Is loyalty to one’s country
the highest calling?

When you read the entire statement of Edward J. Snowden as he explains what he did and why he did it, suddenly larger questions arise — questions for which most national governments on Earth do not seem to have an adequate answer.

The biggest question of all: Is there any legitimate personal calling higher than loyalty to one’s country?

Mr. Snowden, as you may now know, released a lengthy statement to the world’s press at the Moscow Airport on July 12. The entire text of that pronouncement was released on the Internet by WikiLeaks. Reading every word of what the man who has been called a “traitor” by many in the United States had to say is, at the very least, fascinating, as it opens a window onto the mind of a person who released classified information about certain U.S. Government intelligence operations, offering us his rationale, and giving people around the world a chance to think deeply about some issues that the human family is more and more going to have to face as we move deeper and deeper into the 21st Century.

Chief among them: Can the people of our world tolerate living a completely transparent lifestyle? And, perhaps more pertinent: Will the institutions within our world — governments and corporations and political movements and other powerful organizations — ever allow us to?

To consider all of this within a context, let us publish here the full and complete statement of the man who is currently the world’s most famous whistle blower. Here it is, as posted by WikiLeaks.
=================================

Hello. My name is Ed Snowden. A little over one month ago, I had family, a home in paradise, and I lived in great comfort. I also had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.

It is also a serious violation of the law.

The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance. While the US Constitution marks these programs as illegal, my government argues that secret court rulings, which the world is not permitted to see, somehow legitimize an illegal affair. These rulings simply corrupt the most basic notion of justice – that it must be seen to be done. The immoral cannot be made moral through the use of secret law.

I believe in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: “Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring.”

Accordingly, I did what I believed right and began a campaign to correct this wrongdoing. I did not seek to enrich myself. I did not seek to sell US secrets. I did not partner with any foreign government to guarantee my safety. Instead, I took what I knew to the public, so what affects all of us can be discussed by all of us in the light of day, and I asked the world for justice.

That moral decision to tell the public about spying that affects all of us has been costly, but it was the right thing to do and I have no regrets.

Since that time, the government and intelligence services of the United States of America have attempted to make an example of me, a warning to all others who might speak out as I have. I have been made stateless and hounded for my act of political expression. The United States Government has placed me on no-fly lists. It demanded Hong Kong return me outside of the framework of its laws, in direct violation of the principle of non-refoulement – the Law of Nations. It has threatened with sanctions countries who would stand up for my human rights and the UN asylum system. It has even taken the unprecedented step of ordering military allies to ground a Latin American president’s plane in search for a political refugee.

These dangerous escalations represent a threat not just to the dignity of Latin America, but to the basic rights shared by every person, every nation, to live free from persecution, and to seek and enjoy asylum.

Yet even in the face of this historically disproportionate aggression, countries around the world have offered support and asylum. These nations, including Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador have my gratitude and respect for being the first to stand against human rights violations carried out by the powerful rather than the powerless. By refusing to compromise their principles in the face of intimidation, they have earned the respect of the world. It is my intention to travel to each of these countries to extend my personal thanks to their people and leaders.

I announce today my formal acceptance of all offers of support or asylum I have been extended and all others that may be offered in the future. With, for example, the grant of asylum provided by Venezuela’s President Maduro, my asylee status is now formal, and no state has a basis by which to limit or interfere with my right to enjoy that asylum. As we have seen, however, some governments in Western European and North American states have demonstrated a willingness to act outside the law, and this behavior persists today. This unlawful threat makes it impossible for me to travel to Latin America and enjoy the asylum granted there in accordance with our shared rights.

This willingness by powerful states to act extra-legally represents a threat to all of us, and must not be allowed to succeed. Accordingly, I ask for your assistance in requesting guarantees of safe passage from the relevant nations in securing my travel to Latin America, as well as requesting asylum in Russia until such time as these states accede to law and my legal travel is permitted. I will be submitting my request to Russia today, and hope it will be accepted favorably.

If you have any questions, I will answer what I can.

Thank you.

================================
I am particularly intrigued by the Nuremberg statement quoted here. As well, the reminder by Mr. Snowden of what he terms “the most basic notion of justice — that it must be seen to be done.” And I know what Conversations with God has to say about this kind of thing. It says that total, complete, and utter transparency in all things is the only way that an advanced society would choose to live — and that a society cannot advance until it does so.

Your thoughts, please. What about you? Are you ready to live a life of absolute visibility, where everything about you can be known, where you will and can have no secrets, and where privacy around personal information is no longer part of common experience? If not, why not? If so, how so?

Let’s have a conversation here.

Please Note: The mission of The Global Conversation website is to generate an ongoing sharing of thoughts, ideas, and opinions at this internet location in an interchange that we hope will produce an ongoing and expanding conversation ultimately generating wider benefit for our world. For this reason, links that draw people away from this site will be removed from our Comments Section, a process which may delay publication of your post. If you wish to include in your Comment the point of view of someone other than yourself, please feel free to report those views in full (and even reprint them) here.
Click here to acknowledge and remove this note:
  • Unless you qualify what you mean by total transparency or “Absolute
    visibility” people may think & conclude that their most private
    moments can be seen or known about be it a boil on their butt or going
    to the bathroom without cameras or sharing a sacred intimate moment with
    another must or can be known.

    Unless all governments agree to not keep secrets most will feel very vulnerable to those that do. Some secrets may affect people non beneficially, others will not. Some are
    harmless other harmful.

    Granted some people will not care as they have nothing to hide, others will. So to be more specific on what you mean by transparency would be helpful.

    It seems transparency in part, is a way to level the playing people for all people be they
    proletariat or the elite. Closing the class gap.

    Now if our singular top goal was to educate & create more whole healthy
    psychological non dysfunctional loving people people with at least a
    fairly good if not great sense of self worth & self esteem
    first,–then from that place we could more easily tackle the many
    problems that individuals & humanity encounter.

    Because we’d be coming from a much healthier mentality we’d create solutions
    from that more whole, loving, creative non condemnatory space.

    To me I ask “What is our highest priority in helping finding solutions we as individuals & humanity seek?”

    Otherwise we are & will continually be distracted by so much negative news
    drama at every turn. Yet, if we as individuals & humanity had a
    true agreed focus on what is in our best interest to focus on, we could
    really speed things up.

    For now it seems we are more satisfied with moving from one drama to the next but with out focus, endlessly distracted.

    Magically,
    -Marko

  • mewabe

    There are two major questions in this post.

    One is a question of loyalty to one’s country, the other the question of transparency.

    Regarding the first question, many interpret it as meaning blind loyalty (“my country, right or wrong”). Needless to say this is unintelligent and unspiritual. Blind loyalty means shutting down critical thinking AND “moral” choices, or your own conscience, nor to mention your own SOUL. Such loyalty is that of a pet, not a human being. A government that asks us to be pets is out of line.

    As far as transparency, since this is about government, let’s talk about government. Being public servants should mean that all of the actions of the members of a government should be made public. It seems to be basic and logical. The instant there is secrecy, there is an imbalance of power between the government and the public, which is not only wrong but extremely dangerous and pointing directly into the direction of abuse.

    The government must be made and kept FULLY transparent by law. It has in the US, but as this very courageous individual (a HERO) stated, our government doesn’t let pesky annoyances like the Constitution (or international law for that matter) get in its way. A population that is mentally awake (as opposed to brainwashed) would have serious concerns about this.

    People, on the other hand, must be kept FREE to choose transparency or not in their personal lives. This again contradicts the illegal actions of a secretive government that spies on everyone and everything, and proportionally becomes more secretive as it forces us to be more exposed to its agencies of control.

    One final comment: once again, surveillance is NOT transparency. Transparency implies a MUTUAL, CONSENSUAL openness free from fear and coercion. If a parent spies on her child, the child is not “transparent”, he is spied upon by a dishonest parent, a parent who keeps her actions secret.

    The child may say “I don’t have anything to hide, so I don’t care”, but he SHOULD care, as a matter of PRINCIPLE, because he did not give the parent the authorization to spy on him, and the so-called “transparency” in this scenario is not mutual, it is used for CONTROL and leads to an imbalance of power, which AUTOMATICALLY translates into abuse.

    Populations however often act as though they had been lobotomized, or as if the connection between heart, mind, body and spirit had been “surgically” severed. That’s what happens when people are taught blind obedience to authority, and it’s a sad thing to see.

