Miscellany27: On Neale Donald Walsch’s Home with God; Middle-East Tourism in Indonesia; Israel and Palestine – Will It Ever End?; Israel Will Not Negotiate with Terrorists – Now That’s a Laugh!; The Cruel Practice of Exporting Labor; The Dutch “Get Smart” about Immigration; Lip Service to Saving the Environment; Pollution of the Atmosphere by Jet Airplanes; Bikinis Celebrate Sixty Years; Round Up Illegal Immigrants?; The 2006 Australian Psychic Expo
© 2006 Joseph George Caldwell. All rights reserved. Posted at Internet web sites http://www.foundation.bw and http://www.foundationwebsite.org . May be copied or reposted for non-commercial use, with attribution. (4 July 2006; minor edits 13 July 2006, 17 July 2006)
Commentary on recent news, reading and events of personal interest.
I arrived in
As in his other books, Walsch presents some interesting metaphysical views. He does not cite the source of his material, but it appears to be speculation, drawing on various “New Age” sources (e.g., Jane Roberts’ Seth books, such as Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul (Amber-Allen Publishing and New World Library, 1972, 1994)). I do not believe his material to be “revelation” or “channeling” from a high spiritual source, since I have too many disagreements with it. After I read the first three books of the Conversations with God series, I wrote a brief review, relating his views to some of my own, with particular reference to my environmental concerns and planetary management. Some time later, I wrote an essay exploring the difficulty of applying Walsch’s “relative morality” to a personal life. A portion of that essay was pornographic, however, and I have never published it.
In this brief article, I will not summarize Home with God, but simply cite a few of Walsch’s views and comment on them.
Walsch’s ontological view holds that three important aspects of existence are Knowledge, Experience, and Emotion. His “Knowledge” corresponds roughly to my term “Universal Consciousness,” and his “Experience” corresponds roughly to my term “Physical Existence”, in my recent article, “On Symbols.” Walsch writes: “[Walsch] What is the purpose of life on earth, from the soul’s point of view? [God] I can tell you in four words. Your soul is seeking to experience what it knows. Your soul knows that it never left God, and it is seeking to experience that. Life is a process by which the soul turns Knowing into Experiencing, and when what you have known and experienced becomes a felt reality, that process is complete. Home, it turns out, is a place called Completion. It is the Complete Awareness of Who You Really Are through the Complete Knowing and the Complete Experiencing and the Complete Feeling of that. It is the End of the Separation between You and the Divine. This Separation is an illusion, and your soul knows this. Completion can therefore be defined as the moment when Separation ends, the moment of your reunification with Divinity.”
I do not agree with Walsch at all on this point. In his view, souls are set apart from God in some fashion (individuated), and their objective is to “get back to” or reunite with God. Lots of people share this view. In my view, however, the purpose of life is to experience, to feel emotions, as someone (Walsch, perhaps?) once put it, “for God to experience being ‘not God’ (i.e., sense existence in a physical world filled with barriers and limitations).” Soul individuation and reunion with the “essence” of God may be a part of the process (cf., Michael Newton’s Journey of Souls books), but it is not at all the purpose, the objective, the goal.
Walsch believes that whatever problems or challenges are faced in a person’s life must be satisfactorily addressed, and that if a person avoids facing them, e.g., via suicide, he must return in another life to address these same problems. He writes (God speaking): “Then you will do the most ironic thing. You will give yourself another physical life in which to deal with what you did not deal with in your most recent one…. Suicide is the use of death to escape, but it creates the same life all over again, with the same challenges and experiences.” From this point of view, life is a “gauntlet” to be run, and if we do not “get through” it, we must try it over and over again until we do. That view is not only terribly depressing, since life is viewed as a contest or course we must pass to go on, rather than an experience, for which completion / fulfillment occurs simply by having it, whatever it is. In Walsch’s view, if a person fails to “deal with” the challenges of a life, then he is forced to try again – in essence, he is punished for his failure to deal, by having to “take the course over.” In my view, the person who simply cannot cope with a miserable existence and “checks out” has selected one path, one set of experiences, for dealing (or not dealing, if you prefer) with the problems and challenges he faced. In this case, refusing to deal with the problems was the experience he chose, and that experience is “complete.”
