Quoted from a page in Mr. Rockefellers’ book ‘Memoirs’ published in 2002, page 405, Chapter ‘Proud Internationalists’: “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure, One World if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty and I am proud of it.”

Manifestations Part 1. of 1.

Humanity, as a progressive species, has guided, shaped and manifested the world that we live in today. Every individual that has existed or exists now bears responsibility for the world around them, the reality that exists and the direction we are heading in. It is easy for an individual to talk themselves down, to think that they cannot make a significant difference in the universe around them. Progressive scientific theories such as the Chaos Theory are allowing for discussion and rational thinking of the idea that small “insignificant” changes or choices can change the course of the future: the “butterfly flapping its wings creating a tornado on the other side of the planet” image illustrates this thinking. The truth is that we all bear responsibility for the state of the world, and the direction in which we, as a species, are heading. By our actions and by our thoughts we are creating the future, subtle choice by subtle choice. If every individual said to themselves: “I will not kill another living being”, the concept of war would cease to exist. If we each personally took responsibility for our actions and our thoughts, our reality and our future could change dramatically. If every individual thought: “I would do that, but nobody else will”, or: “I would do that if everybody else did”, then it would help to destroy any chance of change. This is the power of thought, and the power of the individual.

People have the power to shape their future, but for administration purposes they leave most of the work up to their superiors, the elected or unelected officials; the military; the institutions and organisations; and those who collect enough money, giving them both influence and power. The people believe that the current state of the planet is in the hands of their leaders, and therefore the responsibility lies with the ruling class also. This is not so. The true power lies in the people, a fact that is well known by the world leaders. This is why such evasive methods of control are being implemented, in conjunction with the ever-increasing rules of law, to further increase the illusion that the State and the leaders have the power. In reality, the power is situated inside of every individual, and thus the responsibility for the state of the world must also lie with the individual. And no government or military can stand up to; or restrain the thoughts or actions of; or imprison against the will of; the individual without inflicting on their free will, their basic “human right”, unless it is in accordance with the rule of law of the State, which as stated is becoming ever-increasingly invasive and restrictive to maintain the illusion of power and control. This is because the people have accepted the “laws of the land”, insomuch as a significant majority has not risen up to challenge the laws and/or overthrow the ruling body. This acceptance of the laws of the land does not necessarily mean a placid acceptance; it simply means a significant majority of the people have not changed these laws. In a democratic society, effective change can be pursued through a number of means, with anything ranging from peaceful protests to a revolutionary coup; from democratic voting and petition signing to violent riots, acts of “terrorism”/”freedom fighting” and the like. The differing means have the same end goals, with differing repercussions. In a democratic society, the governing body is elected by the people, for the people, in theory. Therefore it is almost an unwritten rule that the government must listen to the people. If it doesn’t, it faces retaliation from the people, who could vote out the governing body at the next election, or could pursue more active, perhaps violent, methods to ensure the will of the people is heard. The governing body, which should instinctively listen to the will of the people, usually responds to the number of individuals who elicit change. For example, a large number of signatures on a petition will be more likely to influence government change in the people’s favour; a large number of votes for the opposition party could force a governing body out of office; a large number of violent protesters could force a governing body to act quickly – in the form of military/police control initially, perhaps, but again with a large enough number of individuals, the governing body is more likely to accede to the change. However, the point is, the people always hold the power for they greatly outnumber the ruling institutions. The State only exists because the people accept or allow it. At any given moment, the people could rise up and take back their lands, their lives, and their control. As proven throughout history, the people can rise up in revolution, even without a majority, to seize control.  However this is merely an illusion: the power was with the people all along, it is simply that a new governing body or State overthrows the old system and the people accept this new form, for good or for evil. If the people did not accept it, they could change it through the same means as stated before: via armed uprising, peaceful protest, voting if it is “allowed” by the state, or a number of other means.

Whilst the government and subsequently the State are, ultimately, appointed by the people; those “in power” utilise, for the aim of maintaining the illusion of power, methods of control and restriction. This illusion of power maintains the status quo, in that it is utilised to keep the people from rising up, as well as keeping the public cynical about the extent of their own “power”, if you will. The illusion leads the people to think that they are effectively powerless to stop their government from taking certain actions or pursuing certain ways of thinking; that the actions of their military and other functions of the State are “out of the hands” of the people and that their actions cannot be stopped. This can be seen prior to the Iraq War, when great numbers of protestors turned out to protest the illegal war and their governments’ intentions to send their troops to invade. Despite the large turnout of the protests the Iraq War went ahead as planned. Whilst it can be argued that this is evidence that the people cannot change the intentions and actions of the government, let it be noted that had the protests continued for, 6 months shall we say, a different result may have been achieved. General strikes could have been implemented, forcing the State’s hand. Different courses of action could be pursued, and an important factor (as well as the number of individuals that participate) lies in the length of time that a course of action is pursued. Governments, no matter how stubborn, cannot ignore a significant response from the people pursued for a significant length of time. There are many different methods and ways that the people can elicit real change and response, but change comes from the individual. Let it be noted that soldiers are individuals too, and if each individual stated: “I will not kill an innocent life”, or, “I will not participate in an illegal war”, (to show possible examples of powerful thought), then a government’s course of action could not be completed. War could be prevented.

The people hold the power but get trapped in the “accepted” frame of mind, the “accepted” way of looking at things. However, the accepted norms and values of society, and thus the people, are often influenced by the government body; the State; various State institutions; the “laws of the land”, and other influential factors. This is how the government maintains its illusion of power, and constantly reinforces this illusion through various means of control and restriction. Western societies are experiencing advancements in State surveillance and infringements on personal privacy and liberty. The illusion of power is becoming more real, because the people are accepting the “status quo”, because it’s just “the way things are” and the people believe themselves powerless to prevent further advances in State control. The governments are using opportunities to further legitimise their control and their power above the people. Western “democracies” are doing so by exploiting fears of “terrorism” to justify increases in State power. Other States are doing much the same although in countries where out-right dictatorships control, much less propaganda is needed than in the West. If this continues, then the illusion of power will weaken whilst the reality will strengthen. Governing bodies, through the advancements in technology, the increase in the “Police State” framework of Western States, and the increase in the strength of the military, will strengthen their “seat of power” above the people, meaning that any uprising, rebellion, protest, riot, or any other means utilised by the people, will be easily prevented or controlled by the increasingly totalitarian governing body, thus removing any chance of the people regaining control over their country, or their lives. For today even in the most repressed countries in the world, the power still lies within the people, who are accepting their State, their predicament. Please note, that again I am not stating that they are placidly and timidly accepting their fate, or even that that they are accepting it because it is the “way things are”; even in these repressed countries ruled by an authoritarian government, there are individuals fighting against their oppression, their “predicament”, striving for more liberty and for peace. And a lot of countries now, in the 21^st Century, have built up their armies and their military capabilities, using their military against their own people; Police States where the military is used to repress the people, to break up protests, to kill “freedom fighters”. Even America has amended a piece of law which previously prevented the military from policing on American “soil”, though the governing body has yet to use the government in such a way as seen in some of the most repressed of countries. Yet even in these countries, with rebellious groups and individuals who do not accept the ruling body, there lies a significant number of individuals who accept, whether extremely unhappy with the status quo or not, their state and the State. The people always outnumber the military, and a significant number could, at any time, rise up and change their future. This is as stated previously, and this is the reason government organisations across the world are slowly dissolving the illusion of power and replacing it with cold, hard reality. A reality which every individual is responsible for manifesting, and for accepting.

For the governments in the 21^st Century find themselves at the dawn of a new age of technological and scientific advancement. It could be an age of accelerated revolution and harmony, or it could be an age of destruction and oppression. The future of this age is being decided by every individual, every second.

The governing institutions of the world today have at their disposal far more advanced scientific and technical resources than the governments of only a few decades ago. This is how we have come to see the exponential rise in surveillance cameras across the UK, the rise in “Database States” and the collection of personal data such as fingerprints, the increase in State and Police powers, and the rising power of the Secret Services who have at their hands increasingly powerful technology. The power is shifting from the people to the governing organisations, with a shift in attitudes as well. The people, under the illusion that they are “powerless”, are acceding obedience, their rights and their privacies due to fear of external “enemies”; the threat of terrorism and the constant wars keeping the people in a state of paranoia and self-doubt; memories such as the failed protests prior to the Iraq War further serving to promote a sense of “powerlessness”, while the ruling “powers” gather for themselves more resources at their disposal. And all the while the people’s rights and their freedoms are being limited, with the governments generally ignoring the alarmed individuals attempting to combat these restrictions and invasions and to elicit change in the mentality of our governing bodies. However it appears as though the more power our leaders and our States gather, the more numbers of individuals it takes for them to “listen”.

