An Open Letter to Our World:

EDITOR’S NOTE: I am excited to be able to use this space on the Internet as a place in which we can join together to ignite a worldwide exploration of some of the most revolutionary theological ideas to come along in a long time.

The ideas I intend to use this space for in the immediate future are the ideas found in GOD’S MESSAGE TO THE WORLD: You’ve Got Me All Wrong.  I believe this new book (published just four months ago by Rainbow Ridge Books) places before our species some of the most important “What if” questions that could be contemplated by contemporary society.

The questions are important because they invite us to ponder some of the most self-damaging ideas about God ever embraced by our species—as well as some of the most helpful and uplifting ideas we can conjure in response to those damaging ones.

For example, what if what Mewabe posted here recently (“The problem is not so much whether or not one believes in a creator God, but whether a person LOVES, APPRECIATES, RESPECTS and HONORS life.”) is the key to it all?

I was especially intrigued by the entry that followed Mewabe’s post, from Hempwise. I think this person captured our circumstance in the world today perfectly.

In case you missed it in the previous discussion here, Hempwise said:

“Yes, seeing life as Prime importance, value and being responsible for it all is the obvious solution.

“Just this morning I was listening to the radio (and) a Syrian lady spoke about her three sons. Her youngest was 13 and (she described) why she had to send him to fight for Isis. She said she had no choice in the matter. It was all about Honor.

“So entrenched in her cultural story she was (that) her own thoughts were…of her religion and their beliefs. Even sending her children to war to join their cousins and (meet) probable death was of higher importance than honoring life and sustaining that. This is so very sad.

“The Middle East is on a collision with self-annihilation if the young are continually oppressed by their religious schools, and indoctrinated by the interpretation of old books.

“Religion and governments have to move aside when it comes education. (They are filled with) control freaks seeking to limit wisdom and critical thinking in favor of righteousness and robot mentality.

“The task is mammoth: to change cultural understandings that never get challenged.

“The culture from which we emerge is causing the demise of the culture.”

I agree with virtually every word that Hempwise wrote there. I have been saying for years, after being told in very direct terms in the Conversations with God dialogue, that what humanity would benefit the most from right now is the writing of a New Cultural Story. Our species would be enormously helped by writing, and them telling ourselves and our children, a new story about God, about Life, about Who We Are and Why We Are Here, about our true relationship to each other, about the purpose of Life Itself, about how life functions, about the fact that beliefs create behaviors, and about how life is experienced by the Highly Evolved Beings of the Universe.

The challenge is that we cannot, as a species, come to an agreement on what that New Story is. So we keep telling our Old Story over and over and over again — even though it is the Old Story that is killing us.

The question is: Where do we begin as we seek to craft our New Story? I think one place to start might be to at least give credence to the claim that our Old Story is simply not accurate. That is the point, that is the thrust, of GOD’S MESSAGE TO THE WORLD: You’ve God Me All Wrong.

I do hope you will all read it, not because I wish you to convert you to my idea, but because I wish to propose it as a starting point for a vital new discussion about all of Humanity’s Cultural Story, and where we might all begin in co-authoring a new version of it.

We have to start somewhere. And so here, in the weeks ahead, I will continue to present for review and discussion the points made in this most recent text based on the messages in Conversations with God.

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:
  • N, Asking What if?! led me to embrace my creation of infidelity and divorce as a magical experience designed by me to shake and wake me up at this moment in time. I “play” this “game” daily to place my attention on the gift of life and the thrill of solving its puzzles, instead of placing my attention on being overwhelmed by life and weighted down by burdens. It’s a choice. Playing What if?! reminds me to choose with my heart and not my Ego. Grateful I read these words today. With love, Cleo Everest

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      I am very, very glad that this has been your experience, Cleo. Thank you for telling me this. Sending all good thoughts……neale.

  • mewabe

    In context, my comment as quoted by Neale was to specifically compare the attitudes of the religious versus the atheists, and to argue that atheism is not the biggest problem in our world, but old religious dogma is. Obviously in this very last statement I agree with Neale and anyone else whose intelligence tells them that ancient religious dogma is absurd and destructive.

