JFK and The Re-Writing of History

JFK was killed 50 years ago today.  Truth Dots notes the full-on united front presented by the mainstream media in countless newspaper and magazine articles, TV shows, books, etc, to declare that all "conspiracy theories" are to be left behind, once and for all. Oswald did it and he did it alone. That's all folks, you can pack up and go home.

It is true that many people are willing to jump to conclusions based on their own biases, hence many "conspiracy theories." That is why one must limit ones' attention to people who are actually doing genuine research, and who uncover actual evidence.  And there is an abundance of evidence, that Oswald did not act alone, that he is not the man the media portrays him to be, that government agencies were involved, and that these agencies and the media have been covering up and re-writing history for decades.  It is a tragedy and a travesty that has many precise parallels with 9/11 and its aftermath, and is a hard lesson to be learned.  Because we have been trained to forget about history except as the mainstream culture feeds it to us, we were inadequate to the task of recognizing 9/11 for what it was.

RIDICULE BY ASSOCIATION
Here's a classic mainstream media tactic: provide us with a wise and witty commentator to focus on how one of the most ridiculous JFK conspiracies was de-bunked, with the clear message that it would be better to stay away from any and all such theories.  The intent and effect is to associate all JFK research with the most ridiculous theories, making it easy to dismiss and marginalize any JFK research that conflicts with the official story.



http://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000001183275/the-umbrella-man.html


THE LIMITED HANGOUT



Here's an example of what is known as a "limited hangout," a public relations or propaganda technique that involves the release of previously hidden information in order to prevent a greater exposure of more important details.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

It shows how far the mainstream media will go to dismiss JFK research.  Below is a link to an interview with Philip Shenon, author of the new book, "A Cruel and Shocking Act." Listen for how this guy is willing to make the public aware of damning evidence of corruption and coverup in the wake of JFK's assassination, yet jumps to his own conclusions, without any basis in the facts, that the reasons for all this were nothing more than incompetence, embarrassment, and the desire to "protect President Kennedy's legacy, to protect the privacy of the Kennedy family." This is shoddy journalism posing as hard-hitting investigative reporting, and again conveniently marginalizes genuine research by ignoring it, in favor of simply making up an alternate explanation that fits the conventional wisdom.

http://www.npr.org/2013/10/28/240822565/botched-investigation-fuels-kennedy-conspiracy-theories

Note the title of this feature is "Botched Investigation Fuels Kennedy Conspiracy Theories." Again the way it is expressed is important. They are saying that it is understandable that the evidence being exposed would lead some people to have a "perception' of a conspiracy, but nevertheless you shouldn't think that way. Essentially the author is saying to legitimate researchers, "who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"

SHUT OUT
News Flash: The Last Stand of the JFK Truthers
 Dallas plans to memorialize the fallen president on the 50th anniversary of his death, and the conspiracy theorists aren't invited. 
http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/67089/last-stand-jfk-truthers

THE REAL DEAL
Credible, meticulous research on the JFK assassination has been going on since the 1960's.  One of the greatest researchers is also one of the least known, Mae Brussell.  Has there been anyone since who has done such a thorough job of actually reading every edition of the Warren commission report, cross referencing it and following up on the information that it cited to support its conclusions?  She produced thousands of pages of research and hundreds of hours of recorded programs discussing her research and encouraging others to do their own.
She never asked for a penny and achieved no renown for her efforts.  She was simply a brilliant person who was also a passionate activist for truth.  Here's her first radio broadcast, all the way back in 1971.



Learn more about Mae and access the vast archive of her work at http://maebrussell.com/

WANT TO KNOW MORE?
If you're ready to dive in and do some JFK research, our good friends at WantToKnow.info have prepared the way for you with an outstanding portal to articles, videos and plenty of links and references.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/assassinations/kennedy/kennedy-assassination-jfk-rfk

EVIDENCE OF REVISION
Ready to go down the rabbit hole? Evidence of Revision is an amazing documentary, relying on a treasure trove of actual archival film footage from the times, to show how history was indeed being revised, even as the events were unfolding. Here's part 1:



JAMES CORBETT
Few have honored Mae Brussell's legacy as well as James Corbett of corbettreport.com. In this video he gives us a quick, concise summary of the mountain of evidence that indicates that Oswald was someone quite different than the official story. It is meant to give you a sense of the absurdity of it all, and it succeeds quite well.
Everything he refers to is referenced and linked on this page:
http://www.corbettreport.com/jfk-a-conspiracy-theory/



JIM DOUGLASS



Jim Douglass, in his book JFK and the Unspeakable, has an interpretation of events to explain why JFK was murdered, and why it matters, that makes more sense to me than any other.  I think his ideas are worth pursuing further, as everything I have encountered so far supports his ideas. Here's an interview in which he summarizes his views.



FINAL WORDS
And the final words go to the man himself. Here's JFK giving the commencement address to the graduating class at American University in 1963. Is this the sound of a politician planning to seek re-election, saying what he thinks will appeal to liberal voters, or is it a man who is genuinely turning away from the ambitions of the CIA, the military-industrial complex, and the other elites working behind the scenes to drive the country back to war and ruin?





COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY, 
or SIGN IN AND START A CONVERSATION!
Your thoughts and questions are are always welcome. Please leave a comment below. You can comment anonymously as a guest, but if you take a moment to register, you'll be able to exchange comments with TruthDots or others, and be notified when people respond to your comment.

SHARE!
Feel free to share this post using any of the buttons below.

Against Their Will

                                

A new book, Against Their Will: The Secret History of Medical Experimentation on Children in Cold War America, is a thoroughly researched study on a topic that is not really new or even truly secret: the use of human subjects for medical experimentation, against their will and often even unwittingly, by the U.S. government in the mid-20th century. There has already been much documentation on the subject; here is a link, from the excellent website resource http://www.wanttoknow.info,  to a summary of stories that are in the public domain, reported by mainstream sources, about our government, military and intelligence establishments using human beings as unwilling research subjects in gruesome "scientific" medical studies:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/humanguineapigs

The difference this time is the focus on children as the victims of horrible, unethical experimentation by doctors and scientists from America's most prestigious hospitals and universities, with the full support and participation of the CIA and other U.S. government agencies. No exaggeration, no conspiracy theories; it is simply a matter of historical record.

