“The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed, from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

– Thomas Jefferson


Robert "LaVoy" Finicum: photo courtesy

Those following the occupation/standoff situation between state and federal “authorities” and Ammon Bundy along with his militia team at the Melheur Wildlife Refuge in southern Oregon, may have heard that recently Bundy was taken into custody. As of writing it has been less than 24 hours since the news broke about Bundy having been taken into police custody after being pulled over at a traffic stop en route to a town meeting. This traffic stop somehow ended up leaving Ammon’s brother, Ryan Bundy wounded and left the Spokesman for the group, Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, a Mormon rancher and father of 11, dead one day before his 56th birthday.

The occupation arose initially due to a situation involving Steven and Dwight Hammond– an elderly rancher and his son, who owned a ranch in southern Oregon next to the Malheur Wildlife Refuge that shared a water source with the ranch. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) had been harassing this family over their legally owned property for years over land and water use. Several years ago, there was a situation in which a fire broke out due to a lightning storm on the border of the rancher’s property and federal land. The Hammonds intentionally lit a back-fire, as is common practice, to control and contain the wildfire. This was successful and it ultimately ended up saving the rancher’s land as well as federal land. However, after the ranchers called the BLM to report the situation, the BLM arrested them and cited them on arson charges, but the judge who oversaw the case stated that the standard federal sentences constituted as “cruel and unusual punishment” and significantly reduced the sentences for the elderly rancher and his son.

Bewildered as to why the federal government through the BLM seemed to be targeting and harassing her family, Hammond’s wife, Susan did some investigation on her own about the BLM and their mission to “protect wild lands”. The stated purpose and the common assumption is that the confiscation of these private lands by the federal government was to “protect” the plant and wildlife on them so they were better able to thrive. However, what the wife found was a federal study done in 1975 by the federal Fish and Wildlife Service stating that there was an issue of wildlife (both predatory and grazing) migrating from the confiscated federal land to land managed by farmers and ranchers, and that the managed land was in overall better health.  Ultimately what this study appeared to show that the claims of the federal government that the confiscation of private land was done for the benefit of plants and animals was false. The wife went public with these findings, which some might argue, led to the re-indictment of her husband and son.

There is also the potential motivation of mineral resources for the land confiscation, because according to The New Media Journal the area in which Harney County is located is potentially rich in many natural resources including Gold, Silver, Copper, Zinc, Arsenic, Mercury, Molybdenum, Coal, Diatomite, Bentonite Natural Gas and Uranium.”

After serving their sentence, the Hammonds went home. However, certain parties the BLM re-opened the case, and determined that because the ranchers didn’t serve the federal minimum, they needed to be slapped with “terrorism” charges.  The feds saw that the judge’s decision needed to be overruled and the ranchers needed to be re-tried and sent back to jail- all of which is flagrantly illegal and un-Constitutional. It was during this time that the Hammonds reached out to the Bundy family. Folks may remember the standoff at Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada between the family and their militia/patriot supporters and agents of the BLM, in which the BLM stood down. Cliven Bundy’s land had been targeted for federal “appropriation”, although it later came out that it had to do with selling the land to an energy company which long-time state senator, Harry Reid’s son was working with. A recent video of a BLM awards ceremony shows members of the agency openly stating that they “steal” land. What is happening here is use of bureaucratic red tape and mafia-style tactics to force people off their private property.

After the Hammond’s were re-sentenced, Bundy and his team took over the wildlife refuge just outside of Burns, Oregon, demanding the release of the Hammonds. It was at this time, the Hammond’s stated that the Bundys did not speak for them and did their best to distance themselves from Bundy. It is not known what caused this change of heart, but my guess is that it either has to do with reduced/increased jail sentences, prison conditions, and/or the safety and security of their family. Likewise, many from the town expressed displeasure with these “outsiders” coming into their town, regardless of whether or not they agreed with their cause in principle or in practice. Even many in the alternative media/patriot community disproved of the way Bundy and the militias went about things, and even suspected possible federal infiltrators and agent provocateurs in the group.

Now the situation has seemingly climaxed with the arrest of Ammon Bundy and others on federal charges and sketchy details of a situation surrounding a traffic stop that left Ryan Bundy wounded by a gunshot and Robert “LaVoy” Finicum dead. If I was to take a guess, police and federal agents that may have been involved probably needed to get a story together that would be digestible for the general public and portray them in a positive light while simultaneously demonizing these “militants”. Time will tell. However according to what Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore told local media outlets, Ammon Bundy called his wife after being detained by law enforcement authorities, informing her that Finicum was cooperating with law enforcement officials before being shot and killed.  Finicum’s daughter Thara Lynn Tenney posted a message on her Facebook page stating:

“I want the world to know how my father was murdered today. His hands were in the air and he was shot in the face by the American authorities. Ammon Bundy reported there are 6 witnesses to this evil,”

I talked with a friend of mine last night, who has not approved of the situation from the get-go. She stated that she thought it was unfortunate that someone died as a result of this, but felt it was something that needed to be stopped. She agreed with Governor Kate Brown that the federal government needed to come in to establish “law and order”, and that it was wrong for them to be there. She cited the estimates of how much money it was supposedly costing the taxpayers. My friend finally stated that nobody wanted them there and their cause wasn’t worth someone losing their life. I thought about this for a bit and wondered if the then-unnamed man who was shot and killed presumably by police and federal agents, believed this cause was not worth his life. It turns out that Finicum told NBC News on January 5th:

There are things more important than your life, and freedom is one of them…

What is a cause that is worth dying for? Most people don’t even think like that anymore. It is safe to say that the average man (or woman) nowadays is more concerned with saving his own skin (and cash) than sacrificing it for a noble cause. We have of course the soldiers and veterans of the Armed Services that go to war. They believe they are dying for a noble cause. And while in combat, saving the life of a brother-in-arms is most certainly noble regardless of what “side” you’re on, the actual causes and purposes for American wars hasn’t been “noble” in that it served the long-term best interests of the American people, or the populations we were “helping” for over a century.

Here at home, we have police officers killed in the line of duty seen as heroes, dying for a noble cause. Again, context is key here, as the police have been used to enforce an un-Constitutional and federally enabled “War on Drugs” that have turned the streets of many of America’s major cities into war zones. Likewise they have been used as backup to enforce policies that deliberately violate the liberty of law-abiding citizens, and oftentimes with excessive and deadly force. Regardless of unpleasant realities, by and large the causes of the American soldier and police officer are held in esteem by the general public as noble and worth dying for (although there seems to be less esteem for cops these days). More importantly though, the soldiers and police officers that wear the uniform see their cause as one worth dying for, although there are certainly cowards and individuals who don’t believe they’ll die in every bunch.