    But Neale seems to think, as expressed in his last entry, that a belief in the existence of a God creator is of the utmost importance. I am not so sure. This is a philosophical as well as a spiritual question.

    I personally know, without a doubt because of my personal experiences, of the existence of the Divine. But I have no problem with people who are atheists or agnostic. What matters to me is people’s ability and willingness to feel, to love, to have empathy, to be generous, sensitive, tolerant, honest, to be open minded as well as open hearted, in other words to be fully human. Beliefs or lack of beliefs do not make a human…the opening of the heart does.

    Opening the heart is one of the greatest challenge of humanity. A young child spontaneously knows how to do this, without requiring any theology or God concepts. An adult forgets, because most adults progressively close and harden their hearts, becoming less and less vulnerable or sensitive. Even animals such as dogs are often more capable of expressing unconditional love than human adults. Do animals require a belief in a God creator in order to love? I don’t think so.

    Like John Lennon, who sung much about love but allegedly cruelly abused his sons, we can talk about love, in theological terms, until we are blue in the face. But each one of us knows, at the end of the day, whether, regardless of our beliefs, we actual hold love in our hearts. And THAT is the ultimate question.

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      To set the record straight…I do not think that “a belief in the existence of a creator God is of the utmost importance.” First of all, of the utmost importance for what? A happy individual life? Changing the world? Experiencing and expressing love?

      I do happen to think that a belief in the existence of God can be enormously — and I use the word “enormously” advisedly — helpful in each of the above scenarios. But is it of the “utmost importance” in the sense that we cannot live happy individual lives or change the world or express and experience deep and real and meaningful love without it? Not in my opinion. Many, many people who do not believe in God do one, two, or all three of these things quite successfully.

      I am suggesting that a belief in God, in my experience, can make all three immeasurably easier, assuming — and this is a big assumption — that what we believe ABOUT God is not massively and wildly inaccurate. If it IS, then it would, in fact, be better if we did NOT believe in God. That is the whole point of “GOD’S MESSAGE TO THE WORLD: You’ve Got Me All Wrong.”

      I believe that it is the inaccurate understandings about God held by billions of people that are, in whole or in part (depending on the specific circumstance we are analyzing), responsible for the dysfunction of individual lives and the malfunction of the world at large.

      • mewabe

        I can see, and I “hear” through your words, that you are very passionate about your beliefs. That is a good thing…

        I know that, obviously, some religious beliefs are extremely destructive. Indeed and given a limited choice, it is better not to believe than to believe in a false God, in a demanding and punishing deity. That was my point, and we seem to agree. I suppose I misread your last entry, but I think other individuals have also interpreted your words as meaning that atheism was somewhat of a problem.

        I agree with your last paragraph as far as the “in part” is concerned. I do not think an inaccurate understanding about the Divine is the lone cause of our problems…but that there is a cause behind this cause, another layer to explore.

        This layer is, as I see it, humanity’s inability or unwillingness to feel. Have you ever addressed this point?

        For example, do you really think that a FEELING, sensitive, empathic person could, because of a religious belief, slowly cut another person’s head with a knife, as do members of isis? Do you think a belief alone would have the power to transform a feeling human being into a psychopath? And if not, what do you think causes much of humanity to become unfeeling, insensitive, unresponsive to the suffering of others, numb, and causes a few to be cruel and sadistic?

        That is MY question…I have my own answers, but I would like to hear your thoughts.

      • Patrick Gannon

        Neale, I am having some difficulty resolving what you say here, with what you said in your last column:

        “For example, after the idea that God is to be feared, I believe that the second most damaging notion that some humans hold about God is the thought that God might not even exist.” You went on to say: “Why this is damaging is that it stops all atheists and many agnostics from using God’s power, even as the whole of humanity seeks to work collaboratively to create the life we all say we want for everyone on this planet.” This seems to imply that agnostics and atheists are working against “the whole of humanity.” Was that your point?

