exercising our collective birthright intelligence & intuition with clarity & coherence.
Some of the most inspired and gifted are from top, left to right:
into the southern celestial hemisphere. Today day and night are of equal length.
Today rat haus reality ratical branch
completes its 30th circle ’round the Sun and begins its 31st whirl.
Profound gratitude fills heart and mind, discovering and exploring more of the infinite mystery Life contains and expresses through all our relations. A year can be defined as the time it takes for Mother Earth to go around Father Sun. Launched in September, 1995, this ratitor’s corner begins a celebration of rat haus reality completing its Third Decade and beginning....
This world we all belong to, partaking of and participating in, overflows with heart breaking grief and pain, fear covered over by anger. It is all too easy to give in to overwhelming hopelessness and a belief of being powerless. To dispel this enchantment, remember that each of us is answerable to our Creator. Each one of us has an immutable relationship with the source of our existence. The ineffable mystery we each embody is eternally framed in the wonder of whatever is really going on here. What’s more, these lives we’ve been given are about so much more than just our own souls discoveries. Reconnecting with the bedrock relationships we were born into both with all those of our species and with all Life exploring itself on Mother Earth, provides for all our intangible needs.
Speaking about our Collective Indigenous Ancestors, John Trudell pointed out how in the experience of our lineage from the very beginning, our ancestors “understood that we were borrowing today from the past and the future. We’re borrowing it from both places. So they had this understanding of reality. So they knew that to keep the balance was the purpose. That was the purpose. The reason for being was to keep the balance…. this was … what I will call a spiritual perception of reality. And so because of the spiritual perception of reality they understood that life was about responsibility. It wasn’t about the abstraction of freedom—it was about responsibility.” Trudell 2001.
John Trudell’s speaking and thinking covers a magnificent, wide dimension of ground. There is a wealth of understanding and insight to explore and consider concerning what he communicates. An essential point to keep in mind is that this expression comes from the oral tradition. The written word is different. The spoken word transmits awareness and understanding in a more direct, comprehensive, and integrated form. While the transcript is there, the most thorough way of taking this in is to listen. Links to the recordings are included near the top of the transcript page. rebecca lord, my dear friend and co-founder of rat haus reality, helped with some of the wording. As I wrote in 2015, “To a significant degree, it is because of her life path and relations that ratical encompasses the range of intelligence and wisdom contained within.”
We are all part of and belong to our one, indivisible, fragile, supremely gifted and creative, human family. There is no division, no separation. I understand I am possibly one of the 4 Percent of our family who lives an extraordinarily gifted existence, here at this time, in this place. And, as Joseph Kennedy instilled in his nine children, those to whom much has been given, much is expected in return. From my parents and from the Creator, my path has been increasingly guided by a sense of responsibility to all our relations, understanding how this man-made world actually operates and reflecting this through mediums such as rat haus reality ratical branch and the Museum of Hidden History’s Hidden History Center.
As it happens in this moment, the Second Edition of Understanding Special Operations (USO2) is nearing completion. “Special Operations” is a euphemism for overthrowing governments, sabotage, murder, contrived wars, espionage, torture and assassination. 36 years ago I was gifted to conduct the May 1989 interview with Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty USAF (Retired). With an additional 200-plus pages, USO2’s field of view expands knowledge and understanding gleaned since that interview.
Additional sources referenced in USO2’s new Notes section draw upon Fletcher’s first-hand experience and knowledge of the mechanisms, methodology and factual history of CIA covert operations as well as historical events categorized as the Cold War. Beyond this, personal research and study since 1989 is likewise drawn upon, including content assembled at rat haus reality ratical branch since 1995. A few of these sources are presented in the following.
-
Almost forty years ago, Rosalie Bertell distilled the supreme challenge our species is being called to address:
[A]s things get tighter and as money gets shorter, the thing that’s sacrificed is always health.... [T]here’s no justice issue which does not result in a violation of human health. Every time there’s a justice issue, somebody gets sick. It’s quite clear....
[W]e have a right to know what’s in our food. But the problem is just quietly going underground and everybody’s just quietly eating radioactive food, and they’re going to be quietly getting cancer and quietly having deformed babies. We will quietly undermine the rest of the integrity of the gene pool, and the integrity of the earth.