    • Christopher Toft

      “The child may say “I don’t have anything to hide, so I don’t care”, but he SHOULD care, as a matter of PRINCIPLE, because he did not give the parent the authorization to spy on him, and the so-called “transparency” in this scenario is not mutual, it is used for CONTROL and leads to an imbalance of power, which AUTOMATICALLY translates into abuse, sooner or later.”
      Mewabe, I’m pretty much agreeing with your post but I’m not quite sure about what you say here. If the child “cares” aren’t they buying into the idea that there is something to hide, which is surely part of the reason for the state of things anyway?
      Can anyone really control anyone who has nothing to hide?

      • mewabe

        Yes, a government (or a parent) can control one who “has nothing to hide” when coercion is exercised to regulate behavior.

        The government doesn’t spy on us out of mere curiosity or because it is interested in us. It does so because it is attempting to control our behavior.

        For example: some peace activists have been put on a no fly list in the US. To work for peace is apparently seen as a terrorist activity in present day upside down America. Many different activists have been harassed by this police state even though their activities were legal and non violent, courtesy of the surveillance apparatus and its abusive intents.

        Again, transparency, to be legitimate and spiritually significant, has to be MUTUAL and CONSENSUAL, even if one thinks they have nothing to hide.
        Otherwise you have trespassing and abuse, as the integrity and free will of the person are denied by a party that ASSUMES to take action toward a person without his/her knowledge or authorization.

        • Christopher Toft

          “For example: some peace activists have been put on a no fly list in the US. To work for peace is apparently seen as a terrorist activity in present day upside down America. Many different activists have been harassed by this police state even though their activities were legal and non violent, courtesy of the surveillance apparatus and its abusive intents.”

          You mean like when the British imprisoned Gandhi? I think I see what you mean. Gandhi’s behaviour was controlled by restricting his movement & activities. Also like the monks in Tibet.

          • Christopher Toft

            Addition: I’m not sure that just being watched in itself can control a person’s behaviour but I do agree that it is invasive & disrespectful.

          • mewabe

            When a person watches you without you being able to watch them, unless it is out of loving interest (not the case when it comes to governments or corporations), the aim IS control, and consequently wrong.

            Did I say wrong? Yes I did! WRONG WRONG WRONG.

            Now I have gotten it out of my system (at least for a minute or two!)

          • Christopher Toft

            Yes I agree with what you’re saying here. They cannot control your response to being watched though. They can beat you, restrain you, harass you, imprison you & restrict your travel, but they cannot control your thinking & emotional response to being watched(So I guess we are both right). My aim here is to form an understanding of how I can deal with this issue on a personal level. Putting myself in the shoes of an activist who is imprisoned or harassed, what can they really do that does not involve knives or RPGs? What is an effective non violent response to this kind of tyranny & abuse?

          • mewabe

            Violence is never an adequate strategy, unless pushed into a tight corner, and even then there may be other ways.

            The response to oppression of any kind is numbers, to ORGANIZE…as an individual, you can be easily controlled, silenced and defeated. But a MOVEMENT is more difficult to stop…and that’s probably the only and the most powerful “weapon” all populations have ever had: their massive numbers.

            Of course, to do this, you have to have a strategy and a goal…and as most people are confused and bewildered today, and believe that they are powerless in making any significant change (courtesy of mainstream media brainwashing), most activism is limited in waging very limited battle on very specific issues, not focusing on actually changing the world.

          • Christopher Toft

            Yeah 🙁

          • Tom Fowler

            So why don’t all the current activist organizations come together and agree on a general message? Find a commonality in all the separate issues and join forces, then go from there.

          • mewabe

            I totally agree, this is EXACTLY what is needed, and could become a very powerful and effective movement. All issues point to the same direction, yet no one connects the dots!

          • Victor

            Yes, to join forces. That’s the key.

          • mewabe

            When you write that “they cannot control your thinking and emotional response to being watched, no, not specifically and not YET, but I am sure they will be working on that soon.

            In the meantime, they do know how to manipulate our thinking and emotions, through the media, and they do it constantly and with great expertise (see the book Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky)

          • Christopher Toft

            “no, not specifically and not YET on a constant or personal basis, but I am sure they will be working on that soon.”
            Maybe. Looking at mainstream science I doubt they have the understanding to create anything which can genuinely control the mind.(If scientists really did understand the mind, they would find the idea of genuine mind control horrifying & probably impossible.) I definitely agree with you about manipulation & influence

          • mewabe

            I would not count on scientists finding the idea of mind control horrifying…I believe that when scientists fully understand the brain, if our state of consciousness has not evolved by then and governments are still pathologically obsessed with power and control, it will be time to jump off the planet!

            Do you know that some scientists believe that next step in “evolution” is a merging of machine and human, specifically of computer technology and humanity? Don’t you think they will do all they can to try to control the human brain?

            Haven’t you noticed that the very aim of this civilization has always been to control and master nature in all of its aspects, and that of course includes the ultimate “frontier”, the physical human brain?

          • Christopher Toft

            Perhaps I’m being idealistic, I’m assuming that if scientists really understood the human mind that this would necessarily require an understanding of non duality & the absurdity of the idea of “controlling” one’s “self”. At the moment artificial intelligence & ideas about the human mind seem to operate from an assumption that we are like computers, mindless robots with no subjectivity. I tend to scoff at attempts to create artificial intelligence because science pays very little attention to subjectivity & consciousness, so they are missing huge amounts of data about reality. Science doesn’t even have a clear explanation of what consciousness even is & popular philosophers like Dan Dennett seem to just side step it by saying “oh the brain creates it. It’s an epiphenomenon, an illusion”. Seems to me like “What consciousness”? How can we control what we don’t understand? That said, I am aware that messing with the brain produces emotional & physical responses. Yes it’s possible that what could happen is some kind of dystopian scenario where people are programmed to be robots.

            It’s difficult for me to imagine how this would work though because what would it be like to be such a being? If there were no resistance in any sense, no rebellion even on an unconscious level it would not strictly speaking be mind control, it would be “you” being who you are & obviously this makes no sense. If there was perhaps a sense of unhappiness or rage, this would imply a rebellious disconnected other who was somehow in collusion with the nanites or whatever in his/her brain telling him/her what to do & being a “victim” of his/her robotic persecutors. How would a spiritual master respond to mind control nanites? Whenever I watch star trek & the Borg I always feel a little sceptical for precisely this reason. “We” are not the Borg & resistance is sensible.

          • mewabe

            Don’t forget lobotomies…that certainly took care of ending all resistance. Or electroshocks (“electroconvulsive therapy”). There were/are a crude way of controlling the brain, but there is no doubt that much more sophisticated ways will be created, including more potent medications, which have also been called chemical straight jackets for a very good reason.

            You might say that all of this is only for the “mentally ill”, but a very controlling system can expend its definition of mental illness, as is happening in America today, and as happened in the former Soviet Union (dissidents were sent to psychiatric hospitals), to cover almost all behaviors that are challenging to the system.

            Psychiatry has been used to stigmatize and control people on many occasions since its inception, especially nonconformists, free thinkers and those at odds with authority.

            “Oppositional defiant disorder” (ODD) comes to mind as possibly including anyone who challenges or questions authority, for example.

            In America, millions of children are said to be mentally ill (ADHD, etc) and put on very powerful medications. Google “the drugging of our children” or “family rights association” for mind boggling facts.

            If a system can do that to children, it will not hesitate to use more sophisticated and effective methods of brain control in the future, on children and adults! I have no doubts about this, unfortunately.

            And of course it will be “FOR OUR OWN GOOD”.

          • Christopher Toft

            Oh do not get me started on “psychiatry”! Electroshock is just garden variety torture with a medicalized excuse, not so much mind control more physical abuse. A lobotomy is effectively murder & pills make you passive, mentally fogged & possibly more suggestable. nobody can make us do stuff, all they can do is make us mindless & docile. Psychiatry has a terrible habit of classifying people with emotional problems into very inflexible dehumanizing & sometimes outright insulting boxes with labels like “schizophrenia” & “bipolar disorder”, as if there were mysterious entities in peoples heads that make them ill & beliefs have nothing to do with human illness or flourishing. The soviets even imagined political dissidents to be ill as you pointed out.
            Psychiatry seems to me at best inept & at worst outright malevolent.

            None of this is literally mind control though, just abuse & coercion.