        Here, you are saying that not believing in God is not of the “utmost importance” but according to your prior column, it’s reasonable to assume that not believing in God runs a close second, given how “damaging” it is. When you speak of the whole of humanity working collaboratively to create the life we all say we want for everyone on this planet, doesn’t that include: “A happy individual life? Changing the world? Experiencing and expressing love?” I’m glad you admit that atheists and agnostics are capable of these things, though it seems to be at odds with statements in your prior column which insinuate to me that atheists and agnostics work against these goals.

        Now you are saying here, that if what we believe about God is wildly inaccurate, “then it would, in fact, be better if we did NOT believe in God.” Well, is it “wildly inaccurate” to believe that God is “to be feared”? Isn’t this how billions of people see God? Didn’t you say this was the most damaging notion some humans hold about God? Ergo, doesn’t it logically follow that it would be better not to believe in God, than to believe the “wildly inaccurate” things most believers believe?

        I tend to agree with you when you say, “I believe that it is the inaccurate understandings about God held by billions of people that are, in whole or in part (depending on the specific circumstance we are analyzing), responsible for the dysfunction of individual lives and the malfunction of the world at large.” When you speak of “billions of people” I assume you are speaking of the religionists, and obviously not the atheists and agnostics who are not stoning people, cutting off heads, or passing legislation permitting believers to discriminate against their fellow humans for religious reasons.

        Given this, it seems logical that agnosticism and atheism are superior approaches, given that neither advocates fearing God, not to mention all the other “wildly inaccurate” notions believers hold about God – like being better than those who don’t believe what you believe. However you castigated both atheists and agnostics with your prior column, and that doesn’t seem to square with what you are saying here now. Shall this post be taken as a retraction of at least part of your prior column? I sometimes have difficulty getting what I want to say into the right words, and I’m open to the possibility that was true for you as well.

        “We are all ONE,” whether solely as stardust particles or as part of a greater consciousness is yet to be determined. Until science figures it out, I would suggest being skeptically open minded as most agnostics are; and accepting the help of any person, believer or non-believer who works to support ‘a happy individual life, changing the world, and experiencing and expressing love.’ No deities are required to do this.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Neale, I don’t think I was the only one who interpreted your remarks about atheists and agnostics as being damaging to the whole of humanity. Certainly others were also taken aback by your commentary. Be that as it may, as many times as I read it, that’s how it comes across to me, and I’m entitled to my perception. I’m sure you perceive me as a royal pain in the a$$. LOL.

          When you target specific people or groups like ‘conservatives’ or ‘atheists and agnostics’ surely you must understand that there will be a raising of defenses. Some of your recent columns seems counter to much of what I got out of CWG about ONEness.

          I thank you for taking the time to pen this “clarification.” I don’t understand why you felt it necessary to pick on atheists and agnostics in the first place. As an agnostic I most certainly don’t feel “damaged” or that I am not using “God’s power” – though much depends on what is meant by the word “god.”

          I totally reject your hypothesis that atheists and agnostics are damaging themselves, and suggest that the real problem is religionists whose beliefs are “wildly inaccurate” who are damaging not only themselves, but the rest of humanity as well. It seems odd for you to have even brought it up. How did you expect it to be received? We aren’t stoning anyone or trying to limit personal liberties, are we?

          Reading the bible cover to cover for the first time, and realizing then, that I had lived a youth largely wasted in fear, my agnosticism has provided a far more rewarding life than what I had back when I “believed in God” – whatever that means. I would not go back to those days; and having learned that Bible God does not exist (or the chances of such are extremely remote in my view), I am not in any hurry to pick up any new gods, no matter how nice She might be.

          Concerns: You said above, “Of course, my view is that it would be better still to believe in God in an accurate way, in a way that accurately reflects who and what God is…” At the end of your note you added, ” in my view an accurate belief in our Deity can make it a whole lot easier.” You do realize don’t you that, every minister of every denomination in every religion could say those exact same words – and none of you would agree on what “an accurate way” is. Whatever happened to “ours is not a better way, ours is just another way”? I don’t know whether you, the Pope, Grand Ayatollah Khomanani, the Dalai Lama, or BigBamboozle of the Jungle has a lock on the “accurate way,” and so I will hold to my agnosticism as being the least damaging to being “who I really am” until such time, if ever, that I come to “know” this for myself.