So what of the cause of the Bundys and this reignited “Sagebrush Rebellion”? Even after the Hammond’s attempted to distance themselves from the Bundys, the common consensus among the supporters was that this cause was bigger than one family and their individual plight. The seizing of lands by the federal government operating as a private corporate entity, separate from the general population of the U.S., has been going on since the end of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was a major show of force from Washington D.C. over the States. Today there are numerous, seemingly increasing incidents of the federal government operating as a private entity, taking land from families in the western U.S. that had been operating on, and taking care of that land for multiple generations. One of the tenets of communism is the abolition of private property. Nowadays this is done through federal, state and local implementation of U.N. Agenda 21 and through the actions and policies of bureaucracies like the BLM.

Legally, the federal government only has rights of ownership in ports, military bases nad the city of D.C.- THAT’S IT.  The continued exclusion of the general public from increasingly large swaths of land is illegal under the government’s own laws.  As is the eviction of Americans who have owned and used said land. Many of these farmers and ranchers, as well as their families and numerous supporters see this as a time when they need to “hang together, or assuredly be hanged separately.” They see their freedom and livelihood as under a collective attack by an increasingly aggressive and hostile federal entity that has separated its will from the will of the people. These are the prototypical “Salt of the Earth” Americans- pioneer stock who still believe in honesty, hard work, and self-sufficiency: values and morals that are fading into the sunset.  These are the sorts of people that increasingly urbanized generations of Americans are being taught and conditioned to demonize and hate.

Is protecting one’s land and livelihood, and the land and livelihood of his family and fellows something anyone considers a “noble” cause anymore? The protection of one’s territory and the ability of one’s family to freely survive and thrive within that territory is a law of the animal kingdom and the natural world, so is this not something that should be respected and honored?  Is defending the freedom of land use that was enshrined in the values of the “freeman” of our ancient European forbears something worth defending?  Is defending the freedom of private property, a value enshrined in not only the Constitution that sets the ethics and values of our collective “tribe” of Americans a cause worth dying for? According to Robert Finicum, it was, and in the case of his life and his sacrifice, that’s the only person who’s opinion truly holds any weight.

If nothing else, this is perhaps this is a good time to reflect on what our values are as individuals, as members of this tribe known as Americans, or members of the tribe united by the understanding of the Divine Principle of Free Will. What would you die for? Would you die for your children?  Would you die for your family or your friends? Would you die for an animal companion? Would you die for your faith, whatever that may be? Would you die for the principles of liberty and free will? Better question, would you be willing to die if no one else was?  Would you be willing to die in a battle if you thought it would make the world a better place not just for your children, but for those future generations you will never meet?  And would you honestly and truly be willing to suffer and die even the most terrible of deaths for those things?  It can be hard for many of us to truly comprehend any of this, as these values are not really taught or esteemed these days in our culture.

Jesus stated in John 15:13, “Greater love hath no man than this; that a man lay down his life for his friends.” In fact, one can absolutely argue the point that the story of Jesus is a fable about sacrificing one’s physical body for a sort of “greater good”, despite being persecuted and reviled by the establishment and eventually one’s own countrymen, and then betrayed by one’s own brother “in arms”.

It is too easy for those who may stand ideologically opposed on an issue such as this, to sit in judgement of someone dying for a cause we personally don’t believe in.  It is too easy to belittle and devalue the significance of someone dying for what they see as a righteous cause, if one doesn’t hold the same opinion.  It is especially easy if we ourselves can’t honestly say that we value anything beyond ourselves to that extreme degree of self-sacrifice.  The principle of a warrior has always been one who was willing to go to war and die to protect and uphold the interests and values of his “tribe”.  Like his tribe or not, Robert Finicum did just that.

So in closing, let us allow compassionate hearts and prayers to go out to the family and loved ones of Robert “Lavoy” Finicum. Let these prayers go out to the soul of Robert himself, wishing him safe travels as he transitions into the Life beyond this one. He died fighting for a cause he understood to be right and honorable, and that is something to be honored.

Namaste and God Bless.



“The masses of people are carried along, obedient to environment; the wills and desires of others stronger than themselves; heredity; suggestion; and other outward causes moving them about like pawns on the Chessboard of Life. But the Masters, rising to the plane above, dominate their moods, characters, qualities, and powers, as well as the environment surrounding them, and become Movers instead of pawns. They help to PLAY THE GAME OF LIFE, instead of being played and moved about by other wills and environment. They USE the Principle (of Cause and Effect) instead of being its tools. The Masters obey the Causation of the higher planes, but they help to RULE on their own plane.”

– The Three Hermetic Initiates speaking in “The Kybalion”


Throughout human history, the knowledge of controlling one’s own perceptions was taught to students of spiritual knowledge by the mystics; however, let us recall the Principle of “as above so below; as within so without.” There was also the knowledge of how to control the perceptions of others through concentration and extending the mind outwards is a focused manner. Extending the mind can be done obviously through concentrated thought, but also in every other manner a human can express a thought; i.e. words, writing, symbols, art, song, dance, etc. Extending the influence of the mind into the world is the basis of prayer, magick, and sorcery in addition to being the way culture and the society that grows from it is formed. One of the most ancient ways ways of creating and preserving a culture is through the stories it tells.


All races and all cultures across the Earth have had their own folk stories, legends and myths, of course some are more localized and some are widely known by people across the world. One of these ethnic cultures whose “stories” are known throughout the world is the Jewish people. One of the most notable and qualities of the Jewish people has always been their talent for “storytelling”. From the tales of the Torah and the Talmud, to the Jewish folktales fables of Eastern Europe told by the “Wise Men of Chelm“, to the modern stage and cinema, the talents abilities of these “Wandering Storytellers” to spin a tale that draws the listener/viewer in emotionally through tapping into certain aspects of their psyche has been undeniable.


image courtesy of

Outcasts in part due to the cultural and social exclusiveness inherent in Judaism, Jews were excluded in certain aspects of Eastern European and Russian society due to their strong and insular group identity, as well as a somewhat negative reputation in business and finance practices towards non-Jews or “goyim” (cattle). This appears to be the reason many Eastern European Jews turned to Communism– a resentment for Eastern European society due to real, embellished and fabricated wrongs and an intense desire to see it transformed to their moral ideals.

This historical resentment has likely contributed to the reasons modern Judeo-Globalist elitists like George Soros use their money to promote and enable social chaos and destabilization programs in the Ukraine, which borders Russia. Because of these issues with Eastern European culture, which has historically been influenced by Russia due to the bond of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, many Jews in Eastern Europe choose chose to either become Communists or emigrate to America, which had been historically welcoming of Jews. Many of these Jews migrated to professions within cultural institutions like academia, literature, news media, music and theater.