What exactly are we talking about? It is really too sickening to go into detail about it. The blurb from Amazon.com includes this brief description:

They were drafted as "volunteers" to test vaccines, doused with ringworm, subjected to electric shock, and given lobotomies. They were also fed radioactive isotopes and exposed to chemical warfare agents.

And that barely scratches the surface.

CONTEXT and HISTORY

The context is important to the understanding of this, and why it is relevant today. This activity is known to have exploded and flourished during the Cold War, especially in the late 1040's - early 1950's, when fear of Communism was used to justify a wave of deeply unethical and criminal activity by our government.

In addition, at that time period in the middle of the 20th century, the concept of "eugenics" was still a powerful force behind a lot of scientific and medical activity. What is eugenics? Let's start with a simple online dictionary definition:

"the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)"

In case you're not getting the point, here's this helpful line from Wikipedia:

Early proponents of eugenics believed that, through selective breeding, the human species should direct its own evolution.  They tended to believe in the genetic superiority of Nordic, Germanic and Anglo-Saxon peoples; supported strict immigration and anti-miscegenation laws; and supported the forcible sterilization of the poor, disabled and "immoral."

Link to the full entry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

The Wiki article is disturbing but essential to begin to understand the scope of the eugenics movement in the U.S.as it rose to prominence in the early 20th century. Lest you think this was just some small fringe group of radical nutcases, the article makes clear that this movement was populated by a large swath of the scientific community, funded by the biggest corporate foundations like Rockefeller and Carnegie, and codified into law in the form of segregation, immigration restrictions, and the most hideous of all, compulsory sterilization enforced by law in 30 states. Only after Hitler was revealed to have carried eugenics to its most horrifying extreme did the movement fade in the U.S., but it didn't go away. During the Cold War era of the late 40's and 50's, the fear of Communism was hyped up to a level of hysteria that made it possible to revive the blatantly inhuman concept of eugenics, in order to justify the abuse of not just racial and ethnic minorities but also mentally challenged, physically disabled, sick and poor children. Again, just history.

What you have here is a perfect example of the muddy waters of human motivation, where genuine commitment to a mission, perceived as important and virtuous, coexists with a ruthless detachment and a lust for power and control, unrestricted by any sense of ethics or morality. I wrote a blog post on that subject I hope you'll go back and check out, called "True Believers and Manipulators:"

http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2012/12/true-believers-and-manipulators.html

I'm sure many of the players involved in the experimentation on children were motivated by a passionate belief that extreme measures were necessary to save us from the even worse fate of being overrun by a Communist military dictatorship. That belief, and the fear and paranoia it generated, made it easy for them to put their faith in a junk science that assured them it was OK to experiment on these kids because they were genetically inferior. Meanwhile, others were just happy to take government or foundation money for their universities, hospitals and labs.

But all of them were manipulated by those who organized, funded and directed this activity, who themselves held irrational and conflicting motivations. I quote myself here, from my other blog post:

Mark Crispin Miller, in his introduction to a recent reprint of Edward Bernays Propaganda, points to an answer, as he discusses the dual nature of the minds of demagogues such as Hitler, Mussolini, McCarthy and others.  While on the one hand, they appear to be radically committed to their mission, on the other they are detached and manipulative.  Miller proposes that it is actually both - they are "fanatical and cynical at once, neither wholly in control nor wholly ecstatic.  Such agitators work within a certain mental borderland, where one can never clearly see conviction as distinct from calculation.  Indeed, that inner murkiness appears itself to be the very source or basis of the mass manipulator's enigmatic power, and so we cannot comprehend it through schematic dualistic formulas."

CONNECT THE DOTS

Many will often dismiss warnings about the slippery slope we are currently on in the U.S.: warnings like the constant invocations of national security being used to justify endless military actions abroad, increasing militarization of the police at home, increasing government surveillance of the public, increasing operation of government in secret, etc, all promoted by nationalistic propaganda pretending to be news. I have written about this several times now:

http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-slippery-slope-surveillance.html

http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-slippery-slope-continues.html

http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2013/05/boston-further-along-wrong-path.html

So I ask you: is the propaganda, the misinformation, the stirring up of fear and paranoia posing as patriotism any different today than it was then? Are government leaders any less prone to the corrupting influence of money and power? Is one's racial or ethnic identity or economic status any less of a factor in one's being considered an equal member of society? Are scientific and medical institutions any less interested in cashing in on the expansion of government programs driven by fear and paranoia? Are corporations any less ruthless than they were before in their pursuit of economic enrichment at any price? Are the elites in the upper echelons of government and finance any less disdainful of the other 99.99% of humans in this world?

The book Against Their Will provides its own answer to that question by exposing the fact that the experimentation on children never actually stopped, it has just been moved off-shore, away from prying eyes. As one reviewer on Amazon says:

If you thought that at the beginning of the 21st century things like the ones described before stopped, you are wrong.  As the authors point out, American institutions have been replaced by China, India, Tunisia and Nigeria as sites for Phase One drug studies.  Drug firms now travel to "places where regulation is virtually nonexistent, the FDA does not reach, and the mistakes can end up in pauper's graves."

So since the answer to all the above questions is so obviously no, then why shouldn't we be concerned, no, disturbed, no make that outraged, at the direction our society is going?

RITE OF PASSAGE

It is not pleasant to have to look upon the dark side of human nature; much easier to look away, avoid the issue, and live in willful ignorance, especially when the evil is found to be embedded in our most revered cultural institutions: government, science, medicine. But such knowledge is inescapable. Indeed, awareness of the past, and putting current events in the context of history, are necessary steps on the path to a more peaceful and compassionate future. So don't run and hide; look it in the eye. Weep, puke, rage if you have to. It is a rite of passage. Let it propel you forward into doing whatever you can do to shift the balance of power in the "real" world from fear over to love.



