Thursday, June 21, 2007

Zogby Poll Asks About Secession! Iran War Will Encourage It!

Today I dutifully did the Zogby Poll I get via email every month or so because he does at least give you a chance to click "libertarian" as your political persuasion and because I like to support Arab businesses against all the racist, anti-Arab propaganda out there.
.
Low and behold I got a most magnificent reward! I got to answer a question on Secession, obviously giving pro-Secession answers! Most rewarding for this owner of Secession.Net.
.
The questions were:
.
States should have the right to secede from America if their state
legislature votes to do so.
*Strongly Agree
*Somewhat Agree
*Somewhat Disagree
*Strongly Disagree
* Not sure
.
Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly
disagree that the states which opt to secede from the U.S. should be
allowed to re-enter the country at a later date?
*Strongly Agree
*Somewhat Agree
*Somewhat Disagree
*Strongly Disagree
* Not sure
.
At the end of the poll there was encouragement to join and participate in future polls so check it out. Ask Someone You Know To Join. Send someone an email invitation to join the Zogby panel. They will get an email with this link:
http://interactive.zogby.com/pollregistration/registration/index.cfm
.
Of course, their polls may be slightly skewed because all the propagandized Arab/Muslim haters out there will refuse to participate. But hopefully as the Iraq war drags on, and Iran war looms, people will be smart enough to start blaming the people who are starting the wars -- the Bush regime and its Israeli allies and supporters -- and not the Arabs and Muslims who have to keep fighting back against western attempts to steal their land, water and oil. (Which of course empowers the most violent radicals and disempowers everyone else!)
.
Speaking of war on Iran, the evidence mounts the psychos-in-charge are planning it. Israel's leader Olmert was in D.C. this week giving Bush his marching orders, which Olmert's neoconservative and Israel Lobby allies will make sure Bush fulfills after he leaves. On June 18 CounterPunch.Org published an excellent Paul Craig Roberts article predicting just what Bush et al have in store for us. If even half of it happens, I think we'll see a number of states and parts of states seceding from the union...
.

Is Bush Planning to Nuke Iran? If So, Say Goodbye to Democratic Outcomes - The Reign of the Tyrants is at Hand
.
..The revised war doctrine permits US first strike use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries. We need to ask ourselves why the Bush administration would blacken America's reputation and rekindle the nuclear arms race unless the administration had plans to apply its new war doctrine.
.
Senator Joseph Lieberman, a number of neoconservatives, prominent Jewish leaders such as Norman Podhoretz, and members of the Israeli government have called for a US attack on Iran. Most Republican presidential candidates have said that they would not rule out the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.
.
... As the US media now function as the administration's Ministry of Propaganda, the Bush regime believes that it can stampede Americans with lies into another war.
.
The Bush regime has concluded that a conventional attack on Iran would do no more than stir up a hornet's nest and release retaliatory actions that the US could not manage. The Bush regime is convinced that only nuclear weapons can bring the mullahs to heel.
.
...Pace's departure removes a known obstacle to a nuclear attack on Iran, thus advancing that possible course of action. A plan to attack Iran with nuclear weapons might also explain the otherwise inexplicable "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" (NSPD-51 AND HSPD-20) that Bush issued on May 9. Bush's directive allows him to declare a "national emergency" on his authority alone without ratification by Congress. Once Bush declares a national emergency, he can take over all functions of government at every level, as well as private organizations and businesses, and remain in total control until he declares the emergency to be over.
.
Who among us would trust Bush, or any president, with this power?
.
What is the necessity of such a sweeping directive subject to no check or ratification?
.
What catastrophic emergency short of a massive attack on the US with nuclear ICBMs can possibly justify such a directive?
.
...A speculative answer is that, with appropriate propaganda, the directive could be triggered by a US nuclear attack on Iran. The use of nuclear weapons arouses the ultimate fear. A US nuclear attack would send Russian and Chinese ICBMs into high alert. False flag operations could be staged in the US. The US media would hype such developments to the hilt, portraying danger everywhere. Fear of the regime's new detention centers would silence most voices of protest as the regime declares its "national emergency."
.
Scary, eh? What I've been saying for almost three years. See Link for rest of article.

