딱 걸렸어!!!... 9/11 Truth, one step forwarded!

영국에서 Tony Rooke라는 영상 제작자가 TV 수신료 납부를 거부하여 기소된 일이 있습니다. 9/11과 관련한 다큐멘터리를 제작하기도 했던 그가 수신료 납부를 거부한 이유는 2011년에 BBC가 '9/11' 10주년을 맞아 제작 방영한 2편의 다큐멘터리와 관련이 있습니다.

그 두 편의 다큐멘터리에서 BBC는 기존 미국 정부의 공식적인 입장을 반복하는데 그치지 않고 숱하게 제기된 의혹들 (특히, 비행기 충돌과 무관했던 인근 무역센터 7번 건물의 붕괴)에 대해 납득할만한 증거를 제시하지 않은채 일방적으로 "음모론"이라고 매도를 하여 '9/11'의 진실을 밝히려는 단체와 시민들로부터 항의를 받게됩니다.

BBC는 과학적 증거를 제시하라는 요청을 묵살하였는데, 이에 대해 Tony Rooke씨는 다음과 같은 논리로 수신료 납부를 거부하였던 것입니다.

BBC가 '9/11'과 관련된 정보들을 은폐함으로써 결과적으로 테러리스트들에게 협력을 하고 있다고 의심된다. 영국의 테러법 (UK Terrorism Act 2000) 15장 3조에 의하면 테러리스트로 의심되는 집단에게 자금을 지원하는 것은 엄연히 불법이다. 따라서 BBC의 주요 자금원인 TV 수신료를 내는 것은 테러리스트로 의심되는 집단에게 자금을 지원하는 꼴이 되므로 TV수신료를 낼 수 없다!

Tony Rooke씨에 대한 재판이 지난 2월 25일에 있었습니다. 40여명 정도 들어갈 수 있는 재판정에 약 100여명의 지지자들이 재판정 안과 밖에서 그를 응원했다고 합니다. 물론 영국 및 여타 주요 언론매체들은 이 사건에 대해 일체 함구를 하고 있는 상황입니다.

사건을 맡은 판사는 Rooke씨에 대해 "조건부 석방 conditional discharge"이라는 판결을 내렸습니다. 조건부 석방이란 죄는 인정되지만 유죄 선고를 유예하는 것으로, 이는 법원이 피고인의 (위법)행위가 도덕적으로 우월한 위치에 있음을 인정했다고 해석될 수 있습니다.

Rooke씨에 대한 '유죄' 선고가 유예됨으로 인해, 항소 등의 법적 대응을 통한 BBC와의 진실싸움은 일단 무산되었습니다. BBC 입장에서는 수신료 몇백 파운드를 받아내는것 보다 훨씬 이득이 되는 판결이라 하겠습니다.
 
TV 수신료 납부 거부 운동을 통해 진실을 밝히려는 '촛불'이 영국에서 점화될지.....
Rooke씨의 향후 대응이 10여년이 지나도록 꼼짝않고 있는 우리 안과 밖의 '거짓과 음모의 벽'을 허물어뜨릴 일양지공(一陽指功)이 되기를 소망합니다.

Rooke씨 및 9/11 진실을 밝히려는 모든 단체와 시민들에게 무한한 연대의 정과 경의를!

A man who has been charged with a crime for not paying his TV License Fee in England (which is used to fund BBC's operations) has lodged a legal challenge to this charge in order to uncover the 9/11 truth!!!

This historic court hearings opened on Feb 25, 2013 with deafening silence of the mainstream media.

You can find more detailed story in:

• Historic Case to Challenge BBC's 9/11 Coverage; and 
• TV licence evader refused to pay because the 'BBC covered up facts about 9/11 and claimed tower fell 20 minutes before it did'   
• Moral Victory for Protestor who says BBC 9/11 Coverage was False

I hope his legal challenge will not only have a meaningful crack in the Wall of Great Conspiracy in our modern history but also let people light their candles at it!

STOP Banging the War Drums! ... 그만들 해라!

In an interview in November 2011, Henry Kissinger, who is a master and architect of US foreign policy since 1960s as a protege of David Rockefeller, said "If you can't hear the drums of war, you must be deaf!"