Humanity is always striving, in an almost romantic way, for a utopian future. I hesitate to use the word “perfect” but certainly a future of peace is what we are programmed to believe we are heading towards. It is as if we are to believe that once we advance enough, technologically and scientifically, we will cease to war and to oppress and to limit others; that we will build a utopian, harmonious world free from racism and prejudice; a “good and just” world free from evil, essentially. This, again, is an illusion. It is an illusion propagated by the ruling elite, the governmental bodies, the States. It is an illusion that, again, serves to take power away from the people. We are to be led to believe that once humanity reaches a zenith, a peak in “evolution” or advancement, there will be peace and freedom. We are to be led to believe that this peak will come from technological and scientific advancement, and from our government bodies, our rulers- those to whom we have accepted/consented power to. This places responsibility for the future into the hands of our rulers, out of the hands of the people. And again, is an illusion.

As stated previously, the power lies with the people. The government’s actions are the people’s responsibility, the government is only “allowed” to pursue a course of action because the people accept it, i.e. they do not elicit/force change from the government. The utopian world of peace that we are supposed to be progressing towards could be instigated at any moment by the people; by individuals changing their actions, their thoughts. Humanity does not need scientific or technological advancements in order to manifest a world with more freedom, a world without warfare and oppression. The increases in technology and science are only serving to restrict our freedoms, to limit our power, to increase the suffering in the world. Technology is leading us to more advanced weapons, to more nuclear warheads on the planet. The mentality of our accepted institutions are leading us to warfare in foreign countries over resources, or over another governing body and their restrictive regime- under the pretext that our version of democracy is “freedom”, whilst innocent individuals are killed for a war that they did not ask for.  Under the pretext of security, our Western governments are limiting our rights and ignoring the will of individuals because their number is perceived as being “insignificant”. Under the illusion of powerlessness, the people are losing the will to fight, while terrible atrocities continue across the world- a world each of us is helping to shape.

The perfect utopian, peaceful, “future” of the world would be a world where Man can live in true freedom. To truly be free to explore his free will, without any restrictions. And yet, to not wish to kill, or to destroy another. This is the paradox which is another illusion. The paradox only exists if we are led to believe that “evil” is an existent force inside Man, that one cannot truly be free and also not commit acts of “sin”, that war is an innate part of human kind. This is the unconscious illusionary paradox that is present in modern-day societal thinking, and indeed in the mentality of our governing forces. The truth is, as stated previously, the power is in the individual. If every individual said to themselves: “I will not kill”, then murder would not exist. This is not to say that every individual would turn around and say to themselves, “I will not kill” – the entire military would be out of a job, for example. But it is an example of the power of the individual, and subsequently the people, and it is small changes that make a difference. If a significant majority of individuals thought to themselves: “Violence for any means is wrong”, then it would change their actions and possibly actions of other individuals. This could lead to the individual taking action when encountering violence, i.e. finding out that their country is to go to war could lead to them protesting; seeing war casualties on the news may inspire the individual to give money to the aid, or to volunteer for an aid charity; they could sign a petition or join a group of individuals who share similar views, wishing to change the “status quo”. These are just small brief examples of how an individual changing their thoughts/beliefs could lead to a number of changes. The people hold the power, and the responsibility for the state of the world, and its future. Humanity could “change its ways” merely by changing its thinking, and thereby changing its actions. Either our ruling “elite”, our governing bodies and institutions, would change their thinking, their actions; or the people would manifest change through whatever means necessary- from passive action to active revolution.

The future I described earlier was one of freedom, where individuals explore their free will, in an advancing world free from warfare and oppression. This utopian future may differ from individual to individual, but it is assumed that all these “visions” of the future humanity is heading towards hold some similarities. It would be hard to imagine one’s image of a perfect future to be a world where violence and oppression are still prevalent. However this assumes that whilst governing bodies or committees (or whatever form) may still exist, there would not, for example, be a military or a police force, nor would there be limiting laws or restrictions placed on freedom and free will, for in this envisaged future individuals choose not to kill or to restrict or repress others, but advance and evolve peacefully. It is interesting to note that George Bush Sr. stated in a “historic” speech a different kind of future that humanity has “an opportunity to forge” or rather, manifest. He stated that:

“We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order- a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations”

This simple statement offers a broad insight into the mentality of our governmental organisations. Note the use of the phrase: “law of the jungle”. It is stated that the future will be a world with a “rule of law”, implying that the “law” is above that of the “jungle”; and that the “law of the jungle” is violence, oppression, racism- the “rule of law” will rise above the existing “law of the jungle” to form a “New World Order”, which, it is implied, will be free from the warfare and violence and will “govern the conduct of nations” i.e. free trade, as well as the added bonus of no more fighting over resources- no more wars. A simple search on the internet will bring up multitudes of blogs, web pages and videos on “New World Order”, however it is worth searching for videos or articles on politicians and the phrase “New World Order”; it did not stem from George Bush Sr. in 1991 and has been stated in speeches by individuals such as Gordon Brown and Barack Obama, as well as many other world leaders, powerful individuals, and in various forms in the media in news and print. The phrase and the meaning behind the statement by Bush Sr. above are indicators of the mentality of the world leaders and the future that we are heading towards. Again it is an illusion that may soon become cold reality- a world organisation that extends control and takes away the power from the people. As it stands, the people hold the power to manifest “the future” today – individuals hold this power through their thoughts and their actions. However it may soon come to pass where individuals accede their power to the world leaders and/or this “New World Order” governed by the “rule of law, not the law of the jungle”. This would mean that it would be ever-increasingly difficult for the people to manifest their will over the government organisations that are supposed to be for the people.

George Bush Sr. continues:

“When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order- an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfil the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders.”

This sentence sounds rather ominous especially the, “When we are successful, and we will be”- implying that firstly, the public are supportive of this “New World Order”, and secondly, that there is nothing that can be done to stop it. It then begs the question, what exactly was the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders? Was the initial “vision” of the U.N. to be a worldwide government, ensuring the “rule of law, not the law of the jungle”?

Humanity is approaching a crossroad. In fact, it is already at a crossroad. The problem is actually: how long can we afford to stay at the crossroad? Either the people take responsibility for the state of the world, and the future of our societies and ourselves, or we leave it in the hands of our governing bodies. And our governing bodies are increasing their power at an alarming rate. Their military and surveillance capabilities are advancing, and if they truly are aiming for a peaceful future under a “New World Order”, than it should be stated that violence is not the way to go about it. We cannot enter an age of peace under acts of violence. We should stop the warring now, not later. If we as individuals do nothing, our governments will pave the way for our future with warfare, innocent bloodshed , oppression, weapon stockpiling, to name but a few atrocities. We will enter an age of peace with advanced military and Secret Service organisations behind our “elected” officials, and we will enter under this “New World Order” with less rights and freedoms than before we were “better off”.

So in conclusion, if there is any conclusion to be made from the vast, innumerable difficulties facing humanity at present, and the vast innumerable atrocities we are allowing to happen...  The power lies with the people. At the present moment, though government organisations are slowly tipping the balance. The responsibility for the state of the world lies with the people, with the individual, as does the future of the planet. Do we take our fate and responsibility into our own hands, or do we leave it up to our world leaders, who are continuing the violence and repression that echoes throughout history. The choice, is yours. 

Our Veins are full of Oil, Their Pockets are full of Money.

Chevron claims to have found evidence of corruption and bribery in the ongoing Chevron Ecuador Lawsuit. The lawsuit, which has continued since 1993, is backed by 30,000 Ecuadorians. How can a multi-national corporation stand against 30,000 individuals? Quite simply, actually. Corporations have the same rights as humans, in fact in some respects they have more rights. And when a multi-billion dollar corporation goes to court, you can guarantee that things will get ugly. Bribery, corruption, pay-offs.. these are the things we envisage when we imagine a wealthy company engaged in a lawsuit, armed with top lawyers and the deniability claim. And so it is not surprise that this is exactly what has happened, "evidence" has surfaced of bribery and corruption, though instead of Chevron being responsible, the corporation states that the Ecuadorian political side is to blame. Their website states:


"Video recordings reveal a $3 million bribery scheme implicating the judge presiding over the environmental lawsuit currently pending against Chevron and individuals who identify themselves as representatives of the Ecuadorian government and its ruling party"

Chevron has posted the videos on their website, complete with PDF Video Transcripts and the letter written to the 'Ecuadorian Prosecutor General'. Perhaps this is just me, but I feel that during a lawsuit, it is a perhaps a bit wrong for the opposition to be posting videos and reports onto their website, that they are later relying on in court as evidence. Questions arise immediately as to how Chevron got ahold of video footage of secret meetings. Are Chevron employing spies now? Have they hired Ecuadorians to record these secret meetings? Or are they even more sinister than imagined, are they setting up these bribes and corruption, letting Ecuadorian individuals take the fall and essentially undermining the whole lawsuit?