          • mewabe

            Mind control experiments are nothing new…and whether or not these were successful the fact that they tried before means that they will try again.

            But let’s say the mind will never be controllable, the physical brain is another story. Once the physical brain is impaired by coercive physical methods, it becomes more difficult for the mind to function.

            I believe extremely sophisticated and specific methods of physical brain control are quite likely…remember that there are “good”, independent, clear thinking scientists, and then there are scientists who work for the government, who for example dedicate all their intelligence and knowledge to creating ever more vicious, lethal weapons, such as ETHNIC BIO-WEAPONS and other horrific chemical weapons (yes, even in America!)

            We do live in a world of extreme polarities, and the “good” will never win against the “bad”, as these two conditions are the two sides of the exact same coin…nothing will change until humanity has finally explored all of its fears and nightmares, and is ready to move on to a new, lighter, easier collective experience.

          • Christopher Toft

            Agreed. I remember when I first read 1984, think that it was the best “horror” novel I’d ever read because it terrified me.

          • Victor

            The compost of TV- Media-Religion-‘Education’ is the PERFECT mind control apparatus. The very dream of Fascism: consensual obedience.

            Orwell’s 1984, or Huxley’s “Happy World”, is already here, and widely surpassed in some aspects…

          • Victor

            Ha,ha,ha,ha…! Yes!: WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! 😉

          • mewabe

            Yeah, I would say that putting someone like Gandhi in prison, or even threatening to put a US activist in prison or harassing her, or putting a Tibetan Buddhist who practices his religion or wave his own flag in prison IS control, and that would be a huge understatement! How about ABUSE? About about a POLICE STATE, how about TYRANNY?

            How do we deal with this? STOP BEING COMPLIANT. An abusing government has lost all legitimacy. Disobey.

          • Christopher Toft

            Government & people are not separate, I think there should be no obedience to anyone full stop. If the government “obeyed” the people we would have a democracy like the ancient Greeks where the group with the biggest numbers had the biggest say. Unless you don’t mean that:)

          • mewabe

            Government and people are extremely separate in America. The government is more out of touch with ordinary Americans than was Marie-Antoinette with the French people. That’s why it is so scared and paranoid.

            And in America, we do have mob rule, as this is not a parliamentary system, but a Republic that has forgotten how to be a Republic and is governed by a majority that has the biggest say when elected, as well as much more importantly governed by BIG MONEY (lobbyists, electoral campaign contributions, etc), especially now that corporations are “people”!

            The American government is truly the best government money can buy (Ernie Webb, author).

            Actually, what I really mean is that there should be NO government, the people should govern themselves. Some call this anarchy, a “bad”, scary word for most. It sounds much better to me than the current CORRUPTION and abuses of power of all governments.

            A mature, evolved people would only need administrators, not decision makers, because they would be able to govern their own lives in COOPERATION (rather than blind and merciless competition) and in harmony with everything and everyone else, with all life.

            Under such a simpler, NON ADVERSARIAL system, the interests of the individual and the group would be understood to be exactly the same, so they would be not as much conflict as there is now, under either jungle law (social Darwinism, out of control capitalism) or direct oppression (communism, fascism, military dictatorship, etc).

            Don’t mind me I am a dreamer…

          • Christopher Toft

            I agree which is why I think obedience to anyone or anything is terrible idea. Obedience automatically implies separation & control.

          • mewabe

            Obedience shuts off your soul connection, period. People become zombies…I agree fully, NO obedience of any kind, as the soul is SOVEREIGN as is all life (because it is divine, and the divine is sovereign).

          • Victor

            Yes, those are the names for US current state: Rogue State. Fascism. Period.

  • mewabe

    Another aspect of this, or another way to say what I already expressed, is that transparency is somewhat equal to intimacy. If intimacy with a person we love can be considered normal and desirable, intimacy with governments or corporations sounds more like intimacy with Big Bubba in a prison cell.

  • Tom Fowler

    Hi everyone,
    I had posted a comment earlier and it has been removed, any one know why?

    • Tom Fowler

      WOW! Ohh noo!, did I offend someone’s oh so sensitive version of reality by peicing together letters and sounds that represent ideas and thoughts that are forbidden in your oh so delicate world? Dear God, whom I have insulted by my use of such utterances, please forgive me my sins. Boo hoo. Maybe I can get you a tissue. I’ll make it one with aloe so it’s not too abrasive for your fragile little nose.

      WE HAVE A BIG JOB AHEAD LADIES, I SUGGEST STRAPPING ON A PAIR.
      WHY WOULD YOU LIMIT YOUR ATTEMPT TO ATTAIN THE LIMITLESS??

      • Mike Brown

        if it contains a website link or material it awaits moderation. This is probably a volunteer who has a job and a life to manage in between checking postings. This was probably done to stop people who post the bible, koran or large tracts.This website and its hosts have always been fair to me. Even if they don’t want what I want to post they have my respect for putting the sincere effort into this site and the improvements in the world we all want.

        • Tom Fowler

          I ain’t mad at the sight. I had no link. I had term for defecate replaced in my original post by the term that starts with the letter s and ends with the letters h-i-t.

      • NealeDonaldWalsch

        Dear Tom…How are you today? I have enjoyed your Comments on this site. Thanks for participating. Let me respond to the matter of the language that is used here.

        CWG says that “feelings are the language of the soul,” but it does not say anywhere that no human being should ever object to any feeling that is expressed by another, no matter how it is expressed. I don’t think I see that anywhere in CWG, Tom.

        What CWG says is that we should all live our truth, authentically — and that I do not have to accept your truth as mine, nor subject myself to it.

        Let me put this to you in a context that you might more closely relate to. I live a life in which I choose to express my truth at all times. Here is one truth that I hold: I do not prefer people smoking in my home. It does not smell good to me, it makes the drapes and the furniture and the carpet and even my clothes reek, and, worse yet, it makes me cough, and could ultimately damage my health. So I do not invite, encourage, allow, or permit smoking in my home. If my guests begin to rail against me about that, accusing me of trying to control their freedom of expression and their behavior, i simply invite them to leave my home.

        I also do not prefer or enjoy hearing foul language in my presence, and absolutely not in the presence of my grandchildren. If people come to a dinner party at my home and fill the air during their conversation with the “F bomb” or bathroom humor or other gross and inelegant language, I ask them to please temper their expression and alter their language. If they refuse, and start making me wrong for “censorship,” I simply invite them to leave my home.

        This website is my home, Tom. I am happy to have you here as a guest. But I simply prefer to maintain a level of taste and decorum that represents who I am. Profanity does not.

        You have asked, in your note to Lisa above: “Profane to whom?” My answer is simple, Tom. Profane to me.

        I get to decide in my life what is profane and what is profound, for me. Nothing has any meaning save the meaning I give it. Yet I GET to give things meaning in my life. Every act is an act of self-definition. I don’t choose to define myself with language (to use but one measure) that I consider to be foul, profane, obscene, indelicate in the extreme, unnecessarily crude, obnoxious, tasteless, or crass. Who gets to decide what falls into those categories? Again, Tom…in my home, I do.

        And on my website, I do also, my friend. You can boo-hoo and make fun of this all you want. I love it! I love your humor and even your pointed remarks. They are very effective in making your case. I hope I have been equally effective in making mine.

        Hugs and smiles to you, Tom. Hang out here more if it serves you to do so. If not, thanks for stopping by!

        Love, Neale.

        • Tom Fowler

          I understand. I am surprised though, Neale, that a seemingly all inclusive global conversation aimed at changing the realities of such heart-wrenching issues as genocide, financial enslavement and fear mongering, environmental destruction, etc., would limit the expressive tools available to assist in antagonizing the change necessary to achieve those goals.

          After all, it was god that ridiculed the idea of ‘curse words’.

          I suppose I came to this site, 15 years after I first read CWG, expecting a little more attitude towards the conventions that bind us. But, at the end of the day, this is about each of our individual truths playing out in the way we choose based on what works for each of us, and I respect that.

          Thank you

          • NealeDonaldWalsch

            Hi, Tom….I have been at this a long time now, my new friend…and I have learned that it really is not necessary to use profanity or obscenity to “antagonize the change” I would love to see in the world. In fact, I have learned that antagonizing is one of the fastest ways to slow down the change I wish to see, not speed it up.