I have offered my thoughts on this before, and will continue to do so. Please read my posts, "The Absence of the Light," and "Solutions," for my perspectives on the crucial importance of bringing love, compassion, humility and forgiveness into our lives, as a serious, practical approach to countering the negative influences in the world.

http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-absence-of-light.html

http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2012/11/solutions.html

This is where our true power lies, and we must learn to wake up to it, own it, and use it. As I said in Absence of the Light:

And to anyone who finds this naive or can see no practical value in focusing on these concepts, we must thank them and continue on our way.  We have seen countless examples, time after time, how the actions of one person can make a difference to many others.  The simple act of extending humble generosity, compassion and forgiveness to another can have powerfully positive ramifications.

As I also suggested in that blog, it is the children that often end up being the ones who show us the way. We have so much to learn from them. We should sign up for the course.



Links to reviews and commentaries on the book:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/books/2013/07/07/book-review-against-their-will-dober-secret-history-medical-experimentation-children-cold-war-america-allen-hornblum-judith-newman-and-gregory/mvRMIO8Zt7HakY7HWSLESO/story.html

http://my.firedoglake.com/valtin/2013/07/17/book-review-against-their-willthe-secret-history-of-medical-experimentation-on-children-in-cold-war-america/

https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/allen-m-hornblum/against-their-will/

http://www.amazon.com/Against-Their-Will-Experimentation-Children/dp/0230341713

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/36151/title/Capsule-Reviews/

COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY, 
or SIGN IN AND START A CONVERSATION!
Your thoughts and questions are are always welcome. Please leave a comment below. You can comment anonymously as a guest, but if you take a moment to register, you'll be able to exchange comments with TruthDots or others, and be notified when people respond to your comment.

SHARE!
Feel free to share this post using any of the buttons below.

Earth Day Distractions

Earth Day appears as an opportunity for people with caring hearts and the best intentions to do a little bit of good for our planet. Raising awareness is good; every little bit helps, right?

But when I look at the promo being generated by the Earth Day Network and their multitude of corporate partners, I find that it's what is not being said that is really the point.

Again, I see nothing wrong with pursuing alternative energy sources, recycling, or planting trees. But is it really so hard to see the lies and deception behind the PR?

The world's biggest corporate polluters and despoilers of the environment love to add green logos and put out warm-fuzzy commercials to let us know they are all for "going green," when their actual policies and activities prove the exact opposite.



This has been true for decades. The environmental movement has time and again been co-opted and hijacked by corporate PR green-washing machines, their clear aim to distract us from their culpability, and dump the responsibility onto us, the consumer.

Earth Day is every day for NASCAR industry
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/earth-day-every-day-nascar-120000760--nascar.html

I am all for each of us taking responsibility for what we can do. But as a wise man once said, "don't piss on my head and tell me it's rain." We should all be tired of mega-polluting industries telling us how responsible they are, when in fact every day they are doing their best to trample on not just the law but on any sense of decency and ethical responsibility. And expecting our government to provide any sort of effective control over this is useless.

Where, in any of the Earth Day promo, do you see any of the biggest industrial polluters being called to account for the horrific damage done to our land, air and water, at great cost to our economy, and our health? Where do we see any discussion of the environmental consequences of failed and damaged nuclear reactors? Does anyone want to talk about one of the biggest polluters in the world, the U.S. military? Anything at all about our dangerously misguided way of eating in this country, and the disastrous effect on the environment inflicted by industrial agriculture? The serious risks posed by the increasing presence of genetically modified foods?

No, I didn't think so. Here's a typical bit of fluff from CNN:

Hey Earthling, it's Earth Day; time for a quiz
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/22/world/earth-day/index.html

So by all means, do recycle, do plant a tree, do turn off the lights, do buy an electric car, but please look deeper. Stop buying the green-washing bullshit. Seek alternatives to the corporate-industrial paradigm that keeps a few thousand people incredibly wealthy while the rest of us are left barely hanging on.

If that sounds overblown and unrealistic, you owe it to yourself to look into this further. Fortunately I can recommend a great resource for you with lots of links and references to set you on the path.

Take Action

I am of course referring to The Queen's Table, the most comprehensive, informative and entertaining resource archive you could possibly ask for. This blog has many pages that cover a wide range of aspects relating to food and health. They are all good, but I urge you to spend some time on the "Action" page. She poses the question "What Can We Do?" and answers it on the intellectual, emotional and spiritual levels, all of which are critical before you can expect to make any lasting change in your physical world. And if you are ready for more practical information, try the Links page, with an abundance of references and links to info about organic food, best farming practices, nutrition, toxins and a lot more. If that's not enough, check out the GMO info page, the Rabbit Hole, and Inspiration to Begin. There is a lot to absorb, but as another wise man said...

The Slippery Slope Continues

What do you call it when law enforcement agents invade your home, terrorize your family and hold you captive for hours, for what turns out to be no cause? When you find that their actions were pre-approved by a judge? When they refuse to show you any evidence to justify this needless assault on your privacy, your property and your liberty?