Michael Newton’s views on the journey of souls seem more reasonable. Some souls are “timid souls,” who reincarnate seldom, if ever. Such souls may be satisfied to simply “preview” a life or perhaps “hitch a ride” on a physical creature’s mind for a brief time, rather than “melding” itself to a human brain for a lifetime, with no escape until the death of the body. Other souls relish physical experience, and can’t wait to “get back in the game” (such souls are “risk-seekers”; they live intensely and tend to die young). Some souls wish to experience a full range of physical experience, from “Conan the Conqueror” to “Mahatma Ghandi,” and they have every opportunity to do so. Some souls, at least at certain stages of their development, are attracted to excitement and violence, whereas others are attracted to the attainment of peace and serenity.
The key concept here is action. If a soul incarnates and simply chooses (and
is able) to “sit in the corner” for this life, then he has essentially wasted
that life, although that modus operandi
is certainly, in its own way, an experience of sorts. The “full” life is one that is filled with a
rich, physically and emotionally stimulating variety of experience, which is
realized through action. It does not matter, however, what that
experience is, or even whether you have it at all – it is not at all necessary
to keep coming back into physical existence (i.e., reincarnate) until you “get
it right.” You don’t ever have to come
back at all. All lives represent paths
through physical existence back to spiritual existence, but some are much more
exciting than others. Walsch’s view, or
characterization, is that some paths are more “arduous” than others, not more
“exciting” or “fulfilling” than others. His
view is that certain challenges must be faced in some acceptable fashion in one
life, before the person is allowed to go on to a new life.
It is instructive in this context to review the meaning of the word “karma” (which Walsch does not use in this book, by the way). The American Heritage Dictionary defines karma as: “The total effect of a person's actions and conduct during the successive phases of the person's existence, regarded as determining the person's destiny.” From this definition, it is clear that the emphasis is on action, much more so than on destiny or fate. The actions taken in a life define the life. They are in fact the destiny or fate. The medium is the message. The destiny or fate is not some sort or reward or punishment. You do not have to “do it over until you get it right.” The action is the destiny. The destiny is not some reward or punishment for “getting it right,” nor even Walsch’s “Completion” – it is simply the action.
Walsch’s exposition is very confusing at times. He defines three levels of experience: the conscious, the subconscious, and the superconscious (and a fourth level, the supraconscious, which represents experiencing all three previous levels simultaneously). The conscious level is our usual level of waking consciousness. Walsch continually speaks as if the conscious level (our physical being) can make choices (such as the timing of death), and can “create,” when he is in fact referring to the superconscious (the soul) (or perhaps, to a force beyond or above the soul). Physical human beings cannot create anything at all (except, perhaps, mental images such as thoughts, dreams, daydreams – but even those may be from (ascribed to) an external source). They are not “co-creators,” as many New Age authors, including Walsch, like to say. All that they are capable of doing at this level of existence is moving matter around and directing energy (or causing the conversion of matter to energy by crashing fissionable material together). If you (the conscious “you”) are stricken with paralysis from a severed spinal cord, there is nothing that you (the physical you) can do about it but die. You cannot “choose” to get rid of the paralysis. Moreover, souls too have very limited powers of control or creation – they can “latch onto” bodies as observers, and experience what the body experiences, but that is about it. They may communicate a sense of presence to the physical body, but they cannot control it.
As a physical human being (third-density being, in Laura Knight-Jadczyk’s terminology), you possess certain physical powers, and you appear to have free will, but you have no ability to create. Walsch’s dialogue seems to be directed toward helping the conscious being (physical human being) deal with death, but almost all of his discussion is oriented toward the superconsious being (soul). Forget the soul. It is hardly a factor in your physical existence. The essence of your physical existence is just what you perceive in your waking state. A soul may be along for the ride (melded to your brain), but it is not controlling you. At most, it represents a voice of conscience (or voice of temptation), or a “presence.” To some extent, the relationship of your physical being to the soul melded to your brain is symbiotic, but the essence of the relationship is that it is more in the nature of a parasite, like a lamprey or limpet or remora, along for the ride.
When you think of your physical existence, relate it to the existence of other physical creatures, such as gazelles or lions, which are considered not to have individuated souls (but rather, like whales and dolphins, “group” souls). They experience many of the same emotions that you do. The gazelle experiences sheer terror as the lion sinks its fangs into its throat and chokes the life from it. The lion experiences the satisfaction of a good kill and a delicious meal. Your physical life is very similar. The only difference is that you are highly intelligent, and that an intelligent individuated soul has melded itself to your brain. But that soul is just along for the ride. It is not directing your life. It is simply sharing, or feeding on, the physical experiences – the physically based emotions – that you undergo. The essence of your physical being is just what your five senses are telling you.
