What’s happening with MH17?

Posted: July 20, 2014 in Media

By  – July 18, 2014 

mh17.kf007.cold.war.reagan.ukraine.russia.ussr_occupycorporatismSusanne Posel ,Chief Editor Occupy Corporatism | The US Independent
July 18, 2014

Over 30 years ago a Korean flight that was shot down by Russian military forces was used to justify the Cold War between the US and the former USSR. Today, a new flight and a new scenario nearly mirrors exactly the plotline developed over a generation ago – perhaps to justify another Cold War yet to come.

Reports have been flooding the internet regarding Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 that was “flying through open airspace” at the time it crashed – or was shot down; depending on which report is to be believed.

Apparent leaked telephone conversations in initial reports about the downed plane claimed that “rebels” were responsible for the “surface-to-air attack on” MH17.

In the media the tragedy is being blamed on Russian military forces based on a comment made by Commander Igor Bezler who allegedly stated “his crew had shot down a plane, and that bodies were falling onto the ground some distance from the actual plane debris.”

However, this report is hearsay because Bezler was actually recounting a version of the story relayed to him by someone unidentified person at the scene because Belzer had not seen the wreckage first hand at the time of the interview.

Journalist Noah Sneider tweeted : “At crash site of #MH17. Bodies everywhere, organs splayed out. Too gruesome to post photographs. This is an absolute disaster.”

More anonymous claims in initial reports say “the plane exploded mid-air” which lends to the story formulating that somehow Russian military forces shot down MH17.

According to US media, unnamed US intelligence officials “confirmed” that MH17 was shot down by a surface-to-air missile; however there is apparent debate over whether or not the “shot” was fired by Russia or the Ukraine.

Senator John McCain, member of the Council for National Policy and co-author of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, threatened there would be “incredible repercussions” if Russian forces or pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine shot down the Malaysian flight.

McCain said: “This was an airliner headed towards Russian airspace and it has the earmarks — and I’m not concluding — but it has the earmarks of a mistaken identification of an aircraft that they may have believed was Ukrainian. If that’s true, this is a horrible tragic event which was certainly unanticipated by anybody no matter who they are. And there will be incredible repercussions if this is the case. If it is the result of either separatist or Russian actions mistakenly believing that this is a Ukrainian warplane, I think there’s going to be hell to pay and there should be.”

In the wake of this “disaster” and the 100 passengers who were scheduled to attend a conference on AIDS in Melbourne that are reported to have died, there is little talk about how history is repeating itself.

10513327_4358782983223_3657567655768971189_nBack in 1983 the shooting down of Korean Flight 007sparked the Cold War between the Reagan administration and the then USSR president Mikhail Gorbachev.

KF007 was the catalyst that was used to begin the most nerve-racking time in modern history – when the US and the USSR could begin a nuclear war with each other at any time.

Thirty-one years ago, Korean Airlines Boeing 747, flight 007, was shot down by a Soviet SU-15 interceptor just outside the Moneron Island in the Sea of Japan.

This strike killed all 269 passengers aboard KF007 – only 26 passengers less than the number of accounted dead from MH17.

Then President Reagan told the nation in a formal address: “Despite the savagery of their crime, the universal reaction against it, and the evidence of their complicity, the Soviets still refuse to tell the truth. They have persistently refused to admit that their pilot fired on the Korean aircraft. Indeed, they’ve not even told their own people that a plane was shot down.”

Reagan continued: “They have spun a confused tale of tracking the plane by radar until it just mysteriously disappeared from their radar screens, but no one fired a shot of any kind. But then they coupled this with charges that it was a spy plane sent by us and that their planes fired tracer bullets past the plane as a warning that it was in Soviet airspace.”

Former US Senator Bob Dole appeared on Meet the Press to suggest that sanctions be used against Russia for their crime.

At the time, KF007 was used as a confusion point for the general public because of “opposing views” that left the incident unresolved.

SLAVYANGRAD.org

Key Information in Reverse Chronological Order


#15 – Dissecting the Fake Intercept Disseminated by SBU (Ukrainian Security Service)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5E8kDo2n6g

Note: Half of the Post Translated; The Remaining Half is Speculative
Complete Original of the Post (in Russian) Can Be Found at Eugene-DF LiveJournal

In the disseminated intercept, the place from which the missile was allegedly launched is clearly indicated: the checkpoint at the settlement of Chernukhino.