At the turn of the 20th century, Jewish-American men like the Gershwin brothers thrived producing and composing on Broadway while others such as Paul Reuter and Adolph Ochs displayed a seemingly natural tendency towards media monopoly with their ownership of major news outlets like Reuter’s newswire and the New York Times. Moving into the newly developed motion picture industry seemed a natural progression for a people who seemed to thrive in the “culture business”.

The advent of the motion picture camera in the early part of the 20th century changed the world forever. From the outset, Jews were involved in both the production and promotion of the motion picture industry in both Europe and the United States. In his book, The Complete Illustrated History of the Jewish People, Jewish South African journalist Lawrence Joffe describes the movement of Jews into Hollywood:

At first promoters and producers, then directors, scriptwriters, actors and composers, by 1912 Jews had set up over a hundred production companies in California, and were pivotal to the creation of the eight super-firms…

Almost to a man… the Jewish movie moguls were born into poverty. Carl Laemmle, the 10th of 13 immigrant children, managed a clothes shop before running a string of nickelodeons and in 1912 founding Universal, the first big studio. Louis Mayer joined the junk trade at 8, owned a New York theatre-chain at 22 and produced the epic Birth of a Nation in 1915, aged 30. Adolph Zukor, who founded Paramount pictures in 1917, was born in Hungary, emigrated at 15 and peddled fur garments.

A similar rags-to-riches story applied to the Warner Brothers, sons of a Jewish cobbler from Poland. In 1927 they amazed the filmic world by harnessing new technology to produce the first ‘talkie’. Starring Al Jolson, ‘The Jazz Singer’ presented Jewish family dilemmas about tradition and assimilation to a mainstream audience.

Today, the longevity and dominance of film studios like Warner Brothers, Metro Goldwyn-Meyer, and NBC-Universal are a testament to the legacy of the Jewish pioneers of Hollywood and the film industry. In an op-ed article entitled Who Runs Hollywood? C’mon posted in the LA Times in December of 2008, renowned Jewish American journalist and author, Joel Stein talks about the entertainment industry’s “open secret”:

Jews totally run Hollywood.

How deeply Jewish is Hollywood? When the studio chiefs took out a full-page ad in the Los Angeles Times a few weeks ago to demand that the Screen Actors Guild settle its contract, the open letter was signed by: News Corp. President Peter Chernin (Jewish), Paramount Pictures Chairman Brad Grey (Jewish), Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Robert Iger (Jewish), Sony Pictures Chairman Michael Lynton (surprise, Dutch Jew), Warner Bros. Chairman Barry Meyer (Jewish), CBS Corp. Chief Executive Leslie Moonves (so Jewish his great uncle was the first prime minister of Israel), MGM Chairman Harry Sloan (Jewish) and NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker (mega-Jewish). If either of the Weinstein brothers had signed, this group would have not only the power to shut down all film production but to form a minyan with enough Fiji water on hand to fill a mikvah.

The person they were yelling at in that ad was SAG President Alan Rosenberg (take a guess). The scathing rebuttal to the ad was written by entertainment super-agent Ari Emanuel (Jew with Israeli parents) on the Huffington Post, which is owned by Arianna Huffington (not Jewish and has never worked in Hollywood.)

The Jews are so dominant, I had to scour the trades to come up with six Gentiles in high positions at entertainment companies. When I called them to talk about their incredible advancement, five of them refused to talk to me, apparently out of fear of insulting Jews. The sixth, AMC President Charlie Collier, turned out to be Jewish.

As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you’d be flipping between ‘The 700 Club’ and ‘Davey and Goliath’ on TV all day.

However, the “rags-to-riches” tale of Jewish dominance in the American film industry has somewhat of a dark side to it (as do most tales of dominance). In his review of Neal Gabler’s book, An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood, writer Jack Wikoff describes what might be considered less than ethical business practices by these early film moguls in order to achieve a monopoly in the film industry:

These men acquired this control because of an excellent sense of what the public would buy, intense personal drive, group solidarity as Jews, a willingness for hard work-and — a lot of shady dealing. Gabler describes how Adolf Zukor and Carl Laemmle illegally used Edison cameras without paying the royalties and how Louis B. Mayer cheated the producers of Birth of a Nation by falsifying his bookkeeping, thereby making as much as $500,000 on the exhibition of that one film in 1915.

Of course, dirty dealings and questionable ethics in business are certainly not relegated to Jewish film moguls, although they certainly have developed a reputation as being particularly “slimy” over the years, with numerous testimonies and allegations of prostitution, sexual exploitation and abuse as well as pedophilia within the Hollywood community. However, the real thing that we need to consider for this conversation is what was being done with this new medium of film and what were the motivations behind doing it. Jewish-American actor, Ben Stein in an article for E! Online stated:

The ex-furriers who created Hollywood were Eastern European Jewish immigrants, and all of the great edifice of fantasy-making in Hollywood is their handiwork. Names like Zukor and Lasky and Goldwyn and Cohn are the foundation of mass culture in America and the world… There is a much quoted note that it took all these Eastern European Yiddish-speaking Jews to create the lasting, worldwide image of America and what America is–the mass culture mirror that America likes to hold up to its face.”

These Jewish film moguls created their vision of America and the ideal culture through the silver screen. While their brothers in Eastern Europe shaped the culture through politics, these men shaped it through storytelling. Little by little, bit by bit, the general became enamored by the “movies” and began to mimic and emulate the behaviors and ideals they saw on the movie screen. It became clear that Hollywood was not just “reflecting” certain cultural ideals and values in the American people, it was creating them.

In a speech during a Jewish American Heritage Month reception hosted by the Democratic National Committee back in 2013, Vice President and self-described “Zionist”, Joe Biden payed homage to the role of Jewish leaders in the culture industry for molding the American public’s perceptions:

What affects the movements in America, what affects our attitudes in America are as much the culture and the arts as anything else?… It wasn’t anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’ it was the social media. Literally. That’s what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace [gay marriage]. Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry.



As the ability of film to be used as a medium for spreading cultural ideas and behaviors became increasingly evident, large corporations began to partner with the film studios to market their products. It was on Madison Avenue in New York City that corporate advertising began, and still exists as a dominant force today. One of the pioneers of corporate advertising was Edward Bernays, the “Father of Public Relations” and nephew of famed Jewish psychotherapist, Sigmund Freud. Bernays pioneered Madison Avenue advertising and marketing campaigns for the tobacco industry among numerous other large businesses and corporate conglomerates.