Some authors (e.g., Laura Knight-Jadczyk, David Jacobs) refer to our bodies as “soul containers.” From the point of view of the soul, that characterization may be on the mark, but it diminishes their true character. In the absence of souls, human beings would be just as exciting and wonderful as other mammals, such as gazelles and lions. They would not be, as some have claimed, “soulless robots.” With their high intelligence, physical human beings make nice bodies for intelligent, sentient spiritual beings (souls) to “ride.” (“Possess” is not the right word here – the soul does not “possess” or “control” our bodies – it simply attaches itself (melds to our brain) and experiences what we experience.) Our bodies are not just “soul containers.” They may be that, but they are also much more. They may be viewed simply as containers by souls, who are just seeking well-matched bodies to ride, and are just using us to provide them gratification that they cannot find in the spiritual realm. Souls are, in fact, simply parasites (The American Heritage Dictionary defines “parasite” as: “An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.”)
When physical creatures die, they are gone. When the gazelle and the lion die, they are gone forever (from this “timeline,” but not from Akashic memory). When you die, your physical body ceases to function and disintegrates, as does your personality. The conscious you – the “you” you experienced – disintegrates and is gone forever. (I am being a little loose with terms here, since “time” as we perceive it does not “really” exist, and so such time-related concepts as “eternity” and “forever” and “the next reincarnation” are nothing more than artifactual semantic fictions.) The soul departs, and continues to exist, and will perhaps meld itself to some other physical human being. But “you” – the “you” that you feel, your sense of identity, your sense of existence – are gone forever. Gone like the leaves on the trees. “Gone like the knock on the door. Gone like yesterday and before.”
(The preceding discussion relates to a physical lifetime in a single “timeline.” The nature of time is different for spiritual beings from what it is for physical beings. As physical beings, we are “stuck” in a timeline or “time loop.” From a higher-density perspective, our physical plane exists “simultaneously,” so that we are not really “gone forever” after we complete a life in a particular timeline. Rather, we “exist forever” in an instant and an infinity of timelines, any or all of which may be accessed – or modified as new time lines – individually or simultaneously, from a “supra-time” perspective.)
You were used by the soul, and perhaps you got a little out of the relationship – a vague sense of accompaniment, a few pangs of conscience or temptation. Your physical body, like that of the gazelle or the lion, is a fabulous machine, a piece (or a pawn) in the exquisitely exciting game of life. A soul may have attached itself to you while you played (or were played, depending as whether you consider your thoughts as your own), but you are the player. The soul is just an accompanying observer. There is very little difference between you (the physical you) and the gazelle, except for the fact that you are accompanied by an intelligent, sentient soul, and the gazelle is not. You are a vehicle for a soul to experience physical existence (one experience of many, if it reincarnates often – and one soul of many, if your lifeline is “played” over and over again). But when you die (and the soul departs), you die just as completely as the gazelle – only the soul lives on. (Actually, the soul may depart before the body ceases all of its physical-life functions and decomposes, such as in the case in which a brain-dead person is kept alive by mechanical life-support equipment. In such cases, the soul has departed the body and the physical being has lost its sense of awareness and identity. At this point, it is nothing more than a blob of protoplasm, useless to all except the lawyers and health-care professionals who keep it “alive” for purposes of monetary gain.)
It is an error in perception to refer to the soul that is melded to your brain as “your soul.” It is not “your” soul at all, any more than a passenger in a car is “owned” by the car. You are, in fact, the soul’s temporary, erstwhile body (“container”). Your body is, in fact, just one of many that a soul may, if it chooses, take along its sequence of reincarnations on its “way back to Nirvana.” While your physical existence is just as significant and meaningful as the existence of a gazelle, to an accompanying soul your physical existence – your physical body and your mind – is of no more significance, after it has used you, than a worn-out suit of clothes that you just threw away, or a worn-out car that you just left at the junkyard.
For physical existence to be meaningful, death of the physical being must be final. When two gladiators enter the ring, it is essential (for the contest to be exquisitely exciting for all involved) that they know that if they are killed, they have lost everything – all of physical existence, their mind, personality, and body – forever (in this timeline, which is the only one of which this physical existence is aware). If you are killed in a duel, then you are gone forever (from this timeline). In order for the duel to be meaningful and exciting, you must know that it is really a matter of life and death, and that if you are killed, “you” are utterly destroyed for all time – you cease to exist. (Once again, I am being “loose” with terms. All of existence – the collection of all experiences – “exists” simultaneously and forever. I am referring here simply to our view of existence as viewed and experienced from our unique timeline.) All that remains is the “memory” stored in the Akashic records. What would be the point to your physical existence continuing? There would be no purpose in “saving” all of the leaves on all of the trees, after they died. Or in “saving” all of the fish, or gazelles, or lions. Or in saving physical human beings. They served their purpose – making emotions (feelings), making memories, or maybe just serving as part of a “backdrop” in someone else’s more exciting game – and they are no longer needed.