Monday, June 18, 2007

politically incorrect, sexist Anti-War video

350,000 YouTube.Com viewers can't be wrong! "Hot Country Girl Has Message for the US Troops"
.
Anti-woman, anti-gay, pro-pornography -- anti-US government policy in Iraq, too?? Hey, but it's at a level that actually might get through to President George W. Bush. Email it to him! President@WhiteHouse.gov

Saturday, June 16, 2007

Lieberman Meets with Barney, But Not Peace Activists

After Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) declared Sunday that the U.S. should bomb the heck out of Iran, peace activists made an appointment to speak with him on Thursday, June 14th. Lieberman cancelled since he heard it was going to be a "sit in." (That was another group in the a.m.) Here's an excerpt from the DC Code Pink blog entry on the attempted meeting.
.
An Afternoon Without Senator Lieberman by Kit Kimberly
.
All our careful planning and work to open a dialogue with Senator Liebermanseemingly came to naught today when we arrived at his office to find our meeting cancelled. Well, that's not strictly true, as someone had called Medea early in the day to tell her that, "We heard you're not coming for a meeting but to do a sit-in and a hunger strike."...
.
Peace activists lined the hall on both sides, all the way from the elevators to Mr.Lieberman's office—at least 60 people were there for an action called together the night before... We crowded into the office like well-disciplined sardines, with Medea, Leslie, Ross Pourzal and Robert Nieman, director of Just Foreign Policy, at the front asking why our meeting was cancelled...Capitol police, only nominal when we first arrived, multiplied quickly. Word soon came that we were being asked to leave; if we did not leave voluntarily, we would be arrested. ... "Senator Lieberman's rhetoric is unbelievable. This is a nation that has not attacked anyone inmore than 200 years. How can the Senator even say such a thing?" Leslie's pain and sincerity were palpably, wrenchingly honest; even (Lieberman's Chief of Staff) Ms. Riddle was obviously moved by her words....
.
Medea spoke up and asked, "Would it be possible for just three of us—Leslie and two others—to meet with senior staff? Do you think that could be arranged?"
Ms Riddle nearly nodded, then said, "We can consider that option; but untilthen all of you have to move outside." Slowly but efficiently, we eased our way out of the office and lined back up against the walls. Capitol Police stood along the other end of the hall and watched us carefully, but there was no tension in the air.
.
...One by one, many people took the floor—
WhyNotNews captured most of it on film—to talk about how illogical and pointless a military on Iran would be. ...The discussions were heartfelt and informative, and continued until there was movement behind the Senator's door. After some initial shuffling,Leslie, Ross and Robert emerged from the inner sanctum. Their announcement was, generally, good news. Although, Ross noted, the staff members did argue in circles, they seemed genuinely interested and willing to take their findings back to Senator Lieberman. Leslie in particular seemed relieved and felt that they had listened. "They were open," she nodded, herself-possession restored. "I think we made an impact."

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Joe Lieberman Replies to June 10 End Occupation Rally with BOMB IRAN!!

About 3000 activists showed at the U.S. Capitol on Sunday to protest U.S. government financial and political support for the 40 years Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Protesters called for equal rights in Palestine, including the right to return to confiscated land and former homes, towns and cities inside Israel.
.
I put together both a
Video and a Photo Montage As for Senator Joe Lieberman's press for war against Iran made on a Sunday morning talk show as protesters were setting up the state, see quotes below.
.
Obviously, Senator Lieberman represents first and foremost the interests of the state of Israel which doesn't want the slightest bit of diplomatic or military pressure to give up all the land it has stolen from the Palestinians since 1948. And obviously, if we get U.S. troops out of Iraq, we won't have to worry about what Iran is doing. He is a disgrace to all Americans who love true freedom and justice. But then so are most members of congress who have been bribed and bullied by the Israel Lobby. When will Americans finally stand up and
Fight the Israel Lobby??
.