One of the most famous publicity stunts Bernays orchestrated for the tobacco companies was when he had several famous actresses line up in the front of the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade and light up cigarettes, which until that time, had been seen as something “un-lady like”. The tobacco companies used the admiration that women had for these actresses, calling cigarettes Torches of Freedom, and associating them with the feminist movement. It worked quite well, creating the image of the sexy, independent, and fashionable smoking woman.

Noticing his knack for shaping public opinion, the U.S. Government recruited Bernays in its P.R. campaign to get a reluctant and isolationist American public behind the First World War. The U.S. Government itself, being pressured into joining the war effort by International Banking interests (primarily Judeo-Zionist) based out of Britain and Western Europe. It was Bernays who was charged with bombarding the American public with embellished and outright fabricated stories of “atrocities of the Hun”, which would be repeated in an even more effective and sophisticated manner during World War II. Bernays also came up with the slogan “Making the world safe for democracy”. In his 1928 book, Propaganda, Bernays referred to his experience working for the various “powers that be”:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country… We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.

After the First World War, Hollywood and Madison Avenue continued to develop increasingly sophisticated methods of molding public desires and opinions, and during the Second World War, the propaganda machine was put into high gear, mobilizing the patriotism of the American public to fight a war in Europe that was not truly in their best interest. This propaganda marketing was so successful and so sophisticated; it continues to be effective to this day and is evidenced by the large volume of World War II and “Holocaust” movies produced by Hollywood as well as international (typically Jewish) filmmakers seemingly every year.

It was during and after World War II that the relationship/partnership between the U.S. Government, Hollywood, and Madison Avenue (and of course, International Finance) really became solidified. The post-war release of television brought the ability for this finely crafted visual “programming” of the population into individual households across America, and eventually the world. Television would become the ultimate way for those working in Hollywood, Madison Avenue, Washington D.C., and elsewhere, to extend their mental sphere to people all over the world. The mass media is a way to send all the aspects of the extension of an individual or a group mind, as well as that mind’s desires, to people all over the world.


Shortly after World War II, President Harry Truman signed the National Security Act, which created agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA). These were and still are essentially entities whose purpose for existence is to further the interests of what President Dwight D. Eisenhower referred to in his farewell address as the “Military Industrial Complex”. These entities whose public “mission” was foreign intelligence gathering so that another Pearl Harbor-type event did not happen again, were in fact created to ensure that the War never really ended. Military weapons manufacturers and defense contractors had gained an unprecedented amount of wealth, power and influence, and sought to hold onto that power at any cost. Truman himself stated that “I never would have agreed to the formulation of the Central Intelligence Agency back in forty-seven, if I had known it would become the American Gestapo.”

The Military Industrial Complex, with their front groups like the CIA, partnered with Global Mega Corporations and International Usury Finance, both of which had been empowered with the creation of organizations like the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund directly after World War II. This combine of the old American (as well as Anglo) WASP establishment and the Judeo-Zionists in finance and media proceeded to organize the biggest mafia-style racketeering operation the world had ever seen. This sort of partnership between White European elitists and Jewish opportunists has been going on for centuries, growing in scope and complexity, suffering from time to time from factional in-fighting,

In the post-World War II Globalist system, International Usury Finance would take the lead, and offer loans to developing nations with interest attached that would be impossible to ever repay. It would then make part of the deal that select Global Mega Corporations would be allowed to come into the nation and essentially pillage resources and create a slave-wage labor force. The ultimate goal was the natural progression of the same goal that has existed in the minds of those who desire power throughout known history: consolidation of power and control of resources and populations.

In many cases, the job of the CIA (often working in tandem with other intelligence agencies like British MI6 and Israeli Mossad) would be to run psychological operations or “psy-ops” on the populations through various media and propaganda outlets to work on the consciousness of the populace so they were receptive to and cooperative with the overall agenda of the intelligence agencies and their corporate partners.

If a leader or a population were uncooperative, the Military Industrial Complex would often create and arm resistance movements and stage assassinations to install a government that would control the populace and enable the larger agenda, or they would simply send in the CIA Jackals to “take out” whoever was standing in the way. The CIA has been linked to numerous assassinations of world leaders since its inception. It is even well established thought that the CIA was involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy after he came to fully grasp their tactics and motives, and refused to comply.  Kennedy stated “I will splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.”

In the recently published book, “The CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film and Television”, author Tricia Jenkins outlines what many have known for years and what was until recently illegal under U.S. law, which was the direct use of the film industry as well as various television and news media outlets to conduct psychological conditioning (i.e. propaganda) operations on the American public via orders from the various Executive Branch “alphabet soup” agencies (CIA, NSA, DHS, CDC, FDA, etc.). Former CIA director William Colby stated, “The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”

The CIA specifically has conducted psy-ops through the use of media propaganda on foreign soil to manipulate populations in a manner that suited their aims for decades. However it came out in the 1975 Church Committee Hearings that the CIA used news media outlets to push propaganda and conducted illegal operations on U.S. soil, and it had done so since its inception. Talking about the CIA’s role in the media in a meeting with President Regan in 1981, former CIA director, William Casey stated “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.

The base of operations for one of these illegal psy-ops on U.S. soil took place at Laurel Canyon in southern California during the 1960s where the CIA and military intelligence got into the music business, and like film and television, Jews were (and still are) dominant as producers and record-label owners.

The music and lifestyles that was promoted by these various music and counter-culture celebrities that came out of Laurel Canyon, etc. were designed to discredit the anti-war movement among older and more conservative populations and repel those folks from taking part in it. They were also designed to create a generation of hedonistic, “burnt-out”, “peace-nicks”, that were so passive and detached from reality that they would no longer pose any sort of real threat to the establishment and their agenda.


During the 1960s and 1970s, the CIA conducted a large, multi-subject experiment and program of psychological manipulation and control known as “MK-Ultra”. One of the techniques used for mental manipulation of subjects was the use of LSD to create a schizophrenic state in the test subject. LSD is an extremely potent hallucinogen and (unlike meth) can only be manufactured in a relatively sophisticated lab setting by an experienced chemist. LSD slowly began to make its way into the streets of America, while “gurus” like Professor Timothy Leary were given television time to promote the drug to America’s youth.

From LSD in the 60s, to Cocaine in the 70s and 80s, to the recent Opium/Heroin epidemic, the CIA has a long history of pushing drugs onto the streets of America, using that money to further fund their operations. The intelligence agencies have historically taken part in drug smuggling (which was a specific tactic of the British Empire) and sex trafficking (slave trade) to not only further fund themselves and further demoralize and debase the population, causing destabilization.