            As I look at all of the other really powerful Change Agents in the world, Tom — both past and present — I notice that they did not use antagonism, but rather, inspiration, and their tool of choice. They did not find the use of profanity or obscenity necessary or useful in their public discourse either. Martin Luther King Jr. did not use such language in his public utterances. Neither did Harvey Milk. Neither did Mahatma Gandhi, or Gloria Steinem, or Mother Theresa, or John F. Kennedy, or Abraham Lincoln, or Lech Walesa, or Elizabeth Warren, who is creating great change in Washington even as we speak.

            And God may have ridiculed the idea of ‘curse words,’ Tom, but She did not say that we should, therefore, go ahead and use them indescriminately, in mixed company, in front of children, in public, in ways that ignored the sensibilities and sensitivities of others.

            I personally don’t find that I am “limiting” my “expressive tools” by simply deciding not to use ugly, repulsive, crass, crude, and tasteless language. Indeeed, Tom, just the opposite is true for me. I find that such “tools” as profanity and obscenity are used more often than not by persons who seem to have no other more elegant way to express the depth of their feeling or the power of their ideas.

            I have plenty of “attitude” toward the “conventions that bind us,” Tom, as any reader of my books and other writings will quickly confirm. But if elegance is one of our conventions, I’m not for throwing that one out. I’m for it. Dignity and elegance of expression are part of Divinity for me, Tom. And you’re right…I’m making that all up. That’s just the way I see it and choose to experience it. Thanks for understanding my preferences, and honoring them.

            Your response was….well….elegant. And I appreciate it.

            Blessings….Neale.

          • Tom Fowler

            With all due respect to the lives and efforts of the previously named individuals, the world has never been in worse condition.

            However, I have come to the wrong place. It has been enlightening nonetheless, and the information you allow to filter through you into the CWG books has served to awaken so many in so many different ways, thank you.

            I’ll check back in the future to see how things are coming along, and will say hi.
            Take care

    • Dear Tom, it is this website’s policy not to print obscenities or extraordinarily impolite and ugly language. Our site’s platform is designed to automatically flag and refrain from publishing comments which contain profanity or external links in an effort to provide and maintain a family-friendly website.

      • Tom Fowler

        Profanity? Profane to who? Your God that doesn’t exist? Does he care? Is he offended? Do you care? Have you not learned anything from the CWG books? Isn’t emotion the language of the soul? Isn’t language used to express emotions? Why would you limit the tools of expression?

        Do you think that a god that explicitly told you he can not be offended can be offended. I suggest, Lisa, that you re-asses your position on “bad” language. If you are successful in that assessment you will realize the only obscenity here is your fear that has caused you to feel that censorship will somehow save you from something. I’m offended at your apparent lack of implementation of ALL the messages in the CWG books, not just the one’s that fall in line with the current morality.

        An obscenity is any statement or act which strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time- Wikipedia. Sure wouldn’t want to offend the prevailing morality of this culture. Wake up, Lisa.

  • Tom Fowler

    Absolutely!

    Aren’t we observable, down to every thought, by HEB’s, Star brother’s and sister’s, extra-dimensional beings and whatever other form of advanced civilization exists? This is all measurable and observable frequency after all, correct?

    Granted, HEB’s aren’t going to point and laugh at us. But we all defecate and it all stinks, so what?

    The sooner we realize we all have the same stinky defecation, the systems that survive by propagating this fear of will dissolve virtually overnight.

    We have the same Truth. And we all have similar fears. And the sooner we wake up to that version of reality, the sooner we can dissolve the systems that exist to ‘protect’ us from ‘ourselves’, because they have become dependent for the sake of their own existence on our inability to realize we all have equal emotions.

    • mewabe

      Why does it seem so impossible for SO MANY to understand that there is a monumental difference between voluntary and mutual transparency between different parties, and coercive and unilateral surveillance or spying on a population by an out of control government in the name of fear and control?

      This is not about bowel movements, it is about a government attempting to CONTROL all you do and possibly even think, in the name of some nebulous notion of “national security”. If won’t affect you if you keep your head down like most of the compliant and passive population, but become an activist and see what happens!

      • Tom Fowler

        Thanks Mewabe, and I enjoy reading your posts.
        This is, however, about bowel movements. It starts in the family at the home. Most people have never seen their family members take a dump. A lot of people freak out at the idea that their spouse’s or parents or whomever even have bowel movements. But you know what, they all look the same and there is nothing to be afraid of if someone else knows you poop and that the poop is gross and it stinks. You are no less lovable. That is my point, as long as we feel the need to hide our poop we live in fear. That fear is then manipulated to control us by people who need us to be afraid, because once we’re not, they have lost the battle for our minds.
        But Of Course, YES, the gov’t has no right to spy. But it is their own fear that causes them to think that having our information will somehow protect them. They are just doing what they can to “hoard” more of something, in this case information, because they believe it is going to somehow benefit their model of happiness to ‘have’ it. But again, if we would just start spilling the truth to each other like it’s going out of style, these bums would be out of business, and better yet, once they realize they are just like us and we are like them then the walls can start to come down.

        • mewabe

          Should all 300 millions Americans send stool samples to the Homeland security headquarters? Do you think they would get the message?

          I understand your point…yes, only division, separation, secrecy and fear between individuals among the population gives these people power and control over us. But the openness between us needs to be voluntary, not coerced. The only people who should be forced by law into transparency, as far as their PUBLIC life, are politicians and all government employees at all levels.

          Anyone who has done therapy and has been in a group is at once surprised and reassured to discover that most of our fears, our needs, our pains, our dreams are very similar, regardless of age, race, culture or gender. The “secrets” people hold within, which make them feel lonely and very misunderstood, are UNIVERSAL, if only they could trust enough to open up and share their inner being.

          But that’s only one aspect of transparency. Another aspect is finances, wages, etc…again, employers often keep control of their employees because these employees do not share information on their wages! Competitive firms or individuals do not share information on the estimates they give to the same potential clients for the same jobs…and on and on it goes.

          Divide, establish widespread secrecy and fear and paranoia, CONQUER and CONTROL!

          • Tom Fowler

            Whatever the case, I’m not interested in figuring out how to support current structures of finances, wages, employment, etc. I am focused on pulling the legs from underneath the system of fear that rules this planet and letting the body fall where it may. I am convinced that Truth is the Way. Again, my goal is to experience these institutions fail, not try to figure out how to make them work within the framework of a more enlightened society.

            We can’t be “over there” until we get “over there” and in this dimension that takes time. Reminds of a question my boss asked me once when I was obviously overwhelmed with a task, he said, “how do you eat an elephant?”, to which I replied, “I don’t know”. He answered, “one bite at a time.”

          • mewabe

            I am not either…(interested in supporting or improving anything about this system or any other).

            I have always lived outside the system as much as possible as an artist. If I had followed my heart 100% at the beginning of my life I would have gone to live with a tribe somewhere (rainforest or any other “primitive” place) when I was 16 years old, although I would have hesitated to impose my presence on such people, along with the germs of civilization.

            Have no fears, the man made “systems” of the world are all going to collapse very soon with the rapid collapsing of natural ecosystems. We don’t have to worry about a thing, nature will save us from our global insanity, or at the very least put us all in a massive straight jacket, so we loose our power to destroy everything in sight as we have been doing now for centuries.

    • Awareness

      Your comment on “defecation” tickled me (Laughter) 🙂 The thing with God is that it wishes to experience everything without exception in order to know itself more. You reminded me of a channeled book I read some time ago titled “FELINE HUMANS” by Shaun Swanson and Jefferson Viscardi. The book contains information from a feline human entity called Arvantis. The book states that Arvantis comes to us from what we call our future. Arvantis says the following about going to the toilet:

      “We have an organ that digests what we ingest in a way that is different from what you have on your world. So we don’t have the need for the elimination in the toilet that you have in your world.”