Chevron are claiming that the evidence that they have obtained implicates several individuals including the judge overseeing the lawsuit, Juan Núñez, in bribery and pre-judging the verdict of the lawsuit. Chevron's website also includes copies in PDF format of both a "Motion to Disqualify Judge Nunez" and a "Motion to Disqualify Judge Nunez's Rulings". So if Judge Nunez had pre-judged the verdict to ensure that Chevron lose the lawsuit, and his 'Rulings' are disqualified by Chevron's Motions, then who is to take his place? A Chevron appointed judge? Or a Chevron backed/financed judge? The vacuum that would be left if Nunez is disqualified would mean that Chevron have the upper hand, able to influence or oversee the implementation of a new judge. And I wonder how long it would be before a new judge, with negative attitudes towards the overbearing multi-national corporation, is discovered to be embroiled in deceit and corruption. 

With such a historical and expensive lawsuit, asking around $27 billion from Chevron, bribery and corruption were inevitable. Firstly, because a multi-national corporation is involved. I am pretty sure no-one expects Chevron to roll over and play ball on command. Secondly, because the lawsuit is being judged by Ecuadorian courts. Ecuador is much poorer than Chevron, which is kind of sad in a way. An actual country, with thousands and thousands of people, is poorer than an international oil company. So of course Ecuadorian political individuals, lawyers and even the judge overseeing the lawsuit will be tempted by the money. It is human nature, in a way. And the Chevron site explains that the videos reveal a "$3 million bribery scheme". I'm sorry, maybe this is wrong or irrelevant, but I'm sure Chevron could spend $3 million without batting an eyelid, I'm sure the higher-ups' holidays cost the company more than $3 million each year. But again the question arises, is Chevron involved in the bribery scheme? Did they set it up somehow, knowing that the poorer Ecuadorian individuals involved in the lawsuit would acquiesce? The fact is, that before the lawsuit even begun, anyone could have predicted this. From one side or another, bribery or corruption was bound to have surfaced. From Chevron, who has the capital to influence and destroy decisions and careers, and from the Ecuadorian side, many times poorer than Chevron. Regardless of Chevron's involvement in the bribery scheme, they haven't exactly been playing fair. According to Amnesty International's website:

"Chevron (CVX) has filled a claim with the American Arbitration Association (AAA), so that the Ecuadorian oil company, Petroecuador, will take on any clean up costs and legal fees if Chevron (CVX) loses the lawsuit to the Amazon residents. The Ecuadorian Government and Petroecuador have filled a suit with New York's Supreme Court against Chevron (CVX) and the AAA to stop the arbitration proceedings, which have been temporarily suspended."


So the lawsuit has not yet reached a conclusion, and the multi-billion dollar corporation is already trying to ensure that an Ecuadorian oil company takes on the clean up costs and the legal fees, which goes against many of the principles that the trial is essentially founded upon. It is obvious that 30,000 Ecuadorians have not filed a lawsuit so that one of their own oil companies takes on the costs of Chevron's actions, particularly if Chevron loses the lawsuit. This is on top of Chevron's "Motions" to disqualify Nunez and his rulings. So as well as attempting to void the result of the lawsuit, Chevron are also attempting to ensure that should they lose, they are not liable for the clean up costs or legal fees.


The trial has been ongoing since 2003, and these accusations and games will only serve to prolong the trial. As soon as money comes into the picture, greed and deceit come into play. Chevron doesn't want to admit responsibility, or pay out any money to clean up the toxic waste and the repercussions its had. Ecuadorian individuals involved in the lawsuit have been accused of bribery and corruption. And all this while, the 30,000 Ecuadorians who filed the lawsuit, as well as many more that stand by them, suffer all the more while money causes more problems, and those responsible for the harm caused to these people are tied up in the courts, the law, bureaucracy, paperwork, etc etc, meaning that a decision will still be a long time coming. And reparations to the Ecuadorian area will be longer still. The 30,000 Ecuadorians do not, I imagine, ultimately care about how much money Chevron is made to pay, or if they admit to all the damages or not. They do not care if their lawyers or judge is involved in bribery or not. Ultimately, all these Ecuadorians want is for clean, safe land once more, for an end to the suffering and harm caused to the people and the subsequent generations born in the regions. And this is the same for all people across the globe, who have had to suffer at the hands of multi-national corporations who have more rights than individual human beings, and more money than many countries on the planet today. For these people to get back their safe land and their health, they cannot wage war. They cannot take arms against the intangible corporation, they cannot vote them out of their country or refuse them entry onto their land. They cannot realistically protect their land and its resources from the bloated, wealthy corporations who take the country's resources and sell it on at profit. So they have filed a lawsuit, trying to use the legal system to protect their rights, their basic human rights, and their land. But not having lived in a modern, wealthy capitalist society, these Ecuadorians have not realised something: the legal system protects the wealthy and the corporations, over and above the rights of the individual. And when money is involved, these 30,000 Ecuadorians are pushed to one side whilst arguments of bribery, corruption and unfair practices are uncovered. My hope and compassion is not with the Ecuadorians involved in the lawsuit- the judges and the lawyers and the other individuals. Though I wish them success with winning the lawsuit, bribery/corruption is not acceptable and only serves to weaken their defence against Chevron, who have filed against Judge Nunez and his future rulings. My hope and compassion is with the 30,000 Ecuadorians who filed the lawsuit, and those who suffer even now as we in the West live in comfort, using the oil taken from countries like Ecuador to enhance our standards of living. Because truly, they do not care about the money, or for "revenge" on Chevron; for them it would be enough, I imagine, for the land to be made safe again, their waters to be made clean, and for the damage that has been done in the name of profits to be reversed. 
The damages that the Ecuadorians are filing to be reversed have come from 30 years of oil drilling. Chevron's continuing tactics to divert attention and responsibility from its own actions will only serve to lengthen the ongoing lawsuit and may undermine the final rulings. Ecuadorians are still struggling for survival with devastating levels of miscarriages, cancers and birth defects as a result of the toxic waste that still pollutes the area. 

Lisbon Treaty

Has anyone looked into the Lisbon Treaty? I have read that it effectively undermines our constitution, our parliament, our government, and gives the power to abolish our political parties, force us into the Euro, and basically in conjunction with other EU treaties, is an attempt to create a sort of dictatorship or single governing body which renders individual state governments powerless. So I decided to look into it (sad I know) and came across some clauses in the actual treaty on an EU site:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:SOM:EN:HTML

Well I don't really know what to say, I've written a couple below and said my thoughts on it, I'm still unbiased and not really sure what to think, so I thought I would post some of the clauses of the treaty and see what everyone thinks?

Article 2

Throughout the Treaty:
(a) the words ‘Community’ and ‘European Community’ shall be replaced by ‘Union’ and any
necessary grammatical changes shall be made, the words ‘European Communities’ shall
be replaced by ‘European Union’

(c) the words ‘the Council [shall], acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in
Article 251’ shall be replaced by ‘the European Parliament'

Page C306/14
Article 8A-4:
"Political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness
and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union."
(At the EU’s Party Financing Conference in Madrid in June 1999,parties at the European level were defined as parties with voters in more than 10 countries. Therefore, we do not express the views of "The Union")


Page 306/34
Section 2 "Provisions on the common security and defence policy"
49) (a):
"1. The common security and defence policy shall be an integral part of the common
foreign and security policy. It shall provide the Union with an operational capacity
drawing on civilian and military assets. The Union may use them on missions outside the
Union for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security in
accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter. The performance of these
tasks shall be undertaken using capabilities provided by the Member States.’;"
49) (c)
"3. Member States shall make civilian and military capabilities available to the Union
for the implementation of the common security and defence policy, to contribute to the
objectives defined by the Council. Those Member States which together establish
multinational forces may also make them available to the common security and defence
policy.

Member States shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities.(!!!!!!) The
Agency in the field of defence capabilities development, research, acquisition and
armaments (hereinafter referred to as “the European Defence Agency”) shall identify
operational requirements, shall promote measures to satisfy those requirements, shall
contribute to identifying and, where appropriate, implementing any measure needed tostrengthen the industrial and technological base of the defence sector, shall participate in
defining a European capabilities and armaments policy, and shall assist the Council in
evaluating the improvement of military capabilities
(so member states have to actively improve their military capabilities??! For "The Union"?)
49-6
"Those Member States whose military capabilities fulfil higher criteria and which
have made more binding commitments to one another in this area with a view to the
most demanding missions shall establish permanent structured cooperation within the
Union framework. Such cooperation shall be governed by Article 28 E. It shall not affect
the provisions of Article 28 B."
(does this mean us? Does this mean we will be paty of a "permanent structured cooperation within the Union"?)