CBS News Transcripts: Face the Nation 10:30 AM EST CBS
June 10, 2007 Sunday
.
SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just act--ask you about Iran. You brought up Iran. What should we do? Because we continue to hear more and more of just what you're saying. What should the United States do at this point about Iran?
.
Sen. LIEBERMAN: It's very important, Bob, because I didn't just go to Iraq, I went visited throughout the Arab world and Israel. And what you see throughout the Middle East is Iran in battle basically with us and the moderates, supplying the extremists in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas fighting the Fatah faction, our allies among the Palestinians, and, of course, committing terrorists acts against the Israelis. I'm not one to say we shouldn't sit down with the Iranians. I'm glad we did that in Baghdad a while ago. What we did was present them with evidence that we have that I've seen that I believe is incontrovertible that the Iranians are training and equipping the Iraqi extremists to come into Iraq, and they're killing American soldiers and Iraqis. And I think this is a very important moment. If we're going to sit and talk about the Iranians, tell them what we want them to do, which is to stop doing that, because it's killing Americans, we can't leave it at that. I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq. And to me that would include a strike into--over the border into Iran where I--we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training the se people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers.
.
SCHIEFFER: Well, let's just stop right there, because I think you've probably made some news here, Senator Lieberman. You're saying that, if the--if the Iranians don't let up, that the United States should take military action against them.
.
Sen. LIEBERMAN: I am, and I want to make clear I'm not talking about a massive ground invasion of Iran or--but it--we have good evidence. We've told them, we've said so publicly that the Iranians have a base in Iran at which they are training Iraqis who are coming in and killing Americans. By some estimates they have killed as many as 200 American soldiers. Well, we can tell them we want them to stop that, but if there's any hope of the Iranians living according to the international rule of law and stopping for instance their nuclear weapons development, we can't just talk to them. If they don't play by the rules, we've got to use our force and, to me, that would include taking military action to stop them from doing what they're doing now.
.
SCHIEFFER: Would you go in on the ground, or could you do that from the air?
.
Sen. LIEBERMAN: I'd leave that to the--to the generals in charge. I think you could probably do a lot of it from the air. But they can't believe that they have immunity for training and equipping people to come in and kill Americans. It's just--we cannot let them g et away with it. If we do, they'll take that as a sign of weakness on our part, and we will pay for it in Iraq and throughout the region, and ultimately right here at home.

Friday, June 08, 2007

Paris Hilton and Vladimir Putin Throw Temper Tantrums

This week we saw two examples of celebrity temper tantrums, one amusing, one scary. The sheriff probably wanted celebrity brat Paris Hilton out because she was pushing the medical button every few minutes and screaming and yelling in pain. While that doubtless was annoying, that's the kind of reason sheriffs and wardens invented solitary confinement.
.
It's more likely the sheriff wanted her out because she would bring too much attention to the doubtless many dirty doings at the jail. And she was promising to write a book about her whole stay there.
.
So all this breast beating about an unjust system may be just a little off base. The greater injustice is not necessarily that she got out early, but that most of the other women are there for victimless crimes like drugs and prostitution -- and that many probably are being abused there by poor conditions, guards, other prisoners.
.
By the way, I'll be interested to see if there is a spike in visits to my sites for mentioning Paris Hilton, one of the two or three the most popular search terms on the planet!
.
As for the other temper tantrum, as I write in the entry below, Russian President Vladmir Putin threw one over the U.S.'s plans to put anti-missile missiles in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic. These supposedly would protect Europe against Iran's ICBM's hurling nuclear bombs on Europe. Not that Iran has ICBMs, nuclear bombs or any reason to attack Europe. Putin, of course, sees this as one more U.S. attempt to surround Russia and make a U.S. nuclear first strike against Russia more likely.
,
So Putin threatened to start targeting real nuclear ICBMs at Europe again. Bush was flabbergasted, tried to reassure Putin the U.S. wasn't really improving its first strike position, saying the missiles were "not something we should hyperventilate about." Then he chastised Putin for "restricting democracy" in Russia, just to make it clear that if the U.S. did decide to nuke Russia it had the moral high ground in doing so.
.
And then Putin threw out a trump card: let's work together on a joint anti-missile program in Azerbaijan, right on Iran's border, on an existing military base. The Financial Times headline says it all: Putin calls US bluff with base offer. Bush and Putin actually met on Thursday, assumedly shook hands and held "crunch talks." Should we all breathe easier??
.
See an
analysis by RadioFreeEurope of whether those bases would fulfill the need. Then do your own search for replies to that kind of "objective" source. Study up on your nuclear war theory, kids, it could save all our lives! Listening, Paris???