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article318665/Evidence-for-search-of-Leawood-home-called-flimsy.html

This is the world we live in. The Harte's, a quiet upper-middle-class family from Leawood Kansas, buy hydroponic equipment so they can start growing organic vegetables indoors. But in this insane post-911 paradigm, law enforcement is given carte blanche to respond to minor offenses and even completely innocent behavior as if they were dealing with dangerous terrorists. Local police take notice of the family's activity. Buying hydroponic growing supplies is apparently enough cause to suspect them of growing marijuana. Their home is put under surveillance, their trash sifted. The police extract loose tea leaves from the garbage and wrongly identify them as marijuana. The police conclude that the Harte's are indeed growing the horrible weed. And so, as a result of a police investigation that can only be described as either inept or corrupt, a SWAT team is dispatched, the family's home is raided. The children are forced to watch as their house is torn apart for two hours as their father is forced to lie face down on the floor while an officer of the law stands over him with an AR-15 pointed at his head. The police find nothing illegal growing: only tomatoes and squash. It was just one of a series of raids on that day across two states that was declared a success at the time after police reported confiscating a total of 43 plants and one pound of pot.

http://gardnernews.com/joco-sheriff-participates-in-marijuana-raid-during-440/

The problems here are painfully obvious: they indicate a new paradigm of ever expanding secret surveillance, and militarization of law enforcement, that should make us all re-think what's going on in this country, how we got here and where we are headed. I wrote about this in an earlier blog post, "The Slippery Slope: Surveillance:"

The slippery slope has already become an avalanche. The issue of encroachment on the civil liberties of ordinary citizens is further compounded by the increasingly overt militarization of many police forces, again encouraged and supported by Dept. of Homeland Security, leading directly an increasing frequency of highly aggressive actions by police in response to non-terrorist, even non-criminal situations. Add to that the NSA's vast expansion of its domestic surveillance capacity and the government's insistence that it has the right to operate such programs in secret. This has led to a situation right out of Kafka, in which the Justice Department denies any challenge to the legality of being subjected to surveillance unless the subject can prove the government was spying on him, but that can't be proven because the government classifies that information as secret. 

If an ordinary family could have their life turned upside down by local police over something as trivial as marijuana, what do you think the CIA, FBI, NSA and the rest of the Dept. Homeland Security are capable of? Is there any reason to trust that any of us couldn't be put under surveillance, attacked or imprisoned, based on bogus evidence that more than likely will be politically motivated?

Of course, we live in a fair society. The victims have filed lawsuit against the police, and perhaps they will have their day in court. Justice is wonderful if you can afford it. But what of the many others who have been or will be victimized in similar fashion, but don't have the energy, resources or courage to go up against their own government?

UPDATES:

November 2013: Leawood couple files lawsuit filed over mistaken marijuana raid

December 2014: Leawood couple helps change search warrant law



COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY, 
or SIGN IN AND START A CONVERSATION!
Your thoughts and questions are are always welcome. Please leave a comment below. You can comment anonymously as a guest, but if you take a moment to register, you'll be able to exchange comments with TruthDots or others, and be notified when people respond to your comment.

SHARE!
Feel free to share this post using any of the buttons below.

Pigeons

We live in the era of "share everything" and "I've got nothing to hide:"



I wrote about some aspects of this issue in a previous post called "The Slippery Slope - Surveillance." but if you aren't yet convinced why this is bad, here's another example of why privacy matters:

Your health insurance company may be buying your shopping history data and using it against you. From the Wall Street journal, Feb. 25, 2013:

"Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina recently began buying spending data on more than 3 million people in its employer group plans.  If someone, say, purchases plus-size clothing, the health plan could flag him for potential obesity...Marketing firms have sold this data to retailers and credit-card companies for years, and health plans have recently discovered they can use it to augment claims data..."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323384604578326151014237898.html

Another quote: "...the so-called advanced analytics industry provides an opportunity to zero in on errant employees and alter their behavior...."

Have you noticed how often problems are dealt with by using so-called "behavior modification," otherwise known as operant conditioning? The common term in modern culture is "incentives:"

"Johnson & Johnson,  for example, pays employees $500 to submit their biometrics and other health information; J&J then offers eligible employees an additional $250 if they get pregnancy counseling, enroll in a disease-management program or get their colonoscopy on time.  The "tailored and targeted messages" paired with the monetary incentives are a "great way to bring people to participate in the program," says Dr.  Fikry Isaac, the company's vice president of global health services."

The people who operate the machinery of your everyday life aren't waiting around for you to figure this out. They have already decided that your privacy doesn't matter, They have already concluded that you don't have free will, and that the best thing for you is to control and adjust your behavior through well established scientific methods.

Thank you, B.F. Skinner, for providing corporate America with the pretext for treating the public like pigeons in a lab experiment.

Gandhi - Hijacked

First MLK, now Gandhi. More blatant distortions, mis-interpretations and out-of-context citations from gun-rights activists, this time co-opting and mis-appropriating Gandhi to support their cause.

On the one hand, we should be thankful that this is coming up, because it provides an opportunity to get a more nuanced view of Gandhi. He was not a saint, and he lived in the real world, responding to serious crises. His philosophy evolved over time, as occurs with any thinking person who responds critically when one's pre-conceptions are challenged by new experiences and inspirations.

So here's some relevant Gandhi quotes:

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” 

“I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence.”

Etcetera. This article from Mike Adams of Natural News (re-posted at InfoWars, and I'm sure many others)  has lots more quotes:
http://www.infowars.com/gandhi-advocated-the-right-to-bear-arms-use-of-violence-to-defend-innocents-against-bullying-oppression/

But the flaws and fallacies of this article are many. An excellent article from the website Waging Nonviolence http://wagingnonviolence.org/2013/02/what-gandhi-really-thought-about-guns/
adds some clarity to the discussion:

"Pro-gun activists frequently use those words to suggest that Gandhi supported individual gun ownership both as a means of defending oneself and as a tool to violently resist government tyranny...that Gandhi supported violence to defend oneself and others.  This is a vast oversimplification of Gandhi’s views.
In truth, Gandhi did not oppose the use of violence in certain circumstances, preferring it to cowardice and submission.  Even though Gandhi’s spiritual philosophy of ahimsa rejects violence, it permits the use of violent force if a person is not courageous and disciplined enough to use nonviolence.  Gandhi regarded weakness as the lowest human flaw, and would rather see a person use violent force in self-defense than be passive."

The article goes on to provide solid historical information that adds much needed historical context to the quote.