... At some point or other if we survive, there’s going to have to be a massive non-cooperation with our society which is producing death. And if we are ever to break out of the militaristic society that we live in—and that is what I think is our basic aim, because that’s what distorting everything—it’s going to have to be through an across-the-board non-cooperation effort.
It’s this preoccupation with producing death, and instruments of death and mega-death. This is our root sickness. We’re not choosing to live on this planet, we’re choosing to kill it. If we’re going to turn that around it’s going to require massive non-cooperation; it’s going to have to be non-violent because you can’t violently choose life, you kill it. So it’s going to have to be non-violent. And it’s going to have to be basically people-to-people networks built on trust because you’re trusting the future and you’re trusting your life. Bertell 1986.
-
Launching the David Bohm archive of seminars earlier this year fulfills a purpose sought after for the past 30 years. Within the far reaching exploration and critical analysis of the nature of thought and the thinking process (e.g., see the extensive, linked Index in Proprioception of Thought), an area especially relevant today is the dynamic of projecting violence outside ourselves. The violence inherent and fomented in such “outside” sources needs to be seen in the context of what occurs inside each of us that is much more difficult to apprehend and explore. Bohm’s analysis of this is essential to grapple with concerning how violence distorts thought and how violence and fear are two parts of one process.
If you don’t like what the other side is doing—say the communists or the capitalists, or in religion—you form an image of them as wicked and you say, “They are always that way. They only understand force.” That’s typical of what people frequently say. Of course, nobody “understands” force. If somebody responds to you with force, it will create the sense that you have been violently treated. Also, if people don’t listen to you, you will feel that is a form of violence. In both cases, you may think that a violent response is what is called for.
It is a complex problem, because you may see somebody else’s violence and say that it is his violence. But it is really yours as well, because you cannot see his violence except in terms of your own—your own tendency to use undue force inwardly or outwardly.
Suppose you are watching a television program with a violent content. There is nothing going on there at all except spots of light, but you can feel the violence in the program. Where is it actually coming from? It is coming from your own violence.
Each person has been programmed to violence over the ages. And everybody has plenty of violent programs in him. There is no difficulty in finding a violent program to project into the television image, or to project into the memory image of somebody else. The point is that if you see violence, you see it through your own. Then you think, “That’s terrible. It’s disturbing.” So you deny that it is yours and say, “It’s that person’s,” and you feel better. But the violent movement involving undue use of force is still in there, and will come out in another way in distorting your thought. Bohm 1989b: 26.
Bohm describes thought as the response of memory.
“Thinking is a bit more active, because when you are thinking you can sometimes detect incoherence—you can detect there is something wrong with what you are thinking. But thought acts like a program, and works so fast you can’t do that. Then how do you detect incoherence? You get a feeling—a sense something is wrong. And you require sensitivity to that. That sensitivity is crucial …. I think society systematically destroys sensitivity in order to avoid being upset. It would rather people not notice incoherence, because then they don’t upset the apple cart too much. Therefore, we have learned to cover it up. Let’s say that we have this sensitivity which is very subtle, which can show us incoherence in our thought and action. It can show us that we say one thing and do another, and so forth. But usually we don’t want to be sensitive to that.” Ibid.: 19.
As he encapsulated this in a different seminar, we are trained to become insensitive to incoherence starting at a very early age.
I think our whole society tries to stabilize itself by starting out to destroy sensitivity to incoherence starting with very young children. If people could see the vast incoherence that is going on in society they would be disturbed and they would feel the need to do something. If you’re not sensitive to it you don’t feel disturbed and you don’t feel you need to do anything.
I remember an instance, a daughter was telling her mother, “this school is terrible, the teacher is terrible, very inconsistent, doing all sorts of crazy things,” and so on. Finally the mother was saying, “You’d better stop this—in this house the teacher is always right.” Now she understood that the teacher was wrong obviously, but the message was, it was no use. Even the message may have been right in some sense, but still it illustrates that the predicament is that in order to avoid this sort of trouble, starting with very young children, we are trained to become insensitive to incoherence. If there is incoherence in our own behavior, we thereby also become insensitive to it. Bohm 1989a.