          Religionists always seem to be telling everyone else what to believe, to tell everyone that they are right and they have the accurate info; and for all I know, the Pope may have the real answer, and I’ll end up in a fiery hell for all of eternity because I jerked off and didn’t make it to Confession. We might hope that there’s no Bible God, but you just never know; just as I’m not sure you can ever fully shake that evil childhood indoctrination!

          Moving on and leaving the “perceived” antagonism to atheism/agnosticism behind, you said: “In my opinion it “seems logical” that a change in our beliefs about God rather than an ending of our belief in God, is the superior approach.” Prefacing with “in my opinion” is helpful to a guy like me. Sometimes it’s hard to tell when it’s Neale the person, or Neale quoting “God” who is standing at the pulpit. I would agree that we need a drastic change in our beliefs about God, but as part of this, I would argue that we need to change our definition or idea of what “God” is. For most people in the west, “God” is “Bible God” or “Allah God,” or even “Jesus God,” a deity, a personal god, a supreme “being,” a super person with emotions, wants, needs, desires and a personality, and it often seems to me, as we’ve debated before, that you and others are creating a “New Age God” who is also a deity, also a “being.” Using the word “deity” comes with baggage, just like the word “god,” and not just baggage, but a dictionary definition that includes the word “being” even though I know you’ve said you don’t think of God as a “being.” That’s the problem with words like “deity” and “god.” They aren’t unifying. They are words associated with religions. If you say in one place that you don’t think of God as a “being” and refer to God in another as a “deity” you’ve inadvertently contradicted yourself. I find that these words frequently raise barriers rather than lowering them. I think we need to redefine “god.” “Life” is OK. I think “Consciousness” is probably better and potentially more “accurate” (in my opinion as I wouldn’t agree that science has “proven” the relationship between consciousness and matter to any realistic satisfaction). In my opinion, we need to figure out a way to get away from words like “god” and “deity” that just keep on dividing us.

          Since I’m enjoying the discussion – what do you mean by “soul”? I think “soul” could be another word for “consciousness” if it turns out that consciousness continues without matter. The problem again, with the word “soul” is that it has baggage. Some Christians think their souls go to heaven or hell, others think their “renewed bodies go to a new paradise, etc. The original word “soul” going back to Genesis simply means ‘breath of life.’ I’m not as uncomfortable with the word “soul,” but you have to understand it means different things to different people, and again your understanding of the term may be separating you from someone else’s. It’s almost like we need a whole new vocabulary to get across the idea, and perhaps reality, of ONEness.

          Although I’m sure you see me as a thorn in the side, Neale, I think your core message of CWG, “We are all ONE” is what it’s really all about, and I feel that it has been misplaced recently. I’m hopeful that more unifying commentary based on this concept will be the future direction of CWG discussions.

          • John Jung

            I have read all your comments in this discussion and I not only agree, but I wish that I could express myself as well as you do.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Upon reflection, I also want to comment on your statement that science has figured out consciousness. A small handful of scientists have perhaps put forth theories regarding consciousness, but mainstream science is still very much in the materialist camp.

          Global warming is not a good comparison. In that case, most scientists do agree that it exists and the more expert they are in the field, the more convinced they are that humans cause it. There is no such similar consensus for the attributes of consciousness.

          You didn’t include vaccine science, but that’s similar to climate change. Most scientists agree that vaccines are good for society and the more expert one is in the field, the more convinced they are of it.

          The science of consciousness is not at all like the study of the process of evolution for which abundant empirical evidence is available and accepted by most scientists. That is not at all the case with studies of consciousness.

          What science has to do with Obama’s birther issues I have trouble relating to, but this too says nothing about the study of consciousness.

          What consciousness is and the origins of the universe are two of the greatest mysteries to us, and so we still use “God” to fill those gaps; but I’m confident that one day, science will tell us.

          To me, consciousness is the study of the ONEness of which CWG speaks. You recently sponsored an event that involved putting up flyers (a la Luther’s Reformation?) with words of wisdom (new orthodoxy?) with, if memory serves, an advertisement/link for your latest book at the bottom.