Context is everything, and those who cite this quote are being willfully misleading. They fail to point out that even though Gandhi allowed for the possibility of violence, it was as a last resort for those who were unwilling or unable to adopt the practice of non-violence, which was clearly what he preferred people to do. He spent his whole life teaching non-violence, practicing personal non-violence and making non-violence the centerpiece of his campaigns against British oppression. It seems ridiculous to even have to remind anyone that it is his practice of non-violence that has made him such an influential historical figure, not any perceived advocacy for the right to bear arms.

Gandhi's attitude towards guns and violence shows his acknowledgement of free will. If a person has no other recourse, and has not gained the courage and insight necessary to practice non-violence, then Gandhi says better to use violence than be a coward. But he is clear that non-violence is what we need to strive for, study and practice, so that we may finally move beyond violent response altogether.

It takes far more courage and strength of character to practice non-violence, indeed it is a deep and challenging spiritual practice for the real world. That is what he helped the Indian people achieve, and what his legacy calls on us to try to do.

I understand what Mike Adams, Alex Jones and others like them are worried about. Every day brings new information that adds credibility to the concern that our government is heading in a direction of becoming an authoritarian regime. But that is no excuse for peddling mis-information in order to stir people who don't know any better into an ever increasing state of fear, anxiety and hatred. It undermines the credibility of everything else that media commentators like Adams and Jones do, which is too bad because they often provide genuinely useful information. But you can also see in their work that they thrive on perpetuating a state of fear, not on offering genuine solutions. We must continue to shine the light of truth on these issues, and keep pushing forward on the path that Gandhi has laid out for us.

The Hijacking of Martin Luther King

It has become an annual tradition for somebody who is selling some idea totally antithetical to what Martin Luther King believed, to declare that King "would have approved." I wrote about one such story in a blog post from 2011, "Pentagon Celebrates Martin Luther King Day?" in which I broke down the absurdity of a Defense Department lawyer's claim that Dr. King would approve of war, as long as it's in response to the threat of terrorism.

Now here we are again, another MLK day, and here are more absurd self-serving distortions of Dr. King.

Larry Ward, a political consultant who created the National Gun Appreciation series of pro-gun rights events that occurred last weekend, went on CNN to proclaim that he wanted to “honor the legacy of Dr. King.” Pretending to tip his hat to Dr. King, blacks and civil rights activists, he went so far as to say that slavery may never have happened in the United States if African-Americans had owned guns.

Shall we unpack this to show how ridiculous it is? No, the other commentator on the show took care of that:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/11/gun-appreciation-day-chairman-slavery-wouldnt-have-happened-if-slaves-were-armed/

We could just mention that Larry Ward's business is, plain and simple, Republican party public relations. As always, many people who were part of the recent gun appreciation events do not know or care that the main interest of its organizers is not about gun rights, it's about Republican party politics.
http://politicalmedia.com/about

Perhaps we should point out that a few days after going on his press push, it was revealed that one of Mr. Ward's sponsors for the event is American Third Position, an explicitly white racist political organization. So who is Mr. Ward trying to kid?
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/01/18/gun-appreciation-day-is-sponsored-by-a-white-na/192318

But the mis-representation of Martin Luther King goes further. Some recently published articles are being cited to point out that at one time in the mid-1950's, during an intense period of violent attacks on civil rights activists, Martin Luther King kept guns for self-protection.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-winkler/mlk-and-his-guns_b_810132.html

A shallow reading of the article (and they count on that) would suggest that King would have endorsed today's pro-gun rights activism. What is ignored or marginalized is the fact that over time, Dr. King moved further and further in the direction of complete non-violence, and eventually renounced guns altogether.

The point of this story being shared at this exact moment is clearly to attempt to overshadow and implicitly belittle King's monumental later commitment to non-violence. It is also meant to ridicule people that think King was always completely against violence and guns - as if to say, "ha ha, wrong again you naive liberals. King appreciated the value of a gun just as much as any gun rights supporter, until he so foolishly went in the wrong direction."
http://www.redstate.com/candicelanier/2013/01/17/mlks-arsenal-the-racist-roots-of-gun-control-in-the-u-s/

It is amazing indeed to see hard-line conservative writers twisting themselves into knots to try to make this argument work (as, for example, when their argument forces them to come down on the same side as the radical Black Panthers of the 1960's.). But it fails because it so obviously tries to re-define King by extracting one little slice of his vast and complex life and using it out of context to score a political point.

The fact is, it is central to understanding King to know that his ideas about non-violence evolved over time. His eventual renunciation of guns and violent action was an amazing accomplishment in his life. At the same time he was showing that like any intelligent person, he was capable of changing his views when presented with credible new ideas. The life and work of Gandhi were very powerful and credible indeed. Encountering, learning and absorbing Gandhi gradually changed King's life, in a dramatic way. This is the rest of the story, and the failure to tell it in relation to the story of his earlier gun ownership is not just willfully ignorant, but  intellectually dishonest and disrespectful. For more on how Dr. King's indeas developed, read this excellent article:
http://peacemagazine.org/archive/v17n2p21.htm

This leads me to a related observation: one cannot in good conscience ignore the racism that continues to assert itself in our country.

The clues are sometimes subtle, as in this news report from ABC's 20/20 on the "myths" of gun control.. Notice at about 2:30, when the scene changes to a prison, and the color of the skin of the people on camera makes a point without needing any words.



But sometimes the racism is so blatant it is sickening, especially when, as in Mississippi, it is occurring against children, perpetrated by authorities in the schools, the police and the judicial system.
http://morallowground.com/2013/01/20/report-extreme-racialized-discipline-plagues-mississippi-schools/

It makes me think that gun rights advocates ought to look with great suspicion on the political motivations of their leadership, and their willingness to partner with racists while they pretend to sympathize with Dr. King.

So where does Truth Dots stand on gun rights issues? Well as always, I stand outside of either-or.

On the one hand, it seems futile to support greater governmental involvement in restricting gun ownership, when our government reserves the right to wield vast amounts of the most destructive weaponry in the world, and directs our military to kill with impunity. But we are stuck there, aren't we, because we willingly give our government that power. In fact we are conditioned to think of violence as heroic and even patriotic, as long as it's directed by the institutional "us," the good guys.