It was during this time when the values presented to Americans via the television and film screen began to slowly degenerate and become increasingly violent, decadent, vapid, and hyper-sexualized. The prevalence and cultural acceptance of pornography (also pioneered and dominated by Jewish moguls) went hand-in-hand with the various “liberation” movements of the 60s and 70s, which were steered by Intelligence Agencies and promoted and inspired by various Jewish academics, psychologists, social activists and those working in the “culture industry” working in tandem with the various intelligence agencies.

A new culture was slowly being developed and promoted for America. It was done incrementally, over the course of a few generations, as it was understood that anything too far from the course would be rejected and rebelled against. In the course of 3-4 generations, we went from Beaver getting advice from his father to Miley Cyrus dressed as a doll and twerking on stage during prime time. The moral degradation of western culture with the progressive move into decadent materialism and Cultural Marxism didn’t “just happen”. At the end of the day, Joseph McCarthy was right.

So how does this sort of programming happen? The primary method of “attack” for weaponized media is to assault our definitions and perceptions of truth and reality. Once this becomes debased, the rest one can then be reprogrammed with a new reality. This is done in the sort of hard-core trauma-based mind control experiments done by Intelligence Agencies to create an individual that can be utilized as a dupe, patsy or even an assassin.  This is done by splintering an individual’s psyche through trauma. This is done in a more subtle way to the general public through television and the mass media.

Make no mistake, the terrorist attacks and mass shootings like 9-11 and Sandy Hook are a form of mass trauma-based programming that are partially or in some cases, completely staged productions for the media and public consumption in order to generate a sort of fear-based neurosis and obedience in the general public.


To quote former Jewish American Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, “It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.”  To many, “truth” is nothing more than what allows them feel comfortable in their own skin; what they can “deal with”, and to many, that means believing what EVERYONE ELSE believes as truth- being safe in the majority.

Let’s recall Joe Biden’s earlier quote on Jewish leaders in the entertainment industry, and the implication that television and social media can be used to change the cultural values of a population. What this means is that the entertainment industry has the potential and the ability to shape what a society feels is right or wrong. This results in the ability of the media to shape what a society believes to be true or untrue, as most people nowadays use emotional reasoning, and will generally gravitate towards what they feel as “right” as being the ultimate truth.

So how is this done? The most effective propaganda is that which appeals directly to our emotions. If we look at the mind of a person, we can essentially break it down into three basic parts: conscious mind, subconscious mind, and unconscious mind. Our emotions and feelings tend to arise at the point where our conscious mind meets our subconscious mind. In our day-to-day life of work, family, and social lives, we are operating primarily in the realm of conscious mind as we conduct tasks, make decisions, and navigate reality.

However, when we sit down and “zone out” with out favorite television PROGRAM, we tend to stop performing all of those tasks of the conscious mind, which also serves as a sort of filter for information- a sort of “B.S. filter”. This is particularly true when we are watching something that is supposedly “pure entertainment” like a sitcom or a crime drama. We shut down our critical thinking centers and stop analyzing, just opening ourselves to the experience of being “entertained”. We let down our guard.

The unconscious mind responds to colors, symbols, archetypal imagery, and primal fears. Meanwhile the subconscious mind tends to respond to more complex emotional cues and triggers relating to personal experiences. Together they are the prime target of advertising and “behavior placement” in TV and films. It is the “guardian”, i.e. the conscious, critical-thinking mind being asleep, that allows the subconscious and the unconscious to be preyed upon. Archetypally this is akin to the man of the house being asleep while his wife and child are preyed upon, or the warriors of a tribe being put in a trance by a sorcerer while the women and children of the village are violated, abducted and murdered.

Those not familiar with the concept of behavior placement are more than likely familiar with product placement. This is where you will see, for example, the main character of your favorite TV show drinking a Coke, then see a commercial or two for Coke during that time slot as Coca-Cola is a sponsor of that program. The idea is that since you like and identify with your “TV friend” you will want to emulate them and drink Coke. Behavior placement works in a similar way, but in a slightly more complex fashion.

Again, we’ll use Joe Biden’s quote stating that programs like “Will and Grace” were what shaped the general public’s attitude about gay marriage as an example. This shaping of cultural perceptions is done through use of TV characters you grow to identify with and even “love”. You develop empathy for them and their situations. You think they’re “cool” and want to be like them in the same way a child adores and emulates puppets and cartoon characters.

It is through this empathy and identification with these characters that behavior placement happens. We form a make-believe friendship in our subconscious as we identify with the plights of the characters. We then may begin to take on the values and morals that they espouse to, just as we might tend to with any other real-life friend (that’s why mom didn’t want you hanging out with the “bad kids”).

We then may begin to identify with and even desire the world the program portrays as this simulated vicarious relationship develops. A well-known example of this is the “Hollywood Ending” that so many people want for every aspect of their lives. When watching a television program, you can rest assured that pretty much anything to do with politics, gender roles, and controversial social issues on a TV show would be considered behavior placement, as the “behavior” that the producers are wishing to place you into is the point-of-view and actions of the main characters or “heroes” (even though many modern TV “heroes” would not be considered so by traditional Western standards).

When I was doing door-to-door canvassing our primary goal was to appeal to the emotions of a prospective donor. In one particular organization I would come armed with a picture of our boss’ kid looking sickly juxtaposed next to a corporate CEO stating how much he made while children went unable to receive medical care. This simple imagery appealed to the emotional center of the person, and the objective was to bypass any sort of real sophisticated policy discussion about “who’s going to pay for this?” or “how is this going to be implemented?” which I’m sure many who financially supported “grassroots” efforts to get Obamacare may wish they had asked these sorts of questions.


This method of shaping cultural opinion through media is often used to create perceptions in the public mind that the media establishment wishes them to perceive as “facts” and true events, again through appealing to emotional reasoning and the imposition of a brand of “morality”. Recent examples of this can be seen through the generation of memes through the mainstream as well as through social media regarding the Middle East refugee crisis, specifically with the comparison of “refugees” to Jews fleeing the “Holocaust” in World War II. This “refugee/holocaust” narrative is something the establishment mouthpieces are using to guilt Americans into “getting with the program“.

Recent articles out of The Huffington Post, The Nation, Politico, and The Chicago Tribune among others, ALL follow this particular talking point. Talking points are typically generated from a centralized source such as a government or corporate agency or think-tank and disseminated to the various news outlets. In this case, it appears the source of this particular “talking point” is current CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, Jonathan Greenblatt. Greenblatt called upon the spirit of Nazi-Jewish Persecution and the “Holocaust” in an attempt to guilt and shame the American people in his op-ed for the ADL’s own website entitled “Closing the Borders to Refugees: Wrong in the 1930s, and Wrong Today”:

…in January 1939 another poll asked whether the U.S. government should permit ‘10,000 refugee children from Germany—most of them Jewish—to be taken care of in American homes.’ An astounding and shameful 61 percent said no.