As a physical human being, you have the (apparent) power to move matter, but that is about it. If you have a crippling disease, you cannot heal yourself. The “universal consciousness” may choose to do so, but you cannot do so of your own will. If you are asleep, or in a coma, you cannot wake yourself. You are like a light that is switched off. Some other force must throw the switch to awaken you. You may think that you (the physical, conscious you) are in charge of your life, your thoughts, your actions, but you are largely controlled by another force – universal consciousness. Contrary to Walsch’s assertion, you do not “control” your birth, your life, or your death (although you may be viewed as having some influence over them). You do not choose your life, or your parents, or any other aspect of the physical you. Your soul does not control this, either. All it controls is whether it wants to ride you (meld to your brain) for the term of your physical life. You are not controlled by your soul – it is just along for the ride. You are nothing more than the particular “roller coaster” that it decided to ride in this fling through the amusement park of life, the “wild horse” or “bucking Brahma bull” that it decided to ride in this rodeo of life.
Walsch makes much of a person’s ability to create and control. But “you” (the physical human you) cannot create, and you have only limited ability to control. You can control by moving your body and moving physical objects. But you cannot create anything – not even the thoughts and ideas that are placed there by universal consciousness. Your relationship to the soul that occupies you (i.e., your physical body) is similar to the relationship of your toenail to the rest of your body, or to your mind. Your toenail (like your physical body) has certain functions, but your conscious mind (analogous to the soul) has little control over them. Also, even though every cell of your toenail contains the DNA that defines you, it cannot create anything. It cannot perform the functions of other organs, such as the liver or lungs. It can simply do what it was designed to do, and that is it. Analogously, your soul has virtually no control over your body and what it does. It is simply along for the ride, like a person in a roller-coaster. And although the soul may have more advanced powers of control and ability to create than you do, it has virtually no control over the physical you. That is not part of the “deal.”
So do not concern yourself with the fate of your soul. It is not “your” soul – you were “its” body
for a while. When you die, you are
gone. Your soul, having enjoyed / experienced
your lifetime, will move on to enjoy other bodies or other soul experiences
In summary, human beings can’t create (external objects) – other than “creating” experiences and memories. Souls can barely create. Both physical human beings and souls are in a sense “physical” entities, but at different “density” levels (using the terminology of Laura Knight-Jadczyk). Souls are a higher density, and they “persist” (live on and continue to develop / evolve for a long “time”) whereas human beings are transient (grow old, die, and disintegrate very quickly). Human beings are mortal. The “gods” (e.g., souls) envy our mortality, since it gives profound meaning and significance to life, but they can never experience it directly – only vicariously as “riders” of human beings. When an interesting person dies, it is often said, “When he died, they broke the mould.” I’ve got news for you – when everyone dies they break the mold (the physical human body, including the mind and personality). Except for experiences (emotions, feelings), you cannot create anything, not even a single thought or idea, and certainly not anything physical. The thoughts and ideas that you experience are all placed in your mind by universal consciousness. You (the physical you) are, in fact, just a “container,” whether for the emotional feelings of the physical you or the emotional feelings of an accompanying soul. Of the apparent creator/created duality (in the unitary universe), you (and your soul) are the “created” component, not the “creator” part. Sorry about that.
To a growing number of people, it is becoming increasingly evident that the human species is now being replaced on planet Earth (see David Jacobs’ The Threat and Laura Knight-Jadczyk’s Transcripts from Cassiopaea for more on this). Human beings are being abducted in large numbers and their DNA is being modified to be a better match to a different race of souls from Homo sapiens. As soon as this process is complete, human souls will have lost their planetary home, and will never reincarnate on Earth again.
Here follows an article from the front page of The Jakarta Post,
Vice President Jusuf Kalla stated Friday that he did not support the use of women to attract Middle Eastern tourists, saying his recent off-the-cuff remarks were not meant to be taken seriously.
“My message at that time was that we should seek other
alternatives to lure Middle Eastern tourists to
“I never said that I support the use of women (to attract Arab tourists). I am just trying to encourage the use of other ways of attracting tourists, than what is practiced by people in Puncak.”
