One should never use a vow or promise that is written by an outward authority unless it is fully understood and endorsed through considerable reflection. If you want to be a nun and do not like the wording in the vow you are asked to take then don't take it. All your desires to tread the spiritual path will be clouded if an unrealized vow is hanging over your head. So what then should we do if we have made some promise, such as the marriage vows, but now realize that we made a mistake and it seems best that we get out of the deal? This is a no win situation, but the best thing to do is access your damages and move on with a determination to never allow your word to get in such a trap again. This is a little like the guy who buys a car and doesn't think to get insurance then has a wreck. Once you are in this situation you have to realize that there is no escape from a certain amount of loss and the best thing to do is move forward in life with a commitment to never get caught in the same circumstance again. To keep your word you must be very careful about giving your word as Samu and others have stated. Never give your word without first projecting your consciousness into the future seeing every possible situation that may come up. I find that careful wording changes a promise into a conditional goal. For instance, someone may ask me if I can get a job to them in three days. I may give an answer such as: "Unless something crazy happens you'll have it." or "Nineteen times out of twenty we can do this in three days, providing UPS does its job and all the parts get here in time." By using careful wording one can avoid that one time out of twenty that someone you are dependent on screws up forcing you to break a promise. If you feel somewhat guilty about lies you have told or promises that you have broken and wish you could just make a new start there is an interesting way for you to d o it. Make a commitment to yourself to tread the path of complete honesty and then find a friend to baptize you by immersion. Notice I say find a friend, not a minister or priest. It would be best if this friend is not particularly religious, but just a good person. Let that friend pronounce the words as given in the scriptures: "I baptize you in the name of the (Father [or Father-Mother], and in the name of the Son and in the name of the Holy Ghost... AUMAN." After he or she says these words then let him place you completely under the water and raise you up out of the water. As you feel yourself being raised up out of the water see yourself as an innocent infant in the eyes of God and that you have a whole new life before you. If this is done in the right spirit a powerful effect can be generated. Baptism is not just a once-in- a-lifetime experience. You can perform this ceremony when ever you feel like you want a new lease on life. I am out of time and too tired to think of a good question for you tonight, but will come up with something interesting tomorrow (unless something crazy happens). JJ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3552 From: Marylin Subject: Re: PS on something I said Tracey writes: "With regard to doctor assisted suicide, I suppose part of the reason I don't have a problem with it is because I live with someone who suffers (and I do mean suffers) with chronic pain. It was much easier for me to make up my mind on this issue once I saw some-one really suffering. That's all. :)" Hi Tracey I just wanted to add that I did the death watch on my late husband 3 1/2 years ago and watching a loved one suffer and not be able to do anything about it is what I call HELL for all involved. I also watched my dad die of cancer and when he begged me to bring him a poison into the hospital, I just couldn't do it. At the same time I didn't want him to suffer. It's really hard when one you love is dying and you don't want them to die, yet find yourself asking to God to take them quickly to stop the suffering. Marylin Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3553 From: Sharon Jorgenson Subject: Promises, Promises ZIA, This is amazing what you've written, among other things. "And to me the soul records the lie, the instant the promise is made. And the feeling of the lie creates that black wall." This is precisely the experience I've had in getting married. For two years I tried to make it "work", thinking that I had not yet broken the promise if I was still trying to keep it on some level. I used to take out those wedding vows and weep bitterly as I reread them believing I was shackled to every syllable. Then I had to face the more awful truth that the damage was done the moment I said 'I do' and only speaking the truth (at last) to my lawful spouse could possibly enable me to be true to myself once more. I enslaved myself in order to avoid speaking the truth in the beginning (even before the marriage). It was a terrible bargain that had nightmarish consequences, particularly because there is a child involved. This is the first time I have been able to discuss this with anyone else besides one dear friend, but I feel I can now, being two years on the other side of regaining my soul. And yes I know that I'm mailing this to the whole list. Learn from my suffering and risk upsetting people when you know that that small, still voice is telling you to not follow another's agenda. Let them fly into a rage if they don't like it or whine like a baby or threaten suicide - For God's sakes stand your ground. It's your life; there are better ways to learn important karmic lessons than crushing your spirit. Naturally I have to live with the consequences of having brought a child into this world, but I also realized that she would most certainly learn how to live life from my actions and not my words. If I continued to exist without freedom, she would surely have modeled that. I realized I absolutely had to free myself, not by physical relocation, but in fact. Feeling a little emotional, SharonJ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3554 From: David Curtis Subject: Re: The Path of Truth J J Dewey writes: "I am out of time and too tired to think of a good question for you tonight, but will come up with something interesting tomorrow (unless something crazy happens)." That was probably one of the best posts I've read since this group started. I have a question that might provoke some thought, though. Now that we know all of this, what should we do if we've already inadvertently made a vow (marriage or otherwise) that we now realize we cannot keep? Peace and Love, Dave Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3555 From: Anni Ida West Subject: Re: Promises, Promises Dearest Sharon, Thank you for sharing your inner feelings and thoughts with us your words touched my heart in a very special way. Maybe because I lived through almost the same experiences about 5 - 6 years ago. I know it hurts so much but also that it is the pain that makes us grow. From my heart I send you light and love, keyster-sister. Together we shall overcome :-)) Again: thank you for sharing with us. Anni Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3556 From: Rick Audette Subject: Re: The Path of Truth "If you feel somewhat guilty about lies you have told or promises that you have broken and wish you could just make a new start there is an interesting way for you to d o it. Make a commitment to yourself to tread the path of complete honesty and then find a friend to baptize you by immersion. Notice I say find a friend, not a minister or priest. It would be best if this friend is not particularly religious, but just a good person. Let that friend pronounce the words as given in the scriptures: "I baptize you in the name of the (Father [or Father-Mother], and in the name of the Son and in the name of the Holy Ghost... AUMAN." "After he or she says these words then let him place you completely under the water and raise you up out of the water. As you feel yourself being raised up out of the water see yourself as an innocent infant in the eyes of God and that you have a whole new life before you." "If this is done in the right spirit a powerful effect can be generated. Baptism is not just a once- in-a-lifetime experience. You can perform this ceremony when ever you feel like you want a new lease on life." Wow!!! When I read this, this morning, my eyes lit up. Here we have been given another thing that we, seekers of truth, can do together. First, we all got to read the same book. Then, we are united by the song of 144,000, so