Page C-306/15
Article 8-B
"4. Not less than one million citizens who are nationals of a significant number of
Member States may take the initiative of inviting the European Commission, within the
framework of its powers, to submit any appropriate proposal on matters where citizens
consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing the Treaties."
(So to petition against the EU, you have to ask for further laws?)


Page C-306/12
Article 3-A
"3. Pursuant to the principle of sincere cooperation, the Union and the Member States shall,
in full mutual respect, assist each other in carrying out tasks which flow from the Treaties"
"The Member States shall facilitate the achievement of the Union's tasks and refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union's objectives.’."

(REFRAIN FROM ANY MEASURE WHICH COULD JEOPARDISE THE ATTAINMENT OF /THE UNION/'s OBJECTIVES. In other words- do not oppose the EU, sorry, "The Union")

"The Member States shall take any appropriate measure, general or particular, to ensure
fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the Treaties or resulting from the acts of the
institutions of the Union." (Member states should take measure against acts of other members?)

I don't know the end, or how it began,
or the men that were slain, or the songs that they sang,
but I know that the battles continue this day,
for the violence remains, here to stay.

Fighting for freedom, for love and for peace
they clashed swords with Fate and let Death take his prizes
For out of the carnage and blood nothing rises
Save evil and sin, Destiny's twin, blackened and twisted it rises within
each of the fallen's kin, to continue the fight on another day,
Avenging their father's and brother's lay slain, the children grow up, inheriting pain.

And so it continues, this violent act,
when brother kills brother, in an unholy pact,
to continue the wars of their father's time,
The infinite battle, the ultimate crime,
of taking a life not of your own, to returning to earth another's blood sweat and bone.

The family awaits at their home all alone but their father lay dead on the cold earth and stone,
when will the price of battle become, too much to bear for the people now numb,
from fear of attack and terror and lies
they fall on their knees and preach to the skies
for an end to the violence, to cut all their ties
to the anger of the past, to the embrace they despise.

No longer do men fight blade with blade
Nor fight with honour, in the glade.
Times past when Death did wait his turn
for bodies to fall amongst the fern
with a blade through heart and destiny self-made the soldiers took themselves to the grave.

Now war continues to take its dead
And the fields and sand are still painted red
And Death waits by with gleeful amusement
at the people's panic and their confusement.

But now the dead are innocents slain
by the bombs that fall as if like rain
to burn and brighten the darkest night
the people fall, against the might
for no longer do men use sword and bow
to take their victims blow by blow.
For now the weapons are guns and bombs
which flatten cities- ash falls like snow
amongst the rubble and ruin and blood the children do weep amongst the mud
to inherit the pain once more and again
to continue the battle, to avenge the slain,
Never once knowing it is all the same,
the perpetual fight, the infinite battle,
that nothing has changed in centuries past,
save the weapons that kill have surpassed
mere bows and axes, swords and steel,
The children still are left to feel
the pain and anguish of their father's fight
to which no end, is ever in sight
The infinite battle, born again, always stays the same.


I don't know the end, or how it began,
or the men that were slain, or the songs that they sang,
but I know that the battles continue this day,
for the violence remains, here to stay.

We have lost.

Until the military is disbanded there will be no peace. There can never be peace if your country is vying for military dominance. Until the secret services, secret organisations and secret behaviour of the government is stopped, we will continue to be slaves. For you cannot truly be free when those above you conduct themselves under secrecy. The governing body should be the most transparent institution of them all.

You cannot fight for peace, it is a contradiction.  If the government owns the people, who owns the government? You have to look at the people behind the elected officials, the people who fund them, the elected official's business partners and friends/allies, the corporations who own a stake in the government or the leaders. And that is too much work for the average citizen, who will dismiss everything that does not fit into their "reality tunnel" as conspiracy, who will not see what is happening until it is too late.

The human race has already lost. We lost the game. We lost the race. We just plain lost. This is because we have the weapon capabilities to destroy the planet a hundred times over. Imagine if there was world peace tomorrow. Everyone's happy, no wars, just peace. There would still be thousands of nuclear warheads and deadly weapons across the globe. So we constantly live in the fear of annihilation. This fear of annihilation and the lust for military dominance leads countries to a perpetual arms race to develop the most powerful, accurate, deadly (etc) weapons or systems so that they can own it before any other country, because they are more "responsible" or "democratic". Yeah we have lost. Doesn't mean we should stop trying for peace. Doesn't mean we should stop trying to make things better, or standing up for human rights where ever they are violated. But it does mean that we lost, a long time ago. It wasn't your fault, don't worry. It was the culprits that it always has been- the elected and unelected leaders who own the world and think they know what's best. If it was up to the man in the street, we probably wouldn't be at war. We probably wouldn't have developed nuclear weapons. Because the ordinary citizen does not feel any need to war, or develop super weapons, or kill or maim. The ordinary citizen only begins to think so when the social institutions- the media, religion, propaganda from the governments, etc- begin to tell him that they need to go to war or develop a super weapon.

So yeah. Humanity, the dumbest species on the planet. Constantly warring since recorded history. Yet now we have the capabilities of destroying the planet many, many times over- and it's getting worse, more advanced weapons are developing with more military power than ever. So I would be afraid if I were you. Not afraid enough that you hide in a corner and weep, but afraid enough that you go and spread information, or organise yourselves, do action. Because you have two choices. You can either try and act, spread info, talk to people, get angry at the state of affairs and try and change things while we still have a pseudo-democracy, or, you can go shopping. Yeah that's right, shopping. Go about your day as normal, go shopping, "What do I care, I'm going to die one day anyway". Yeah that's the right attitude to have. Don't think about our future, our children.. just think about yourself. 'Cos that's what you've been programmed to do, you little robots, to be selfish little drones, caught up in routines and shopping and cycles self-perpetuating throughout your life, whilst outside of the bubble of society.. bombs fall from the skies destroying cities and killing innocents.. people starve and suffer from the effects of the globalisation of our corporations, the entities we feed with our consumer spending as we live comfortably, never having to see the how our hard-earned money is used to destroy the world.. third world countries are being taken advantage of, for their resources, their land, their waters, their people as a source of labour, their rainforests.. Whilst a western agenda keeps their populations in a state of ignorance and cynicism, closely monitored by the Big Brother state..

The very fact that the US secret service has admitted and released declassified documents relating to projects such as MK-ULTRA should raise questions and great fears. MK-ULTRA was a project to investigate mind-control and brainwashing techniques, the fact that the government and the secret service was investigating this area should worry you. The fact that they finally gave in to pressure and declassified the documents should worry you. If this is what they admit to, what do they keep secret?

MK-ULTRA was supposedly ended in the 1970's, though there is information out there from former CIA members and veterans that suggest that the project being disbanded was a cover story, or at least that similar projects are being continued. Until organisations like the CIA are disbanded or declassified, the people will remain ignorant and will remain under control. Do you really think that the CIA, for example, has stopped these sort of experiments? Or do you not think that they learned a few things from these experiments? The fact that they were conducting this sort of research is very, very worrying. And with more finance and greater technology in today's world, things are only going to get worse. Project HAARP, for example, is very worrying and there seems to be more to it than they would like to admit. We are under surveillance, we are under control. The worrying thing is how the government, media, and secret service leaders are all linked together if you investigate, even if it is merely financial, funding is being shared around between these powerful institutions to which we are all under the influence of.

I will continue this with more information when I have a chance.

Here's a link to a video about MK-ULTRA: Mk Ultra Project - very scary
CIA Mind Control Operation MK-ULTRA

Can We Have The Freedom To Have A Critical Debate Please?

In democratic societies, we elect our governments to protect our selves, but then our governments feel they need to protect us from ourselves. After gaining power and authority, the powers that be then feel that we cannot think and act responsibly as adults, and must exert tighter control on what we do with our lives, what we ingest into our bodies, and how we think and act in society.

The problem is, despite many debates and scientific evidence in support of marijuana, and the hemp plant in general, it remains an illegal, yet natural substance. Despite growing up alongside the plant, many societies have in the last century or so, criminalised the plant and its use by individuals.

As responsible, supposedly free adults, in a democratic society we only have a limited control on our consciousness and how we choose to explore our consciousness, possibly one of the most fundamental aspects of our existence. We are conditioned and programmed from birth to fit into a specific frame-of-mind if you will, or reality, to have certain views on existence and how reality works, and discouraged from exploring our spirituality and our consciousness. There are many levels and functions to the human brain, yet we as societies seem to hail the "alert problem-solving" level as the highest and most admirable level to be on, the alert problem-solving level is seen as as being consciousness, when we have many different brain waves and potentiality to explore. We are not allowed to take mind-altering substances that allow us to expand our minds further, or unlock possibilities, hence the misinformation promoted and the strict laws which mean that if you take a mind-altering substance, you are a criminal and can be locked up with murderers, rapists and other real criminals.. to take a substance which only impacts on your own body cannot be criminal. To smoke or ingest a plant that has grown up alongside humanity cannot be a criminal act. To exercise free will to explore your consciousness cannot be criminal.