-
In addition to every person on Mother Earth having plenty of internally incoherent violent programs, there are the externally projected incoherent make-war death-wish programs that are now raised to an unparalleled, cataclysmic level with the creation of atomic bombs, followed shortly afterward with hydrogen bombs—which can never be used without ending virtually all life exploring itself on Mother Earth. In the 1989 interview section on “Final Chapter in the History of War Making: Going from Offense to Defense” Fletcher discussed what he and many other WWII career military officers felt was the enormous mistake made by shifting the U.S. military posture from offensive to defensive and as part of this, creating the Department of Defense.
Warfare, probably best defined by Clauswitz is an all-out action of a certain country. It is total action; it’s not half-way, it’s not divided, it’s not graduated—it’s total. Well, you can’t make total defense. You have to make total offense, even if you’re in a defensive position—if you’re in a siege in a fort, you’ll be thinking about offense because you’re thinking of getting out of there—you’re going to die if you stay there. Offense is the core of war. Clauswitz lists nine principles of war that have been the same ever since men were throwing stones at each other on up to atom bombs. The primary principle of war is the objective. If you don’t know what you’re doing, you’ve got no business going to war. That is the antithesis of the idea of having a Department of Defense. Prouty 1989: 93.
David Swanson is executive director of World Beyond War. In his September 8 post, “The Department of War,” he wrote:
Restoring the original and non-Orwellian name to the U.S. Department of War ought to have a positive impact on people’s speech and understanding ….
[F]lipping those linguistic habits, for whatever reason, remains something that would benefit us all. Words shape our thinking as much as communicate it. We shouldn’t applaud Trump for dropping the pretense that wars are waged for something other than sadism, power, and profit, because he’s trying to normalize the glorification of sadism, power, and profit. But if those who oppose evil were to drop the pretense that the greatest evil in the world is “defensive” and “humanitarian,” we’d be much better off ….
Restoring the acceptability of genocides, carpet bombings, and nuclear bombings doesn’t flow inevitably from restoring the name of the institution responsible. If we choose, the unconscionable horror of such things can instead mean that admitting what the Pentagon is, and stamping that disgusting, barbarous title over its front door could allow the development of a significant anti-war contingent in the United States. Such a contingent should not be simply anti-Trump. We should not be bothered by what he calls the war machine, but by the war machine itself—even when the name change is resisted or reversed.
One way to help this along would be to conscientiously remove from our speech and our thoughts, not just “defense” but all variety of insidious war propaganda terms. We might try also giving honest names to every governmental department. We might consider alternatives to war, and the case for war abolition.” Swanson 2025.
-
Truly we continue hanging on the crumbling precipice given the Dynamics of Possible Nuclear Extinction. In the 1989 interview, Fletcher pointed out how, “in modern-day clothes [U.S. Armed Forces] have a very serious problem that they cannot handle. Because we were talking about atom bombs. Now the hydrogen bomb—every American should be required to read about the destruction created—the power, the force of the Bravo Shot at Eniwetok on March 1, 1954—that was above 15 megatons. It would be unbelievable. It would wipe out any city—Los Angeles, Washington—and not only wipe it out but move the debris that's lethal hundreds of miles downwind. You cannot fight war with that.”
And yet, the obdurate fixation of U.S. powers-that-be bent on making just such cessation-of-all-life-on-earth war proceeds apace. With 1.) U.S. military spending greater than the next 9 countries combined, 2.) U.S. Military Bases Surrounding the World, 3.) Striving for Armageddon via U.S. Nuclear Forces Modernization Program, and 4.) the increasingly likelihood of Nuclear Famine, confronting the reality that a nuclear war has already begun demands breaking the spell of denial and exercising our birthright intelligence to face squarely the nuclear sword of Damocles for the sake of the children and all that follow us here.
-
John Judge introduced me to Fletcher at the end of 1988. We met in 1987 when I learned he was speaking near where I lived by Tom Davis. Tom was a first-generation JFK assassination researcher whom I met through his capacity as bookseller after some years of listening to Mae Brussell’s weekly radio program, World Watchers.
John grew up in Falls Church, VA outside Washington D.C. where both parents worked as civilian employees in the Pentagon beginning in 1943. Going through the door to eternity in 2014, John was a nonpareil friend who geometrically expanded my understanding of the world we all belong to while wearing these human overcoats. Judge 2025.