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

U.S. Nuclear Primacy and Bush-Putin, Clinton-Yeltsin Threats

Headlines: Bush flies into row over missile shield and Putin in nuclear threat against Europe.
.
Pat Buchanan blames both Bill Clinton and George Bush II for "losing Russia" after the dissolution of the Soviet Union provided an opportunity for peace.
How? By making military alliances with and putting bases on the soil of its nearest neighbors. Read
Justin Raimondo's series of articles about the various alleged western conspiracies against Russia.
.
Even Israel feels free to make quasi-military threats against Russia. According to a Jerusalem Post article in January of 2007: Voicing extreme concern over Russia's recent sale of advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Iran, senior diplomatic and defense officials warned Moscow Tuesday that the deal could have serious security implications that would even "get back to Russia."
.
Buchanan laments: Yet, on the eve of the G-8 summit, Vladimir Putin has announced that Russia will retarget missiles on NATO. We must, he said, counter Bush's decision to put anti-missile missiles in Poland and radars in the Czech Republic. Why are we doing this? The United States says the ABM system in Europe is to defend against an Iranian attack. But Tehran has no atom bomb and no ICBM. We appear to be headed for a second Cold War – and, if we are, responsibility will not fully rest with the Kremlin. For among those who have mismanaged the relationship are presidents Clinton and Bush II, the baby boomers who appear to have kicked away the fruits of a Cold War victory won by their Greatest Generation predecessors.

Don't forget that former Russian President Boris Yeltsin and U.S. President Bill Clinton also exchanged threats during and after the U.S. bombing of Serbia over Kosovo. During the bombings we had scary threats from Russians.

“I told NATO, the Americans, the Germans: Don't push us toward military action. Otherwise there will be a European war for sure and possibly world war.'' Russian President Boris Yeltsin, April 6, 1999

"In the event that NATO and America start a ground operation in Yugoslavia, they will face a second Vietnam, I do not want to forecast what is going to start then. I cannot rule out a third world war.'' Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, April 17, 1999

Just let Clinton, a little bit, accidentally, send a missile. We will answer immediately. Such impudence! To unleash a war on a sovereign state. Without Security Council. Without United Nations. It could only be possible in a time of barbarism. Boris Yeltsin, May 7, 1999

The world has never in this decade been so close as now to the brink of nuclear war. Former Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin, May 27, 1999

Wisely, Clinton stopped bombing Serbia a few days later and never did send in ground troops. However, in December of that year, after Clinton criticized Russia's ruthless bombing of Chechnya, Yeltsin replied: Yesterday, Clinton permitted himself to put pressure on Russia. It seems he has for a minute, for a second, for half a minute, forgotten that Russia has a full arsenal of nuclear weapons. He has forgotten about that.

During a press conference that same day Clinton replied, with a laugh: I haven't forgotten that. You know, I didn't think he'd forgotten America was a great power when he disagreed with what I did in Kosovo.

And thus our destinys remain under the control of angry Alpha Males jockeying for power who have the ability to launch massive attacks on each others military and population centers that will kill hundreds of millions of people on the first day of war.

As if Alpha Male irrationality isn't enough of a problem, there remains the debate over whether the U.S. military is planning to obtain nuclear primacy with a first strike against Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons. Putin's fear in opposing the "missile shield." A whole list of reasons the Russians and Chinese should be frightened is presented in the March/April 2006 issue of Foreign Affairs. See "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy" By Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press.