that no matter where or when we say it, we are saying it together. Next we get this mail list and can join in discussions about the principles being taught. Then with the aid of individual web sites and ICQ, we become even closer. Now JJ has introduced the idea that friends can baptize each other, to help get a new lease on life. To think that at one time I wondered what two "keysters" would do if they met. How nice it is to know that we have a growing number of "family traditions" to engage ourselves in. I'm excited by these developments. Rick Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3557 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: Re: The Path of Truth You know, Rick just articulated what I have been feeling all day. I am so excited about JJ's post and even e-mailed him personally re: my "issues" with giving up the social lie, the business lie, etc. (I mean, there has been more than one occasion when I was going on a job interview and my boss thought I was at the dentist or some such). For me, making the choice to be COMPLETELY honest takes an enormous amount of courage, not that I'm not up to it. It's kind of like being a little kid and mustering the courage to go off the high dive for the first time. I have always admired those people I know who can "say what they mean, mean what they say, and not say it mean." And there is no reason why I can't be one of them. As long as I'm willing to "jump." Anyway, thanks Rick. Thanks JJ. Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3558 From: (Richard/ Sharon) Subject: Lies One of the most empowering moments of my life came when I truly understood that I am responsible for my life, every aspect, every moment of my life. I can choose to be a victim or I can choose to not be a victim. If I choose victim, I can lie and try to pretend nothing is my fault, or I can choose to tell my whole truth and face the world with my light shinning, this was a very freeing experience for me, which is saying a lot. I used to lie a lot, because I felt if I were honest, people might see the REAL me and not like me, and being liked by everybody was important to me, but since I started liking myself, it doesn't matter so much if others don't. Love & Light, Sharon Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3559 From: Zia Subject: Sharon.J Promises, Promises Well done brave soul, I honor you. ZIA ps I so felt you it was as though I breathed your emotion with you. Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-24/3560 From: J J Dewey Subject: A Promise Is... Something crazy did happen. I got the flu. Oh well, life goes on. In order to keep promises we must first have a clear idea in our mind what a promise is. Many people lump all statements of intent together as promises and as such put themselves in an impossible situation if they seek to keep them all. A loose statement of intent is not a promise because it is not taken by the giver or receiver as a binding statement. Instead, it is just a statement of an act that you intend to fulfill. An example of such a statement of intent is something like this: Wife: "Honey! Will you pick up a dozen eggs on the way home?" Husband: "OK" Now what happens if the husband just forgets to get the eggs? Has he broken a promise? I present here an answer of no. Why? Because the husband merely made a loose declaration of intent that was not taken as a solemn promise by his wife. She may be irritated if he forgets the eggs, but she will not feel betrayed. Does this mean that we can be lax on our declarations of intent? No. We should seek to fulfill all such declarations if possible, but it is not the end of the world if we slip here now and then. Because there is no sense of betrayal the interference with soul contact will be small. Before worrying about perfecting ourselves with the fulfillment of our declarations of intent we must first work with our promises and control circumstances as well as self so that we can keep all of them. What is a promise? It is more than a declaration of intent. Instead it is a declaration of what you WILL do. A broken promise is serious because it is a breaking of the will, your will. You have willed to do a thing and your will was broken by the only person who can break it, yourself. Now let's turn the dozen eggs thing into a promise. Wife: "Honey! Will you pick up a dozen eggs on the way home?" Husband: "OK" Wife: "That's what you said yesterday, but tonight I have to have them for company. Can you be sure and get them on the way home?" Husband: "I'll be sure and remember this time." This is not the most serious commitment in the world but the wife takes it seriously enough that there would be some feeling of betrayal if the guy does not bring home the eggs. Not keeping his word here can create some soul interference. If a person truly forgets an item that he gave his word on he should then do everything in his power to fulfill it as soon as the memory is recalled. In the case of the husband, if he forgets the eggs, but remembers as he pulls up in the driveway, the best thing to do is backtrack to the nearest store and fulfill his pledge. It is most important that when we make a commitment and we are aware of such commitment that we do all in our power to be true to our word. If we do this consistently then our vibration moves in harmony with the vibration of Spirit, which is truth, and the door to soul contact opens wide. Dave writes: "I have a question that might provoke some thought, though. Now that we know all of this, what should we do if we've already inadvertently made a vow (marriage or otherwise) that we now realize we cannot keep?" I answered this somewhat yesterday. Let me repeat my words: "So what then should we do if we have made some promise, such as the marriage vows, but now realize that we made a mistake and it seems best that we get out of the deal?" "This is a no win situation, but the best thing to do is access your damages and move on with a determination to never allow your word to get in such a trap again." "This is a little like the guy who buys a car and doesn't think to get insurance then has a wreck. Once you are in this situation you have to realize that there is no escape from a certain amount of loss and the best thing to do is move forward in life with a commitment to never get caught in the same circumstance again." There are times that it is best to remove ourselves from an unworkable promise but when thus happens we must realize two things. First, this is a message to me that I did not accurately look into the possibilities of my future and must be wiser next time. Second, there will be some temporary soul interference, but if I commit myself to a life of truth I can progress back to where I am supposed to be. Temporary soul interference may be a price worth paying to get out of a bad situation. Promises such as many marriage vows that are written by someone else are often not as serious as the ones you put in your own words. If you agreed "to death do us part" then you must reflect on what type of commitment you internally made as you were agreeing to these words. Were you thinking that you would stay with your spouse no matter what or were you thinking that you would be true to her until the death of the relationship? There are always many variables to consider. Just remember this. When you learn to be true to your word, the Word within you will be known and it will be found to be made flesh in you. God will then be known as 100% trustworthy. As a general rule it is a good idea to only make promises when it is important to the other party involved, and then word them in a way that you are close to 100% sure that you can fulfill them. My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war. JJ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3561 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Re: A Promise Is... J J Dewey wrote: "My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war." I am surprised by the apathy in New Zealand to the Yugoslavian situation, especially now that NATO has commenced bombing. Obviously, the average NZ'er doesn't realize that the Balkans is one of the world's hot spots, despite the media being full of the current situation. I'm also surprised because Kiwis are generally quite cynical when NATO forces (or one or two of them) step in to supposedly save a country or race from tyranny. I grudgingly accept that there are some instances when you have to go to war to preserve peace. I'm just not convinced that this is one of those times. The rhetoric emanating from Clinton and Blair lacks in credibility as far as I'm concerned but then, it usually does. I just wonder why they've chosen this particular sovereign state to liberate from tyranny when the same sort of conditions exist, and have existed in other countries over the years eg many African states (I don't recall the NATO forces jumping to quash Idi Amin). One can't help wondering what the real reasons are and, of course, there are many theories around such as a Wag the Dog type policy to divert attention from Clinton's domestic situation (both within and outside the White House) and control of the lucrative Balkan drug trade. Whether or not the NATO forces are justified in bombing a sovereign state and conducting its own form of 'cleansing', I have to say that all those concerned are very much in my heart and mind when I'm saying the Song these days. Let peace reign. Love Glenys -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ask a teenager now while he still knows everything! Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3562 From: Diane Linen Subject: Re: A Promise Is... J J Dewey wrote: "My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war." *If* I believed the media in this country, I would know I am feverish. ;-) I believe that this is madness. Why should we suddenly take up this particular cause at this particular time? I think that this will be another no win situation such as others like Korea, Vietnam etc. This is a wag the dog scenario to get our minds off of the Chinese espionage situation. I do not support our presidents' decision. Diane Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3563 From: "Faith" Subject: RE: A Promise Is... I'm new to the list, so greetings to everyone! This post made me think of Jesus' Biblical injunction to "let your nays be nay and your yeas be yea," in other words, do not promise. All of the trouble that has been experienced by those who have shared on the list what happened when they *tried* to keep a promise (and by untold others) may be the reason for his warning. I would also add, in response to this: "Promises such as many marriage vows that are written by someone else are often not as serious as the ones you put in your own words." I disagree. Even though you did not write them yourself, you knew what they said, and so have agreed to abide by them *as if* you'd written them yourself. Also: "If you agreed "to death do us part" then you must reflect on what type of commitment you internally made as you were agreeing to these words. Were you thinking that you would stay with your spouse no matter what or were you thinking that you would be true to her until the death of the relationship? There are always many variables to consider." I would imagine that, if one were honest with oneself (and that is my own personal judgment), they would acknowledge that they accepted the literal definition of death when they agreed to this statement. Otherwise, they would be agreeing that if their partner felt that the relationship had died, then it was perfectly all right if he or she decided to pack up and leave. I doubt this is the mindset when the marriage vows are taken. One last thing. JJ wrote: "I answered this somewhat yesterday. Let me repeat my words: "So what then should we do if we have made some promise, such as the marriage vows, but now realize that we made a mistake and it seems best that we get out of the deal?" "This is a no win situation, but the best thing to do is access your damages and move on with a determination to never allow your word to get in such a trap again." I would say that, ultimately, this might be true. But there is an intermediate stage that could be skipped with this scenario. That is, *we* may, with our ego minds, think that we have made a mistake, but our Higher Self may see that there is no mistake, and that a situation can be gotten through and a wonderful relationship salvaged if one will stick it out. Let me say something here, though: I'M NOT ADVOCATING STICKING IT OUT WHEN THERE IS ABUSE OR ADDICTION! I'VE GOTTEN OUT OF THAT SITUATION MYSELF, AND IT WAS THE BEST DECISION I'VE EVER MADE! What I am saying is that we often get angry or frustrated or fed up, and decide "That's it! I'm leaving this so-and-so this time!" when what we actually might need to do, if our partner is a basically decent person whom we still feel some love for, is to learn to get along, to not get angry so easily, to be more respectful and patient and solicitous of the other person. I'm speaking from experience here, and not suggesting anyone do something I haven't done (actually, I'm still working on these things :-) myself. It's not easy; in fact, it's one of the hardest things in the world, but it can be worth it in the long run. Plus, if we switch to another relationship, unless *we* have changed, we'll run into the same situation! Gosh, what a way to make oneself known! Thank you for "listening" :-). And I hope you're getting better from the flu, JJ! Peace, Faith Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3564 From: A.M.M.F.Appelman Subject: Kosovo - war Hello everyone, I'm Alex and live in The Netherlands. Here in Holland we have been hearing and reading reports about the Kosovo conflict on an almost daily bases for a very long time now. I don't know if in the USA the media coverage has been this intensive as well, but I suppose that Kosovo being so much closer to us Europeans has something to do with it. (most European countries have had extensive media coverage on the subject for a long time as well). The feeling about this war, among most people I know, is that this war is a terrible thing, but absolutely necessary to stop the military under Milosevic from going ahead with their inhumane massacring of the Albanian refugees. We just can't allow him to go on killing people. This is a widespread feeling because even one of our most pacifistical political parties (Groen Links, which would translated mean Green Left) unanimously supports the NATO-attack. As there have been many negotiations and diplomatic attempts to persuade Milosevic to sign a peace-agree-ment or even a seace-fire, nobody is surprised that it came to this. Personally, what strikes me most is that the people of Kosovo seem to be outraged with this 'intrusion' into the conflict, which they see as an internal matter. There appear in our newspapers huge photographs of crying and screaming soldiers over the loss of their comrades. All though I would never deny the pain, hurt and suffering of anyone who has lost someone he or she cared about, I must say that it all looks a bit hypocritical to me. How can someone be outraged to get attacked when he has done the very same thing for a long time himself ?!? If you hit a person, don't be outraged if he hits you back! Mind you, I'm absolutely not a supporter of the "an eye for an eye"-philosophy but this attack is not about vengeance and they just have to stop killing one another. I therefore think that this NATO-attack was necessary to try to protect the Albanian refugees, and all others that Milosevic is trying to remove from Kosovo, from following the same horrible fate as the Jewish people did in the second world war. If NATO had not done this, they would have been asked later what they existed for and why they hadn't done anything. But if someone could explain me the standpoint of Russia and China, that would be great because mere commercial interest couldn't, in my eyes, possibly justify their unwise behavior. Shouldn't they back the international community up when tragedies like these can be prevented? I just don't understand them. Of course I realise that both sides of the conflict feel that they are fighting a just cause, but that is the case in most wars, I suppose. If they were to consider the consequence of their actions and the point of view of the other side better, peace would be much easier achieved. But that might be a little na Well, I hope that I was able to write down my thoughts as clearly as I intended. These are just my opinions of matter, but I know that many people feel the same way. It may not be the best way to think about attacking people, but I really don't see how one could be mild in ones opinion in this case, although I usually do try to be. I hope this isn't too long a text, but I wanted to speak my mind exactly the way I felt about it (which I think is what JJ asked) Greetings, Alex Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3565 