Puncak is a
As reported by this newspaper Wednesday, Kalla referred to Middle Eastern visitors seeking janda – the Indonesian term denoting either widows or divorcees – in Puncak.
Kalla’s media and press advisor Muchlish Hasyim said the Vice President apologized if his remarks were offensive to some people, but they were meant to show the reality of the situation.
[End of The Jakarta Post article.]
When I worked in
I get so tired of the domination of the news, both in the
If it were up to me, which it is not, I would just let them
“slug it out” and get it over. Of
course, such a resolution – or any resolution – is not in the interests of US
business, which is delighted to see the region fester and thereby generate profits
from the sale of arms to both sides (and, through the endless instability,
access to oil from the Arab nations that we “protect”). The length to which the
The handout to
On the BBC news yesterday (4 July) I heard an Israeli
official state that
The Jews have applied genocide as a matter of policy time
after time after time. That is their modus operandi, their preferred “rules
of engagement” for dealing with other people whose land they want (as it is by
many other successful peoples as well, such as the Romans in
As Machiavelli observed, there are three ways to possess a
conquered land: (1) kill everyone presently there; (2) make a contract with the
former leaders of the conquered people to administer a “puppet” regime; or (3)
go to live in the conquered country in large numbers (as the British did in
North America, and the Chinese are now doing in Tibet). Historically, the Israelis have preferred
option 1 – the “genocide” option. It is
certainly the most effective, since it eliminates the intractable “problem” of
the previous inhabitants (such as the Native Americans in the
(It is noted that the reason why the
In today’s economic view of the world, labor is simply a
commodity, to be transferred across borders whenever and whenever it serves
economic interests. The
In my recent assignment in
Evidently I am not the only person who has this low opinion
of trafficking in human labor, however, for I read the following editorial on
the Opinion page of The Jakarta Post,
Provide Filipinos with jobs at home, not abroad
By Neal Cruz, Philippine Daily Inquirer,
When President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her party of
junketeers return from
A “caregiver,” if you still don’t know, is the polite word for people whose job is to wipe the behinds of people too old to do it themselves, bathe them, oftentimes in their beds, feed them and clean up the mess afterwards.
Spaniards and people of other Western “progressive” and rich countries don’t want to do this disagreeable job, which is – no matter how you try to “deodorize” it – the most menial, the most humiliating job of all.
It is lower even than a laborer’s or servant’s job. So there are no takers for this job
there. So Western countries import
“caregivers” from dirt-poor countries like the
Unlike here in the
There are many such nursing homes in Western “modern” countries because the proportion of their senior citizens to their young ones is increasing.
Nursing homes are depressing places. In there, you see mostly catatonic, infirm, old people ready to keel over and croak. Every morning, the corpses of those who died during the night are carried out.
Nursing homes try to make life cheerful for their wards. This they do by holding parties and dances and games, but the old people know that their days are numbered. They are only waiting for their time to go.
This depressing atmosphere affects the caregivers and in due time they become emotional wrecks themselves.
Few people are willing to become caregivers, but for poor people, like many Filipinos who cannot find other employment, a caregiver’s job is a lifeline for their families. That is why caregivers come only from the poorest of the poor countries; they are people who are forced to accept the job because there is no other job available for them. Kapit sa patalim (clinging on to a sharp knife), as we say in Filipino.
Why am I saying all these?
Because I am sure GMA (Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) and her spinmeisters
will boast that by visiting
In due time, we will be known all over the world not only as a nation of domestics, laborers and prostitutes but also as a nation of caregivers or, as the more unkind foreigners label it, “ass-wipers.”
Why have we sunk this low, a nation of heroes and freedom-lovers reduced to “wiping other people’s behinds”? Because our government is so incompetent and corrupt it cannot provide jobs for its countrymen here at home. So Filipinos are forced to seek jobs in other countries, lest their families starve.
The Philippine economy is kept afloat only by the earnings
sent home by those overseas Filipino workers.
Without them, our foreign currency reserves would disappear because
public officials and rich businessmen, who fatten themselves on the sweat and
tears of poor Filipinos, squander foreign exchange on junkets such as the one
the GMA party just embarked on. (Imagine
how many millions of pesos in taxes have just been spent for the junket to the
Filipino workers die working for foreign employers in
That is because there are no jobs in their home country and they are forced to leave their families at home to earn a living in foreign shores.
GMA should provide jobs for her countrymen here at home instead of sending them away to take on humiliating jobs in other countries, and then living it up on the earnings they send home.