      Arvantis also says:

      “We have another organ that is in the cranial region of our brain that helps us to observe those beings in existences and realms that are of a different frequency than what you generally perceive in your life experience. In a sense, it makes us a little bit more intuitive, you might say, or have a greater sense of extra sensory perception.” 🙂

      Our going to the toilet reflects our present state of CONSCIOUSNESS and evolution 🙂 Of course all of this is temporary 🙂

      Blessings 🙂

  • Awareness

    I am happy with total transparency. However, I do not believe in “one sided” transparency. In this case the “one side” being the government (eventually as we evolve higher we will no longer need governments and they will cease to be). I am in favour of the same access the government has being given to all the people. So for example the “NSA” which is a government agency has access to all email and phone records of the people. This same access should be available to everyone in the population also. Another example say if the president of the USA has access to an individuals emails the individual should also have that same access to the presidents emails also. As the saying goes “what is GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS ALSO GOOD FOR THE GANDER” 🙂

    Also, I absolutely and most certainly do not believe in “secret court rulings” (Snowden has referred to this). The way I see it, the transparency God refers to in “Conversations with God” is full visibility with absolutely nothing hidden. Since we are all One and We are ALL God, what is there to hide? Besides, in order to evolve higher there must be No More Secrets. The GROUP (GREAT SPIRIT!) channelled by Steve Rother says “The veil is being pulled away, so there will be NO MORE SECRETS ON PLANET EARTH” 🙂

    Blessings to ALL 🙂

  • petwar83

    This whole issue brought up great debate between myself and my friends. I am someone who appreciates what I have as an American and I have enjoyed growing up in this country. But the US gov’t has and continues to do things that go against what I believe to be true for me. They go against what I believe and what makes me happy. Because of this, I could never pledge complete and total loyalty or allegiance to this country simply because I pledge complete loyalty and allegiance to my own well-being.

    Not to sound selfish in that respect, but I can’t support something that doesn’t sit right with me in my heart. And so that’s why I have no problem with Snowden doing this. Transparency is important, but it must be a two-way street and it cannot be forced. Government and families can’t force total transparency and be able to call our world an “advanced” civilization. It has to come through the personal choice and understanding, one by one, that living an open life and embracing that is much more fulfilling than living in fear and secrecy.

    I am a very private person. I enjoy being alone and I have a universe of thoughts in my mind that nobody knows about. If somebody asks a question, I will give them an answer. But I’m not going to openly discuss everything I think to people unless asked, because I like having those thoughts to myself. It would take someone who truly cares to ask those question and to pry into my mind. But I decided awhile ago that one day, when I fall in love, I will allow that person to delve into that universe that only I know and understand.

    Hopefully one day we can all have enough love and trust to allow each other to do the same.

  • Trystan

    I worked in the intelligence community for a good number of years while I served in the Air Force. As such I was privy to a great many things that the average citizen of this planet was not. I served during the cold war. There was always the danger that someone with access to “classified” information would leak that information. As a result I have every confidence that my phone and other forms of communications were monitored to prevent serious damage. It was a fact of my life and I accepted it as such. In an age where people air their dirty laundry on national TV and post every waking thought on Facebook and Twitter, I am astounded that it people are bothered by the governments actions. I grew up being taught a very simple principle. Do not do anything you would not want your mother to find out about. So other than the basic aversion to something we said or did being known by someone we did not intend to know it. Why is there an issue here? Honestly! These software programs suck up every bit of information out there. And unless I am mistaken there are not enough analysts in the world to read and listen to every bit of it. I believe these programs are such that they flag certain bits of information that pose a “threat” to national security. That is a broad topic, but threats to the President, Congress, the Senate, public buildings, airplanes etc. Things like would be flagged and a real person would then be notified and the text, forward and back would be reviewed to see if it were a valid threat and then action taken to protect the person or the nation. Does anyone really think that our government, or any government cares if you have a secret email account and are sending hot steamy letters to a mistress without your wife’s knowledge? Seriously. The people who are most bothered by this program are the ones who are doing something they do not want their mother or spouse to know about. Plain and simple. Live an open transparent life and you have nothing to fear.

    • Awareness

      The government and all it’s institutions must also be completely open and transparent just like everyone else 🙂

      • Trystan

        True. But who do we have control over? Only ourselves. Do we withhold our love and compassion and limit our evolution because our brother chooses to travel a different path at this moment? If so who do we hurt? If we choose to live in love then, in time, perhaps those around us will learn to live in love. And then those around them may join the movement. And when we are all living in and through love there will be no cause for fear that causes people to ridicule others. Fear of ridicule and reprisal is why more people are not transparent.

        • mewabe

          The government is not secretive because of a fear of ridicule…it is secretive for several reason…first it believe that the public “couldn’t handle the truth”, such truth being often very brutal and immoral, particularly when it comes to foreign policies.

          Secondly, the government is very often dishonest, BREAKING ITS OWN LAWS, and consequently needs to hide its actions.

          “[We are] no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men”

          Woodrow Wilson (1856-1954) 28th president of the United States

        • mewabe

          “But who do we have control over? Only ourselves.”

          Please…could you say this exact line to the government? It seems that it has forgotten, attempting to control us while being completely out of control!

          • But aren’t’ we the government for better & worse? Could it be that the government is simply reflective of aspects of individuals in more gargantuan form?

            When we criticize the government, it’s often for doing things we do simply on smaller levels that they (the government) reflect on a larger exponential levels. Example, government corruption & people fudging on taxes. The difference is in degrees.

            Of course, not all government is corrupt nor do all citizens fudge on taxes. We play the victims of the government or the aliens, or our childhood or something to take away our own involvement responsibility be it small or larger. There is always the bad guy to blame while we too are part of the problem as well as the solution.

          • mewabe

            Yes I agree, the government is not unique in its corruption or abuse of power, or pathological obsession with power and control. This is why I agree with Neale that the “solution” is not political…and this is why no one has ever been able to imagine something better than the systems we have, with a few variances (capitalism, communism, socialism, etc)

            I point out what I think is “wrong” when I see another person approving a governmental action or policy I believe is “wrong”. And I participate in lawful activism. You could call this “criticism”.

            For example when the government declares war on another nation that never attacked us, I AM NOT THE GOVERNMENT!

            When the government persecutes a whistle blower, I AM NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

            When the government puts someone to dearth, I AM NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

            My personal attitude is that NO government of the world is my government. My ONLY allegiance is to the EARTH (not the human world, the actual earth…the physical creation).

            In my heart and soul I am OF THE EARTH, not of our current societies. I regurgitated society, the dominant cultures and their conditioning long ago.

          • Thanks for the share.

            I think to say “For example when the government declares war on another nation that never attacked us, I AM NOT THE GOVERNMENT! When the government persecutes a whistle blower, I AM NOT THE GOVERNMENT.”

            I get your points here Mewabe, my point is that when we get all emotional, complaining & critical of the government we can & may also miss & ignore those very elements we have within ourselves on a much smaller scale. It’s easier to blame government than ourselves. They are the ultimate scapegoat & we the helpless victims.

            I think on some level say, we may persecute a whistle blower in the family for pointing out the elephant in the room be it abuse, addiction etc. & go along with it, (at least for awhile) because of various reasons, we are too young & small to understand, or other problems we consider at the moment more important, allow the abuses to go on for however long they do.

            To further example this this: suppose I point out to someone as gently as I can that they may be very rigid in certain areas of their life. They can respond that I can’t point it out unless I have it myself! This is I believe an accurate statement.

            However, my rigidity is at a much lower sometimes non existent level. Just because I see it in others does not necessarily mean I too have it at the same degree. I may have in the past, but I worked, played and processed through it.

            I feel there is a valid place for criticism on anything, but it seems it’s so easy to criticize rather than offer solutions. Each has a place, but I feel we are too problem centered as a society rather than solution orientated.

            Let’s offer more solutions along with our constructive criticisms.

          • mewabe

            Thanks for your thoughts…I know we will end up agreeing to disagree, respectfully, and that is perfectly good.

            Again, I criticize loudly when I see someone approving something I think terribly wrong. And I do not have to become introspective and wonder if I ever stepped on an ant by accident before I criticize a government or a nation’s war “collateral damage”.

            I do not criticize individuals or groups who are not in our face, or who do not step on our toes. But the government is increasingly in our faces, and I never invited it there. So this gives my plenty of legitimate reasons to say a resounding “NO”!

            This is not about blame…I do not blame the government or people for what happens in my life…I am self responsible and self-reliant. And that’s the point, one of many: I do NOT need the government to “protect” me, limiting my freedoms and rights proportionally to the degree of “protection”.

            Do you see my point?

            The solution? Stop being ruled by fear! Simple, no?

          • I’m not sure, you sound like an individualist & survivalist, not needing anyone, I’m not really sure this is what you are actually saying but it sounds that way to me.

            But aren’t we in this together? We barely use the power of personal creation on any grand scale, let alone using collective creation, except for doing so unconsciously.