From: David Curtis Subject: Re: A Promise Is... J J Dewey writes: "My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war." Interesting you ask. I thought about bringing this up, but decided it would interfere with the progression of the group. I'm glad you've incorporated it somewhat. I have a general bad feeling about this war. I don't believe we should be in it. We shouldn't be sticking our noses in anywhere, honestly. We are playing the worlds police, and I think there is some resentment coming from many of our neighbors. I would be very interested in what you have to say about this war. Peace and Love, Dave Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3566 From: Samu Karlsson Subject: Re: A Promise Is... JJ writes: "My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war." Most of the people who I've talked to think that this was the only alternative left to restore peace (which I find quite a paradox, to use what is basically a form of violence to stop violence, hmmm...) yet many, me included, have a feeling that there's gonna be bad unexpected consequences... To be honest, I have quite a sickening feeling about the whole thing, I really don't feel good about it... Well obviously people, civilians, are getting killed, but like Glenys mentioned, I too have to wonder why Kosovo was chosen, when there's been many other places in history that haven't been helped/destroyed/whatever it is that's tried to be achieved? I really get a feeling this is so much more than it seems... Funny thing, I too was thinking about the movie Wag the Dog this morning before I read JJ's mail... And I did get an impression that this was, hate to say it, like a practice for something else coming up soon. I get the feeling that Kosovo will initiate something. It really is hard to think that feelings between the parties in war could be anywhere close to neutral after this. We shall see, I am praying for a peaceful outcome. All the innocent people suffering are in my thoughts. Right now many European countries, Finland included, are getting ready to give probably hundreds of thousands of refugees a place to hide from the madness of this war. If I have to find something good in this totally crazy situation, it is that it can make us look at ourselves more as one unit living on this bluegreen pearl instead of separate groups of people with different beliefs and backgrounds. We all still want and look for the same basic simple things in life, doesn't matter what we name them. Peace can only come after having enough self- esteem and respect for your brother to see him as equal. Then you don't want to be hitting him no more, because you know in the end you're really hurting yourself. All I am saying is give peace a chance. With harmonious thoughts, Samu Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3567 From: Tracey Hobson Subject: Re: A Promise is... JJ wrote: "Just remember this. When you learn to be true to your word, the Word within you will be known and it will be found to be made flesh in you. God will then be known as 100% trustworthy." I feel like a dummy asking this, but the above makes no sense to me, almost as if it is the spiritual version of psycho-babble. Please take no offense, JJ, but I could just use some clarification of what this means. As for Kosovo, it feels to me like this Milosevic guy is somewhat Hitler esque, but on a smaller scale. From what I understand of this conflict, it goes back CENTURIES. The press is attempting to boil it down and make it neat and understandable, but I suspect some major history is getting lost in the translation. Perhaps John could be asked if he spent a lifetime as an ethnic Albanian, and what the "real deal" is... my 2 cents worth. Tracey Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3568 From: Jennifer Hampson Subject: Re: Kosovo --JJ Re Kosovo. Personally I am concerned about this war. I seem to remember from my history lessons that the first world war was triggered by Archduke Ferdinand in Serbia. And since history repeats, I feel that even as far away as in Australia, which considers the States its most powerful ally, there may be repercussions. Add to this the potential disruption of the Millennium Bug, the increase of natural disasters, the world financial situation (and here in Sydney, Australia the difficult preparation for the Olympic Games) and I think we need to be prepared for the possibility of some tough times ahead. I have heard the following responses to Kosovo... "They should have intervened earlier before so many people had been killed." "Let them shoot it out and get it over with." "America can't keep its nose out of other countries business." "Fighting for peace is like f------ for chastity." Probably most people here feel it is so far removed from their own day-to-day lives that they do not give it a second thought. It has been very prominent in the media, but then the news has been full of information about wars and discord all over the planet for some time. And all the while Australia has remained a safe haven, which many of its population regard as "The Lucky Country". The Australian media portrays whatever the USA does in its foreign policy, as being the correct action, and our politicians are totally supportive of the NATO strikes. Our news reports are probably just like CNN's but delivered in an Australian accent. I see the States as being willing to take responsibility on a global basis, and play its role in peace-keeping. But I think many other countries regard it as interfering in something it knows nothing about and they resent the dominance the USA exerts over them. By the way, I am loving the posts on promises, lies, vows etc. Thank you. Jennifer Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3569 From: Zia Subject: Question to JJ Greetings to All and my question is to JJ: "Do we each have a name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost within us? And if so does this differ for each of us, or do we all fall into one category being of earth?" I also noticed the 'auman' at the end of the baptism. The easter Hindu religion know the name of God as AUM. I have unlocked the meaning of this work (for myself) and see 'an AUM' as being what I am. Do you have any comments on this? Also the Auman is very close to Human! Perhaps according to some the difference between the 'a' is angelic, and the 'h' is heavenly. Any further comments would be appreciated. It just seems odd if God does not have a name, why we would be baptised in his name!!??!! Thank you, ZIA Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3570 From: (Richards, Gary) Subject: Re: Digest No. 1999-03-25 of The Keys of Knowledge List Hi Folks, JJ said: "My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war." I am an Australian living in Australia and I do not support the war in Kosovo at all. Our Government has once again paid lip service to the war and would jump in like a good little puppet if asked to so so. I don't think our gov't necessarily represents the wishes of the people (what gov't does?). I don't believe that hitting someone with a bigger stick than the one he is hitting his enemy with is a true way to peace. It strikes me that whenever these recent wars occur, there is always a lot of propaganda and lies (same thing) to cover up the hidden agendas and to make the "good" guy look better than he is plus make the "bad" guy look worse than he is. I don't think anybody really understands what is going over there we simply hear what the media serves up to us. How can blowing the crap out of anyone make them peaceful, sacred? ...yes, peaceful no. What difference does it make if the UN kills every one or they kill amongst themselves, they still die. There has to be a better way. I am not sure what that is but there must be a way to be true to a cause and resolve it without death and destruction. Love & Light Gary Richards Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3571 From: Rick Audette Subject: A Promise is... JJ wrote: "Just remember this. When you learn to be true to your word, the Word within you will be known and it will be found to be made flesh in you. God will then be known as 100% trustworthy." I too will like to hear what this means. In the meantime, it strikes a chord in me and I would like to offer what it suggests to me. My theory is that as you truly come to know a thing, you become one with it. It doesn't matter if that thing is physical atoms, other humans or God, because everything that exists has consciousness, being