John’s father, John Joseph Judge, was a WWII Army Air Corps veteran and had been a cryptographer assigned overseas. He worked as a civilian at the Pentagon after his return from the war until his death in 1965, Judge 2006. John’s mother, Marjorie Alice Cooley Judge worked for 25 years as a man-power analyst for the Deputy Chief of Staff in the Personnel Office of the U.S. Army, directly under the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As John described in 1992:
My mother worked for 30 years altogether, but 25 years for the Deputy Chief of Staff in the Personnel Office of the U.S. Army, directly under the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She was the highest-paid woman employee of the Pentagon; she was five levels above top security. I mentioned to Fletcher Prouty the other day I worked from the bottom up and he worked from the top down, and we met at the Joint Chiefs. My mother’s job was to project overall national draft call figures five years in advance. She had to project an annual national Selective Service call that was right within a hundred people either way five years ahead. She knew from those projections and from the information she got that they were withdrawing from Vietnam ….
He was pulling out. My mother knew that because she had to project those kind of figures. I asked her after she retired, “When did they tell you they would escalate in Vietnam?” Because she had to be among the first to know. She said, “Late November of ’63.” I said, “The last week in November?” She said, “Yes, the Monday following the assassination.” I said, “Was this a few more advisers, a change in policy?” She said, “I couldn’t believe the figures. I took them back to the Joint Chiefs—in what must have been the first protest by the civilian community to the war in Vietnam—and said, ‘These can’t be right.’ And they said, ‘You’ll use them.’” They told her November 25, 1963 that the war in Vietnam would last for 10 years and that 57,000 Americans would die and to figure that in. Judge 1992a: 4:38.
Growing up in the shadow of the Pentagon, John’s spirit was prompted to question and challenge the war making imperative he encountered in this world at a very early age. In grade school John refused to “practice for a nuclear attack by crouching under … desks and covering … heads.” He argued “that a desk would not protect him from a nuclear blast. He soon found himself in the principal’s office.” Our Founder 2019.
John found many ways to express his opposition to war including its human costs to veterans; see Judge 2011. Prompted by the false flag events of September and October 2001, John observed how Pan-daemonium had been given free reign and license with the construction of the house of war, begun on September 11, 1941 and completed-dedicated on January 15, 1943:
I had a dream image about September 11. I grew up in the halls of the Pentagon, because members of my family were civilian employees there for many decades. I felt my windows shake when the plane exploded into the side of the building. I was offered a job at the Pentagon library when I was 15 years old, but my moral consciousness was already too far developed to accept it. After my relatives died, I took a photo of the Pentagon that they kept in their house, and hung it in my room. I know of no other reason to build a five-sided figure, which points to the south, except that in the arcane it is used in rituals to summon the Devil. While I do not believe in the Devil, I do believe in human evil. I always felt that the structure summoned it. In the ritual, the pentangle not only summons but also contains the Devil. My dream image was the plane breaking the pentangle and releasing the Devil. Pan-daemonium, as Milton called the capital of Hell. That evil must again be contained, and not summoned again. Judge 2001.
-
Concerning the false flag events of 2001, it was an extraordinary privilege to assist Graeme MacQueen in putting together his final compendium titled, The Pentagon’s B-Movie - Looking Closely at the September 2001 Attacks, completed before his untimely death (stage-four cancer). MacQueen 2023. As Graeme invited all of us to consider in the Conclusion of his 2017 essay, Beyond Their Wildest Dreams: Sep 11 2001 and The United States Left:
Suppose our imaginations can embrace the possibility that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by elements in the U.S. government. In that case what do we do next? There is no mystery. Once the imagination stops filtering out a hypothesis and allows it into the realm of the possible, it can be put to the test. Evidence and reason must now do the job.[42] Imagination cannot settle the question of truth or falsity any more than ideology, morality, or “common sense.”
I am not concerned in this article to demonstrate the truth of the “inside job” hypothesis of the 9/11 attacks. Ten years of research have led me to conclude that it is correct, but in the present paper I am concerned only with the preliminary, but vital, issue of imagination. Those who cannot imagine this hypothesis to be true will leave it unexamined, and, in the worst of worlds, will contribute to the silencing of dissenters. The left, in this case, will betray the best of its tradition and abandon both the targets of imperial oppression and their spokespeople.