The problem, is that in our societies the only legal option for altering your mind is alcohol and prescription drugs. There are also legal highs but many of them are now shown to be as dangerous as the illegal ones, sometimes more so. Socially acceptable drugs though, are alchohol and tobacco, two of the most dangerous substances known to man. Tobacco contains nicotine, one of the most addictive substances, and the tar build-up and chemicals in tobacco and smoke lead to thousands of deaths each year, as well as cancers and other illnesses. Alcohol kills thousands each year as well, and leads to violence and criminal acts, huge NHS bills, and leads to many complications and addictions. All people are asking for, is the right to choose what to put into their body. Society and Law states that only alcohol and cigarettes are acceptable, despite the dangers and the deaths and addictions they cause. The argument for legalising or at least decriminalising Marijuana does not go along the lines of "all drugs should be legal". We all know the huge dangers drugs like Cocaine, Speed, Heroin, Crystal Meth etc cause. All people are asking for is an informed debate about Marijuana and the hemp plant, with rational and critical thinking, not the petty arguments against it you hear on the news, from politicians and ignorant people:

"Well it's a drug so it's dangerous"... (so is alcohol, shown to be far worse.. and cigarettes of course)
"Well if you're going to legalise Marijuana you may as well legalise Cocaine etc" (erm...no, the debate is about marijuana and it's dangers/benefits, not harder more damaging drugs- notice how often that remark is thrown by people opposed to Marijuana, they start comparing it to very harmful drugs such as Cocaine and Heroin, ignoring the facts)
"Well it's illegal for a reason" (If we cannot have rational critical debates about law in a democratic society, then there is no true democracy. The government is not always right, it makes mistakes, sometimes huge mistakes, and sometimes it thinks it knows what is best for you when it is not. Look at Tobacco for example. For a while it was legal to purchase at the age of 16, then a few years ago it was raised to 18. Does this mean that the government made a mistake? Or they looked into it again and realised how harmful it is for you? Think of how many people turned 16 and thought "oh I'll buy some Tobacco", to become addicted to it, and then the law changed. So these 16/17 year olds addicted to smoking Tobacco have now become, in essence, criminals if they continue to purchase Tobacco. Laws should be discussed and debated over, we cannot place all our freedom and the rule of Law in the government's hands, they are elected by the people for the people and so should answer to the people- in theory)

The arguments against it go on in similar vein and are similarly ridiculous. Often people in the media attempting to have a rational debate about Marijuana are shot down with these ridiculous arguments against it. Basically the argument against it is that people cannot be trusted with their own minds and bodies, people cannot be trusted with free will, if Marijuana was legalised crime and deaths would go up (ha! really?), etc etc. It's funny because people against Marijuana often ignore the fact that Amsterdam has legalised Cannabis consumption and sale in special coffee shops, and the city is not under a siege of crime or deaths or accidents, and if you look at the figures far less youth smoke Marijuana than in other cities. It's often the case that making something criminal only creates an underground, making it more appealing. If Marijuana was legalised, people would still make rational, independant decisions about their own bodies, it's not like everyone would suddenly become full-time stoners, just like not everyone is an alcoholic. It would be illegal to smoke and drive, just like drinking, and working under the influence etc, it would not cause a mass pandemic. There is too little faith in the people and the leaders that be feel that we need more laws to control us and restrict what we choose to do with our lives.
At the end of the day I think it is ridiculous to call someone a criminal for ingesting a naturally-growing plant that has been with humans since our beginnings. We naturally have cannabinoid receptors in our brains that bind with the THC in Marijuana, there is no other purpose for these receptors so it is clear we have evolved alongside the plant. Our prisons are too full, and there are more pressing, real criminals that should be in prison instead of pot-smokers. If it was decriminalised than there would be no criminal dealing, if you could grow a plant in your house people would be happy to just smoke Cannabis in their own home. If it was taxed there would be a massive revenue for governments. Instead we are wasting so much of our taxpayers money on the "War on Drugs" and catching pot-smokers who do not commit any other "crime" than ingesting a natural plant. To be honest, it would be nice to have another drug to choose from other than alcohol (yes alcohol is a drug, and not an innocent drug either) in society, one which does not lead to mass violence and addiction, AA meetings etc.

The Cultivation of Cannabis can lead to a maximum imprisonment of 14 years.
If a person goes out, gets drunk, and commits Actual Bodily Harm, the maximum imprisonment is 5 years.
So we live in a society where to cultivate a natural plant and a fairly safe drug can lead to 14 years in the prison system (costing a huge sum of money over the years not to mention the psychological effect on the person), yet to commit Actual Bodily Harm (which occurs frequently when alcohol is introduced- the media panic over street crime and violence may be exaggerated or scare-tactics but it often involves alcohol, especially football hooliganism) against a person can lead to 5 years in comparison.
Not to mention the fact that in the UK, Cannabis is now a Class B substance leading to an unlimited fine or 5 years for simply possession. The direct.gov.uk website states that "Class B drugs are drugs that are less dangerous than Class A ones, but they can still be harmful. Class B drugs include cannabis and some amphetamines" and "Class C drugs are less dangerous to the user than Class A and Class B drugs."
So apparently, Cannabis is more harmful than Ketamine. Which does not seem to stand up to reason or critical debate but hey, they are the experts after all. It also places Cannabis in the same category of harmfulness and possible prison sentence as amphetamines, a group of drugs which are very harmful to your body both physically and mentally. Oh and apparently Magic Mushrooms are a Class A substance with possible sentences of 7 years in prison for possession, or life in prison for dealing. But we won't go into that here, this is about the debate about Cannabis. A debate which has support from people in high places, people in authority, thousands of people worldwide, medical professionals, etc so it's not just "dumb pot-heads" who want it legalised, it has support from many people and the debate will not die down, nor will people stop using the natural plant. Making it a Class A won't stop people. Making people criminals for taking it will not stop them. Because that is also an issue, whenever a new law is created, more criminals are created, and then "oh no the crime rate seems to be going up". Well, you did just make X percent of law abiding citizens now criminals. The other issue is the banning of Cannabis leads many to ignore the hemp plant, a vastly versatile plant which has so many uses it could actually alleviate many of the world's problems. We've turned away from hemp and it's uses into a synthetic, mass-produced world where natural is illegal and the Laws created by Man are superior to Nature. Uses of Hemp


All this is asking for, is continued support for the ongoing debate. In a truly democratic society, people should be allowed to voice their opinions and have critical, rational debate with people looking at the facts and not propaganda and misinformation, and defensive arguments that do not stand up to reason. Let people voice their opinions, and let people be responsible for their own bodies and their own actions. 


Debates in the media. Look at these videos and similar videos and weigh up your own views and opinions:
CNN Larry King 03/13/2009  - discusses hemp use as well and its prohibition
Why is Marijuana Illegal? - interviews with the US public on their views and how it came to be illegal
A GREAT MARIJUANA DEBATE! - a pro-legalisation guy versus a dumbass
Marijuana Debate On CNBC - again a pro-legalisation/anti-legalisation debate.. 

Is there a War on Consciousness?

What are your opinions? Do you feel that your right to explore and develop your consciousness is in any way restricted, or controlled, or unwillingly shaped? Do you feel obliged to think, feel or act in a certain way, or else it is "wrong" or not in line with "the rest of society"? Do you believe in the right to pro-choice, to choose how you develop? Do you think there are those who want a War on Consciousness? Does anybody read this blog?

I think we have to remember as beings, that everything is, as it is.
Our languages and beliefs are just our constructs of models and concepts that we transpose onto the universe. Words, for example, have no meaning. Many languages will have different words for the same thing, but that does not mean one is superior or more correct than another. Our beliefs and ideologies are created and negotiated by us as we try and work out what is going on, everything is just a model for something, there are only theories and words for processes, when often we cannot or do not see the full workings. So to say something cannot happen is a great leap in judgement, everything is as it is, as it is. Things don't just change because one day homo sapiens became consciously aware and started questioning things. "That can't work, it doesn't fit into the model that we have created for the universe". Everything is, as it is, as it is. We apply the meaning.

Our Veins are full of Oil

The problem with our societies, cultures and economies lies in the fact that we are fueling the present by stealing from the past and the future. I am talking about one of the greatest evils of the 20th Century and prior, Oil.