In May of 1939 the St. Louis carrying 937 German refugees—mostly Jews fleeing the Third Reich—set sail for Cuba. Most had applied for U.S. visas. Turned away from Cuba, as the St. Louis sailed so close to Florida that the passengers could see the lights from Miami, they appealed to President Roosevelt to give them safe harbor. With public opinion opposed to lifting the stringent immigration quotas or to make an exception for the ship’s passengers, the St. Louis returned to Europe. Almost a quarter of the passengers perished in the Holocaust.

Today, the world faces the largest refugee crisis since World War II. Almost 60 million people around the world have been forcibly displaced from their homes. The war in Syria, fueled by the unparalleled brutality of ISIS, is largely responsible for the spike. And once more—shamefully—there is a push for the United States to turn a blind eye to the suffering of refugees and shut our doors to those in need.”

It should be noted that Jewish American author, Robert I. Friedman highlighted in his book “Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America” that the Anti-Defamation League pressured and eventually convinced the FBI to call of investigations of individuals with known affiliation to the Jewish-Russian Mafia who also sought “refugee status” back in the 1970s, stating that doing so would be “anti-Semitic”. This is the same Anti-Defamation League that has had ties to the Jewish Mafia since the days when infamous Jewish American mobster, “Bugsy” Siegel established Las Vegas (now dominated by Jewish American billionaire Sheldon Adelson).

In this article we have mentioned the “refugee poll” where Americans voice a politically incorrect opinion. This is a meme that has been popping up all over social media these days thanks to “AJ+”, i.e. Al Jazeera for millennials. Al Jazeera being the news media organization owned by the government of Qatar– one of the oil-rich Arab Gulf States that is refusing to take refugees, while being linked to the funding of Islamic terror groups. Now we will use this refugee poll as an example showing how a meme on social media can be used to shape public opinion.

As the refugee poll begins to be spread around on social media, often initiated by the organization or individuals that originated it, it can then be amplified though the echo chamber that social media creates, making a new “meme”. This effect causes this the core message carried by the meme to become amplified; where it can then be promoted as well as enforced through a sort of peer-pressure, that social media and any other modern social institution inevitably creates. The pushers of the meme will then often shout down those who would disagree with ad-homonym attacks where the dissenter is ostracized and attacked as a racist, a Nazi, an anti-Semite, etc., etc., causing critics to be silenced out of fear of social ostracizing and embarrassment.

As an aside, it is may be worth noting that much of social media openly partners with U.S. Intelligence agencies to collect data on the general public while tracking the trends in public opinion through complex algorithms.


It is ingrained into us to desire to “fit in”. This desire is so strong that many will change what they know to be right or wrong to simply “belong”. This starts at childhood with our family and is further refined through schooling and institutionalized peer-pressure. This is how the newly uploaded behavior/thought pattern, after being implanted into the subconscious of a large group of people takes root and becomes self-enforced as a sort of new cultural dogma or belief system. This is how human beings are trained what to think and feel.

We live in a bubble inside of a bubble. If the physical world is indeed holographic in nature, than the world the majority of us who live in modern culture experience life that is even more of an illusion. For multiple generations now, our beliefs, our culture, what we believe is and is not true about every aspect of the world has been defined to us by someone else who saw it in a movie somewhere. We have major news networks owned by major Hollywood movie studios (i.e. NBC-Universal). Does anyone see something wrong with this? Perhaps it is high time that we as a culture, as well as individuals, took a look at our ideas and our beliefs, while thinking of these words by psychotherapist and motivational speaker, Dr. Eldon Taylor:

We’ve come to a point in our lives where it’s fair to ask, ‘what was the last original thought (I) had?’ The way you walk, the way you talk, the vocabulary you use; all of these things are built into the expectation you have of yourself, based on the role you have chosen to play in the ‘theater’ of life, as it has been defined to you.


Years ago I had a brief debate with a friend who parroted a claim by his professor that art could only follow culture and not the other way around. I did not agree, although I did not have the understanding to articulate as I am here. Any serious study of the psychological effects of words, music, symbols, pictures, and movements on an individual or group would soon realize that was not the case. Visual arts, musical arts, and performing arts are all “art”, and all involve influencing the psyche of the viewer in some way to be effective. Anything that can reach into your psyche has the potential to influence it if allowed.

What is happening here is that another world is being created inside the one our physical bodies laugh, cry, work and love. An artificial bubble has been placed around us and is being continually upgraded. It is a media bubble that taps into, amplifies, steers and molds our fear and weakness. It gives us ideas and beliefs that we may not have otherwise held because we allowed ourselves to be weak and susceptible. It is a world of fear and illusion manifesting through our weakness.

Those who have the focus and concentration to project their mind in a unified manner with other “like minds” are building the world they perceive: a world that sees reality as a prison, rather than a classroom. People who live in this world don’t really want money, as many naively claim; they use money. But what they really want is pleasure and then power- that is the progression of greed and most people in modern society suffer from it. Power to rule the prison they perceive.

Recently I saw a discussion on whether there was a “conspiracy” of a few, or if it was the mental cluster known as “the mass mind” that was to blame for the hiding or “occulting” of certain knowledge or information. I will say that if we look at the “human as cell” model I presented earlier, it is both. If look at the example of a virus or other seemingly negative entity somehow coming into an existence in the BODY, we can see how this might be similar to the selfish and destructive individuals credited/blamed for the “disinformation program” accepted to the general public, and the desires and beliefs they adhere to.

There have ALWAYS been groups of individuals who kept certain knowledge from those not deemed ready to fully understand it.  That was a foundation for the ancient Mystery Schools and later Secret Societies like the Rosicrucians.  This hiding occulting of knowledge can be seen as good or bad depending on motivations.

Regardless, at the end of the day, it is the general public who is in a state where the virus; whatever you want to name it; can do its work and create a sort of viral cancer, causing the human “cells” to turn on each other and destroy themselves. But it is weakness and ill-health within the individual cells as well as their cell groups that allows the virus to take hold in the first place. The symptoms of an illness are simply the body trying to purge itself and bring itself back to balance. The same could be said of the suffering and “illness” in the individual as well as the collective humanity and all its components.

In the end, a society and its leaders will be reflections of one another, archetypally though it is the King who is ultimately responsible for living in accordance with the Law, so the people and the land don’t fall into ruin.  But the question becomes in this day and age; who is playing the role of the King?  Is it really those we have chosen, or allowed to lead us?