As I wrote in the Postscript:
The gleaming critical analysis presented in this volume covers genuine living history of our post-WWII world, beginning during the period when U.S. federal covert agencies stepped into the big time with political assassinations, including Patrice Lumumba[†][††], John Kennedy[†][††], Malcolm X, Martin King and their Converging Martyrdom, Robert Kennedy, Fred Hampton and John Lennon[†][††]. The center of this book is concerned with the acts that followed these assassinations, the one-two punch operation of the 11 Sep 2001 bombings followed by the anthrax attacks.
The purpose of producing this volume is to manifest what Graeme wrote of in an early draft of the Preface: “If we in this social movement of 9/11 dissent are not willing to tell our own stories, who will tell them? Wikipedia?[†][††][†††] A graduate student somewhere keen to impress his or her advisor by exposing ‘conspiracy theories?’”
-
Fletcher Prouty’s first-hand account of his involvement with elements of the U.S. government’s subterranean world that took shape in the decades following World War II illuminates our living, albeit hidden, history. This knowledge and history belongs to all of us. Beyond the time span from WWII to 1989 discussed in the First Edition of Understanding Special Operations, our present-day unaccountable U.S. Intelligence Police operate far and away outside the strictures of accountability and law and daily commit several hundred crimes.
A 1996 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence report titled “IC 21: The Intelligence Community in the 21st Century” confirmed criminal actions are carried out every day by the Clandestine Service (CS) of the CIA: “The CS is the only part of the IC, indeed of the government, where hundreds of employees on a daily basis are directed to break extremely serious laws in countries around the world ... A safe estimate is that several hundred times every day (easily 100,000 times a year) DO (Directorate of Operations) officers engage in highly illegal activities.” (Emphasis added.) USG 1996.
As John Kelly analyzed this, “The report was the first official admission and definition of CIA covert operations as crimes which the committee, without explanation, equated with essential national security operations. In other words, the national security of the United States requires that more than one hundred thousand extremely serious crimes be committed every year. The committee expressed no legal or ethical concerns about these crimes.” Kelly 2002 Kelly breaks down the facade of so-called national security as justification for a wide range of state criminality including crimes against humanity:
One would think that one hundred thousand extremely serious crimes a year would be a major story no matter what the CIA’s rationale was. At the very least, pundits could have pondered and asked in the press how these crimes serve U.S. national security, particularly since the committee did not bother to do so. Nor did the committee explain the impact the crimes might have on peaceful, diplomatic relations or examine their moral and legal ramifications. In fact, the committee indicated that it did not matter that laws were broken because they were laws of other countries. To claim that our national security requires one hundred thousand crimes a year is a rather stark assertion and operating principle, particularly in a world that increasingly believes the United States acts as if there is one law for America and another for the rest of the world. Beyond that, it would seem that these crimes might actually threaten U.S. national security by making enemies. What nation is going to roll over, play dead, and accept that breaking its laws is axiomatic with U.S. national security?
There was not a single word about any of this even in the alternative press, which was particularly disturbing in light of the nature of the CIA crimes. The report suggested that the CIA’s crimes include murder and that “the targets of the CS [Clandestine Service] are increasingly international and transnational and a global presence is increasingly crucial to attack those targets.” In other words, we are not simply talking about stealing secrets. We are talking about the CIA committing crimes against humanity with de facto impunity and congressional sanctioning.
Other government documents, including CIA reports, show that the CIA’s crimes include terrorism, assassination, torture, and systematic violations of human rights. The documents also show that these crimes are part and parcel of deliberate CIA policy (the staff report notes that CIA personnel are “directed” to commit crimes). Ibid.: 312.
What do such government-directed immoral, unprincipled, and genuinely evil policies and agendas indicate about the “the land of the free and the home of the brave”? Precisely whose interests are actually served by U.S. government-perpetrated crimes of terrorism, assassination, torture, and systematic violations of human rights? The above analysis is uniformly denied through omission, distortion, lack of contextual analysis, and disinforming opinion stated as obvious, incontestable fact.