[End of The Jakarta Post article.]
I consulted in the
It is axiomatic that human population always expands to
match the available food supply.
Following every Green Revolution, there will always be a subsequent
surge in the population to match the food supply. More is never enough. Through its policy of massive population
The following article about current Dutch immigration policy appeared on the back page of the 1 July issue of The Jakarta Post.
Immigration minister at center of political row
Dutch Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk, who was a the center of the political row that led to the resignation of the Dutch government Thursday, is nicknamed “Iron Rita” for her tough stance on immigration.
A former prison warden, Verdonck is both celebrated and despised for her “rules are rules” attitude and decisive manner.
The 50-year-old mother of two is a latecomer to Dutch politics and joined the rightwing liberal VVD only in 2002.
In 2003, Verdonk was named Immigration minister and her no-nonsense
attitude personified the answer of the established political parties to the
rise of grassroots populist parties in the
Verdonk soon set herself apart from other ministers by her decisiveness and straight-talking manner.
“For too long our society believed that (asylum seekers) were to be pitied. That is no the case. They make a conscious decision to come here and must bear their own responsibility,” she said last year.
“If we treat them as if they are needy they will act like it. I hear stories of people just begging out on the couch waiting for people to take care of them.”
The traditionally tolerant
Among the policies championed by Verdonk was the expulsion
of 26,000 failed asylum seekers, some of whom had been living in the
Se also ruled that homosexual asylum seekers from
Internationally, Verdonk is best known for introducing a
test for aspiring immigrants to prove their knowledge of Dutch culture and
language before being allowed to stay in the country.
The minister also publicly spoke about imposing a ban on wearing a burka (an Islamic garment that covers a person from head to toe) in public and suggested that towns should introduce a code of conduct stipulation that only Dutch could be spoken in the streets.
She greatly disappointed Dutch football fans when she
refused a request to grant citizenship to Salomon Kalou, born in the
“They say I am the toughest woman in the
Over time Verdonk, who has a degree in sociology and criminology, grew more confident in her role as minister and swapped her severe black suits for more colorful pink and red outfits.
“Rules are rules” is Verdonk’s mantra which she readily repeats in the many debates that her proposals always provoke.
Her political style causes people to either love her or hate her. In December she was even voted most popular Dutch politician in a poll of 21,000 people who lauded her straight-talking manner and reliability.
In the same poll, Verdonk also came third in the list of most unpopular politicians.
[End of The Jakarta Post article.]
I was interested in Verdonk’s view of the burka. When I worked in
I know personally the ire that taking a stand against traditional
Islamic customs can evoke. In 1997,
while I was living in
Upon reading the news coverage on this in the Charlotte Observer, I wrote a letter to the editor. I stated that I had read the Koran from cover to cover (twice, actually), and that there is absolutely no requirement for Moslem women to wear scarves, or even to cover the hair on their heads. The only passage that I found dealing with dress is one that admonishes women to “cover their adornments.” Since the only parts of a woman that differ from a man are her breasts and genitalia, I assumed that this passage meant that a woman should cover her breasts and genitalia. Men and women both have hair on their heads, so the passage could not possibly refer to that.
You would not believe the caustic response to my e-mail by other contributors to the Observer’s editorial page. The Observer published one that I recall that said something like, “Who is this guy Joseph Caldwell? What does he mean by sticking his nose in this?” It was, like all of the negative responses to my views, an ad hominem attack on me personally, saying absolutely nothing about my view, position or argument.
The Dutch are finally waking up to the fact that they have
been destroying their culture by mass immigration.
It is axiomatic that nothing will be done to protect the environment that impedes economic development. The government will pretend that it is taking steps to protect the environment, when in fact all that it ever does is pass measures that temporarily reduce or slow environmental damage. They will never do anything that results in a significant overall or permanent reduction of economic activity or development. In fact, most of the measures that they impose, such as the use of “scrubbers” on smokestacks, actually increase gross domestic product and wealth for the wealthy. They will never allow any environmental action that causes a net reduction in economic activity or material wealth. [By the way, I am fully aware of the fact that the violin (“fiddle”) was not invented until long after Nero’s reign.]
Here follows an article that exemplifies this fact. It appeared in the 3 July issue of The Jakarta Post.
Thesis shows danger of
By Adianato P. Simamora, The
The outer areas of
Mediana Johanna Hendriette Uguy’s doctoral thesis in the
environment program at the
Peri-urban areas, which exist in several cities in
“It leads to the elimination of green areas, conservation areas and productive land, and also destroys natural and social environments,” Mediana explained last week.