Our economies are based on Oil, to the extent that our government and it's allies deem it necessary/acceptable to begin warfare and occupation of a foreign state in order to maintain control of their Oil reserves. Whether this was the main reason for occupation, or mearly as "Well we're already here so may as well control the Oil" is debatable, though it is more than likely to be a major factor in the decision to invade. The flow of money, interest rates, the fabric of our economies are strongly linked to Oil, and the results of warfare. Many countries profit from the wars caused, and the amount of Oil that is produced. A fluctuating economy based on Oil and death is not sustainable, it cannot be a part of our vision for the future, or a democratic society.

Oil is death. It is based on death and causes wars. Oil is created by the remains of dead plants and animals that come under pressure to produce oil, a process taking hundreds of thousands of years. Think of how quickly the petrol in your car is used up, and then think of how long it has taken for that Oil to have been formed. And how many people died to get it to your car. We are stealing from animals that died in the past and using the oil that is formed over thousands of years, which is not sustainable as we are using it at a far faster rate than it is being created. We are stealing from the future, because it is inevitable that the Oil reserves will run out, or at least get to a critical point. We are bringing a global crisis closer and closer to us in the present by each passing day. Scientists do not know precisely when the Oil reserves will run out, but then again scientists do not know when our actions will cause Global Warming or Climate Change to reach an irreversible point. Perhaps this is why people do not care. There will come a point where our actions will be irreversible, but at the moment we can continue our actions and that is why people do not care- the majority only care for their lifetime, not those of the future. But it is clear whichever way you look at it, that the Oil industry is insanity.

What are the negatives of Oil? It is not sustainable and takes hundreds of thousands of years to form. It's use and by-products generate dangerous, harmful pollution. It makes economies fluctuate based on the amount of Oil in 'circulation' or production, and also based on who has it at a given time. It leads to recessions and harm to citizens who have to pay more when it is scarcer or when the companies that control it put up the price of a barrel. It causes endless warfare, with thousands if not millions killed over the course of history- it is a resource based on death from the minute it begins being formed under the earth. Countries go to war over it- it is a finite resource which is not equally distributed, leading those who own large Oil reserves to be either in a position of power, or in danger of warfare, occupation, sabotage, bribery, etc etc. It damages the environment and ecosystems (see Ecuador and Chevron/Texaco's actions), it harms people, is toxic... This list goes on and on but what is clear is that Oil causes a lot of damage to the planet, to ecosystems, to people, to countries, to economies, etc.. We cannot and will not continue to harm the planet and the people by such a Fossil Fuel- we need sustainability and a renewable resource which does not cause harm.

The leaders that be, are more than the elected officials of the governing bodies. In a world based on money, it is inevitable that the people in power, the ones with influence, will be the immensely rich and wealthy individuals. The gap between the poorest people on the planet and the richest people is astronomical. People with money always want more money. This is why Oil has not been outlawed, why we do not use alternative, sustainable resources, at least to a satisfactory level. There is too much money in Oil, to just give it up suddenly. Think about it- Profit is based on scarcity. If a sustainable, renewable energy source was used tomorrow, there would not be as much money in it for those concerned with such a thing. If there was only 100 barrels of Oil in the world tomorrow, think how much money those barrels would be worth to the world. Profit is based on scarcity. If it was suddenly discovered that cars could run on air, for example, where would the money be in that? Not saying that air could be used to run the world as an energy source, but then again light can.. Solar power would once have been thought of as insane, but is a real possibility. However it is still not enough, and is still very expensive to place solar panels on your house or car.. But then again this shows where the money and research is being spent, not enough is being done because the leaders of the world still base everything on Oil. Think about it. There is no reason why we cannot ween ourselves of Oil and stop this addiction. The only thing that connects Oil to the world and its economies is money. Oil = Money. But also, Money = Oil. We base our money on Oil, a finite substance that is not even equally distributed, so we can essentially give  our economy to a foreign power if they have all the Oil- imagine if they refused to sell the Oil? Or if they put up the price of a barrel tomorrow? We would either declare war or our economy would suffer..


Enter the Hemp plant. [to be continued]

Intentions and Reptiles

There are numerous scientific studies out there that prove that our very intentions affect and influence people, plants, machines, even at remote distance. Sorry, can I just repeat myself. Our very intentions. Affect the world around us. Scientific evidence. I'll just allow that to sink in for a moment.
 I don't think this is much discussed or people actually realise the meaning of this research.. And then I look on the TV and see reality shows and brain numbing material and want to go out and shout to the public saying "We are beautiful and have more potential than we can ever imagine, why are we letting ourselves be sucked into the mundane, trapped by the ordinary, stuck in routine?" The oldest part or "circuit" of the human brain is supposed to be the reptilian brain, and is concerned with routines. Located in the brain stem, it is concerned with our autonomous vital needs and our fight-or-flight system. It is concerned with routine, as stated, and instincts, rituals. Despite our newer, higher brain forms a lot of people tend to stay on this base level. However you can hardly blame people when the media and advertising use techniques to appeal to this part of the brain, and lower people down to a baser level. Notice how a lot of people can be quick to anger, have road rage, not think rationally, are wrapped up in routines and rituals constantly, and cannot think for themselves to a great deal. This could be because of the reptilian-derived part of the brain. We should be above this by now, but either consciously or unconsciously the institutions that be (media, gvt. etc) appear to be keeping everyone on a baser level utilising fear, sex (media- sex sells), routines, discouraging thought (possibly not actively but mainstream TV does not provoke too much thinking in the average viewer), anger, discouraging spirituality (from a rationalist perspective- "spirituality is nonsense", "there's no evidence for it"- despite large advances in scientific theory that often are downplayed or not given as much coverage in the media) which aims to raise people's consciousness to higher thinking instead of the baser levels. Think to yourself, how often do you get lost in routine, feel dazed and confused as to what else to do, or how often do you switch off and watch dull TV, or are quick to anger, or are persuaded by advertising and marketing appealing to the reptilian aspect... Maybe if we start to catch ourselves doing it we can get out of this brain-fogging that the mainstream media and institutions seem to be (actively or not) encouraging.

On the subject of atoms.

On the subject of atoms. It is interesting to note that the atoms in our bodies are replaced numerous times throughout our lifetime. The atoms in our brain are no different. We do not have the same atoms now as we did when we were children, for example. This raises various questions pertaining to reality, consciousness, memory, etc. This suggests that we are not the matter of which we are made, for our matter is constantly replaced. Where do thoughts reside, and memory especially, if our atoms are replaced many times? If we do not have the same atoms throughout our lives, than how do we retain memory? Indeed, how do we claim to be the same person, if our matter is different from our selves in the "past"? This seems to imply that our "self" is not located in the physical, for the physical matter changes while our personality and memories remain. You would assume that if all the atoms in your brain would change, then the makeup of the brain would change, yet we manage to retain an identity, thoughts and memory.

Emily

It was at the end of summer when boy met girl, hope met tragedy. As the warm summer days began to wane, the boy known as Dylan increasingly found himself wandering through the old abandoned industrial estate that crouched in the east side of town, lurking like the spindly corpse of a spider with its sprawled legs in the air. The disused chimneys and towers still reached high into the sky even as the factories crumbled and aged below. Walking through the industrial area was dangerous, it was far from any signs of life and the old buildings were unstable, but for Dylan the area was peaceful and let him be alone with himself. Nobody had ever troubled him there despite his mother's warnings that the industrial area was a forsaken wasteland rife with drug dealers, addicts and 'whores', not that Dylan knew what a whore was. In his head he had pictured a wailing banshee with a flame of red hair and sharp clawed hands and he was sure that he had never seen one of them in the industrial area before. Nothing there but bolts and screws and forgotten memories.

The blistering summers day had faded as the sun began its descent and Dylan knew he was lost. He had strayed from the path and was encircled by crumbling factory structures that blocked any view of the area. He was not worried, of course, he had been lost in the factories before and always managed to find his way out. But that was during the summer months and days were longer. It was only at the start of summer that Dylan had been allowed out to explore. Before that he had spent long days in school daydreaming of far-away lands and adventures waiting to be discovered. Sir always caned Dylan when he saw that his attention was elsewhere, but then again Sir never did like him. He was a poor boy with unkempt hair and a ragged school uniform and Sir was a man of class. Dylan just thought he needed a monocle as his other eye was made of glass but never dared to ask. Sir never liked Dylan.

Little lost Dylan sat on a wooden crate and looked up at the fading light and the darkening sky, sighing. He was not afraid of the dark but he was afraid of his mother who was known to start drinking at lunchtime and stop the following morning. If he was late back and she was not passed out then he would be in for a beating and probably wouldn't be allowed anything for dinner. Just as he pondered this last thought he caught a glimpse of movement in the corner of his left eye. As he turned his head to look a small pebble struck his right shoulder, and a tiny giggle broke the silence. A small girl about his age stood several feet away from him waving. She was wearing an old faded pink dress that was tattered and torn slightly and marked with dust and dirt from the factories. A small pink bow was in her scraggly hair and she had no shoes or socks on. Dylan was taken aback by the unexpected company and of the girl's prettiness. She giggled again and waved, and he slid off the crate and held out his hand to her.