Regarding the world of Settler Colonialism that began to take off in the late 1400s and beyond, Buckminster Fuller observed how the nations of Europe “were simply the operating fronts of behind-the-scenes, vastly ambitious individuals who had become so effectively powerful because of their ability to remain invisible while operating behind the national scenery. Always their victories were in the name of some powerful sovereign-ruled country. The real power structures were always the invisible ones behind the visible sovereign powers.”
There is a vital need to activate remembering that we are borrowing today from the past as well as the future. So much forgetting makes possible the incoherent, life-destroying processes and activities that beset this world—the only one we, our ancestors and our descendants, will ever have. This started a long time ago. John Trudell expresses his understanding of how, within the techno-logic perceptional reality, one of the civilizing processes is to erase memories; memory of who we are and what we are, memory of identity and self-reality.
Our being comes from our relationship to the Sun, and to the universe. Because our relationship to the Sun – I mean let’s be, you know, be very coherent and clear about this: without the Sun we would not have life. Alright, it’s almost like the rays of light that the Sun represents and brings to the Earth, see, this is the sperm that gives life to the womb that the Earth is.
So our relationship to power and our relationship to the reality of power is connected to that relationship. Anyway, what I see, the human, the being part of human is being mined through the human experience. See they’re mining us.
And whoever they are, I don’t have the names, but we’ll just figure some of that out on our own. Because, you know – and I’m sure they have names. [laughter] I’m real sure that they do, but I can’t say them to you because I don’t – they don’t want us to know their names, maybe, right? Because, what they’re doing isn’t really – you know, in a way it’s like vampirism in a lot of things – but anyway, in a mechanical term, we’re being mined.
And the being part of human is being mined through the logic of the human, alright, and the emotions of the human. The being of spirit, the spirit of being is what is being mined through the logics and emotions of the human, in order to run this system, see.
I mean this is the purpose of techno-logic civilization. They call it techno-logic for a very specific reason. This isn’t an accident, okay? You know, it truly isn’t. But the purpose of the civiliz[ation] – and so one of the civilizing processes is to erase memories. Alright?, to erase memories. Because we have ancestral memory. It’s encoded in the DNA – it’s a genetic memory.
You look at how techno-logic civilization – and everywhere that it goes, the longer it’s there, the more isolated the human beings – but they’re not called human beings, they’re workers and citizens, etc., alright? Alright? But the more isolated they feel, they no longer – you know, maybe they remember their grandparents or their great grandparents.
But see, you’ve got all that ancestral knowledge that’s encoded in the DNA, but it’s been cut off. So it can’t activate because if we’re not conscious that it’s there then we can’t – it just makes [things] difficult. See this is the memory that it’s very important for them to erase. Alright, and it’s about who we are – it’s memory of identity and self-reality.
Tuning in to our living history amplifies and expands prior awareness: about responsibility and how we choose, in every moment, to interpret what we perceive in precisely the way we choose to interpret it. Engaging our souls in this way is the antidote to the entire techno-logic perceptional reality that is based upon death. The eventual, inevitable outcome of such reality is oblivion and annihilation. It is our responsibility as sentient, self-aware, self-directed beings to see and acknowledge this and then act upon this understanding.
Trudell’s perceptions and awareness are ever more timely, offering insights and the means to conduct our own special operations to support the human project into its post-industrial mind epoch.
Because this thing about life and death – you know, this techno-logic reality has been around for 3 or 4,000 years – I don’t know however long it’s been around, you know. But its whole reality is based upon death so therefore, at some point it must die. Our whole objective as human beings is to stay alive. Do you get it? I mean really alive. Not surviving and existing, I’m talking about alive. Connected to life and living. See, we have to outlast it because we can’t outfight it because its violence and its aggressive mindset, alright?, is beyond parallel.
But that doesn’t mean that it’s powerful. That just means that it’s violent and it’s aggressive and it’s without parallel and you better be damned careful of it. But that’s what that means, about power – our relationship to clarity and coherency and the use of our intelligence is our relationship to power and we can outthink it. Simple math. Simple math. It’s a mathematical thing.
In the authoritarian state system only x-amount of people are given permission to think. Okay? So at some point, theoretically, we will out- surround them. If we will just do what is necessary to get there.