Pay close attention at the Alleged Map of the MH17 Catastrophe.

As you can see, the distance from the point of launch to the point of the fall is 37 kilometres. At the same time, the elevation of the plane was 10-11 kilometres. For the Russian BUK M2 this distance is, in fact, achievable (although with a very important caveat discussed below).

However, Ukraine does not, and cannot, have modern digital high-tech Anti-Aircraft systems in its arsenal. What it does have, at…

View original post 3,513 more words

THE DAY OF THE MALAYSIA AIRLINES PLANE CRASH

The United States on Friday began building a circumstantial case against Russia for the downing of a Malaysian airliner, as President Obama saidRussian supplies of sophisticated weapons to Ukrainian separatists were “not an accident.”
Confirming widespread reports of preliminary U.S. conclusions, Obama said the plane “was shot down” Thursday by a surface-to-air missile fired from separatist territory. All 298 aboard, including one U.S. citizen, were killed.

Obama stopped short of publicly accusing the separatists, or their Russian patrons, of pulling the trigger. But he left little doubt whom he believed was to blame for what he called “an outrage of unspeakable proportions.”

As an international inquiry was organized, and investigators struggled to reach the wreckage and bodies strewn across fields of wheat and sunflowers in separatist-held territory, Obama said Russian President Vladi­mir Putin has the power to end the escalating violence in Ukraine.

“If Mr. Putin makes a decision that we are not going to allow heavy armaments and the flow of fighters . . . across the Ukrainian-Russian border, then it will stop,” he said in remarks at the White House. “He has the most control over that situation, and so far, at least, he has not exercised it.”

Senior aides added elements to the administration’s case throughout the day. At an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting in New York, U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power said a Russian-made SA-11 missile system, easily capable of reaching the plane that was flying at 33,000 feet, had been spotted in the area of the shoot-down. Because of the system’s “technical complexity,” she said, “it is impossible to rule out Russian technical assistance” to separatists operating it.

Separatist leaders, who have downed several Ukrainian military aircraft in recent days, had “boasted” on social media about Thursday’s shoot-down “but later deleted those messages,” Power said. “Russia can end this war. Russia must end this war,” she said.

“Whether it was a Russian military unit that did it or it was a separatist unit . . . we don’t know,” Pentagon press secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said at a briefing. He noted that Russia has up to 12,000 troops deployed on its side of the border with Ukraine.

Privately, U.S. officials said intelligence assessments, based on weapons believed to be in separatist hands and the tracked location of the launch site, had concluded that separatists fired the missile, although it was unclear whether they knew their target was a commercial airliner.

One of the strongest public statements came from Britain, which lost 10 citizens aboard the flight. A statement released by Prime Minister David Cameron’s office said “it is increasingly likely that [the Malaysian airliner] was shot down by a separatist missile.”

Russia said it welcomed an investigation by the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization but responded sharply to the thinly veiled U.S. accusations of at least indirect responsibility for the shoot-down.

Obama should “stop lecturing Russia” and force the Western-backed Ukrainian government to seriously engage in negotiations with the separatists, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.


Aviation history is littered with civilian planes that were shot from the sky, intentionally or not, by military weapons. Malaysia Flight 17 was cruising at 33,000 feet, more than half a mile higher than Mt. Everest, when a missile hit it July 17. And the missile’s range is believed to be more than twice that high.

At the U.N., Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin criticized those he said were “trying to prejudge the outcome [of an investigation] with broad statements and insinuations” and accused the Ukrainian government of failing to warn international aviation to avoid the conflict area.

By continuing its military offensive to dislodge the separatists, Ukraine “chose the wrong path, and their Western colleagues supported them,” Churkin said. “I’m talking about the United States; they actually pushed them to escalate,” he said, and now “they are trying to lay the blame on Russia.”

A spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry said none of its sophisticated antiaircraft systems, or any other weaponry in service with the Russian armed forces, had crossed the border into Ukraine, Itar-Tass reported from Moscow.

Amid the official statements and allegations came the now-familiar accoutrements of international tragedy — the laying of flowers at embassies and in hometowns, candlelight vigils and the signing of condolence books.

The one U.S. citizen known to be aboard the flight, Dutch dual-nationalQuinn Lucas Schansman, 19, was traveling on the Malaysian flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur to meet his family for a vacation.