"The United States is baiting China and Russia, and the final nail in the coffin will be Iran, which is, of course, the main target of Israel. We have allowed China to increase their military strength and Russia to recover from Sovietization, to give them a false sense of bravado, this will create an all together faster demise for them. We're like the sharp shooter daring the noob to pick up the gun, and when they try, it's bang bang. The coming war will will be so severe that only one superpower can win, and that's us folks. This is why the EU is in such a hurry to form a complete superstate because they know what is coming, and to survive, Europe will have to be one whole cohesive state. Their urgency tells me that they know full well that the big showdown is upon us. O how I have dreamed of this delightful moment."

He is a real man of foresight, isn't he???!!! 

Actually, 'the drums of war' which has been resounding at the moment is a kind of 'an ensemble' of cross-border (in the disguise of 'humanitarian intervention and responsibility to protect' and 'war on terror')  and within-border (in the disguise of 'austerity' and 'war on terror').

The question is "WHO is the composer and conductor of this disgusting ensemble?"

According to "REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN":

War is not, as is widely assumed, primarily an instrument of policy utilized by nations to extend or defend their expressed political values or their economic interests. On the contrary, it is itself the principal basis of organization on which all modern societies are constructed. (emphasis added)

Our modern society itself is the War System serving private bank and corporate interests, not serving WE THE PEOPLE and other living beings' interests. So, it is no surprise at all to see the great psychopath Kissinger saying like above without any moral scruples.

But,  Hey you! Don't tell me there is no hope at all. Together we stand, divided we fall!!!

벌레 먹은 사과, 그 단맛의 진실... The Future of Love?

"섹스를 통해 영적인 경지에 이를 수 있다 (Through our bodies touching, we can touch the divine.)"고 주장하시는 Adam Gilad씨가 오는 2월 10일에 "From Sex to Super-Consciousness: The Future of Love" 라는 주제로 온라인 강연을 합니다.

욕정과 수음마저도 도덕적 종교적으로 억압되었던 역사를 감안하면, 놀라운 진보가 아닐 수 없습니다. 

허나, 우리는 여전히 '매춘/혼외정사의 세계'와 '일부일처제가 강제하는 울타리' 사이에서 칙칙하게 흐느적거리고 있습니다.

아래 인용된 글은 위에 언급된 온라인 비디오 강연에 게스트로 초대된 Allex Allman씨의 글을 Reality Sandwich에서 허락없이 무단 전제한 글입니다.

"욕정이 사랑하는 사람과의 열정적인 섹스로 연결되기 보다는 오히려 그 친밀감으로 인해 욕정이 수그러드는 경우가 허다합니다. 심지어 타인과의 섹스를 상상하는 것이 사랑하는 사람과의 섹스를 상상하는 것보다 훨씬 더 성적으로 자극적인 것에 대해 부끄럽게 여기기도 합니다." 

왜 그러는 걸까요?

대부분의 사람들에게 '섹스'는 그저 '사랑하는 사람과 육체적 관계 맺기(욕정 해소)' 정도로 이해되고 있다는 것에서 문제는 시작됩니다.  이 정의에 따르면 '사랑'은 '육체적 관계 맺음'이라는 행위 과정 속에서 무언가 새롭게 적극적으로 창조되어지는 것이 아닌 수동적이고 부차적인 어떤 것으로 밀려나게 됩니다. 

또 다른 문제는 우리의 인지구조와 관련이 있습니다.
내가 내 스스로 알고있는 '나'는 과연 진정한 '나'일까? 하물며 내가 잘 알고 있다고 믿고 있는 '타인'은? 만약, 내가 알고 있는 '나'와 내가 알고 있는 '타인'이라는 것이 사실은 우리 뇌의 인지구조가 지어낸 '허상'이라면?

생면부지의 타인과는 '불타는 밤'을 보내면서도, 믿음과 사랑으로 긴 시간을 함께한 타인과는 '밤이 무서운' 현실...

침대에서 벗어야 할 것은 속옷만이 아니라 성스러운 '영육합일'을 가로막는 '나'와 '타인'에 대한 '허상'도 함께 벗어야 합니다.

침대에서 성불합시다!

Making Love and Sex With Strangers

by Alex Allman

It can feel like your sex drive is betraying your heart. You wish that you could be consumed with mad attraction for the person you love, and yet all too often, familiarity actually kills libido. You might even begin to feel shame around the simple truth that you are often more sexually aroused by thoughts of complete strangers than thoughts of the person who is so dear to your heart.