          If you (believe or think) that science has proven consciousness manifests matter rather than emerging from it, then come up with some large scale experiments to prove it. Contribute to the science. Get a bunch of people online to make a clock run backwards or affect a random number generator in a way that scientists will be forced to acknowledge.

          Do you remember this line from Stranger in a Strange Land? Jubal: “I still wish you had called it ‘Cosmic Halitosis’ or some such. But the name doesn’t matter. If you’ve got the truth you can demonstrate it. SHOW people. Talking about it doesn’t prove it.”

          So, involve people, not with more endless words, but perhaps with consciousness experiments. Prove it. Make scientists accept it.

  • Lloyd Bradsher

    mewabe, love your questions and it is good to ask such questions. What causes humans to feel separate from others? Why do we feel isolated and individuated from even our own family, although we are all family? As a society we honor warriors, those that will kill for us and we glorify their actions as an example of how life is intended to be lived, and it makes me so sad. I have killed for this country, and I have made my peace within myself, knowing that all existence is eternal, and it was just the human form that I killed. Living, learning and growing in understanding of Self, Creator Self, and how it interplays within my existence and yours. How do we teach each other to Love? In my heart I know it is only possible by living the example of a Loving Life. Accepting others as myself, as part of the whole of my existence, and doing the best I can to explain who we are together. Namaste’

  • IamIam

    Those are grand questions by Mewabe. I think one must look at the question as to whether there is a dark force or not. Neale does not believe in the “devil,” Satan, or whatever you want to call it. The question becomes what, then, is the dark force we witness on Earth, such as Isis, psychopaths harming others and so on. Look in the news and pick a story. Just pick 2 or 3 and ask, “Is this dark or not?” In my view, there is
    a dark force “acting out” a deep seated energetic vibration that has been buried, perhaps, but loosed on earth for a while now.

    Hitler was such a force. Hitler was a sociopath, a psychopath or something along those lines, and the masses sat back. He was, what many researchers who study psychology, called “charismatic.” He was viewed in large arenas working the masses, who were taken in by his charisma, and they just sat there. I mean it took WWII to come forth and protect love from such dark force. It took the whole world intervening to stop a dark force. So, what causes, as Mewabe says, “much of humanity to become unfeeling, insensitive, unresponsive to the suffering of others, numb, and causes a few to be cruel and sadistic?”

    I think a numb culture is what we have become. Why? I don’t know. I don’t have the
    answers. I have a few theories. I think we don’t tend to think critically. We tend to want a leader, something to tell us how to think. I think we need to ask questions and answer them for ourselves. In my view, we have some dark forces at play in our culture that keep our children numb, comfortably numb, as the Pink Floyd song goes. Our children are the answer. Our children deserve more than these numbing video games that they have come to rely upon for entertainment. Adults tend to hand over the reins of oversight to these teenagers. I know many who say, “Eh. . go ahead. Stay on there all day.’ I am the only one that limits that junk that I know of. Many are desiring to connect, but these games, especially those single point, first shooter games are the most insidious. .I can’t even look at them. I just can’t. We have to do better for the children.
    Where are the days of football, kickball, green grass and blue sky for this generation?

    Most are now occupied in a virtual landscape, a land of 2 d. They don’t want to go outside. Most don’t. It’s sad, to me. I know the research is both ways. I have seen many of my students argue that gaming is good. It allows dexterity. It allows quick
    mind, but I have another theory. First, go check out how the kid moves the head after being immersed in that sort of first person shooter game. After an hour, try to get the kid off the game and watch how hesitant he is at your request to “leave the game now.” He sort of has to do a double, triple take, and shake the head so that he is aware of his surroundings. It’s almost like when one is dreaming and one has to shake one’s head to get one’s bearing. The kid literally has to shake off the insidiousness of the game before he can reenter the real world so to speak.

    The perception, the field of perception, is severely restricted in these first person shooter games, especially. The eye is at base level with a gun looking out and into a field of perspective that looks real to the kid. It looks real to me. It looks just like one is in the middle of war, looking out at the field with a hand held camera angled just so, and a man on the ground with a gun in hand, looking out. Your kid with a gun in hand looking out for the hunt, the hunt of war made visual in 2 d just for entertainment only, of course.