            If we can move toward being more solution oriented as opposed to problem centered that would be progress. Bad news is good news in disguise waiting for a solution.

            I feel there is a collective mentality that just is overwhelmed by all the problems in the world & thus there is a resignation that can set in as a result. Yet even with this, most people would be very willing to be proactive, sacrifice their entertainment, hobbies, tv, computer free time for solutions they believed would really benefit & solve our many problems.

            As PEB’s Primitively Evolved Beings we have yet to come to some agreed consensus on what to do. Many organizations are working & playing for solutions. Many are grassroots organizations. As the individual spiritually advances, so does the collective. It seems dreadfully slow now, yet it can speed more as time goes on.

            When the people lead, the leaders will follow.

            The awful problems we have are also setting up a contextual field of grand negativity so we can rise above it to show & experience our even grander spiritual selves as a result!

            At that time, we will out grow most of the negative drama trauma like out grown toys. For now, we are in that exciting but delicate time of transition.

            Old school networks are being destroyed just like in a disaster film, but not with out a Godzilla fight to stay alive. In this sense, many of these Sci Fi movies are metaphors of our eventual triumph.

            Iron Man, Superman, Pacific Rim, etc. are to me representative & foretell our victory, disguised as entertainment.

            These movies are so wayyyyy over the top that they again to me represent the over the topness of our problems of Big Brother Government & our wars, individual & collective dysfunctions & massive world problems.

            These movies can be seen as unconscious metaphors hiding as proletariat distractions which have truth in them regardless of the manufacturing consent by the elite. In other words truth hides in many forms if we look for it. The same for solutions.

            Now please excuse my tangent. Hot weather lethargy for two days is subsiding & more energy is coming out today! 🙂
            Magically, -M

          • mewabe

            Ha! This is so funny and entertaining!

            “I’m not sure, you sound like an individualist & survivalist, not
            needing anyone, I’m not really sure this is what you are actually saying
            but it sounds that way to me.”

            So you come to this conclusion and box me in some fringe category based on the fact that I wrote that I did not need a government to take my freedoms away under the pretext of keeping me “safe” (from what exactly? More people die from peanut allergies or hospital infections, not to mention car accidents or alcoholism each year than have ever died from terrorism in the US).

            Seriously, if the government wants to keep us safe, perhaps it should fix the infrastructure!

            I am not an “individualist”, I am a free individual. I was born free, as everything that exists outside of the man made world (animals, etc), as created by the Creator.

            “Not needing anyone”? That’s funny too, since this is one of the new age mantra, that we are not supposed to need anyone! Actually I need people, not government. I can govern myself, thank you..

            I am not a “survivalist”, I believe in living, not surviving. The “survivalists” are those masses who struggle to survive in the mainstream culture. I don’t believe in that.

            You missed my point entirely, when I wrote that I did not need the government to protect me, and that the solution was to stop being afraid. I am not afraid, that’s why I do not need the government to protect me by spying on everyone and frisking people everywhere, acting like a giant paranoid schizophrenic asylum escapee.

            I will take freedom and danger anytime over tyranny and “security”. That’s why I am not living in China, or at least I did not think I was until a few years ago, when this country changed for the worse, first under Bush, and now under Obama, and then under the next puppet.

            The rest of your comment is interesting…but beware of boxing humanity (“PEB’s”, etc).

            There are people here who are very evolved, and others who act like newborns, or as if they were blind and deaf. This planet is a place of great contrast and learning, and extreme polarities, as you know.

          • “You missed my point entirely, when I wrote that I did not need the
            government to protect me, and that the solution was to stop being
            afraid. I am not afraid, that’s why I do not need the government to
            protect me by spying on everyone and frisking people everywhere, acting like a giant paranoid schizophrenic asylum escapee.”

            Yes I did & that’s why I qualified when I said I wasn’t sure. Thanks for the clarification.

            “but beware of boxing people (“PEB’s”, etc).”

            I agree, yet I would still say we are all mostly PEB’s for the most part, save for a few rare enlighten beings, of which I’m certainly not one of! 🙂

          • mewabe

            Thanks Marko, and why not? Why would you say you are not enlightened? It does not mean perfection…it means that the light shines on you!

          • Mewabe, Thich Nhat Hanh, Ekhart Tolle, Byron Katie, the Dali Lama. Those are enlightened beings.

            Neale does not claim to be, or even be a master. That’s good!, because people can relate to him more.

            Neale represents spiritually advanced progress at a very high level, which at least seems more attainable & possible than the above mentioned.

            Sure, in time, it’s possible, that is, in this life time that we may become self realized, I know a few others who are & they live normal extraordinary lives.

            I do feel I’m advancing more than I thought possible.

            In 2012 I realized I wasn’t habitually thinking negative thoughts anymore or very few, & feel, think & experience a positive inner & outer experience, a majority of the time. That was & is still a BIG revelation for me.

            Smiles, -M

          • mewabe

            You know, the persons you have listed may or may not be enlightened, as knowledge does not necessarily mean enlightenment (Alan Watts was extremely knowledgeable, he had it all figured out, but he still had a drinking problem. Was he enlightened? He alone knew).

            A homeless person on a street corner may be more enlightened than any of them. The Dalai Lama does not claim to be enlightened, by the way, he only calls himself a student.

            Spirituality is not like going to school, with levels, gradation, degrees, and “mastery”. You don’t really have to “advance” as the goal is within you. All you need is reach that, be that which is in you already, PURE BEING, which means Being without divisions or separations, or conflict (in other words be one within and with all things, and you will resonate with the oneness of the whole universe).

            As in “When you make the two one……….then you shall enter the Kingdom”.

            To be one, you do not have to be virtuous, wise, knowledgeable, perfect, or even positive. A fetus is one with its mother. A fish is one with the ocean, a bird one with the air…all we need is to become fully conscious of what already is. This oneness is the very essence of divinity.

            That’s one way to do it anyway…every path is different.

            The prize is very subtle and humble, silent, still…that’s why it is disregarded, as people look for a firework outside of themselves and above. But the subtle light is there at all time and looking and seeking blind us to its subtlety, as if we were looking for our feet…we could not walk properly, and would stumble.

          • You may be correct on the Dali Lama, years back Barbra Walters ask him if he was enlightened & he said how could he be, he still wears glasses, so for him, not wearing glasses was not indicative of one who is enlightened. It’s also possible to be enlightened and not know it is it not?

            Nevertheless, it gives us pause to individually contemplate what is actual enlightenment. It depends on what we call enlightenment & how we define it.

            I ask the question to people regarding enlightenment. If most of your life is peaceful, joyful, happy, prosperous, good relations, good health & self esteem,etc how important is enlightenment to those people?

            To those living in much negativity, drama trauma, poverty & illness, enlightenment may be seem more important as a goal to experience.

            Others may be happy in very dire experiences & that may constitute a form of enlightenment. So it depends on how you define it.

          • mewabe

            Enlightenment changes everything and nothing…one still has to breathe and pay bills, cook dinner and sleep and take showers, even when enlightened. The difference is that there is a perspective…as with someone who has had a near life experience, in a way, there is a complete identification with consciousness (rather than with the body or mind or emotions exclusively).

            A person can satisfy these things (heart, mind and/or body) and find some sort of happiness/fulfillment.

            But the definition of enlightenment, for me, is not only full soul/consciousness identification, but to fully identify with all life. To not just know intellectually that all life is one, but to feel and experience it on a constant basis…to feel no separation. It leads to feelings of ecstasy, of bliss, and of complete inner freedom from time, space etc (liberation). The intensity of these experiences vary, but a background of inner peace, liberation and full consciousness remains at all times.

            To me, this is “enlightenment”, because it restores the self in its true nature, which is the divine nature, as, again, the very essence of the divine is oneness (as well as eternity and infinity).

            So in my worldview and experience, to realize (as in self realization) oneness beyond time and space (in the eternal now and the infinite here) is to realize divinity, it is to be “enlightened”.

            There is no need for proof of enlightenment, or recognition by any other…only you know, you have absolutely no doubt, and it makes you extremely humble…because wherever you are in consciousness, you know you still haven’t even lifted one corner on the immense divine universe, and the more you “know”, the more humble you become.

            The more you know, the more you realize how little you know. There is no mastery, ever. Only the ignorant seeks mastery. There is only life, and it is infinite and eternal, as are experience, learning and growth.