Yet it would be naive, or worse, self-deceptive, to not acknowledge that this is the way humans are built, and in absence of some intentional action on your part, this is likely the way your relationships will evolve.

A big part of the problem is that most people define "making love" simply as "sex with someone you love."


Their partner is the person they are most likely to feel judged by, and the person they most fear judgement from.  There is simply too much at stake.

The danger with that definition is that it assumes that love is passively to be enjoyed during sex, rather than something that you DO.

However, if you examine the phrase "making love," you might notice that it is not grammatically passive.  There is a powerful action term in there.  "Making" is creating -- perhaps the most demanding of all actions.  One can watch, listen, or even walk quite passively, but making or creating requires attention, intention, and presence.

In my definition, making love is in doing the work of surrendering the mind (or the ego) in service of relating.  It is being present with your shared desire rather than being wrapped up in your unconnected mental or emotional experience.

One of the unexpected consequences of this definition is that it is possible to engage in profound love-making with a total stranger in a didn't-even-catch-your-name one-night-stand.   

Being "in love" is not required for "making love." Rather, what is required is an openness to love itself and a willingness to "do love" by being present.  Further, it is often easier for some individuals to do this with a relative stranger than with someone they deeply love and respect, with whom they have shared many of life's trials and rewards, and with whom they've developed a deep and trusting relationship.

There are two reasons for this counterintuitive experience:

The first is that for a couple who have not practiced and worked at "doing love" while "making love" throughout their relationship, the path to being truly present with each other during sex becomes overgrown with all of the accumulated disappointments, minor betrayals, grudges, wrong-makings, and resentments of the years living together as partners in the business of life.

Eventually, for many couples, they wake up one day to discover that their life partner is the single most threatening person in the world for them to become sexually vulnerable, present, and real with. 

The second reason is that no human ever really accurately knows another in the terms of the "ego/I".  The person I know myself to be on a daily basis will never be the same person that exists in your mind of who I am.  

If we dig into the labyrinthian alleyways of modern spiritualism and non-duality, then we might agree that the person who I know myself to be on a daily basis is a fiction to begin with, just a story that I have created about myself to justify my self and hide from the terror of mortality.  And my fictional story of who I am and your fictional story of who I am are not likely to be exactly the same story.

The longer we know someone, the more entrenched our version of that story becomes. We might not be surprised to discover that someone we just met is, in fact, very different from the way we first imagined them.  But our parents, children, siblings and lovers?  We have built up strong certainties that we know them as well (or even better!) than they know themselves.

Bringing that story into bed with you, in open and loving acceptance of your partner, with all of their faults and all of their wonderful qualities... might feel a very great deal like intimacy.

Yet I'd like to offer a perspective that no matter how you bring that story into bed with you, you are actually destroying any chance of authentic intimacy, killing the freshness of attraction, and erecting powerful barriers to experiencing Making Love.

Try this instead:

Do whatever mental acrobatics you need to in order to completely drop your "knowing" and your familiarity of who your lover is.  Bring yourself back to presence, to seeing them new in the moment.

You will discover that it is more powerful to be present with your lover's orgasm - simply at the level of feeling and experience (or even just to be more present with his cock or her pussy and your own baseline animal feelings of arousal for their genitals), than it is to be present with your lover's personality.

Sometimes the training wheels necessary to get your mind to drop familiarity might involve a fantasy... perhaps a fantasy of a didn't-even-get-your-name one-night-stand. You close your eyes and then open them again to see this person before you completely new.  The truth of the situation opens for you and you relate to them not as "who they are," but as the root experience of being human together.

Bringing your self back to presence, seeing your lover in the moment simply as they are, and not as they have ever been before, and then experiencing them through erotic touch IS making love.  

At this level, sex becomes an entirely spiritual endeavor.  You are now in the space, not only of truly making love, but of truly making love with a person you are in love with. In this state of mutual experience, it is not uncommon to weep tears of joy over and over again, each time you make you love, because it is not something that never becomes routine or familiar.  

Ultimately, your commitment to "doing love" with your partner during sex will lead to moments of deep and profound recognition of Truth itself; which, of course, is the recognition of Love itself.