    This is the argument. “It’s just a game. I am aware. I am not violent. That’s for crackpots and sociopaths. You don’t need to worry about me. I make straight A’s. I know it’s just a game. I’m not a sociopath, and so on.” True. And, yet, the visuals created in these games are much like a hand held camera with a first person shooter angle and movements that mimic on the ground action, and then there is the blood bath. Yes, it’s animated or whatever, but the field of perception is altered, skewed after so many hours and hours and hours of focal point distortion, sitting in front of these games with quick, jerking movements that mimic a true war zone. Why?

    OH my God. What are we doing with these dark, dark video games everywhere? So many just say “go ahead. Stay on all day. I’m running errands, honey. I’ll be back soon, and on and on.” I am the only one that limits this junk. I get it from all of them who tell me I am worrying for nothing. At least, I don’t hear word that any are even monitoring this behavior. Monitoring is the best I can do because “everyone is doing it. Period.” I am the only one that I know of amongst the ones I encounter who even discuss monitoring at all. I am a black sheep like that, but wow I despise these videos. I despise what they do, how they look, what they create and what they don’t create. In fact, I have cracked a few fifty dollar ones, just because. Numb?

    They sure create numbness in the children. They don’t create true life, true love, living earth love. These kids aren’t even out in the earth. They hang in a dim lit room with a monitor.

    Now, what? We have a mass creation on earth of the youth as first person shooters. Now, what? This one is my soapbox, too. Sorry. I meant to be writing my own books today, but Mewabe had to ask a good question. I don’t have answers. My answer is how in the hell did we get here? How do we turn back the hands of time so that our children can be children again? How do we start anew? How cani we start anew when a culture we have built, a whole economy, a whole society we have built is based on the internet? We have I pad, I pod, video, game cube, Gameboy, n 64 and rush, rush, rush, corporate mentality, and all that whew I did it. I bought those little Gameboys. I thought Mario was the cat’s meow. . Mario Party and Princess Peach. . .Paper Mario, but then came x box and call of duty and oh my god. Oh my god.

    Did it have to be so dark? Dear god. Dear god. Many of our sons are playing this rot for hours on end. Now what? These games are numbing our children. They are numbing even some of the parents. Friends of my son have parents who play religiously call of duty. Whew What do we do to turn back time and teach the children about the grass that is so green, the sky that is so blue? I don’t know. I just don’t know. I do know culture has become comfortably numb to this dark force. It is a dark force. Don’t be fooled. It is quite dark indeed.

    Darkness is real. Call it a devil. Call it satanic or not. Call it plain old dark energy, but
    it is on earth in the form of these first person shooter games. That mindset that created this plethora of dark energy to absorb the children’s minds and control their output as Life Force is dark visible, satanic, in my view.

    I know many here shy from the word “devil,” satan and the like. Believe me, I never believed in a devil, but when I witness dark energy like this, I call it devil, dark, satanic. Look at this, and tell me what you call it. It is numbing, at best. It is causing our future to be sheeples. Just follow the arrow. Follow the angle. Follow the gun just ahead. Don’t think. Just point and click. Whew That’s dark. I despise the whole mindset that created these videos for our youth. It is causing much destruction upon our culture, in my view. I think we can do better. I think we have to do better. We owe it to the children. We owe it to the world. We owe it to life. Dear god. Not all life has such crap to hand to the offspring, the well spring of the future–our children–on a daily, hourly basis, at that.

    Can we become life again? Can we undo these dark mindsets that teach children how to be numb, at best? Can we teach them? Can we reach them how to be life force, love sweet love, even as they sit there holding a virtual gun in hand hour after hour? Isn’t this sort of hypocritical? To them, it must be. To me, it’s difficult to be the one, the only one, who says “no” all the time. We need to boycott, to monitor, to stop allowing so much visuals, darkness visible in entertainment, to step up and speak out, to garner forces against this activity that has overtaken teenage boys especially and their time, space, life force. Period. Numb is the word for sure.