as it is either God or the reflection of God. There are many examples of this, but I'll use one from my own experience to draw a parallel. I have a mechanical aptitude rated in the 99%ile. I have always been very good with designing, building and fixing machines. It seems weird, but at times I can actually place my consciousness inside of machines and I can also hear them talk to me. It is very much like the machine and I are one. On many occasions I have walked up to a mechanic, that was having trouble fixing something, put my hand on the machine and told him exactly what the problem was. When it was later confirmed that I had pegged it and the mechanic wanted to know how I knew, I could only say, "the machine just told me". So, tying this in with what JJ said, it is kind of a reverse approach to the same oneness. By imitating God's behavior, by being trustworthy, we become one with God in a very real (flesh) way. Flesh, in this case, is just another way of saying "Truly One with" and this is achieved through Knowing. I don't know if this helps explain it any better. I have a feeling it's one of those "principle" things, that you can only get to by hints and parables. Maybe some others can think of other examples that would make it even clearer. The clever artificer, Rick Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-25/3572 From: Zia Subject: Discovery of 'Truth' In covering lies and promises, suddenly I see truth from a very different perspective. So many people have been searching for 'the truth' or 'truth'. It seems to me that if we tell the truth, we are full of the truth, we are truthful, and in being truthful, we are being God. It is not the truth about something that we were searching for, but being truthful ourselves would open us to the truth of God and thus the truth of everything. Any thought, word or action that is a deception of ourself or another, cut us off from God and knowing the truth, of ourself or another. This makes me wonder if truth is a principle, and the reason we looked at lies and promises, was to lead ourselves into a principle by default. Thus the living Word must be a truth, unclouded by lies or deceit, and that our words spoken in truth are given life to, being able to manifest into life. In observing children and even myself, the temptation to lie could be a fear of punishment, or any fear therefore, or a desire to have something, which is to be something. With either fear/desire causing a lie, the word of myself would be powerless or dead, (stillborn), for it did not come from a living Word, filled with pure truthful intent. In my decision to walk the path of honesty, my connection to soul/spirit is unblocked, and thus my words have power, are thus alive. The outcome of speaking the truth is I trust myself, as I trust God to speak the truth, and therefore I trust God and I trust myself. God find me now trustworthy. I know this to be true. Who said to thine own self be true?! ZIA Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3573 From: Anni Ida West Subject: Re: A Promise is... I am throwing my 2 cents worth opinion in on this subject too. Here in Denmark the attitude towards the war in Kosovo is very much like Alex wrote about from Holland. We have heard about the problems for a long time - about Milosovic performing an ethnic cleaning in Kosovo, killing a lot of people and creating so many refugees. As far as we are told by our politicians and medias everything has been tried for a peaceful solution. Milosovic is seen as the stubborn devil who will neither listen nor negotiate. But many people also think it is terrible that Denmark is an aggressor and is taking part in these bombings. I myself have a hard time - I do not support violence at all. But at the same time I realize that sometimes you have to fight for what you believe in. If Churchill had done nothing when Hitler started killing people - what would have happened? Now somebody else is killing a lot of people - the only difference is a border. Hitler went outside his own country - Milosovic does not. But a massacre is a massacre where ever it is happening. One day when we are one world with one world-government we shall have to deal with all massacres no matter where they are happening. So why not start now? I know there are a lot of massacres going on in f.ex. Africa as well - so why interfere in this one in Kosovo? Simply because it is closer - at least to us in EU - I mean this is happening almost in our backyard! I believe we are all obliged to interfere if we see wrong being done to others - but I also think all must be done for a peaceful solution and only when everything else has failed can we consider using force. If everything else has been tried in this case? I don't know - I am not sure. Like my friend Samu and others I also have a bad feeling about this war. I hope I am all wrong. Let us all send much light and love to Kosovo when we sing the song. Anni Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3574 From: J J Dewey Subject: The War Principle Thank you for your comments on the war in Kosovo. There are two basic types of wars that have been waged by the free countries of the world in the last century. First is a war against an aggressive nation or nations where territory outside of their established borders was forcibly seized with the possibility of unlimited expansion of tyrannical powers. Examples of such wars were World War I and II, the Gulf War and England's war with Argentina over the Falkland Islands. Second are wars of intervention dealing with civil war or internal strife within a particular nation. The prime example of this was Vietnam, we also have Bosnia, Haiti and now Kosovo. Notice that all the wars fought in the first category were decisively won by the free nations. Now notice what happened in Vietnam. At first we just put our big toe in the mix for a lot of good and humanitarian reasons, but the problem was the war just kept escalating. Clinton put us in Bosnia with a promise to pull all the troops out in a year or less. It has now been three years and 20 billion dollars later and troops are still there. Clinton has not withdrawn the troops because he now realizes that if he does the civil unrest will return with a vengeance. We intervened in Haiti and years later we still have troops there and problems still persists. There are only so many times we can send in troops to calm civil unrest and then leave them there. I find it amazing that Clinton who protested Vietnam is now leading the way to create mini Vietnams all over the world. Let us hope that he is not leading us unto a full fledged one this time. At best they will bomb for a while to send a message and then withdraw. At worst we will send troops, Russia will send troops and supplies to the opposing side, and who knows what from then on? Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3575 From: J J Dewey Subject: The Word of Truth I want to welcome again our new people to the list. Faith in her first posting brings up some interesting points. Faith: "I'm new to the list, so greetings to everyone! This post made me think of Jesus' Biblical injunction to "let your nays be nay and your yeas be yea," in other words, do not promise. All of the trouble that has been experienced by those who have shared on the list what happened when they *tried* to keep a promise (and by untold others) may be the reason for his warning." First let me quote the scripture dealing with this. "Again, you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord." "But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let your word be Yes, Yes or No, No; anything more than this comes from the evil one." Matt 5:33-37 New Revised Standard Jesus does not say here to not make promises for he made promises himself and the scriptures speak repeatedly of the promises of God. They even speak of a sealing called the Holy Spirit of promise: "In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise." Eph 1:13 So if Jesus was not trying to discourage us from making promises, then what was he saying? Simple. He was telling us how we should make a promise so the light of the soul is not diminished. When we give our word we should just plainly state "yes, I will do it," or "No, I will not." The idea of swearing on the throne of God, your grandmother's grave, the Bible, cross your heart or any the embellishments should add nothing to your word. If you say "yes, I give my word, or my promise," that should be as binding for the person of