Three Australian siblings, ages 12, 10 and 8, returning home with their grandfather from a vacation were among the 80 children the United Nations said were aboard the flight. Power, in her Security Council speech, said three children had the letter “I” next to their names on the flight manifest, indicating they were infants.

Two-thirds of the passengers were from the Netherlands, where grieving relatives gathered at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport. A large but undetermined number of the dead were international AIDS researchers traveling to a conference in Australia.

Referring to the researchers, Obama said that “in this world today, we shouldn’t forget that in the midst of conflict and killing, there are people like these — people who are focused on what can be built rather than what can be destroyed. People who are focused on how they can help people that they’ve never met. People who define themselves not by what makes them different from other people but by the humanity that we hold in common . . . and it’s time for us to heed their example.”

Although statements by the United States, and others such as Britain, grew harsher as the day progressed Friday, it was unclear what the administration proposed to do once responsibility for the attack was firmly established, and who would be with it.

“This should snap everybody’s heads to attention and make sure that we don’t have time for propaganda, we don’t have time for games. We need to know exactly what happened, and everybody needs to make sure that we’re holding accountable those who — who committed this outrage,” Obama said. He said he saw no U.S. military role in the conflict.

Several governments represented at the Security Council meeting limited themselves to expressing shock and sympathy over the dead. China cautioned member nations not to “jump to any conclusions . . . or trade accusations.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Friday pressed Russia to work harder toward a political solution in Ukraine. But she also drew a line between the Russians and the separatists, saying that “the Russian president of course has an influence,” but “still one has to differentiate between the separatists and the Russian government.”

On Wednesday, both the United States and the European Union imposed new sanctions on Russia, but the European moves were significantly less stinging. Suggesting Friday that she was in no rush to go further, Merkel called Wednesday’s move “an adequate response to what happened in the past few days,” although she noted that the European decision had left open the door to “act on a new level” if necessary.

European governments have generally been more reluctant than the Americans to slap tougher sanctions on the Russians largely because of Moscow’s economic clout in the region. Some analysts suggested that the desire of Europeans to sidestep truly forceful sanctions to protect their economies should not be underestimated.

But should the separatists, with direct or indirect Russian aid, be conclusively proved responsible for the shoot-down, others said the calculations in the region might change.

“It’s a game-changer because it’s very difficult to see how anyone in Europe can continue business as usual,” said Jonathan Eyal, director of international security studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London. “This time we have our own European casualties. It’s not a theoretical conflict in which people we do not know are dying.”

Broadening Your Horizons video

Video  —  Posted: July 20, 2014 in Media

By Ishtar Babilu Dingir

Marines on Levels

It’s no wonder that when Chris Smith, the head of the Environment Agency, arrived on the Somerset Levels today, he was running scared. Apparently, he didn’t let anyone know exactly where he would arrive, and when.

He didn’t even tell the local MP.

Conservative MP Ian Liddell-Grainger, who represents Bridgwater and West Somerset, was blowing a gasket when contacted about it by BBC News: “I will tell him what I bloody well think of him – he should go, he should walk. I’m livid. This little git has never even been on the telephone to me. When I find out where he is, I will give it to him. He has not told the local MPs, the local council or the local press where he is going to be. He’s a coward.”

This failure to even contact the democratically elected MP of that constituency is typical of the fascist goose-stepping jackboot of this global corporatist takeover. Because even if you believe that all the recent stormy weather is an act of God – rather than an act of HAARP – there is one inescapable smoking gun. You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist, because it’s all on record in the form of government consultations and EU Directives, to realise that the flooding of the Somerset Levels has been largely caused by a deliberate run-down of the necessary maintenance to drainage infrastructure which is required for geo-engineered land.

This draconian slashing of the funding of the river dredging, and other necessary work needed for adequate drainage, has been carried out in line with EU policy which itself is aligned with UN Agenda 21, which seeks to move people out of the countryside and into the cities.

What will happen next is that the carpet baggers will move into the Levels to buy up the land at rock bottom fire-sale prices, which is all the farmers will be able to charge now that the land has been contaminated from overflowing sewerage and their farms are virtually uninsurable. The carpet baggers will probably make a killing in selling that land on to the frackers, as it stands over a huge shale gas field which they’ve been slavering over for some time.

Chris Smith is trying to pretend that these cuts to dredging and maintaining banks and walls are all about austerity and cutting our cloth accordingly etc, like good little housewives. But it’s interesting to note that only £10 million is being set aside to bail out the Somerset Levels – (and it’s not new money; only the same £10 million that was cut) – while the big banks’ bail-out, just a few years ago, was to the tune of £850 billion.