Check out the article where the authors detail many reasons to support their point that ...the age of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is nearing an end. Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy. It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike. This dramatic shift in the nuclear balance of power stems from a series of improvements in the United States' nuclear systems, the precipitous decline of Russia's arsenal, and the glacial pace of modernization of China's nuclear forces. Unless Washington's policies change or Moscow and Beijing take steps to increase the size and readiness of their forces, Russia and China -- and the rest of the world -- will live in the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for many years to come.

In September of 2006 Foreign Affairs published a response questioning their conclusions. If you haven't heard of "U.S. nuclear primacy," blame a media controlled by pro-war corporations and special interests, and a peace movement in denial about the imperialist intentions of both the Democrats and Republicans. Hillary Clinton might get elected and first strike China and Russia without ever reading the phrase! Just like she never read the report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

And people wonder why I want to get rid of large nation states A.S.A.P.! See Secession.Net and MiddleburyInstitute.Org

Monday, June 04, 2007

Thou Shalt Not Lie! (You silly people!!) Creative Evolution Rocks?

I don't know much about the group Campaign to Defend the Constitution. It describes itself thusly: DefCon is an online grassroots movement combating the growing power of the religious right. We will fight for the separation of church and state, individual freedom, scientific progress, pluralism, and tolerance while respecting people of faith and their right to express their beliefs. That sounds good enough to encourage people to go to their blog and read about their protest against the new Creation Museum -- Defend the Constitution flew the sign to the left over the Museum's grand opening!
.
Great protest idea!
See more details about DefCon's campaign to combat the Museum's silly efforts to convince the public that the earth is just a few thousand years old.
.
One of the many things I have not written about at length, though I have copious notes and sources, is the misleading dichotomy between "creationism" and "evolution." "Creationists" DO make some good points about the inadequacy of current evolutionary theory to explain a multitude of issues, the most important being the statistical improbably of complex beings evolving so quickly without some sort of intelligence being involved. The evolutionists, of course, have masses of data proving that evolution has occurred over billions of years, debunking the extremely silly notion it never happened at all. However, there are lots of sensible people who know that the earth is billions of years old and that evolution happened, but are tired of being dismissed by scientists because they think there is some sort of intelligent principle at work.
.
The scientific alternative is what Henri Bergson labeled "creative evolution," and George Bernard Shaw professed as his own religion. The kind of idea a number of spiritually minded and/or creative thinking scientists have played with over the last century or so.
.
I describe "creative evolution" in the most general terms in the outline of my book CONSCIOUSNESS AND COMMUNITY: TRANSCENDING GOD AND STATE.
.
METAPHYSICS: (the nature and purpose of reality) “New paradigm” science describes principles of self-organization which operate all through reality–creating time-space-energy-matter. These principles operate from the sub-atomic, chemical, astronomical, and planetary levels, up into the cellular, plant, animal and human levels. Scientists describe differing but complimentary “dynamic” and “integrative” principles which resemble the assertive "yang" and harmonizing "yin" principles described in Taoist philosophy. And they see evidence of an inherent drive to evolve more organized systems and more fully conscious beings--ones who could more fully experience and enjoy reality. (Or, as I like to say, in the beginning was the urge to have a good time.) .
Some scientists compare these principles of self-organization and evolution to consciousness. The dynamic principles are like imagination and will and integrative principles like memory and awareness. Moreover, there is evidence of fields of awareness and memory called "morphogenetic" fields linking similar entities--atoms, chemicals, and each living species, including human. These fields communicate subconscious knowledge among, and promote physical and social evolution of, these entities.
. Because these principles are like consciousness, and because their purpose seems to be evolution of greater and higher consciousness, I personally choose to call the very nature and purpose of reality "consciousness." I personally believe that the concept of universal consciousness must replace the concept of a transcendent “God.” As promoted by authoritarians who claim to speak and act in the name of a superior entity, the word and concept “God” has become like an idol–one that alienates us from our co-creation of the universe and our own lives. Recognizing that we are products of our own conscious evolution, not the creation of a transcendent god, we will recognize ourselves as the creators of human destiny. We finally will be able to create the heaven on earth, kingdom, Shangra La which so many religions have described.
.
S
omebody get me a $50,000 book advance so I can catch up on current research, name some names, throw in some heart warming and inspiring stories, finish the danged book, and have my first billion seller. P.l.e.a.s.e?!?