truth as is possible to get. Concerning God giving a promise it is written: "For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself." Heb 6:13 This is also the highest embellishment any of us can give to our promises. We can promise by the power of our own selves, our own power of truth and our own integrity. Swearing by something outside of ourselves creates a power outside of ourselves that interferes with the Spirit of truth within ourselves. Faith continues to quote me and comments:: "Promises such as many marriage vows that are written by someone else are often not as serious as the ones you put in your own words." "I disagree. Even though you did not write them yourself, you knew what they said, and so have agreed to abide by them *as if* you'd written them yourself." I maintain here that when we take an oath that is created by someone else, especially an authority figure of the church or state that many just take it because that is the thing to do. Few really think about what they are committing to. Those who write their own wedding vows will consider very thoughtfully about what they are promising whereas how many think of the implications of "til death do us part" as fostered on us by the church and state? How many consider when they are making this vow the following possibilities: Would I keep this promise if: My spouse was an ax murdered? My spouse had to be committed because of being a danger to himself and others. My spouse threatened my life My spouse abused children. My spouse joined a cult He or she got a terrible disease I found out I just would never be happy with this person. Very few people think of things like this concerning oaths that are forced upon us. Instead they just gleefully take the oath believing that love will conquer all. I made the mistake of taking an oath written by someone else for my first marriage, but after my marriage fell apart I vowed to never make that mistake again. I agree with Faith's further comments that we should not end a relationship lightly, but should try every possible means to make it work. Only after we are sure that separation is the only solution should we end the relationship. If we create pain for a faithful spouse who is loving and doing their best then we are in danger of creating some negative karma. On the other hand, when the message comes from the inner self to separate do what you have to do and don't look back. Don't keep the relationship in limbo. Tracy writes: "JJ wrote: "Just remember this. When you learn to be true to your word, the Word within you will be known and it will be found to be made flesh in you. God will then be known as 100% trustworthy." "I feel like a dummy asking this, but the above makes no sense to me, almost as if it is the spiritual version of psycho-babble. Please take no offense, JJ, but I could just use some clarification of what this means." Actually, several others made some expanding comments in this direction: Rick says: "By imitating God's behavior, by being trustworthy, we become one with God in a very real (flesh) way. Flesh, in this case, is just another way of saying "Truly One with" and this is achieved through Knowing." Also Zia states: "It seems to me that if we tell the truth, we are full of the truth, we are truthful, and in being truthful, we are being God....Thus the living Word must be a truth, unclouded by lies or deceit, and that our words spoken in truth are given life to, being able to manifest into life... "With either fear/desire causing a lie, the word of myself would be powerless or dead, (stillborn), for it did not come from a living Word, filled with pure truthful intent. In my decision to walk the path of honesty, my connection to soul/spirit is unblocked, and thus my words have power, are thus alive. The outcome of speaking the truth is I trust myself, as I trust God to speak the truth, and therefore I trust God and I trust myself. God find me now trustworthy. I know this to be true. Who said to thine own self be true?!" Now for my two bits worth. Let me quote the statement again: "When you learn to be true to your word, the Word within you will be known and it will be found to be made flesh in you. God will then be known as 100% trustworthy." In the Gospel of John he wrote "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1 In other words, In the beginning was the One God who set himself in motion or vibration which became the Word. This vibration, or Word, projected itself and created the Word or the Son who was with God. The two then reflected from each other to infinity and created infinite points of potential life. The beginning of all things as we know it was The Word which is God. This Word is a an exact reflection of all that is in and from God and it is a pure light of truth that is within each of us. There is no darkness, deceit or illusion there. The only way to harmonize with the Word which is pure Truth is to become the truth ourselves. When all the words we speak are words of truth and promises which come true then the barrier between man and God evaporates and soul contact is established followed by the Oneness that the Master talked about. Hope this helps.. That's all the time I have for now. JJ Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3576 From: Samu Karlsson Subject: Re: Question to JJ Zia asked: "Do we each have a name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost within us?" These questions were aimed at JJ and I'm not answering for him, but thought I'd think out loud a few words and lead you to writings JJ has sent before :) Father, Son, Holy Ghost, The trinity of creation, yes we all have the name within us! God is the creator and the original initiator of principles we are created in His/Hers image and carry All the potential, so yes it is there within, for some more dormant than others. To what degree we are able to internally recognize our true nature and externally express it is an indicator of how well we have been able to achieve soul contact and avoid the illusions that may keep us from seeing the truth about ourselves, and keep searching for answers outside. We only see what we choose to see, and as long as we believe we can only find thru searching, we live according to the belief that we wouldn't already have the keys to our own universal knowledge :) I see it more as gaining insight, understanding, realizing and activating that which we already have and are instead of adding something that could be found from the outside. We all know how to shine, sometimes we just need to see a morning star to be reminded:) "I also noticed the 'auman' at the end of the baptism. The eastern Hindu religion know the name of God as AUM. I have unlocked the meaning of this work (for myself) and see 'an AUM' as being what I am. Do you have any comments on this?" "It just seems odd if God does not have a name, why we would be baptized in his name!!??!!" JJ mentioned the original meaning of Amen in his recent post Commandments and Amen, which you can find at http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives/JJ224.html The name of God is something we have spent time covering in the past in numerous emails, one from JJ is To Become or Not To Become, read it at http://www.dlc.fi/~samu3/JJArchives/JJ82.html "Also the Auman is very close to Human! Perhaps according to some the difference between the 'a' is angelic, and the 'h' is heavenly. Any further comments would be appreciated." Words being vibratory patterns, 2 words that are close also create energy forms that are closely related to each other. I too would like to learn more about the connection between auman and human :) Well Zia, I hope this gave you more food for thought if nothing else :) Btw, loved your letter Discovery of 'Truth' :) I think that in that mail you're saying what you are writing about, truth. Yes, when we are being truthful, we are being 'God-ful', filled with divine essence :) Or rather, we are giving that which already is a chance to become alive. It's all about finding from within rather than looking for it outside. I liked what you said about truth being more like a principle, because I think it is. If truth was a fact, it would be like an object floating in space waiting to be discovered. When truth is a principle, it looks more like a truthful chain of events that are created from within the previous expanding decision or realization. The 'bubbles' created are facts but they're not the truth, which is the principle behind the creation of this event itself. The