The original problem-reaction-solution impetus in the EU directive, which wants to turn floodplain, like the Somerset Levels, into “Washland”, seems to be based on a now outdated idea of the sea levels rising due to ice caps melting because of ‘global warming’. But ‘global warming’ has now had to resign itself to the findings of real science, and so has had a swift rebrand to ‘climate change’.

However, ‘climate change’ is, in itself, a misnomer in that it indicates that a changing climate is a new problem which we have to deal with. In fact, our climate on Earth changes all the time…. the only constant in the climate on Earth is change…and just because the weather is behaving differently to how it has done during the course of our own allotted three-score-years-and-ten is hardly surprising. The climate on Earth is only a small part of huge cosmological cycles – even a 100 year cycle is as nothing, viewed from that perspective. We really have to stop beating ourselves up about this, and stop trying to control it.

Added to that, the very notion of going back to an imagined time of pristine, untouched wilderness comes from a deluded Victorian fantasy about the Noble Savage which has somehow infected the more idealistic of the Greens. They seem to forget that man is a part of that very Nature that they want to protect.

Geo-engineering is not a new-fangled or modern way of living on the land which is against Nature.

For instance, when Tim Lohrentz did some research into the Ilopango volcano in 535 CE, he found that the Mayans had blasted through rocks with gunpowder to open up a river to prevent their settlements from flooding after that volcano erupted. Even the so-called pristine Amazonian rainforest, it turns out, was not a natural wilderness when the Spanish first arrived, but a huge geo-engineered market garden.

In other words, man has long worked alongside Nature, and in a co-operative and sensitive way, to engineer it, to optimise its fruits. Geo-engineering doesn’t have to be about a war between man and Nature with one of them always wanting to run wild and roughshod over the other, as the UN Agenda 21 psychopaths want to do.

Richard North has a lot of experience in environmental issues and is one of the few honest journalists left. He has just published this article which gives more details about how the trajectory was deliberately set nearly a decade ago for what he says is “Not so much a man-made disaster as a government-made disaster”.

Floods on the Levels

By Richard North

It is all very well for Chris Smith, Chairman of the Environment Agency, to prattle on about “difficult choices“, and to tell us that “more must be done to protect the Somerset Levels”. But the flooding crisis over which he is presiding is one which he, at the behest of the EU, has deliberately allowed to happen.

Allowing the flooding of the Levels was a matter of EU policy, introduced by a 2007 Directive and consciously adopted by the Environment Agency in 2008, which then sought to increase the frequency of flooding in the area.

What then makes it impossible for the people on the spot, like Owen Paterson, is that they are having to deal with those decisions, which were made years ago. Only now are the consequences becoming evident, while the people (or agencies) who contributed to the disaster are entirely invisible.

In the “invisible” class is that classic elephant in the room, the European Union, which was behind the last great change in British strategy, heralded by a Defra consultation document in July 2004 called “Making Space for Water“. It introduced “a new Government strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management in England”.

The clue as to its provenance came on page 23, under the heading “European Dimension”, which told us that flood risk management was being discussed at the EU level, and the themes under discussion were “all consistent with this consultation and the current approach in England”.

The outline of the EU approach had in fact been published in a COM final, (2004)472, the very same month as the Defra document, signalling the “European” interest and warning of further activity to come.

At the time, Charles Clover, writing in the Telegraph, was very far from being impressed. He complained that, while Defra calls it “Making Space for Water”, others called it “flooding”. And, in those few words, the future government policy was revealed. Flood defence was to give way to “management”. In EU terms, that meant more flooding.

Government consultation continued into 2005, making it very clear that a “new strategic direction” was involved, one which involved changing the emphasis from flood protection to allowing certain areas to flood. For Somerset, this had already been spelled out in an EU-funded conference in Warsaw in 2003, outlining the results of the Ecoflood projects at a cost of €350,000, finalised in 2005.

Flood defence for farm land, along with high levels of subsidies, had been for many years an important element of Britain’s production-orientated agricultural policy, wrote the authors. Many floodplain areas benefited from publicly-funded flood defence and land drainage schemes which reduced crop damage and facilitated a change to more intensive farming systems.

Recently, however, they continued, policy emphasis has been placed on environmental enhancement, on greater diversity of economic activity as a basis for sustainable rural livelihoods, and on public enjoyment of the countryside. Funds previously committed to support farm output are increasingly diverted to encourage land managers to deliver environmental benefits.