          • Yes, I’d add, it’s the process & the journey combined, imbibed in the now co-creating the future.

          • Mike Brown

            If anyone tells you they are a master they aren’t. Run

            and the ones that are wouldn’t tell you.
            maybe its only to be shared in the heart center between a

            chela and a master and only possible if one has accepted

            the other in that role .

          • Awareness

            I Pledge myself in service to LIFE 🙂

    • mewabe

      Does not doing anything you wouldn’t want your mother to know about include being a peace activist, or being any other kind of activist, who, even when totally non violent and acting legally is monitored and whom the police can harasses because haven access to such information, or who can be put on a no fly list for absolutely no valid reason?

      Let’s not oversimplify this issue, please! This is not about the FBI trying to destroy Martin Luther King by monitoring his secret affairs and leaking the information to his wife. This is not about some shady agency trying to find “dirt” on someone to discredit them…this is about TOTAL surveillance, and Fusion Centers that profile ANYONE who sticks their neck out (demonstrators, activists, etc) and that are not overseen by the Federal government.

      Honestly!

      • Trystan

        Have you personally been limited in such a way for your peaceful activism? Or have you heard of others who have been? If it is you, then you know the truth of what you have done or not done. And if you are honest with yourself and have not done or said anything that could have been interpreted as violent then you are just in your view that you have been wrongly limited. If it is another, you can not know if they are truly the peaceful individual you believe them to be for they may not be as transparent as you believe. .

        • mewabe

          It is interesting that you are asking for proof that peace activists and others have been put on a no fly list wrongly…while YOU ARE NOT BOTHERED AT ALL that the government can put such individuals on such lists WITHOUT ANY PROOFS of wrong doing, only “suspicion”.

          “Guilty until proven innocent” is the new American way that you want to embrace?

          A SOVIET style Total Surveillance State with ever expanding bureaucracies of spooks is not exactly what I would characterize as “American”, meaning belonging in what is supposed to be a free society, where individual rights are protected.

        • mewabe

          “If you have not SAID anything that could be INTERPRETED as violent”???????????????????????????????????????????

          Are you actually aware of what you are saying?

          You are saying that free speech will end up in your loos of freedom if your words can be INTERPRETED as violent?
          Who is doing the INTERPRETATION, and acting as God?

          What kind of world are you living in?

          And before you give me the line that “we are living in a dangerous world”, I would rather be free and face the danger than live in a prison society.

        • mewabe

          From the San Francisco Chronicle:

          Alan Gathright, Chronicle Staff Writer

          “A federal “No Fly” list, intended to keep terrorists from boarding
          planes, is snaring peace activists at San Francisco International and other U. S. airports, triggering complaints that civil liberties are being trampled.

          And while several federal agencies acknowledge that they contribute names to the congressionally mandated list, none of them, when contacted by The Chronicle, could or would say which agency is responsible for managing the list.

          One detainment forced a group of 20 Wisconsin anti-war activists to miss their flight, delaying their trip to meet with congressional representatives by a day. That case and others are raising questions about the criteria federal authorities use to place
          people on the list — and whether people who exercise their
          constitutional right to dissent are being lumped together
          with terrorists.”

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      I think the issue here is the government’s honesty about it. If the government simply said, “Yes, we are collecting this data and monitoring these calls, etc.,” not many people would give a hoot, just as you have said. The issue Mr. Snowden has brought to the fore is whether the government should have been doing this in secret. As he says, justice has to be seen in order to be done. I agree with you, Trystan. For the most part, the only people opposed to transparency are people with something to hide.

  • poniesnpaint

    Trystan probably has it right. As a child during the Cold War we “just knew” all these dreadful things would happen, but the spying part was kept secret and the social mindset of the times permitted that kind of blind obedience (think Frank Burns of MASH)—while some of us knew it was wrong, we were swept up with a greater wind. But I like Trystan’s point that while people spew all sorts of venom and garbage freely these days, it pretty much makes the government look like a rank amateur at this game. Privacy and a sense of self-respect have all but disappeared from the larger society, which is sad.
    That being said, I don’t want to hide stuff, I am not squirreling away information or sins of horror that would scare children straight. . .there are just things I consider belong to me alone to contemplate—and from that point make better choices. I do agree with the old concept of “don’t do anything you don’t want your mother to find out about”. It keeps you along some basic principles of decent behavior towards others. Transparency of that kind is good, and I think necessary. What I resent is the government deciding that I’m some sort of arch-villain-in-the-making and they feel they need to monitor every thought/e-mail/call or trip to the little room upstairs.
    Transparency that is willing, thoughtful and a part of the culture is fine, but when citizens are forced into the “all-seeing eye” of the government, then resentment comes in strongly. Everyone is quick to leap to a conclusion without finding out the mitigating circumstances, the thoughts and motivations of the people involved and so on. It’s easy to make a snap judgment and just say “You’re WRONG!” at high volume without giving the other person a chance to be right.
    Therein lies the problem as far as I can see. Everyone wants to make a quick pronouncement, no one wants to be seen as weak enough to be merciful. Transparency has become a watchword for snooping fear that we may not be as good, as rich, as pretty as —-whatever— as the next person. Maybe if we gave people a chance to be “good” about their lives, we wouldn’t have to force the issue—transparency would be as natural as breathing, but this culture has changed the mindset from “innocent until proven guilty” to “born guilty and you’ll play hell trying to prove otherwise”.
    Self-righteousness, the natural child of fear, has taken over.
    Judgmentalism–the twin, supports the process
    Either way, no one can “win” until we reinstate kindness, mercy and compassion to ourselves and our fellow beings. Transparency, then, wouldn’t even be up for discussion.

  • mewabe

    Neale, I was trying to answer your post, but it seems that it has vanished…so I will post my thoughts here instead…

    Neale, I cannot believe that you actually think that!

    “The only people opposed to transparency are people with something to hide.”

    Don’t you make the difference between transparency and surveillance (essentially spying, profiling, etc)?

    Don’t you see the problem with what you call a “transparency” which is not voluntary but forced?

    Do you really believe that anything that is achieved through coercion, that does not honor free will, has spiritual value?

    Don’t you see a problem with what you call “transparency” when it is not mutual, when the entity that is spying on you is itself ultra secretive (not to mention extremely powerful), and persecutes whistle blowers (not just in this case, I mean secretive about so much more)?

    This is not a political or ideological question…it has nothing to do with Obama, or Bush, or a fusion of the two as seems to have occurred…it is a spiritual question: can anything
    that is achieved by coercion be spiritually valid in your opinion?

    Not in my world. My God is not a boss, a commander in chief or a spook, and if she is not, no one else has the right to be.

    • Michael L

      Freedom!!!!!

  • Awareness

    ‘America has no functioning democracy’ – Jimmy Carter on NSA

    Former US President Jimmy Carter lambasted US intelligence methods as undemocratic and described Edward Snowden’s NSA leak as “beneficial” for the country.

    Carter lashed out at the US political system when the issue of the previously top-secret NSA surveillance program was touched upon at the Atlantic Bridge meeting on Tuesday in Atlanta, Georgia.

    “America has no functioning democracy at this moment,” Carter said, according to Der Spiegel.

    He also believes the spying-scandal is undermining democracy around the world, as people become increasingly suspicious of US internet platforms, such as Google and Facebook. While such mediums have normally been associated with freedom of speech and have recently become a major driving force behind emerging democratic movements, fallout from the NSA spying scandal has dented their credibility.

    It’s not the first time Carter has criticized US intelligence policies. In a previous interview with CNN, he said the NSA leaks signified that “the invasion of human rights and American privacy has gone too far.” He added that although Snowden violated US law, he may have ultimately done good for the country.

    “I think that the secrecy that has been surrounding this invasion of privacy has been excessive, so I think that the bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial.” Published time: July 18, 2013 12:15 Edited time: July 19, 2013 10:39 at RT 🙂

    Blessings to ALL 🙂

  • mewabe

    To use a few simple words to explain my point more clearly (I am not sure why it seems so difficult to understand):

    Would you rather give a present to someone, or have that person steal this object from you?

    Would you rather share intimacy voluntarily, or have someone force him/herself on you?

    Surveillance is indeed invasion (thank you Jimmy Carter!), it is stealing, it is rape.

    Voluntary transparency, on the other hand is a totally different thing. It is given, not stolen. It is a choice, not an obligation. It protects the dignity and integrity of the person rather than violating them.