Here is another area where Dr. King's position gradually became unequivocal, and in 1967 he took the exceptionally bold step of publicly condemning the U.S. government's perpetration of violence around the world as well as at home. This is another aspect of King's legacy that is willfully neglected and even intentionally distorted by many. But in the year before he died he made it quite clear what he thought.
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/058.html

There is no better symbol of governmental hypocrisy than President Obama himself. Obama enjoys being the beneficiary of King's civil rights legacy, and clumsily quotes King, incorrectly and out of context, to improve his own image. But Obama's record of commanding violent and destructive military actions goes against everything King stood for. In an even more bizarre twist, during his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech (for which he had done literally nothing to deserve), Obama both cited King as an influence and utterly repudiated him in the same speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AORo-YEXxNQ

I broke this down in more detail in my earlier post:
http://truth-dots.blogspot.com/2011/01/pentagon-celebrates-martin-luther-king.html

On the other hand, I have heard so many times that 99% of all gun owners are patriotic, responsible, well trained, full of wisdom and common sense. It is pretty easy to see that this is not really so cut and dried. I'm not talking about anyone I know, of course. But I am sure this, this, this and this barely scratch the surface of the large numbers of angry, ignorant and careless people, many of whom are in positions of influence and authority, who insist on carrying guns. This troubles me greatly, and that feeling is amplified by adding in the possibility of racist attitudes and emotional instability into the stew.

Am I exaggerating? I don't know, what do you think? When you have an authority figure like this ex-military/ex-police chief/professional weapons trainer going on YouTube, vowing to take to the streets and start killing people in the name of preserving his 2nd amendment rights and urging others to do the same, I think I have a point.


I don't have a problem with anyone claiming their constitutional rights. What I object to is the way people on both "sides" of this issue constantly respond and react out of fear. Indeed, we are constantly being pushed by authority figures and the media to believe we only have two choices: support one position, or be very afraid of what will happen. You must support unrestricted right to carry guns - the only alternative is to cower in fear. Or you must support greatly expanded government restrictions on guns, or else - that's right, cower in fear.

This choice is phony. It dis-empowers us and it denies the human capacity for creative, innovative thinking, for compassion and courage. We must move past this fake either-or paradigm and stand up for the highest spiritual and ethical principles at every level, starting from the personal to the family and community, instead of expecting our society's institutions to somehow change the way they've always been, just because we demand it.

Bob Koehler gives us a window into one powerful approach to this:
http://commonwonders.com/peace/unarmed-empowerment/

But there are a million ways, big and small. Find your own way. And always, always refer to Martin Luther King himself, not other people's mis-interpretations of him.



UPDATE: 
The Air Force Global Strike Command wants you to know that Martin Luther King would be proud of them for overcoming racial, cultural and religious differences in order to "ensure perfection as we maintain and operate... the most powerful weapons in the U.S. arsenal." 
http://www.afgsc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123333051

Well that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy, how about you?

The Absence of The Light

It has been challenging, to say the least, to stay on an even emotional keel this holiday season. The devastating tragedy of the Sandy Hook school shootings presented such a harsh contrast to the Christmas holiday with all its spiritual meaning, it was hard to know how to respond, what to say or feel.

Nevertheless, lots of people think they know, and are doing their best to persuade us that we only have two choices: we must take a stand either for or against gun control, either for or against 2nd amendment rights, either for or against guards with guns in every school.

And of course there are a variety of conspiratorial perspectives: the shooter was brainwashed by the CIA; it was a false flag operation meant to stir up support for severe gun restrictions; etc. There may be grains of truth in such theories, but I prefer the more obvious explanation. A mentally deranged person with easy access to a weapon of destruction is simply a mirror of the state of our culture: a broken, twisted, violent world lurking just beneath the surface veneer of affluent, civilized society. In this illusory realm we have an unspoken consensus agreement to remain numb to the violence all around us, except for the moment when it strikes close to home.

It is heartening, therefore, to see that there is interest in approaching this situation, as a practical matter, on a spiritual level. I have seen some remarkable expressions of support for healing with compassion and forgiveness. A friend posted this on Facebook and received dozens of positive comments: "When I was talking to my father about the horrific tragedy in Connecticut on the phone tonight, he said something that surprised me. He said that the only justification for such a heinous act is the hope that we, as a people, could respond to it by becoming more loving toward each other...he said, "Beyond the issues of gun control and mental health, if we could go further and become more giving toward one another, to somehow love one another more in response to this, that would be the only reaction that would at all justify such a tragedy as this."

There was also this amazing Facebook post: "It is beautiful that everyone comes together in such times of tragedy. It is my hope that these feelings of compassion could be an every day reaction by everyone, for everyone. Right now we cannot be sad enough, or worry enough, to change what has already happened. What we can do now is have more compassion for everyone's journey, and send our love and light to those who suffer in pain from loss of their loved ones. Perhaps this recent tragedy can also help us understand the extreme grief and sadness any parent any where in the world feels when they lose their child to senseless acts of violence. It is all unacceptable. Overwhelmingly hard to understand because no one can make sense of the senseless. The world is ready for a true shift in consciousness. I will not watch the media reports on the event, because it is unacceptable to me to use the grief of so many people to sell advertising, political points of view, or ratings."

Another friend shared the stunning, powerful statement given by Robbie Parker, father of one of the slain kids, and again got many thoughtful and positive comments:



I've also seen people whose response is to become utterly deluged with painful emotions, not realizing that this event was only triggering the expression of pain and anxiety they were already feeling about something else. Shortly after the shootings, I had to talk a family member down from being engulfed in a raging flood of feelings that was becoming overwhelming.

In truth, however, I was not far from there. Our dad was recently diagnosed with stage four lung cancer, and a number of other health issues have also come to light. It has been hard for us to come to terms with, and thus our emotions are already much closer to the surface than usual.