In this context, we were told, there is reduced justification for high standards of flood defence for agriculture. Indeed, there may be substantial benefits if some floodplain land is returned to its previous unprotected, un-drained condition.

Therein lay the death knell for the Somerset Levels, as a new term was to dominate policy: “Washland”. This was an area of the floodplain that was to be allowed to flood or was deliberately flooded by a watercourse for flood management purposes.

Unacknowledged by either government, the media or even Chris Smith in his current diatribe, this policy was given legislative force, not by the Westminster parliament but by an EU directive 2007/60/EC of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks, the so-called “Floods Directive”.

In recital 14, we saw spelled out the requirement that flood risk management plans should focus on prevention, protection and preparedness. But, “with a view to giving rivers more space, they should consider where possible the maintenance and/or restoration of floodplains, as well as measures to prevent and reduce damage to human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity”.

Implemented as the Flood Risk Regulations 2009, there, writ large, was Defra’s “Making Space for Water” policy. It was all that was needed, by way of legislative authority, for an already Green-dominated Environment Agency to abandon the Somerset Levels and to allow them to flood.

To reinforce the change, Defra commissioned a research project costing £105,032, carried out by Nottingham University, which noted that “EU legislation is really driving change”. The authors promoted an “ecosystem approach”, an idea at the core of EU policy, driving the move away from traditional flood control into the “sustainability” camp.

The shift in policy can be seen with brutal clarity on the Commission website which gives priority to the “environment”, citing a raft of EU measures, including the Water Framework Directive, the Habitats Directive, the Environmental Impact Assessment and the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive. The Floods Directive is part of the package and this, we are sternly warned, has to be implemented by 2015.

Just so that there should be no doubts as to where the policy thrust lay, DG Environment in 2011 issued a note, stressing that flood risk management “should work with nature, rather than against it”, building up the “green infrastructure” and thus offering a “triple-win” which included restoration (i.e., flooding) of the floodplain.

By then, the Environment Agency needed no encouragement. In its March 2008 plan it had decided that, “providing a robust economic case for maintenance works on the Somerset Levels and Moors remains a challenge” (p.131).

We believe, the Agency said, that “it is appropriate to look again at the benefits derived from our work, particularly focusing more on the infrastructure and the environmental benefits, which previous studies have probably underestimated”.

We have, they added, “international obligations to maintain and enhance the habitats and species in the Somerset Levels and Moors, and it is within this context that all decisions have to be made”.

And, with that, they were “doubtful that all the pumping stations on the Somerset Levels and Moors are required for flood risk management purposes. Many pumping stations are relatively old and in some cases difficult to maintain. It is necessary to decide which ones are necessary particularly in the context of redistributing water”.

Of six policy options, the Agency thus adopted the sixth, to: “Take action to increase the frequency of flooding to deliver benefits locally or elsewhere, which may constitute an overall flood risk reduction”. This policy option, they said, “involves a strategic increase in flooding in allocated areas” (p.142). The Levels were to be allowed to flood, as a matter of deliberate policy.

Thus, when the BBC reported that the government had been “slow to act”, it could not have been more wrong. Our true government, the EU, had been there years before, planning to make the disaster that has overtaken the people of that part of Somerset a routine occurrence. The flooding was not so much man-made as made by government.

By the time Owen Peterson arrived to try to deal with the situation, he was years too late. Between the EU, the previous Labour government and the Environment Agency, the damage had already been done.

Thanks to Richard North for this excellent article

This article is being discussed here on Ishtar Babilu Dingir’s forum, Ishtar’s Gate.

Self-Love

Posted: January 22, 2014 in Media
Tags: , , , , ,

Earlier today I went for a walk and felt very depressed. I couldn’t help but feel down about my life and the situation I’m in, I just feel sorry for myself. About four weeks ago I left my job in order to try and make a career out of what I love which is creating, but namely making films. The moving image has totally revolutionized the world, and yet at the same time become a form of mind control whether it is marketing or propaganda.

I know I’m not the most well off person, and I can honestly say I really do feel happy to be able even to write this blog and post it for you to read. It’s a kind of self-analysis of my life at the present moment which I seem to do every now and again but never when I’m happy. Like most songwriters tend to write when they are sad, either having a relationship break up or a song about losing control on a night out partying. All writers tend to express a part of them at the present time, even if your remembering a past event you write in the present moment’s emotional state.