Sunday, June 03, 2007

Roseanne Barr Plugs June 10 "End the Occupation" Rally

My uppity women heroines just don't stop, do they? See my May 2007 entry about Roseanne's views on Zionism.
.
As the June 10, 2007 End the Occupation of Palestine
rally organizers state in a recent email:
Actress, comedienne, and talk show host Roseanne Barr has specially recorded an audio message urging people to participate in the mobilization. To listen, click here and then pass on the link.
.
Here's the sexy photo they included of Roseanne. In case you don't know, the rally commemorates the 40th anniversary of the 1967 war where Israel occupied Arab land in the West Bank and Gaza, and began their current regime of confiscations and defacto apartheid, shoving millions of Arabs into defacto concentration camps. (More on the land the confiscated 1948-1966 below.)
More quotes from the email.
.
We're also very excited to announce that together with our friends at Imagine Life, we'll be airing a one minute cable television ad next week in the Washington, DC area. Thousands of people in the area will see these spots promoting the June 10-11 mobilization on CNN, CNN Headline News, MSNBC, and Comedy Central. To view a mock-up of the ad on Google Video, click here and then pass it on.
.
Our ads in the Washington, DC metro train system are continuing to spark interest all over the globe. Articles and news stories have appeared in recent days on the local ABC, NBC, and CBS affiliates, and in the DC Examiner, International Herald Tribune, Associated Press, and more. To view a selection of articles, click here.
.

See my blog entry about the ads here.
.
Of course, the End the Occupation group does contain a number of activists opposed to giving up much of the land Israel took before the 1967 war. It should be noted that many libertarians have taken a strong property rights position to defend the rights of individual Palestinians and their broken and dispersed communities to get back land confiscated since 1948. See libertarian Murray Rothbard's late 1960s (PDF)
War Guilt in the Middle East on why libertarians must take a stand. As the dramatic depiction of four maps below shows, that (in green Palestinian) land would be confiscated to become much of what is now (in white) Israel!
Such libertarians also would support the "right of return" of Arabs and their descendants to all of Israel's public spaces as well. See Richard Ebeling article Property Rights and the 'Right of Return'. And Sheldon Richman's 'Ancient History: U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War Il and the Folly Of Intervention. Particularly good is Stephen P. Halbrook's Journal of Libertarian Studies article The Alienation of a Homeland: How Palestine Became Israel. (See PDF version.)
.
Most libertarians believe Israelis had a right to form a state on justly bought or settled land, what there is of it. (Even truly unowned desert lands settled by Israelis usually bloomed only because of water sources stolen from Palestinians.) They also have the right to make it a "Jewish" state. Just like the Arabs living in Palestine have a right to call themselves Palestinians and form a state with those who choose to join them, including Christian and Muslim Arabs, Jews and secularists. Or there can be two Palestines formed from voluntarily participating entities, one Muslim, one mixed religiously. Or there can be any number of networks and confederations of free communities of various makeups, as I discuss in my article Israel-Palestine Confederations.
.
I've written a few other pieces on the topic, including: Middle East Issues and Emotions: my 1986 War Resisters League article and an updated February 2004 version, which obviously will need to updated again. A few years back I also wrote Is Applying Libertarian Principles to Israel Anti-Semitic? during one of those periods when allegedly libertarian Zionists were on the attack. In the end the solution to the Israel/Palestine issue is a combination of religious tolerance, giving up ideas of "collectivist" and "state" rights and recognizing the just rights of individuals.