“How do you do miss? My name's Dylan”, he said politely. The girl giggled again and didn't answer him. Her eyes were shining with a hopeful abandon that seemed almost luminescent in the trickling light. Dylan was enraptured by her eyes. Never had he seen a girl who seemed so scruffy and unkempt yet so beautiful. His awkward smile was met by her and instantly his worries were forgotten.

“I've never seen anyone here before, do you like to be alone here too?”, he asked her curiously. The girl nodded and her eyes flashed again with hope and her face beamed with joy. Dylan knew she must have felt alone, like him, because she seemed to be so happy that she had found someone. Aside from the industrial area, he had nothing and no-one and here seemed hope that somebody cared for his presence in this world.

Dylan stayed for hours with the girl, who spoke to him after a fashion. Her name was Emily and the industrial area was her secret hideaway too. She used to help out when the factories were running and her parents worked here. But that was long ago, she said and these days she was alone.

But she was tired of being alone. Dylan understood her perfectly and said as much. As darkness fell the two of them lay together, holding hand as they stared at the stars.

Dylan visited Emily every day for the rest of the week and the two of them played together in the disused factories and derelict buildings, and talked to each other about secrets and loneliness, tragedy and hope, the future and the past. Emily told him that she had died many years ago as the result of an accident with one of the big factory machines, but Dylan did not care. She was the only person in the world that made Dylan feel special and he knew that he loved her, and she loved him. By night they lay together and watched stars create miracles in the sky.

It was the happiest week of his life. But all things come to an end. At the end of the week Dylan's mother locked him in his room and told him to pack up his things. They were going to live with his father in a city many miles away and never return. He cried and cried and refused to pack but his mother was enduring a powerful hangover and beat him with a belt until he was silent. Dylan waited until later when, his mother was passed out and climbed out of his window, making his way to the industrial estate. As usual, Emily jumped out at him when he was in the darkness of one of the factories, but Dylan didn't laugh this time. Instead, with tears pouring down his face he told Emily what his mother had planned.

“But you can stay here with me, you don't have to go with her”, Emily pleaded as she grasped his hand. Her icy cold fingers caused goosebumps to run up Dylan's arm and a shiver to run down his spine. He knew he faced a choice- either he lived with his father and alcholic mother, or remained with Emily, forever. He shook his head and a tear fell down as she stood on tip-toes to kiss his cheek. That night they watched the stars creating miracles in the sky, and Emily fell asleep against Dylan's shoulder as the moon began to set. As dawn broke, Dylan woke Emily and told her he had to go.

“Will I ever see you again?”, she asked with a trembling look. There was a wild look in her eye of hopeless abandon and reckless lucidity. Dylan shook his head, eyes downcast. Emily went very quiet and there was a fiery look in her eyes as she gripped her hands into fists.

“I'm sorry”, Dylan whispered quietly and turned away. If he stayed any longer he knew he wouldn't leave, and his mother would be after him. Emily stood silent, watching the boy turn. The only person who had ever loved her was leaving. She would be alone again, for eternity. Anger welled up inside her as she saw red. There was no pain, only light.

The iron bar was spiked at one end and it was this end that pierced the back of Dylan's skull, sending fragments of bone and tissue cascading to the dusty factory floor. The body of the boy known as Dylan dropped to the floor and a cloud of dust billowed out from the impact. Blood dripped down the crumbling wall and the iron bar clanged to the floor, the sound echoing through the factory. Emily wept uncontrollably and fell to her knees, her anger satiated she realised her actions and cried out loudly for Dylan. Her ghostly screams carried up through the broken floorboards and into the night sky, the eerie wailing of a banshee.

Dylan's body was never found; few wandered into the dusty factories and forgotten warehouses anymore. Though some say that if you wander through the estate at night, you can make out the figures of two ghostly children, running through shadows. It was at the end of summer when boy met girl, tragedy met hope.

Warnings from the future

Sci-Fi flicks have always involved some twisted utopian vision of the future. Yeah you have the flying cars, the laser guns, robots and the like. But the future vision always holds some totalitarian state that governs the people, some macabre cold computer/database that runs the System, Artificial Intelligence governing the people. People are retina scanned and tracked (a la Minority Report), complete biometric data being stored and perused by a governing machine that people place their lives in. Doors, vehicles, weapons, computers all work at the touch of a fingerprint scan or retina access for convenience. But how personal is our genetic makeup? How public do we want our DNA records/iris makeup/fingerprint patterns to be?

You see, for me the Science Fiction futuristic cities and societies were always seen as something dangerous, something cold and unfeeling. In the films, people had traded in their personal data and genetic makeup to the higher powers, and the System as it were is always run by some macabre governing body (e.g Equilibrium, 1984- not sci-fi but Orwell's vision of the future, hauntingly accurate) in conjunction with a state-of-the-art AI System (e.g The Matrix, Surrogates etc etc)... In the films, the vision of utopia and advancement is seen as beneficial, everyone is happier and tasks are much simpler. And yet, the protagonist of the film, the hero of the hour is often the only one to notice how bad things have truly gotten, who sees beyond the facade and notices that something is not right, and that the totalitarian governing body (be it human gvt. or AI system) is inherently evil, or at least cold and unfeeling enough not to have emotion. In essence, human emotion is usually eroded away in these Sci-Fi film portrayals.. People become much like the very robots that "serve" them, or is it control them?

So yes, we generally have a protagonist who rebels against the system, saves the people, returns humanity back to the humans. Everyone rejoices, the credits roll up, people are satisfied.

And yet it seems as though we are heading towards the future that Sci-Fi films portray. You see the Sci-Fi flicks of note and of the genre stated above are, for me personally, a warning. A warning that we do not lose our humanity too much. A warning that we do not head towards a society run by computers, AI, systems beyond our control.. That we do not accede total power to those above, after all, the government's strengths should lie in the fact that the people are, in essence, in control. Once the government/governing body (e.g AI construct, extended database etc) extends its control/power beyond that of the people, then it becomes dangerous. For me, these films/novels etc are a warning. After all, the "hero" of the story is often one who liberates the people from this reality, the reality of being under total control and surveillance. Often the hero defeats the government, or the head of the government, or destroys the system of control.. Basically the hero gives humanity back to the people. Orwell's 1984, I don't know about you but for me the novel was a stark warning as to the dangers of acceding too much power to those already in power, the dangers of technology and surveillance, and many more subtle warnings that encompass the novel itself.

For me, these films and novels reflect warnings and dangers. But it seems that for many, they merely offer blueprints for the evolution of societies.

We are at an age of exponential growth, technologically and so forth. But I do not feel we are mature enough to handle this growth. It is the 21st Century, the new millenium. But we have not eradicated war. We have not eradicated poverty. We still do not trust our leaders, and they have probably lost more of our trust now than ever. Hence the increased control and the restrictions on human rights. And so we find technologies such as nano-chips and nano-machines being developed, mass surveillance of our own societies, advanced weaponry and warfare.. all of which serve beneficial purposes but also hint at very dark, very scary repercussions. And we do not trust our leaders to use them wisely. Especially those who realise our leaders are more than the elected officials, our leaders are the ones with the most capital to realise their ambitions.

When you look at futuristic societies as depicted in films and books, people often have much done for them, the advancement of technology being so great that people often appear slower and languid, more at-ease, perhaps happier- perhaps with less obvious emotion (!). People take more time it often appears, and many tasks such as opening a door or even driving are automated or performed by robots/AI systems. But this is, again, a worrying example of acceding power and control to others. But regardless. People have easier lives, and take more time to do things, they relax more it seems, and do not have the frenzied hustle and bustle of many of our western societies, where we do not live for the moment but rather live for the future. Everyone is busy, time is always an issue and there is always things to be done. It almost appears as if everyone is working frantically towards something, to a better "tomorrow" if you will. And perhaps, subconsciously, that is what people feel, or rather, what they are told. It seems as though somewhere, the leaders of the capitalist world are whispering to the tiny workers below, saying "Yes, work harder, faster, better, we need to work towards progress.. one day you will be able to relax, and everything will be done for you. We just need you to work now, and let us run everything for you. Trust us, we know what is best for you".

Maybe I am being too cynical, but my main point is that, for me, the vision of the future as depicted by sci-fi films is a cold and unwelcoming place, where people have traded in their humanity. Personally, I feel that our uniqueness lies in our biometric data. Our DNA codes are what make us who we are!! Our fingerprints are unique to our individual being!! Our retina information is personal to each individual! So why, why, should we ever give this up, for any reason? No reason, for me, is good enough for me to have my personal information, the building blocks that make us each a unique person, stored in a system, either publicly or privately. No threat to safety, "terrorism", or anything could make me want to give my personal information and data. I will quite happily push open the door, thankyou, without having my iris scanned. I will drive manually, thanyou, without fingerprint scanning.