“The root problem is with governmental policy, which can’t keep up with the dramatic and fast-moving transformation of these areas.”
Her thesis is based on her research on Cimanggis subdistrict
in Depok, south of
She said the high cost of living in
Cimanggis, with a total area of 5,354 hectares, is designated as a conservation area under a 1999 presidential decree.
The decree also names 19 subdistricts in
Industries that use up groundwater are not allowed to operate in the conservation areas.
Since then, the population of Cimanggis has grown about 6.3
percent per year, far higher than
“The rapid growth is due to the presence of housing complexes, which numbered 57 in 2002 compared to 32 in 1992. This is followed by the construction of economic facilities such as supermarkets and turnpikes,” Mediana said.
The housing complexes mostly occupy land that was previously used for plantations, rice fields, forests or water catchment areas.
Seventy percent of the residents living in housing
complexes, and 55 percent of those who don’t live in housing complexes, work in
Unfortunately, physical development in these areas was not followed by public services. This led to knotty problems such as floods, traffic congestion and social conflicts.
Mediana said that the dependence of Cimanggis residents on
She added that the local administration had not yet made the environment a priority in its city planning, or boosted economic growth to increase the budget. Instead, the area relied heavily on real estate development to balance its books.
“For example, the Depok administration set a target of raining Rp 11 billion [9000 Rupiah (Rp) = one US dollar, so this amount equals a little over a million dollars] from building permits this year,” she said.
To create sustainable peri-urban areas, she argued that the government should adopt the so-called urban-ecosystem approach.
“The city must be viewed as an ecosystem. They must apply spatial integration; balancing human activities with environmental conditions,” Mediana concluded. “People must have an obligation to maintain the environment.”
[End of The Jakarta Post article.]
Unfortunately, no government will take any action to save the environment that means that the total population or the total gross domestic product must decrease. And so the human population will continue to increase, economic activity will continue to increase, and the destruction of the environment caused by large human numbers and industrial activity will continue to increase, until the system collapses catastrophically. And that, my friends, is just around the corner.
The “ploy” by governments of letting the environment be
destroyed by developers, and then claiming that it is too late to do anything,
is in widespread use around the world.
On a personal level, I was affected firsthand by this practice. In the early 1980s I lived in
In the “Foothills” where I lived, the land had been declared
a 100-year “flood plain.” This meant
that there might be a flood on average about every 100 years in that area. But
You read a lot nowadays about the fact that the pollution of our atmosphere by jet planes is increasing rapidly, because of the constant and rapid growth of aviation. The Economist magazine reported recently that before long, airplane exhaust would account for a total of 15 percent of total CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.
Naturally, nothing of any significance will be done to stop the growth of transportation, so nothing meaningful will be done to reduce emissions from cars, busses, trains and planes. Oh, yes, they will be made more efficient, so that the amount of pollution added per passenger mile will decrease. But the number of passenger miles will continue to grow and grow and grow, as long as this insidious system continues, so that the total amount of pollution from tourism will be unlikely to decline, and probably grow as well.
In my recent trip from the
I read a travel book on
I heard on the BBC World channel a few days a go where the
bikini bathing suit was invented by an automotive engineer who worked part-time
in his mother’s ladies-wear store. That
is really interesting! There has been a
flurry of news articles in recent days on the fact that the bikini was invented
sixty years ago. Here follows an article
that appeared on the
Bikinis still abreast of fashion 60 years on
By Jo Biddle, Agence
Sixty years ago the bikini exploded onto the world, and a trip to the beach has never been the same since. Once banned in several countries as indecent, today few women’s wardrobes are complete without it.
And if women today are covering up more, it’s more out of fears over the dangers of long-term exposure to the sun rather than out of any lingering coyness, with the last itsy bitsy shreds having been discarded long ago.
One week after the first
Made of three triangles of material held together with ties,
the bikini was considered so shocking that Reard had to use a nude dancer from
“It was banned in a lot of places at the time by countries
and by several mayors in regions in
“The emancipation of swimwear has always been linked to the emancipation of women,” he said.
Two-piece costumes existed before Reard’s creation. Early Greek mosaics appear to show women
wearing two-piece costumes, but they were probably designed for sports not
But to a bikini, size makes all the difference.
Reard’s version was smaller and lighter (small enough to be passed through a wedding ring) and most controversially stopped below the navel.