Friday, June 01, 2007

40 Years Since Sgt Pepper - Which Apocalypse Will We Choose? Fire or Love??

ACK! Forty years since the amazing Sgt. Pepper album was officially released. Where does the time go? Back then the media and pop music reminded us constantly of all the amazing doings out in San Francisco, over in Central Park, and all over the world as people celebrated what quickly became known as the summer of love. Search for lots of articles about it today! Several use the title "It was 40 years ago today!"
.
Younger folks don't realize how stifling it was to be a woman in the early 1960s. Those dozens of Beatle concerts where hundreds of thousands of screaming women threw off years of repression probably gave a good boost to the new “womens' lib.” John, Paul, George and Ringo not only helped us loosen our rage at our restrictions, but pointed the way towards liberation, even as they themselves evolved from "good boys" to rebel leaders seeking spiritual enlightenment.
.
In 1964, at sixteen years, I had three experiences which helped me leave the constrictions of the Catholic faith. I read most of Ayn Rand’s novels, which raved against religion of any kind. I had my first spontaneous experience of the universe as being one connected consciousness and of my being part of that consciousness. And finally at the end of the summer of 1964 I saw the Beatles twice in person, August 30 in Atlantic City, New Jersey and September 20 in New York City. (Yes, I am one of the anointed ones!)
.
Before the latter concert four of us went exploring through the upstairs halls. We separated at a staircase when a guard appeared. Our friends who went down the staircase ended up at the entrance to the Beatles' reception room! They saw two live Beatles! My sister and I ran the other way and ended up in the lobby. I've always seen that as the great symbol of the many missed opportunities in my life.
.
However, by 1967 as I eagerly awaited the release of Sgt. Pepper, I was a psychological wreck. I had dropped out of college because of my own inner conflicts and alienation. I rebelled with anger against the "good girl's get married and have kids" straight jacket imposed by the conservative Ohio college I'd foolishly picked -- even as part of me wanted to be accepted and happy within that paradigm. It would take another year, and reading Abraham Maslow's magnificent book MOTIVATION AND PERSONALITY, before I discovered that self-actualization and not "being a good girl" were the purpose of life. So in the summer of 1967 all that love and peace and liberation were just a distant and confusing dream to me, but one that Beatles music helped nurture and keep alive through my anger and conflicts and one last attempt at "fitting in."
.
Lennon, of course, was the first (and greatest) "Rock and Roll Messiah." He started early boasting that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus and explaining that it was Jesus disciples' twisting his message that bothered "the Beatle." Lennon had, and told us he had, feelings that bringing a great messianic message was his "job." He sang: "I am you and you are me and we are all together...You just got to be free. Come together, right now, over me." And then there were his constant complaints "they're gonna crucify me." (And of course he was murdered by a Christian fanatic convinced he was undermining Christianity.)
.
Lennon "resigned" his job around 1973 with his song "GOD." "God is a concept, by which we measure our pain, yeah, pain, yeah, pain." The song liists all the things he doesn't believe in--Bible, tarot, Buddha, Jesus, i-ching, etc. He sings: "I just believe in me, Yoko and me. That's reality. I was the Walrus, but now I'm John. And so my friends, you'll just have to carry on. The dream is over."
.
Despite his "resignation," can we ever forget the great line: IMAGINE THERE'S NO COUNTRIES AND NO RELIGION, TOO?? Gosh, that's what this blog is about!! Well, just added it to my header description!
.
For decades millions believed that when the Beatles got back together (i.e., were "resurrected") it would be the beginning of a "new age." Even when Lennon died, some dreamed his sons would replace him. Of course, now that the other great spiritual seeker, George Harrison, also has passed, that dream of physical reunion definitely is over.
.
Nevertheless, the spirit lives on. I always say that the Beatles were the FOUR HORSEMAN OF THE APOCALYPSE OF LOVE. There is an APOCALYPSE OF FIRE coming, with 20,000 nuclear weapons ready to destroy most of the large cities in the northern hemisphere and at least half of humanity. It is humanity's choice which apocalypse it wants to actualize. If listening to Beatles songs and reading their lyrics and believing that they present a fairly coherent message and guidance for the future helps humanity somehow rise to a higher level of consciousness in time to stop the apocalypse of fire, I'll be real happy.
.
That's what I'm working on this summer. What are you working on??