You may think, well, sci-fi films/novels are works of fiction, they do not represent reality. But you are so, so wrong if you think so. Science Fiction has influenced Science, and has been influenced by Science, for generations. Look at the films and novels of the past, and compare it with technological and scientific advances. Look at the world around you today. Nano-machines, Global mapping, Interactivity, Brain mapping, Genome mapping, Genetic modification, increased surveillance, high-definition TV/cameras, the list goes on and on and on. Not to mention the military technology advancements that have occurred, the technological advances aimed at destruction rather than growth. Imagine if the military budget was spent, just for a year or so, on renewable or beneficial services... Poverty could practically be wiped out, there would be no need for fossil fuels, pollution would practically die out...

But it seems as though we are heading for such a future as depicted by science fiction genres. A technologically advanced society, where our governments have total control and we are all tagged, catalogued, and surveyed at all times. Where our personal unique data is recorded in databases run by "The System", whatever shape or form that will take. Just think about these things, as you find out via the mass media news networks of the "marvelous" new technology that has come into focus, or the "beneficial" aspects it will bring. Think of the negative effects, the things the news does not show you. Think for yourself. Think of the things they don't tell you, the technology the governments or intelligence agencies are working on in secret, perhaps a few leaked documents or rumours surface but what of the rest? Think of the future you want to live in.. and who or what you want controlling your lives.

Think of the science fiction films.. of the hero.. who tries to save the people from themselves... think of the hero.. who takes down the system.. restores humanity... think of the direction we are heading... and think of the implications of everything around you... Next time you see a science fiction film.. ask yourself.. is that the world you want to live in? Or do you support the hero of the story, the one who sees it for what it really is, and attempts to save humanity....

Illusions of Grandeur

The wind screamed horrifically as it kissed bare skin with steel blades, icy tears dropping like bombs shattered shards on the concrete forest. Figures below hurried along pre-set paths or inside metallic beasts roaming the endless roads, looking for a way out. The background people walked by, shadows and caricatures of each other they shuffled and bumped their way through pedestrian traffic. Some stopped and lit cigarettes, pausing to reflect on the chaos around them, nicotine sharpening their mind as their pupils contracted, taking in the scene before them. Silhouettes of people lost in their own worlds, the never-ending fall down the rabbit-hole that is consciousness. "Some day all of this will be yours", fathers whispered to their children over fast food and asparteme drinks. The children, smiling, look around at the post-dawn chaos and the shuffling presence of shadows, acknowledging no more than the advertisements and branding allowed. Caught up in the system, the background people could not see that what restricted them, each experiencing mass-produced consciousness that was injected intravenously. Society was fabricated and shaped by the social institutions which governed the people. Mass media organisations, religious institutions, corporate branding- all served on some level to keep the mass population from reaching their potential. War, poverty, evil and the like were, it was taught, fundamental parts of human existence which could never be eradicated. Once the people had surrendered to these ideals, their fighting spirit was subdued and they fell on their knees, seeking guidance from those who had reached a level of power and influence, which was measured by wealth. Most of the people were happy about this, their lives they knew would be short, because they were told that life was short. And so they lived for the 'morrow, the days that never came, and their thoughts dwelled on the past, days which seemed so much happier and better.

Killer Story- Part One

“The tangible mortality of man lends itself inevitably to the postulation of the infinite, for it is in the very nature of man to continually and exponentially question and ponder things beyond his own understanding and experience. Thus it is no great departure for man to overextend his empirical and cultural beliefs and explore the unknown. This is how we learn; being a creature of adaptation and curiosity we consistently produce new thoughts and beliefs, often without fully acknowledging their presence or validity. The issue of validity or morality is a subjective, social creation- information itself is devoid of conscious morality or opinion, and thus it can be stated that any information or 'ideas' are equally 'valid' and of importance; whether it can be used for good or evil is a matter of intention and subjective views of morality. This lends itself well to the formation of ideas and ideals- for advancement in this area is always as a result of building upon pre-existing information, be it prior ideologies; cultural and/or social values; historical theology; or any number of ideas that survive the passage of time and are transmitted via the shared information pool to which all thoughts and ideas belong. Do you understand? To which all thoughts belong, therefore we inevitably share the intrinsic experiences of others, a collective unconsciousness to which no specific owner is attributed. Your pain is my pain, and vice versa. Do not think you suffer alone, oh my brother, when what you are experiencing is merely the physical manifestation of the suffering we all experience, passed through the generations... Do you not feel enlightened? Suffering breeds clarity, it is through pain that we learn more about ourselves and our limits; there is nothing more pure than pain. Do you understand me?”

The mess on the floor groaned deeply and shifted it's head slightly, spitting blood onto the white marble. A bloodied eye set it's gaze upwards, fixating on the figure standing over it. The pupil dilated slightly at the shift in light, the nervous system still reacting to external stimuli somewhere beneath the pain. Of course the pupil is just a hole, a hollow in the centre of the eye. The blackness of the hole is the abyss inside of the eye, the darkness that hides inside all of us. The other eye was closed shut, swollen and bruised, with a deep capillary cut seeping below. The once-immaculate business suit of the villain was now soaked in dark blood as if it had been dumped in a sink of claret, and ripped in several places where thick gashes had penetrated the skin and opened it up, exposing layers of fat and muscle below the skin. But the deep gashes were not random nor were they a sign of butchery, very much the contrary. The lacerations appeared to be ordered, methodical, calculated. The deep lacerations served to sever important nerves, meticulously chosen and artistically executed. At the shoulders, the axillary nerves on each side of the body were pierced, cutting off the deltoid muscle's function to enable the arm to be lifted away from the body. The medial collateral ligaments of both knees were severed, leading to swelling due to haemorrhage and severe loss of function as anterior cruciate ligament damage also occurred in both knees. Deep capillary lacerations in the chest, cranium and limbs meant severe blood loss would occur, though slower than if arterial or vein lacerations had occurred. The result was indeed bloody and horrific but was carried out with a trained eye, not the work of a butcher but of an artist.

The shadow of a man lay in the grips of agonising pain and localised paralysis as blood seeped from open wounds onto the sparse white marble floor of his 'humble' abode. The material ornaments, artefacts and trinkets gathered in life and placed about the room brought no comfort to the man as he lay confronted with his own mortality, the metallic taste of iron in his mouth bitter-sweet. Life extended before and beyond him, a series of fleeting imagery and forgotten memories of a time long past, before the rapturous love of material wealth overtook his soul and the lustful glee of power took away his compassion for humanity. It is in the moments before death that one truly measures the worth of a man, for it is in those final moments that the true spirit of a man shines through and the material, corporeal world is transcended in a final beautiful moment of shining glory. But this man's soul was crushed long before the blows to his moral shell, and as such his eye was dull and vacant as it stared upwards, beyond the figure of retribution, beyond and beyond this mortal world and it's fleeting moments...

Our hero pauses for a moment, a small smirk playing around the corner of his lips. This one would not last much longer, his breathing was already becoming shallower and more laboured as time ticked by, the large grandfather clock's tick-tick-ticking the only sound to be heard in the large entrance hall besides the almost inaudible, laboured breaths of the clock's owner. The grandeur of the house was wasted on these two figures, infinitely closer in those final moments than two people ever have been- as the hand of retribution cupped the villain's face, their gazes locked and a deep understanding was passed silently between them. The villain opened his mouth slightly to speak but all that came out was silence, blood flowing from his mouth onto his torn chest. Our hero put a finger to his bloodied lips and grasped his hand as he whispered into his ear,

“Shh. No need for words. I understand you now more than anyone ever has and ever will. You have surrounded yourself with the comforts of the flesh and hid away from the responsibilities of Man, seeking pleasure and materialism over helping others. You have stepped on many people to get where you are now, ruined many lives and brought poverty and despair to those around you. But true poverty lies in the heart of Man, for you knew not what true wealth was, so blinded by the ethics of the very society that has turned against you. But fear not, my brother, for this is your moment of enlightenment. I have made you pure, Hayward Browne. You have never been more fit for heaven that you are now. For you see, you have done the bravest, most selfless act of your life this pensive eve. For you have died.”

And with that final speech, the villain knew peace. The thinnest of all smiles played upon the corner of his lips, and his eyelid slowly closed over and a final sigh left his body, as quiet and content as a child's sigh as it lay in the arms of its mother with no fears in the world, safe and content, knowing true peace as it slipped slowly into the soft, warm abyss of unconsciousness. Our hero lay there with the body as the warmth slowly left it, the last vestibules of mortality fleeing the human vessel as the pool of cooling blood congealed around him.