We are now at a point in history where any sort of natural aristocracy we had in the past has fallen into decay.  Perhaps it is now time for each of us to gather the strength to pick up the sword and scepter and become the King- the Sovereign who is master of himself and unchanged by external impulses and forces.

So next time you turn on the television, or go see a movie, or log on to social media, look at the various messages that are being pushed. Why might be a motive for pushing these messages? What might they be trying to say to you? What are they trying to get you to think or want or believe? Who would benefit from getting you to buy into or believe what is being presented?

Television and media in general is constantly advertising and “marketing”. If it is not actual products, its ideas and belief systems that others wish to impose upon us. So next time you watch your favorite TV shows or log onto social media, keep your critical thinking mind active and see what the program is trying to download into your consciousness. Or better yet, turn the TV off, log off Facebook and experience reality without having someone else define it for you.

Namaste and God Bless.


“Jesus said unto him, ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.’”

– Gospel of Matthew chapter 22, verses 37-39


I was recently asked to write a blog about Love. While I have certainly “paid lip service” to Love as being one of the three fundamental principles of Creation (i.e. Light, Life and Love), my writing has tended to be more focused on Truth, Logic, Reason, with a morality based on the principles of Light and Life, but the “Love” aspect can get a bit overlooked. The problem with Love is that it is not something that can be intellectualized or completely comprehended with the powers of Logic and Reason. This can make it hard for those of us who are incredibly “cerebral” to get a good grasp on it. The force of Love is primarily understood through the heart center, as opposed to the mental center. For myself in particular, as well as a great deal of men in modern society, this heart center is a mysterious enigma that we would care not to mess with, as men tend to be more geared toward the mental/logic aspect of things as opposed to the nurturing/empathetic. But as we will see, Love actually extends beyond the realm of pure “emotion”.

Another problem is that the modern notion of Love has become tangled in with the lower ego and its characteristics of attachment and possessiveness. This is especially true with many “romantic love” relationships, which have become increasingly distorted and even poisoned to a degree in the west with unrealistic expectations. This is in no small part due to the Hollywood/Madison Avenue portrayal of “love” in romantic comedies and diamond commercials. We have come to see romantic love as a possession: “this is MY girl” or “that is MY man”.

Most people will not admit to viewing another human being as a possession, but on some level, the modern “committed” relationship is possessive on some level or other. When attachment and possessiveness become a foundation for a relationship, suffering will inevitably ensue. This is because in order for attachment and possessiveness to be satisfied, nothing can change, and unfortunately, change is the only constant in Life. Attachment and possessiveness are not Love.

Then of course, there is the problem of sex, a.k.a. “love making”, and all of the illusions, delusions, and expectations that stem from our modern “understanding” of it. This situation is so messy that it warrants its own article. On one side, we have the male playboy/sissy-boy paradigm, where men either see women as objects to be used and exploited, or they allow themselves to be degraded and humiliated for their sin of being a man.

On the other side, we have a similar phenomenon with women where they will degrade and disempower weaker men, or seek a sort of backwards sexual “empowerment” by allowing the dominator “playboy” to use and degrade them.  In either case, promiscuity is promoted as new wave feminism has promoted this as sexual “liberation”. When people have sex, an energetic bond as well as an emotional bond is formed in some capacity, although we may be oblivious to it. This misuse of sexual energy has caused a great deal of harm and conflict in the world. This is not Love, either.

Ugh. What a mess, this Love business. And you wonder why I don’t write about it? Obviously we’re not finding out what Love is from all of this so far, just what Love isn’t. I think at this point we may need to set some definitions before we can move forward. So then, what technically is the definition of “Love”? Well, it is apparently a word with many definitions:

1. A profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person.
2. A feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend.
3. Sexual passion or desire.
4. A person toward whom love is felt; beloved person; sweetheart.
5. (Used in direct address as a term of endearment, affection, or the like): Would you like to see a movie, love?
6. A love affair; an intensely amorous incident; amour.
7. Sexual intercourse; copulation.
8. (Initial capital letter) a personification of sexual affection, as Eros or Cupid.
9. Affectionate concern for the well-being of others: the love of one’s neighbor.
10. Strong predilection, enthusiasm, or liking for anything: her love of books.
11. The object or thing so liked: The theater was her great love.
12. The benevolent affection of God for His creatures, or the reverent affection due from them to God.
13. Chiefly Tennis. a score of zero; nothing.
14. A word formerly used in communications to represent the letter L.
Verb (used with object), loved, loving.
15. To have love or affection for: All her pupils love her.
16. To have a profoundly tender, passionate affection for (another person).
17. To have a strong liking for; take great pleasure in: to love music.
18. To need or require; benefit greatly from: Plants love sunlight.
19. To embrace and kiss (someone), as a lover.
20. To have sexual intercourse with.

Wow. Okay, so is Love not just one thing? Are there really different kinds of Love? To get some clarity, perhaps we should look at another word that keeps popping up throughout these multiple definitions- affection. Affection is defined as a gentle feeling of fondness or liking. My spiritual teacher once suggested an exercise where you would connect with another person unbeknownst to them, sensing their Light. This could be done sitting on a bus or standing in line somewhere. The purpose was developing a sense of the neighbor as one’s self, and ultimately extending one’s capacity to Love others. First, he said, there must be some development of feelings of “fondness” within you for the stranger; otherwise the exercise would not be overly effective.

So what is it that causes us to have fondness for a person? At the root of it is some sense of commonality; something that is shared between the both of you- a common bond. The two most powerful bonds are created through familial blood/genetics and through romantic/sexual union. Akin to the immediate blood/genetic bond, we have the natural fondness for “those like us”; i.e. those of a similar racial, ethnic, or cultural background to us.

After that we have the broader category of “shared experience”, which is capable of trumping racial or ethnic similarities if the bond is strong enough. This can be sharing personal experiences that create the bond of friendship. This can be sharing spiritual experiences that create the bond of a spiritual or religious fellowship. This can be the sharing of a goal or an aspiration where some form of team bond is necessary like in sports or combat or even the workplace. This can be the sharing of a community. This can be the sharing of personal struggle like in recovery circles, or a “group struggle” like in various social and political groups or movements.

Moving further, we have the commonality of a nation- i.e. we are Americans and we share American “goals and values” (although that notion is slowly disintegrating). In any of these cases, we don’t really have to look too hard to see “ourselves” in the other person, as we on some obvious level or other share some sort of common bond or aspiration with that person.