    • mewabe

      Hi IamIam,,,I wish you had not taken out your comment…it was interesting.

      • IamIam

        Thanks, Mewabe. I just don’t care for censoring comments. This has happened before and I’m off for a bit. Take care, my friend 🙂

        • mewabe

          I understand…Some people cannot read more than one sentence or hear more than one sound bite without being overwhelmed. But most people can read and hear, so don’t worry about negative comments.
          Take care 🙂

          • IamIam

            no worries, Mewabe 🙂 It was just a statistic I posted and it got censored. I prefer more openminded sites. Have a great day 🙂 Take care 🙂

  • Cecco Cecamore

    Hello ! IT IS US
    Millions (we hope Billions) all wondering what can be done on Earth to halt the madness – but WE just never learn. We only remove lunatics after they have commited years and years of unspeakable horror. We could have greatly mitigated the impact of Hilter, the Kamir Rouge in Vietnam and many other atrocities if the majority of governments on Earth would have worked together – and not bee afraid to kick some ass! Many people who knew what was going in Germany wrote letters to FDR which he ignored. (I realize the popular scapegoat is Neville Chamberlain – but FDR certainly was far more powerful on Earth than Neville). In 2004 – I recall watching CNN news about the war in Iraq. There was a lot of activity to report on that day.. a few stories in, the reporter stated that the US Army had uncovered the mass graves of 400,000 people. The manner in which this news was reported blew me away. It was just thrown in the news along with the other reports. Later, I learned these bodies mostly were from previous wars, but that Saddam Husseins son’s (Uda and Hoosay) had been going on mass killing spree’s frequently and using these sites.

    After a few weeks – this story was out of the news.

    The reason I give these examples is because WE USUALLY KNOW when atrocities are being committed. Certainly Bill Clinton was aware when he signed “The Iraqi Liberation Act” (Google that). Clinton (not Bush) formally introduced the notion that Iraq had WMD and that Saddam’s sons were torturing thousands.

    If I asked 1000 people on the street today, which president officially declared that Iraq had WMD first – Clinton or Bush … 999 would say Bush. This is because we don’t want to really deal with atrocities, we want to find “our side’ and get on our talking points. We do not want to stop any atrocities – if it means “the other side’ will get some credit. It’s f-in insane!

    The nightmare in Syria is barely mentioned on the news. (Except FOX – and even they have tapered off). We keep letting barbaric monsters kill millions because. Why?
    We don’t have the stomach to do what needs to be done, because we think innocent civilians would be killed, so we don’t even bother trying to form a world coalition.

    So we just sit by year after year

    Most Americans freaked out because of what we did in Iraq, but don’t give a rip about how 400,000 bodies ended up in mass graves.

    That’s how we get to a mess in Syria.

    As we speak – right now … millions of Syrians are living a hell on earth. Why? because we’d rather see hundreds of thousands of civilian die, than spill our own blood?

    We have lunatics on Earth right now, and we are ignoring them. Because it wont be easy to deal with – and my favorite … it will cost billions. So F-ing what? So it will cost billions to restore the Middle East to sanity – It needs to be F-ing done. Doesn’t it? Or are we just going to wait until a few dirty bombs land here? (And lord knows if that happens … everyone will be blaming “the other guy”). Liberals will blame Bush and conservatives will blame Obama. It’s neither.

    IT IS US!! IT IS US – we are the ones all afraid. We should all be calling our leaders and saying “WTF” … let’s stop this insanity now.

    • Patrick Gannon

      I’m hesitant to send our kids back over to the mid-east to be ground into hamburger again so as to enrich the military industrial complex. I recently read an article in which the author proposes that if the US had not entered WWI, all sorts of lives could have been saved. He proposes that Germany would have won and dominated the continent with a powerful government that could have never been taken over by HItler and the Nazis, thus saving 12 million lives. He proposes that Communism and the USSR probably would not have sprung up or been tolerated, in a region dominated by Germany, thus saving millions more.