Events like this shooting pull back the curtain to expose the gaping flaws in our society as a whole, but they also make it easy for us to get lost in our own personal pain. It's a very human thing to do. Who hasn't gotten excessively angry with someone over a minor quibble, only to later admit they were actually upset about something else. So it is with grief, anxiety and the agony of feeling helpless, powerless to change the things that are going wrong.

The fact is there are things we just can't control. No amount of feeling stress, anxiety, grief or depression is going to make those kids come back, or make cancer go away. We may need to express those feelings, but to get stuck in them accomplishes nothing and helps nobody. In fact, we only hurt ourselves, and render ourselves useless for helping anyone else.

Nevertheless, we plunge ahead with the intense urge to do something, to make a difference, to solve the problem, to fix what is broken. But that is just covering over the deeper issue we don't want to face: no amount of campaigning for gun control, or gun freedom, mental health awareness, etc. can heal the heavy sense of despair, the spiritual emptiness, the loss of hope that weighs down our hearts.

If we really want to find a way to restore our ability to feel love, joy, faith and hope, we must be willing to do some hard spiritual work. We must be willing to step back, way back, and see everything in the widest possible perspective. That rusty old saw, "it's always darkest before the dawn," is counseling us to remember the light, even as we are stuck in the darkness. Not so rusty after all.

This terrible incident happened to very young children. The sadness of such a thing is unbearable, and yet we have other children around us who are there every day teaching us how to live in a state of blissful happiness. We have children who have survived unspeakable horrors who nevertheless come back to show us, the supposedly intelligent and wise adults, a thing or two about hope.



There is also the fact that the shootings happened during the Christmas season, when the genuine spiritual lessons of Jesus traditionally penetrate, for a brief moment, into the mainstream of the public consciousness.

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God..."

...Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?" Jesus answered,       "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times."

 In light of the tragedy, we are called on to pay much closer attention to their deepest meaning. We must learn that these teachings are not only for when things are all lovely, but are most especially important when things are going bad. 

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.  He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous...

"You have heard that it was said, 'eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

And to anyone who finds this naive or can see no practical value in focusing on these concepts, we must thank them and continue on our way. We have seen countless examples, time after time, how the actions of one person can make a difference to many others. The simple act of extending humble generosity, compassion and forgiveness to another can have powerfully positive ramifications.
It always starts small - with a spouse, our family, our children, a friend or co-worker - but the ripple effect is undeniable.

I know what you're thinking. How did we get from gun violence to this? Well, I said this would take work. Sometimes these kinds of ideas need to be approached in small steps. We just need to keep asking ourselves, what do I really want? To win and feel morally superior, or to live in peace? Is being right more important than liberating myself and others from and endless cycle of struggle, suffering, anxiety, guilt and remorse?

OK, then, what if we just do something, anything that takes us in that direction. Just do one thing that shows some compassion, some generosity, some forgiveness. Help someone relieve their suffering; be of service to someone who needs help.

"The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted."

We have to stop thinking about how this is not going to change anything. That is the ego talking, thinking that we must have a large, systemic impact to be worth something.

"Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

We only have one reasonable choice: to try, just try, to live each day with hearts full of love and compassion for things as they actually are. In this way we can bring peace to our little corner of the world. Lots of people are already doing this, all the time. Let's join them.




COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY, 
or SIGN IN AND START A CONVERSATION!
Your thoughts and questions are are always welcome. Please leave a comment below. You can comment anonymously as a guest, but if you take a moment to register, you'll be able to exchange comments with TruthDots or others, and be notified when people respond to your comment.

SHARE!
Feel free to share this post using any of the buttons below.

True Believers and Manipulators

                   
As more and more facts come to light about the stunningly immoral behavior of the superclass which seeks to control every aspect of our lives, we keep asking ourselves, what motivates these people?

Mark Crispin Miller, in his introduction to a recent reprint of Edward Bernays Propaganda, points to an answer, as he discusses the dual nature of the minds of demagogues such as Hitler, Mussolini, McCarthy and others. While on the one hand, they appear to be radically committed to their mission, on the other they are detached and manipulative. Miller proposes that it is actually both - they are "fanatical and cynical at once, neither wholly in control nor wholly ecstatic. Such agitators work within a certain mental borderland, where one can never clearly see conviction as distinct from calculation. Indeed, that inner murkiness appears itself to be the very source or basis of the mass manipulator's enigmatic power, and so we cannot comprehend it through schematic dualistic formulas."
(By the way, this is a very valuable book to read, and Miller's excellent introduction makes it doubly so.)

I think this idea goes a long way to explaining the actions of all the megalomaniacs running rampant over our democracy, our economy, our media, our civil liberties, our education system, our privacy, our environment, our food, our water, you name it. And of course, waging wars around the world. They always come up with a rationale to justify what they do, and perhaps they even believe it is a righteous, virtuous cause. But that doesn't stop them from engaging in the most blatantly unethical, manipulative, and usually criminal behavior in pursuit of their goals.

The powerful manipulators seem to have two underlying attitudes. One goes something like: "I think you are inferior, therefore I have no reason to treat you with any respect, compassion or humanity. I can exploit you and do whatever I want to you with no concern. The only things of importance are the increase of my own wealth and power." The other would be: "I think you are inferior, therefore I must use my vast superiority to do whatever is necessary to protect and improve the world as I see fit. Because you are inferior you are incapable of deciding for yourselves what is best for you. I, in my superiority,  must make those judgements - for the greater good of all." As Miller suggests, both of these attitudes may exist simultaneously in their minds.