    • Christopher Toft

      How can a person steal something from you that you have no attachment to?
      How can intimacy be forced? It wouldn’t be intimacy. I still am not sure about what you’re saying here Mewabe. Yes I agree surveillance is invasive, but I cannot see how it could be stealing when we cannot own anything. If transparency is given, how then can it be stolen?

      • mewabe

        Who said I had no attachment to some things, in terms of necessary practical usage? Would you like a person to clean up your bank account or take your car?

        Yes, some things CAN be stolen.

        About forced intimacy, I did NOT use these words. I wrote, essentially, would you rather have intimacy or be raped? THAT was the meaning. It seems that you are playing with words rather than ideas. I am interested in ideas, not in splitting hair or words…

        You are apparently taking my words too literally. When I said surveillance is stealing, or that it is rape, I do not mean it literally. I am simply comparing it to stealing or rape or ANYTHING that is done against your will, that is done WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT.

        Perhaps YOU have given your consent, or would give it if asked. I did not and would not, because a relationship between the individual and a giant and powerful government bureaucracy of Total Surveillance is terribly and unfairly UNEVEN. Only when they let me see everything they write, say and do, only then may I allow them to do the same to me.

        Actually I would not, on second thought, because I do not believe in control. The object of surveillance here is to try to control the behaviors of populations (supposedly to prevent acts of terrorism), and I do not believe in control, at least NOT TO THIS DEGREE that everything is recorded.

        I would on the other end be transprarent towards a person who is interested in me…not towards anyone or anything who would attempt to control me.

        • Christopher Toft

          “Who said I had no attachment to some things, in terms of necessary practical usage? Would you like a person to clean up your bank account or take your car?

          Yes, some things CAN be stolen.”

          Mewbe, who exactly owns anything? Where is this permanent, independently existing being who owns permanent, independently existing objects? What car? What bank account. I am not meaning to be all “smug Zen” here, I am deadly serious

          • mewabe

            Alright…please wire the entire content of your checking account, saving account through PayPal, and send me anything else you do not own, which is everything…I will pay for freight.

            Thanks!

          • Christopher Toft

            Point taken. I’m tiered & a bit muddled. I’ve been reading this Buddhist book & it’s gone to my head a bit. I’d like to discuss this further when my mind feels less cloudy. Sometime over the weekend probably. I enjoy our talks! 🙂

          • mewabe

            I don’t think we own anything, of course, but we use some things. And as long as we use these things, then we have a sort of agreement, a pretense that they are “ours”.

            I don’t own the oxygen that is in my lungs and blood (and hopefully brain)…but if someone or something was to suck it all out, “taking it from me” as it were, I would be in trouble.

            So we have these agreements, to respect each other’s “usages”. Some “usages” are more critical than others. Such as…I don’t want anyone “stealing” one of my kidneys while I am distracted reading a good book, because I am still using them 🙂

            Does “usage” sound better than to say “each other’s property”?

          • Mike Brown

            Ha ha ha. I just about fell off my chair here

  • Mike Brown

    Remember when the most upsetting thing that happened in a lazy dog day
    of summer was that the neighbor had started his lawnmower too early Sunday morning? The night was quiet and so dark you could see the stars while listening to the frogs and I didn’t really need to think about the global anything.

    I miss that.

    • mewabe

      I still experience this in my corner of the universe on Pluto…except it is not lawnmowers but weed wackers! Still plenty of frogs, but mysteriously the crickets are gone…

      Global communication has made the world a very small place, a little cramped and oppressive. We have less tolerance for the sufferings of the world toady, because it touches us every day, we can’t ignore it.

      This in itself causes a global crisis, as well as personal ones. It’s uncomfortable, like a strong fever, but it is good, and necessary…time seems to be accelerating, and we are coming to a head, the cauldron is coming to a boil, as the whole of humanity is emptying the contents of its collective psyche or unconscious, its “inner demons” (vital force) for all to see and face, and hopefully heal. The “collective body” is shaking, regurgitating, having hot and cold sweats, and is a little delirious, feeling lost, confused and very afraid…it is PURGING itself.

      It is not pretty, but change is definitively happening, and those who resist it will be knocked off their feet (so will those who do not resist it…because it will be like a tsunami).

      I have had a feeling for many years now that THE ONLY SAFE PLACE IN THE WORLD TO BE, SOON, WILL BE YOUR VERY OWN SOUL and divine connection. Nowhere else…as everything else is shaken to the core and blown away in order to CAUSE this transformation, this COLLECTIVE soul connection.

      I do not mean to scare anyone, but there is absolutely nothing to fear, that’s the point. We are intensely “playing” with global fear and other familiar illusions now in order to finally release them, to realize there are illusions.

      • Mike Brown

        “It is actually very good, all we need is trust in the process, we are finally getting there!”

        Err if you say so. In the immortal words of John Lennon ( encased in Lennon’s Tomb) just Gimme some Peace.
        I would give you the lyrics from Mr Lyric Site but not today.

        Because I’m always so responsible I’m thinking of going wild.

        Born to be mild.
        Peace .

        What can I say you can’t let Stand your ground laws stand but what can I do about it in Canada?- just a couple of weeks from confounding things that are beyond me solving. Obama and
        my liege Stephen Harper can have it.

        Mike

  • Awareness

    I felt the following message, so I thought I should share:

    Heavenletter #4621 Hello, Myself, July 20, 2013

    God said:

    You are My testament to Myself. You are the Speaker and Revealer of My Heart. Reveal it! Get on with it now.

    I made you in My Image. I gave you all the Rights and Privileges and Purposes and Responsibilities that are Mine. I made you My Heir. I proclaimed you Myself. I told you to
    venture forth and reveal Truth. By My Very Nature, and by yours, I drew you in My Image, and so I multiplied Myself and spread My Multiplication Tables upon Earth and told you to go forth and multiply. Multiply My love, I said. I told you to be a Mirror of Myself, to reflect Me upon Earth, to be a testament to Me, a revealer of Me, a brightener of the Sun, a polisher of souls, a cleaner of eyes, a helper of others to see.

    I washed your windows. I kissed you tenderly. I sent you forth. I spread you upon the Earth like homemade frosting on a cake, and, then, you forgot everything including
    what you were on Earth for. You thought you were on Earth for yourself alone, and, so, you wandered, not really fathoming what you were on Earth for and what you were doing here in what appeared to be a jungle to you, so unseeing were you.

    You became a pauper King, a King with a paper crown. You forgot that you were gold. Instead, you claimed to be an imposter, tarnished tin, a poser as it were, someone who
    arrived in a new country with false identity papers. You made too little of yourself. Instead of walking like the Son or Daughter of God, you scrambled on Earth, walked on tippity-toes, or you crawled on Earth and could hardly lift your head. You cast your eyes down and hung your head and said, “Tut, tut.”

    You found fault with others. You didn’t realize that you were chalking up flaws of yourself and brandishing them around as if they belonged to others. Instead of inspiring the world, you looked for inspiration and couldn’t see it. You simply did not see the splash of light you yourself shine on Earth. You saw a shadow of yourself. You denied yourself and called yourself victim. That is as good as calling yourself a cartoon character. You let yourself be a patsy. This was a nod you gave yourself.

    At the same time, you strutted around with world importance and tried to get worshippers to you who didn’t know who or what to worship. On bended knee, you refused yourself your identity, or, in truth, you saw yourself as no more than refuse.
    You thought you were a staggering loss, you who are everything to Me.

    You may well have accused Me of poor dealings with you. I became a scapegoat while you became an accuser. You attributed your irresponsibility to Me. You pointed to anyone and everyone. You refused to admit your own culpability.

    All of this subterfuge was to refute your own capability. You couldn’t bring yourself to go out of your zone. You stayed enclosed or even embalmed away from your True Self.

    Here I AM. Your True Self. Look at Me and see your Self. I am your Co-Signer and your Heritage. I AM you, and you ARE I. Now you are getting closer to the Truth of Who you
    really are and What you are really made of. You are more than any words can say. Still, just the the same, I whisper your Greatness: “Thou art I. I AM thou. Hello, Myself.” 🙂

  • Amanda Elizabeth

    Is loyalty to one’s country
    the highest calling?

    No, I believe loyalty to God Himself and to Yourself comes first . For instance, if you knew or sensed what you were doing/going to do was going to hurt yourself or someone extra,
    I would discontinue doing it or not do it at all.