An interesting biological correspondence to this feeling of fondness that seems to emulate from the “heart center”, is that located just above our physical heart is our thymus gland. The thymus gland is involved in development of the cells of the immune system. This is the part of our body which instructs the rest of us as to what is “us” and what is not “us”- that is what is “foreign” like harmful bacteria or viruses. When we feel this sort of fondness that seems to emanate from this area, we are for all intents and purposes, accepting another individual as “part of us”. This is especially true when it comes to romantic love. We are accepting this person as part of our being on some level. While this has its roots beyond the physical, the feeling of Love itself is very much tied to the physical body.

As Father Paul Blighton, founder of the Holy Order of MANS stated, Love “works through the flesh body of man, not only in its relationship with man and woman, but also in its relationship to the ultimate of the Self and the gaining of illumination on the Way.


But what about the “other” that does not share any of these obvious bonds, can we see ourselves in them? One of the “shared experience” categories I listed above was “community”. There has been historical tension when outsiders move into a community, particularly if the outsiders do not homogenize with the pre-existing community. This occurred with the Jews in Europe and has occurred with various immigration waves in western nations in the last century.

These schisms tend to happen when groups remain insular to themselves for whatever reason. If an individual or a group keeps to themselves, then suspicion inevitably develops. The “outsider” group suspects the people who live around them and resents them for not accepting them. The primary group suspects the “outsiders” for maintaining a separate group identity from the primary group. This creates a perpetual feedback loop of resentment and mistrust. This will cause the heart center to reject these “outsiders” as the immune system would reject a foreign entity in the physical body.

However, the problem with community is even greater in this modern era, as many increasingly urbanized people barely know their neighbors at all, fostering a sense of isolation within one’s own community, even if these people are obviously in some way like them. We have become a society of “individuals” to such an extent that we have become “islands unto ourselves”, lacking any sort of real communal identity outside of our “obligations” to the State. This state of modern isolation has grown increasingly severe as televisions, computers and smart phones create an artificial connectedness in a virtual world, while creating a bubble of separation and disconnectedness in the physical world. We will be hard-pressed love our neighbor if we’ve never even seen our neighbor.

So, back to the question I posed earlier: can we love the “other” who lives outside our groups and shares no obvious commonality other than basic “human-ness”? What of people whose culture and perhaps even their very moral definitions are profoundly different from our own? Are we capable of loving them just as we would someone who shares a more obvious commonality?

We are taught we are “all the same”, and yes, on a fundamental root level, humans share a common ancestry in the same way that cats or dogs do. However, the idea that we are “one humanity” is by and large an abstract philosophical concept to all but perhaps a select few. While many pay lip service to this concept, few really understand this notion of “oneness” on much more than a superficial level.

The majority of humans are tribal in one manner or another, and naturally suspicious to those who don’t have obvious commonality to them in one way or another. This is especially the case when it comes to groups. This can be seen in the nature when a pride of lions might quarrel with a leopard over a kill. They are all cats, as we are all humans, but their goals are geared toward the enhancement and survival of their particular group. This same basic group consciousness and group “identity” is also present in the different races and nations of humans, albeit at a somewhat more sophisticated level.

We begin with Self, then to romantic partners and nuclear family, then to extended family, then to our friends and our “tribe” (groups we belong to that have shared goals and identity), then to our cultural “folk”, and mixed in with family, tribe and folk, we have our race. Then as we move out beyond that, we are in the realm of foreign “other”. It is natural that as we extend ourselves outward, the bonds will become weaker the further out we go. This is a basic Law of Nature, as energy dissipates and becomes weaker the further it moves away from its source.

So does this mean that we aren’t capable of unconditionally “loving everyone”? For most of us, no, probably not, (at least not in this Age) and I don’t think it’s anything to beat ourselves up over, either. This ability of complete and unconditional Love for all beings and all humans in particular, is something that is reserved for the most spiritually attained beings. It is an ability that can be developed only after true internal Unity and Sovereignty is achieved.

We have to develop the capacity for Love internally before we can fully express it externally. The vast majority of people (myself included) are internally divided, some to a point of self-loathing. This puts us a long way away from manifesting this sort of “Universal Love” consciousness and to expect this sort of “Christ-like” acceptance of all humanity from people living in this day and Age is unrealistic and unfair.

That being said, we can work towards extending our capacity for Love by partaking in various forms of selfless service, be it working at a homeless shelter or performing random acts of kindness for loved ones, co-workers, or strangers. I suggest working within one’s own community, and learning to love the people who are actually your neighbors by definition. We can then begin learning to love the people around us in a more full and complete manner.

Likewise, we can use the internal “wounds” we have to develop empathy and compassion for others. We can begin doing as Father Paul said, and loving those around us “for the Life which they represent and are manifesting- no matter how little, but that they are manifesting- because it is part of the Creation.”

Father Paul also went on to say that Love “is the thing that brings forth true sacrifice. And love is a thing that will lay its efforts and its desires and its wants upon the altar for the purpose of helping another man or woman. Anything less than that is not love, it is purely emotion. It is not the all-encompassing Love.

Here, we are beginning to move towards the impartial Love or “Charity” that St. Paul was referring to in the famous verse out of his first letter to the Corinthians:

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away… And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.”

Love is humility, Love is compassion, Love is truth, Love is fidelity, Love is honor, Love is hospitality, Love is courage and Love is sacrifice. More accurately, Love is the expression of these principles and virtues in the physical world by the physical person motivated by higher forces. Love in its highest and truest form only exists through action- through the activation of the Divine Will. This action of Love can be directed outwards towards others, or inwards, towards one’s self. With this understanding, one could contest that Love is not a “feeling” at all, and that writings describing Love as a feeling or an emotion are not actually describing Love at all, but something else.

Of course, there is still a problem with all of this, which is the fact that ALL of this that I have just written is still fundamentally conceptual and logic-based, as it is put into words and ideas- none of which at the end of the day can understand or accurately describe Love. Love is understood through experience and experience alone. Its truth can’t be rationalized or conceptualized. It cannot be understood, only known. It doesn’t matter if a person expresses Love in words, if you have not had some kind of deeper experience of the Love they profess through actions, then any statements of love will ring as hollow. Love is Divine Action.

At the end of the day, I am still figuring out what Love truly is and how to genuinely express it. I still may not fully understand Love, but I DO know what it feels like. It feels like a mother holding her child in her arms. It feels like finally understanding the sacrifice of a parent who works two jobs to provide for their family. It feels like a friend doing what they can to cheer you up when you’re going through a breakup. It feels like the embrace of a sibling whom you have not seen in far too long. It feels like the warm nuzzle of a beloved pet that shows you unconditional affection. It feels like the warm understanding and patience of a great mentor. It feels like a partner supporting you and cheering you on to be the best person you can be. It feels like helping someone in some way just because you can. It is only through having known Love that one can truly know how to express Love.


Namaste and God Bless.