interesting thing is that we don't need to go to a certain mental or emotional state thru finding 'the truth' before we can start living it...We just decide to start one of these chains from where were at and voila, if we live according to the highest we are able to perceive, we've become a living example of truth. Truth has many faces, but One core :) Truthfully yours, Samu :) Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3577 From: xavier Subject: Re : A Promise Is... J J Dewey writes: "My question of the day is a little off topic. As you know we entered into war in Kosovo. According to the media in this country the whole world except for the Russians and a few crackpots in America support the war. I would be interested in hearing comments from those of you who live outside of the United States about the general feeling of your friends and associates about the war." okay i'll have my little go to it, and don't ask me about people in France, i don't hear or watch news, and don't talk about war with people (actually I seldom even talk with people, except with spiritualist friends once in a while) Well according to what i feel about geopolitics, there may be much hidden truths in this. First of all this whole serbian problem may be a result of the action of our governments and banks. After that, they come with a war, like the one with Saddam, did you know that France flooded Saddham with weaponry and technology for years, calling him great friend and all, until things got bad and it became "war of the devil"? Okay this is one way of seeing, but there is the other side: There still may be some truth in this, that there is war, and there may be some good reasons for Nato to get there. Anyway, to me the major point is that we as citizens are globally supporting what our governments decide, without knowing the least bit about what it is deciding:) That paternalistic maiming taking care of you;) Now If I want to change this I need to get informed and involved, right? Or at least to demand information to the gov't, not the usual propaganda on tv "it's right, it's ok, we take care of it, BELIEVE US". Now in my ignorance there are reminders, once a Russian woman told me, about 5 years ago, see:), "beware of the Serbians, they carry the war inside them, they began many wars, and when they get to war once again, I'm afraid it will get to a global conflict once again". So with the august astrologic problem, the millennium bug and all, let's say we are asked this time to be conscious and act for peace, at least for a LAZY one like me, it would be a first time. "bleeping for chastity" I loved that one, thanks Jennifer:) Yes that "peace making" UN-US talk is getting on my nerves too:) Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3578 From: xavier Subject: Re : Re: A Promise is... Anni Ida West writes: "If Churchill had done nothing when Hitler started killing people - what would have happened? Now somebody else is killing a lot of people - the only difference is a border." Well do we know if our economic and politic power aren't supporting, or even building, that war since the beginning, as usual? Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3579 From: xavier Subject: Re : Re : A Promise Is... "xavier" writes: "bleeping for chastity" "I loved that one, thanks Jennifer:)" BTW I'd even propose it as a bumper sticker:) Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3580 From: Zia Subject: Kosovo In reading the comments about the war and the desire to bring about peace and understanding, and that to kill has not and does not bring about peace, it seems to me the solution to the ending of all wars is quite simple. War seems to be the projection of a lie, and is maintained through deceptive promises. When each one of us simply tells the truth we become the living Word, and thus the wars will become a thing of the past. Death is the outcome of lies and deception for we are cut off from our soul and our life being, while eternal life is the outcome of simply telling the truth of my soul/spirit/heart being. In our song, 'on wings of power' is the picture to me of thinking with my heart/soul/spirit. I have put a gold crown on a golden heart, with the words Kosovo underneath, wrapped in the flames of love and encircled with the golden bands of the Spirit presence. When each person in Kosovo listens to their heart/soul and tells the truth to each other, the war must cease, and peace reign. To truth, and the telling thereof. And the beginnings of trust. ZIA Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3581 From: "Faith" Subject: RE: The Word of Truth Thank you, JJ, for the nice welcome and your response to my post. Your replies were thought- provoking (even if I didn't agree with all of them :-J) - I especially liked this: "If we create pain for a faithful spouse who is loving and doing their best then we are in danger of creating some negative karma." Uh-oh! I know I have a lot to work on in that area - I can be very self-centered at times, not taking the feelings of others into consideration as much as I should (for those who get into the Myers-Briggs, I'm an ENTJ :-). Reminders such as yours are very welcome. Peace, Faith Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3582 From: LeLona Hodges Subject: The Word of Truth I know I haven't been very vocal lately, but it's because I'm having about 15 people arriving in town for the weekend, from all parts of the country, and needless to say, I've been busy getting ready for it. It'll be a truly light filled weekend. I do have something to say about "The Word". Once a person keeps their own word, the Word of God, which dwells within, can manifest outwardly, and when spoken, the Word It's self has the power to fulfill It's self. All of nature prepares the way to fulfill the Word spoken. LeLona Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3583 From: (Richard/ Sharon) Subject: Truth vs Lies All of your postings have caused lots of different thoughts for me which is obviously, a good thing, one thought was in using mental telepathy, lies are secrets and once we, all, stop lying, or holding secrets, thus opening ourselves fully to one another, perhaps our telepathy with one another will kick back in, we sure wouldn't have to worry Y2K. L&L Sharon Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3584 From: David Curtis Subject: Re: The War Principle J J Dewey writes: "I find it amazing that Clinton who protested Vietnam is now leading the way to create mini Vietnams all over the world. Let us hope that he is not leading us unto a full fledged one this time. At best they will bomb for a while to send a message and then withdraw. At worst we will send troops, Russia will send troops and supplies to the opposing side, and who knows what from then on?" The worst case scenario is exactly what I'm afraid of. Something about this situation just doesn't feel right. In fact, more than that. It disturbs me more than any war I've encountered in my lifetime. JJ, I agree with you on the fact that we shouldn't focus on the negative. I believe you should always focus on the positive, but I also believe you should be prepared for the negative. I've heard predictions of death and famine, the fall of the US, and many other terrible things. (99% of which I don't believe.) Nostradamus even predicted what appears to be a nuclear attack on the US in the 7th month of this year...the target is supposedly New York..