The first costume, which was made of cotton printed with
images of newspaper headlines was named after the
Although Reard’s costume caused a sensation, it was not an immediate hit in a world struggling to recover from World War II with little time or available money for frivolous visits to the beach.
But by the end of the 1950s, it had become a fashion item de
rigueur, thanks in part to
“I think it was the precursor of all swimming costumes. In fact the bikini is the simplest and the
most minimalist of all swimming costumes,” said Saillard, an exhibitions
planner from the
Some experts have dated the bikini’s phenomenal successes
The invention of lycra in the early 1960s also revolutionized swimwear, replacing cotton, scratchy nylon and even soggy wool as the bikini’s material of choice.
Another milestone was passed in 1964 when Sports Illustrated first used a bikini-clad model on its front cover, says American writer and socialite Kelly Killoren Bensimon who has written The Bikini Book, laden with pictures celebrating the bikini’s 60th birthday.
Since then the bikini and its wearers have passed into legend, becoming iconic images of 20th century culture.
“This bikini made me a success,” said Ursula Andress, with a huge amount of understatement, of her role in the 1962 James Bond classic, “Dr No” in which she slinks from the waves in a white bikini, a knife slung casually round her hips.
And who can foret the sensual Brigitte Bardot in her bikini in the legendary 1956 film And God Created Women, or Raquel Welch’s wild little fur number One Million Years B.C. in 1966, which turned her into a best-selling poster girl.
“The bikini is a snapshot of fashion in the second half of the 20th century, at once scandalous and forcing women to become ever thinner,” said Saillard.
“The bikini transforms women into an object of seduction and desire, such as garage pin-ups. Buton the other hand it shows that women are becoming increasingly independent and masters of their own bodies.
“In fact the biggest gesture by women to prove their independence is when in the 1970s they throw away their bikini tops.”
Today fears over skin cancer as well as the changing use of the beach as a place for sport, rather than for tanning, means topless is out and women have several costumes and bikinis to suit all occasions.
[End of The Jakarta Post article.]
What utter foolishness!
Here follows a quotation from my book, Can
The $100 Solution to the Immigration Problem. The immigration problem in the
Will this be done? Of course not. Americans are now too squeamish to lose lives or take lives, even in war. (See The Economist, January 22, 1999, p. 28 for further discussion of this development.) This proposal would in fact save many American lives. Illegal immigrants are criminals. The federal prisons are flooded with them. Even if it is assumed that the murder rate for the illegal immigrant population is the same as for the general population (currently about 8 per 100,000 per year), they are responsible for about 400 murders per year (8 x 5 million / 100,000 = 400). That is more than one a day. Even if an illegal immigrant is hanged every day for a year, that is only 365 executions a year. By doing this, and getting rid of the illegal immigrants, the lives of 400 Americans would be saved, every year. Ask any mother whose child has been killed by illegal immigrants whether she thinks illegal immigration should be a capital crime.
There are other ways in which immigration could be stemmed. Exile any businessman who hires an illegal alien to the alien’s country of origin. Require anyone who sponsors an immigrant for citizenship to trade places with that person, and to emigrate to his country.
The preceding examples may seem extreme and convulsive, but the eventual result of uncontrolled immigration – civil war – is also convulsive, and on a much grander scale.
The alien invasion is a war against
[End of quote from Can
The only thing that needs to be changed in the above text is
the numbers. Instead of the five million
illegal immigrants the
The introduction and enforcement of capital punishment for
the crime of illegal immigration would quickly solve the problem – and reduce the
During the period in which I was recently evacuated to
I attended a few of the lectures, and had readings from three of the psychics. One of them was particularly specific in her readings. She “saw” my wife, and said that she had blue eyes and that the first initial of her name was a “J.” She was right on both counts (my wife’s name is Jacquelyn).
I attended the lecture on psychometry, in which one person “picks up” information about another person from physical objects that have been possessed by that person. At one point in the lecture, the lecturer asked each attendee to give some possession of his to someone else in the audience. I passed my wedding ring to the fellow sitting in front of me, and he passed me his car keys. The lecturer asked each of us to contemplate the object for a few seconds, and then describe what we saw.
What came to my mind was a scene involving a yellow-colored pickup truck. The pickup truck was on a dusty road, along the sides of which were tall trees. The dust was billowing as the truck moved along. The gentleman who owned the keys was quite impressed. He said that I had once owned a yellow pickup truck (which he called a “ute,” for utility vehicle), and he recalled the scene that I described quite well – it was a road he had traveled a number of years ago, about an hour north of Alice Springs.