Over the past few weeks I have to say I’ve found it difficult to pluck up the courage, enthusiasm and get out of my lazy routine in order to work out next step in life. Since I’ve left school I’ve not really done anything to show for my efforts, life has been rather stagnant. A part of me is too afraid to move forward, I’m afraid of disappointment along the way and yet I’m disappointed at the moment that I’m not moving forward with my life. I guess I’m doing too much thinking and not enough action, yet I don’t have enough motivation to act. Or when I get some motivation of an idea it tends to burn out because some problem gets in the way and I can’t seem to move on.

It’s like I’m waiting to find the answers at the back of the book, or there to be a walk-through of my life, I guess I’m looking for the easy route out or more to the point, in.

 

I spend most of my time now in my house and I tend to find as many distractions as I can to shire away from my problems, to look away from myself in the mirror. The four walls have encroached upon me and without a daily routine I find it difficult to have control over my life. I don’t have control, I let my mind wonder without homing in on what really matters to me, maybe because I don’t know the answer or I don’t want to face the answer. I’m not saying that letting go is a bad thing, it’s a necessary part of life, with break up’s, loss of love one’s etc. We all need that time to let ourselves go but in order to turn back around and get back on track to what we really love doing, Whether it is spending time with our children, or building your business we get to a point where the repetitiveness of life dwindles our energy into oblivion. That is why people go for a run, go on holiday, let themselves go at the weekends or simply meditate every night before they go to bed. Even going to sleep is a form of revitalization, and is necessary for life to evolve from one state to another. But we can’t keep going on holidays all our life otherwise we will crash into problems along the way, we won’t find satisfaction in repeating the same thing over and over again.

 

I realize that for a long time I’ve been repeating my actions, I tend to look at facebook about 20 times a day waiting for some inspiration to come. I look at job sites for some inspiration to come and get nothing out there appeals to me, nothing revitalizes my energy. Quite rapidly my positive energy has been evaporating, I’ve been feeling like a hermit that has to be in solitary confinement in order to realize my own wrong doings. I feel as though it’s punishment for something I’m not aware of. I don’t blame myself though, and as I go for this walk I start to think I’m depressed and that my life is going spiraling out of control into the deep depths of my own unconscious despair. I feel unloved by people around me, I have no girlfriend or anyone to turn to for that matter. I’m not saying that for you to feel sorry for me but because it’s what I’m facing up to.

I take my book on this walk and as I start reading I come to realize that the energy I’m missing in my life isn’t a new career, a partner and to feel wanted by others, it isn’t a holiday I need, but simply to love myself.

At the moment I’ve been avoiding myself trying to find distractions, trying to find excuses and yet all this depressed state I’m in is really just me not being able to be content in myself. Self-Love is the only true love there is; if there is such a thing called life after death like science is slowly starting to understand then when we pass on to what ever conscious experience we have and there is a piece of our experience here that moves on with us. Then we can’t take with us the love of our partners, only the memories of them and those memories will have that love ingrained in the experiences, but if we love ourselves that love will continue. Really our existence is simply ourselves and the external world, and our journey physically is to experience the two together at once while evolving. I don’t blame myself for being lazy as now I think I understand that it is a necessary part of my journey. I needed to experience and understand myself that here physically I need to love myself, and stop rejecting the Truth right in front of my eyes.

 

If I’m seeking Truth, what is really out there and who I am, then hiding from it isn’t helping. It ultimately leads to an inequality and imbalance in my psyche, depressing the development of my ego. If I don’t love myself then how am I meant to find someone to love, for then I won’t know what love means. I also think that it maybe one problem with society today, that there are so many distractions people aren’t facing themselves in the mirror and loving themselves. It’s one of the reasons why marriages are failing because it’s so easy now to not face the problems in relationships and now financially we can be supported by the state if all else fails.

As I walk home I begin to realize that I need to start creating more, it’s been on my mind for a while however an idea popped into my mind that I’ll be getting to work on over the next few days. That idea was a transformation from a depressed state into realizing I need to love myself and then into making a pro-active change from my mental state into physical reality. To manifest and nurture my the love for myself creatively instead on dwindling on my negative energies in my bedroom. That walk has really revitalized my energy today, so I urge you to go for a walk now. Revitalize your own energy and find the love for yourself, then once you have that you can use that energy to love others around you.

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 40 other followers