Your descendants and my descendants depend upon us, alright?, to keep the reality of the living alive. And we are going to influence the outcome, no matter what we do. So [what] I’m talking about is, well let’s take some responsibility, alright?, and let’s influence it in a more clear and coherent way. Outthink them. Trust ourselves and our ability to think. And each and every one of us was given just as much intelligence as we need. It’s not a contest....
Such seeing and understanding is of supreme value and significance. It reawakens memory of who we truly are and what we are here for. In the world we find ourselves living in there is virtually no sense of vital, life-affirming purpose being proffered by the techno-logic mindset reality. Certain periods in the past altered the perceptional reality we find ourselves in today.
... we know there was an inquisition. And this inquisition went on for 4 or 500 years in Europe. The purpose of the inquisition was to alter the perceptional reality of the descendants of the tribes of Europe. To make them believe and see reality the way the church wanted them to believe and see reality.
The church called it – they waged a war for possession – for possession, this is important – they waged a war for the possession of the souls of the godless heathens. And to be a godless heathen you just didn’t believe in god. It wasn’t a part of your reality. Or another way [of] becoming a godless heathen was to question the authority of the church to do this.
See now, again, I’m not making this up. You know, this did transpire. These things did happen. And they killed as many people as they could – I guarantee it – in order to get the other ones to submit. So they killed as efficiently as they could with the technology they had at their disposal at that time, alright? And because they created a rationalization as to why to do it, so it just became as efficient as they could do.
And at some point, the descendants of the tribes of Europe no longer knew what it meant to be a human being. They just didn’t know – they didn’t want to know. So the descendants of the tribes of Europe, in the end, had to love what they feared which was there to possess them. See, and I think it messed up love in a lot of ways, you know that they haven’t unsorted yet.
The perceptional change that occurred through events such as the inquisition caused a primary break and division to occur in how we relate to ourselves and how we relate to Mother Earth that gives us life and meaning. The result has been that we have become divorced and separated from the genuine source of Life’s value and purpose. (See Bohm’s explanation of the word meaning, consisting as it does of three parts: ‘significance’, ‘value’, and ‘purpose’.) It is possible to restore the connection to all our relations and to once again ride the balance that was the original basis of being and participation in the circle of Life.
I’ve never been able to envision gods or goddesses. I can’t imagine the Creator in a human form.... And I think our road, our path to trouble started when we started to do it that way.... but I don’t go with god because I know that’s a limited perceptional reality. See, they forced it on us. But the trouble came see, when, when we decided that the Creator entity had a human form. See because then, that, that rationalized and justified mistreating the rest of the natural world.
Alright? I mean, sexism and racism came out of this perceptional change because once the Earth – you know under the new god thing, see, the Earth was no longer the Mother. The Earth was the property of this new god. And all god’s children ... their job and objective was to subdue the Earth for this god.
So in order to achieve that objective they had to create sexism. See, sexism has got to do with how we live with the Earth. And racism, because now that the Earth was property, you know and all spiritual value was away, was away from the Earth, you know. Real spiritual value was now a religious perceptional thing, and, right, so it wasn’t all encompassing, it wasn’t just a part of the reality anymore.
... Now whoever it is we pray to, right?, whoever it is we pray to, however we pray, whatever, however we do that, alright?, I think that we have an obligation and a responsibility and it’s about respect. If we respect our Creator, then we should use our intelligence as intelligently as we can as often as we can. And that means with clarity and coherence. That means to activate and respect our intelligence and activate the thinking process so that it’s going the way we want it to be because that’s why it was given to us.
Our intelligence – as the human being part of all of this reality that’s going on, we were given intelligence, this is what was there to help us through the evolutionary reality – to ride the balance, so to speak, of the evolution with our intelligence. It’s our medicine, it’s our protection, it’s our self-defense.
I quoted the above segments ten years ago in a February ratitor’s corner titled Keep the Balance. I keep coming back to this spoken expression of the profound power we all embody to exercise our birthright intelligence with clarity and coherence.
We are borrowing today from the past and the future. We’re borrowing it from both places. As our ancestors knew, so it is for us now: to keep the balance is the purpose. That is the purpose. The reason for being is to keep the balance. This is a spiritual perception of reality. Because of the spiritual perception of reality, recognize and understand that life is about responsibility. It isn’t about the abstraction of freedom—it is about responsibility.