(or the New City as he refers to it.) Anyway, my question is this.. What should we as a group do to prepare ourselves for what MIGHT be on the horizon, while at the same time focusing on the positive? Peace and Love, Dave Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-26/3585 From: John Kosior Subject: Re: The War Principle David Curtis wrote: "The worst case scenario is exactly what I'm afraid of. Something about this situation just doesn't feel right. In fact, more than that. It disturbs me more than any war I've encountered in my lifetime." "Anyway, my question is this.. What should we as a group do to prepare ourselves for what MIGHT be on the horizon, while at the same time focusing on the positive?" Hi Folks, One last post before I embark on my journey. This question of what's on the horizon seems to be on everybody's mind these days. And it has a lot of people very concerned. It seems like there are two perspectives on the horizon. One has the scene of peace and brotherhood and calm beauty for all. The other, looking out over the same horizon, shows the scene of an unspeakable horror. The most terrible judgments to ever come upon the earth. I say, how interesting. It seems as if we are looking into the face of our polarities. You know, those wonderful little "black or whites" we've chosen to live within for all these millennia. Ever since biting into that little apple marked, "Knowledge of Good and Evil: DO NOT EAT". And so now, here we are with the latest ultimate visions of good and evil swimming around in our psyches, matched beautifully with the voices that ring out what is truth and what is deception. What are the rewards and what are the punishments. Who is right, and who is wrong. Or is everything right, or wrong. It gets very confusing in a time like that. I see it as a time when light will get lighter, and darkness will get darker and we will be forced to choose. Each of us. As individuals, choosing who we will serve. The path of light and promise, or the path of darkness and despair. Oh, those little polarities. What a little nuisance they can be. But, alas, we're not left without any answers. In fact we've all been in school for quite some time. Learning to change our perception from one which is mesmerized by either polarity, to one who looks upon the poles for what they are, two sides of the same coin. And with that perspective, one has overcome the devil's trap, so to speak, which is to be so polarized on one side or the other that when the light switch is finally turned on, you may never see the light. So as I consider all that's going on around us, I resist the temptation to worry about the dark polarity. I resist the temptation to relax in the light polarity. And instead, I focus my attention on the source of the energy, which is God. I center my mind on my honest appraisal of God's character, which is, good. And in this way I link myself to the plan of the source, who's plan I know to be good, and in whom I have protection from both the polarities. We're coming to a time when we will no longer be pulled by the force of either polarity, neither good nor bad. But instead we will know the Source, who is Truth. And if that happens to us while we are still on this earth, then we will truly, for the first time, usher in the Kingdom of God, where His will is done on earth as it is in heaven. I have no prediction for whether or not the light or dark visions of our future are true. I simply know that the One I trust is trustworthy. This is how I'm preparing for the possible worst. And this is how I'm preparing for the possible best. Since I already know it all works out in the end, I can live my life now in that knowing. No matter what the events of the day try to throw at me. If I tear down the comp tonight, I won't be back online until I'm settled somewhere. In that case, I bid you all the greatest assurance in the One who is trustworthy. In Light and Love, John Post No. keys-l: /1999-03-17/3586 From: Glenys Lowery Subject: Kosovo This was posted on another list and I thought I'd share it with you because it had some good points. It's great to see that most of us share a concern about the intervention of the NATO allies intervening in what is essentially a domestic situation. I'm sure with so many of us remembering those involved when we say the Song that it will make an enormous difference to the outcome. Even so, like others, I'm very disturbed about the situation in a way that I haven't been about other action taken in the name of 'peace' Love Glenys ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WSWS : News & Analysis : Europe : The Balkan Crisis Whom will the United States bomb next? By the Editorial Board 26 March 1999 With the US-led bombing of Yugoslavia a new chapter has opened in America's use of military force around the world. In the public justifications Given by Clinton and other American officials for the attack, the issue of Yugoslavia's national sovereignty has been ignored. One does not have to be a supporter of the Serbian strongman and Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosovic and his brutal policies to acknowledge that Kosovo has long been recognized as part of Yugoslav territory. The Present war establishes a new precedent, namely, the right of the most powerful capitalist powers, above all the United States, to militarily attack a country for the policies it carries out within its own borders. This new doctrine has staggering and ominous implications. Less than a decade ago Washington felt constrained to justify its aggression against Iraq with the argument that Baghdad had opened itself up to attack by invading another country, Kuwait. The Bush administration, moreover, felt the need to secure the cover of United Nations authorization for the gulf war. Now, it seems, no such principles of international law are operable. What then is the principled basis on which Washington has launched the current war? In his White House speech Wednesday night Clinton justified the bombing campaign on the grounds that NATO intervention was required to halt Belgrade's repression of the ethnic Albanians in the province of Kosovo. His potted history of the conflict in the Balkans omitted the incendiary role of the US, Germany and other Western powers in precipitating the civil warfare in the region, and their continuing support for autocrats, such as Croatia's Franjo Tudjman, who have pursued a policy of ethnic cleansing no less ruthless than that carried out by Milosevic. But even if one takes Clinton's arguments for good coin, a critical question is posed: is the United States asserting its right, indeed, its obligation, to use its military might against all sovereign states that violate the rights of ethnic or national minorities living within their borders? If this is the case, then Washington is obliged to radically alter its attitude to a long list of countries. It must, for example, embrace the cause of Tamil nationalism in Sri Lanka and end its support for the regime in Colombo that continues to prosecute a bloody war against the Tamils in the northeast of that island nation. It must prepare for military action against its present NATO ally Turkey, which conducts a policy of police-military repression against its substantial Kurdish minority even more savage than that pursued by Milosevic against the Kosovars. What about Spain's decades-long suppression of the Basques? And Chechnya and Ossetia in Russia? Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan? Moving further east, there is the explosive struggle of the Moslem population of India's Kashmir. The African continent is rife with conflicts of tribal minorities against dominant groups. Let us not forget America's support for Israel, notwithstanding that country's decades-long suppression of Palestinian rights. What about the national agitation of minorities on the very borders of The US, such as the Quebecois in Canada and the Mayan Indians of Chiapas, Mexico? Must not the Pentagon also train its sites on Ottawa and Mexico City? What are the principled criteria by which Washington distinguishes legitimate struggles against national oppression in whose behalf bombs and missiles must be launched, and its yardsticks for determining which nations are to be attacked? In fact, no such criteria are ever advanced, for the simple reason that they do not exist. From this very partial list of ethnic and national flashpoints around the world, it is obvious that US policy is not based on some universal moral principle. On the contrary, Washington vigorously supports a whole host of countries that engage in the systematic suppression of national minorities. In reality, the attitude of the US in any given case is determined by The prevailing conception within its ruling elite of American capitalism's economic and geopolitical interests. Even the beginning of an objective analysis demonstrates that Washington's policy is thoroughly opportunistic and hypocritical. To the extent that it is able to obscure this fact from the American people, the government is indebted to the media, not one of whose representatives dares to challenge the banalities and lies of Clinton, Madeleine Albright, and company. The Clinton administration's rationale for bombing Yugoslavia advances a formula that can be used to justify US intervention anywhere in the world. As circumstances change, today's "fledgling democracy" can virtually overnight become tomorrow's "rogue state." It provides, moreover, a political framework for exploiting and manipulating the grievances of various na