As you explore this topic you find there are many levels as the elites manipulate those below them, who in turn manipulate those below them. The plight and peril of anyone who has genuine passion and commitment is that he is susceptible to being used by someone who knows how to manipulate his passion. Thus the revolutionaries in the Arab Spring uprisings in Egypt and Libya are in danger of being manipulated by Western covert forces who only view their countries as pieces on the global chessboard. NGO's and charitable foundations, staffed by hard-working, smart, sincere, committed individuals, unwittingly provide cover and credibility, disguising the true objectives of the mega-billioinaires who finance them. Honorable young men and women with noble ideals, equipped with great intelligence, skills, and bravery, become the public face of a military that, just below the surface, is rife with corruption and senseless brutality.

Perhaps the true believer's passion is actually nothing more than bigotry, or simple hatred of the poor, the foreign, the dark-skinned. He can be used by the elites to engage in the most heinous, in-humane actions - which also happen to serve the long-term agendas of the elites. That person may eventually be exposed as a racist or extremist, but his manipulators remain obscured.The recent coverage of the sordid history of forced sterilizations in the U.S for most of the 20th century is but one example:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/15/health/california-forced-sterilizations/index.html
http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/11/07/8640744-victims-speak-out-about-north-carolina-sterilization-program-which-targeted-women-young-girls-and-blacks

We have some contemporary examples in which it is hard to tell whether one is a true believer, or a cynical manipulator. Take for example Duane Clarridge, a CIA officer who became notorious in the 80's for his role in the Iran-Contra scandal.  He is a perfect example of someone so wrapped up (apparently) in the myth of American exceptionalism that he is convinced that any level of brutality is allowable, as long as it is in the cause of defending and promoting American interests. Note how insistent he is on selling us on the righteousness and importance of what are clearly violent, inhumane acts.



And his present-day counterpart, Jose Rodriguez, virtually identical in his tone and intent:



Do they really believe what they're saying? If so, whose agenda are they serving so willingly? Or are they just cynically spouting the words that they know will inflame the passions of those who respond more to appeals to emotion than to reason? Or is it all of the above?

In political rhetoric, there is always some invocation of a "greater good" to justify actions that are clearly, obviously uncompassionate, inhumane and destructive. Cut social spending to save the economy. Fight endless wars to achieve peace. Support a dictator to help spread democracy. The illogic of such double-speak is usually so transparent one wonders how they carry it off. Then we remember: they are experts at that.

In a world of such insane contradictions, it helps to recognize that this is actually the elites' weakness: the inherent irrationality of their actions. By being so utterly obsessed with personal gain and the exercise of control, they are forced to produce a rationale for public consumption that simply doesn't hold up. They are aware of it; that is why they engage in so much propagandizing, media manipulation and cultural conditioning. What we need is for people to reawaken their common sense and capacity for critical thinking, in order to break through all that, and realize we need to stand up and refuse to tolerate it.

It also calls for us to re-connect to our core sense of compassion and empathy for others, in order to grasp the basic, simple ethical flaw in the mindset of the manipulator: that the lack of caring for others is, in reality, destructive to themselves and to the greater good they claim to serve.


COMMENT ANONYMOUSLY, 
or SIGN IN AND START A CONVERSATION!
Your thoughts and questions are are always welcome. Please leave a comment below. You can comment anonymously as a guest, but if you take a moment to register, you'll be able to exchange comments with TruthDots or others, and be notified when people respond to your comment.

SHARE!
Feel free to share this post using any of the buttons below.

Robert Koehler: Peace Journalist

I feel very fortunate to have discovered Bob Koehler, a veteran journalist who for many years has turned his talents toward commentary with a mission. His writing has been very inspirational to me, and I would say Bob has figured prominently in motivating me to go forward with this blog.

Bob speaks his mind, with his heart fully engaged, on matters of conscience. He observes and comments on current events, then drills down into them to find the deeper relevance to our humanity. He unfailingly takes a stand firmly on the side that so few seem to consider: the one of compassion, of forgiveness, and most insistently, of non-violent conflict resolution. He insists that we take a hard look at the callousness, the inhumanity, of much of our modern society, but he is also fully confident in our ability to transcend it.

As a career journalist in Chicago, he has the credentials to back up his analysis of current events. He has been an award-winning reporter, editor, and for many years a columnist. Regarding his column, I'll let him describe it for you:

"Since 1999, I’ve written a column that has been nationally syndicated by Tribune Media Services, which is part of the Chicago Tribune. That column was initially called by the name this website still bears, Common Wonders. It started out more personal than political, then, post-9/11, as the Bush administration unleashed its war on terror, I became increasingly focused on current events. I referred to the column as “part political brawl, part secular prayer...”
...I’ve trespassed, as a journo aiming at a mainstream audience, upon the sacred consensus that America is a dumbed down, spectator nation, yet somehow special, God’s Chosen Superpower, the greatest nation on Earth. Let’s get beyond our limited allegiances, I say, and celebrate our wholeness as a species and a planet.
I’ve been called blatantly relevant.
And I have proclaimed myself, ever since coming across the term at Transcend Media Service, a peace journalist.
“Peace journalism is when editors and reporters make choices — about what to report, and how to report it — that create opportunities for society at large to consider and to value nonviolent responses to conflict.” — Jake Lynch

Visit his website, commonwonders.com to keep up with his weekly columns.

While you're there, check out his book, Courage Grows Strong At The Wound.

Bob says:

"The book is a collection of my essays fused into several narratives. They run the gamut from the highly personal (dealing with grief, the death of my wife, single parenting) to the acutely political. The book is about the quest for both inner and outer peace, the urgency of both, and the fragile future we are giving birth to." 

Amazon.com says:

"This spellbinding book is a plea for sanity and disarmament, a celebration of the wonder of life and a cry of faith in an empowering love that can save us."

And a great review of the book can be found here.

I count on Bob's weekly columns to remind me that there is always another aspect to be considered when reporting or commenting on the brutality and injustice of our world: the possibility of non-violent conflict resolution, forgiveness, redemption, and peaceful co-existence. Bob is there to remind us that these are not just the topics of Sunday school sermons, but are in fact essential for our survival and evolution as a species. And he frequently shows us that there are brilliant, courageous people out there in the world right now, doing the hard work of seeking peace.