      The west involved itself in re-drawing the maps of the Mid-East paying more attention to where oil was, than to where ethnic and cultural regions were located – thereby seeding the regional conflicts that continue to this day. Just as Christianity some 500 – 600 years ago tore up Europe killing each other until they got tired of it, deciding that God apparently wasn’t on anyone’s side; so too it seems Islam must go through the same learning process. Persians vs. Arabs, Shiites vs Sunnis, one way or the other it’s got to play out, just as the Catholic vs Protestant wars did 5 or 6 centuries ago. Islam began 500 – 600 years after Christianity, so it looks like they’re right on track to go through their own cleansing conflict, and I’m not sure it makes any sense for us to get in the middle of it.

      If it’s 400,000 bodies that should provoke America to to kill people in foreign lands, then what about Ethiopia (1.5 million), Rwanda (800,000), Indonesia (500,000), Angola, Uganda, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Burundi, etc. with their hundreds of thousands? Why do we send our kids to die in the Middle East and not in central Africa?

      We created the situation in Iran when the CIA overthrew the secular, democratically elected government of Iran and placed the Shah in control; leading after years of abusing his people, to the takeover of the country by Islamic extremists. Why does Iran want a nuke? Because they are surrounded by other nuclear countries such as Russia, Pakistan, Israel, India, China, and the US via sea and air. Having a nuke would allow them to tell the US that if we invade them, they will nuke us – and that will most assuredly prevent us from invading them. MAD (mutually assured destruction) works. Countries that have nukes do not invade each other. An invasion of Iran however is something which Israel’s conservative government desperately wants – even though Israel is responsible for this whole mess in the first place, by not admitting that the Exodus was a myth, that the Jews are not God’s “chosen people” and that Bible God did not order their ancestors to butcher the ancestors of all their neighbors. Israel needs to step up to the plate and send the discussion down a new path – one that recognizes that the Abrahamic religions are based on myths and campfire stories; and see where that leads us.

  • GH Annie

    Neale, thank you for the re-minder, throughout the comments below, that words are read through the filter of what we believe (unless they are not, by being conscious of our filters). My “take away” from this column is what you, along with many, many others, have been saying for a very long time: If we do not choose to change what we believe at a fundamental level, we will destroy ourselves through our actions. In your instance, you propose only that believing in God in an accurate way would be one way, not the only way, to do so. It is your view, and mine, that this path would be a Joyous, Loving, and Soul-fulfilling way to do so. For some, it would not, if they do not believe in a soul or in a god. I do not condemn those who do not believe in a soul or a god, and I do not believe you do, either, or I would not be a member of Evolution Revolution. Condemnation, which I believe stems from fear, is one of the actions with which we are destroying our species. Thank you for providing this space for us to converse, and to give ourselves the opportunity to rewrite Who We Believe We Are. Many Blessings and {{{ gentle huggies }}}, ~Annie

  • Gina

    I know tons of people that could be enormously helped by both a belief in God at all and a more accurate belief about God. Just hearing such a cliché as the Universe is friendly at time of hardship can have a relieving effect. Human psyche without some kind of conscious connection to Source is so fragile. Just a little more stress, and there goes your sanity–first mental health is threatened and people develop physical symptoms that are quite serious. Everyday matters, money, school, exams, relationship–without putting all this in a larger perspective one way or another, it just drives you crazy literally. There is more accurate beliefs about God, as there are degrees of accuracy in this relative world we live in. It’s too much if you thought you were all by yourself. It’s too hard if you experience life without God. Self proclaimed atheists and agnostics who say they don’t feel this way are not really atheists or agnostics deep down. They know of this force and source and energy. Real atheists and those wrong headed people when faced with obstacles unravel right before your eyes and you wouldn’t believe how they can have such a total meltdown over such nothing?! You get to realize immediately they must not have a mechanism through which they can view this from a broader perspective from time to time. There is no point in quibbling over words, categorizing, catapulting, and hair splitting, knit picking over word definitions. Life without God, i.e., awareness and felt sense of connection with something larger than you is a mighty struggle. I witness it all around. One should be blind to observe otherwise.

    • Susan Garcia

      Change will occur, with us kicking and hollering. Source Energy (GOD) is using Neale as a tool to avert what we as a whole have created and we can recreate our new story to tell.