"What IS reality?" (video) --- "Kiefer89" of WA

Many years ago, I came across two video clips of Jet's that someone, "TheMickeyRat", had taken the time to upload to YouTube, along with a bunch of Jet's personal pictures taken mostly from his step-family's Thanksgiving in 2002.

Jet was an introvert and “spacing out” isn't necessarily a sign of insanity (I do it, and I'm sure YOU do it, too). In his “Reality”-clip, he's on poppers (I asked him specifically), he's listening to "Down With The Sickness" by Disturbed and oh.. that yelling black adult man at the end of the video is taken from a movie called “Animal Factory” (2000), so.. no guys, that's definitely not “another possible victim” of that monster you have created to entertain your fantasies.

Over the 8 years since I left a comment on this «Reality»-video, the responses have been exclusively «negative», I suppose, but at least I can sincerely stand by what I said then.

(Jet and I both enjoyed Pink Floyd a lot, by the way.)

WHY? Because he was REAL (or, at least as real as he "could" be - the vast majority of his letters were read and re-read a few times by bored prison guards looking for reasons to further "punish" him, and the same went for his phone calls, so..).

I was the one who asked him to, preferably in details, share his experience with regards to the Groene-situation (that is, the part before the taking of the kids to the Montana woods). I still think "The Groenes" is my favorite blog entry of Jet's - and I sincerely appreciate them all.

Thank you, Jet. I spoke to one of your sisters a couple of days ago, and she kindly gave me all I needed to know with regards to your ashes (and "final resting place", as they say). Hey buddy.. I miss you. 

"Kiefer89", May 2021

"Unfortunately, there can be no doubt that man is, on the whole, less good than he imagines himself or wants to be. Everyone carries a shadow, and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the blacker and denser it is." - Carl Jung

Joseph Edward "Jet" Duncan III (February 25, 1963 - March 28, 2021)

My soulmate, free at last!

(Jet while attending North Dakota State University)

Today, on the 28^th March 2021, I received a call from one of your attorneys, informing me that you, my Lighthouse, Mr. Joseph Edward Duncan III (the fourth of five children born to Lillian Mae and Joseph Edward Duncan Jr. on the 25^th of February 1963 in Fort Bragg, North Carolina) had been released from this ride that most people call «life», this morning.

Over the course of nearly 9 years, you and I have exchanged (1000+) letters, x number of 15 minute-monitored-and-recorded phone calls, etc.. and, you know, shared some personal experiences.

I last spoke to you on the phone earlier this month (on the 2^nd) , and we agreed to speak again in a couple of days.. and then, someone affiliated with your case calls me instead - to tell me that you have now left ALL mortal prisons (or, «passed away», as they like to put it nowadays). I smiled. Of course, I still do. 

There is no such thing as death. There is only transition.

I love you and you love me.

Your Valkyrja

[via e-mail from Norway, March 28, 2021]

Brain Surgery Aftermath

Part 1: Brain Surgery Aftermath

So, a couple of weeks ago I let some brain surgeons cut a three-inch hole in my skull so they could reduce the mass of a fist-sized tumor that was killing me. They told me even before the surgery that the tumor will most likely grow back, and kill me anyway. The point of the surgery and any follow-up treatment (like, chemo-therapy, and radiation-therapy) would be simply to slow it down, and hopefully slow down the debilitating effects of the tumor as well.

So, I refused the chemo and radiation "therapies", because I saw no advantage in slowing it down, if doing so meant only that I have to be 80% paralyzed on my left side longer, and whatever other maladies (debilitating consequences) the tumor has in store for me down the road (three to six months from now I could lose the ability to speak, eat, or even crap without needing a diaper change (man, that really "hurt" to write that, and I'm sure it will "hurt" even more if and when it happens).

It's sinking in slowly, just how much worse it can (and likely will) get. The worst part isn't shitting my pants (which thankfully I haven't done yet, not being able to feel or use my left hand (thank God I still have nearly 100% use of my right hand (my writing hand!). The worst part, and what I dread the most, is losing my ability to think clearly, and solve simple problems, like just covering myself with a blanket to get warm so I can sleep. I never thought of such things as a "skill" before. But, not being able to do such simple tasks, without getting confused and frustrated, has changed my perspective on what a "skill" even is. 

Part 2: How It All Fits (Understanding, Love, Judgment, Hate, etc.)

Love is understanding.

Understanding is the absence of judgment (i.e. forgiveness, which is also love, proper).

Faith is the absence of fear (and vice versa). Fear prevents understanding, and thereby is the enemy of love.

Hate is a form of ignorance, which then is a lack of understanding accompanied by fear - find the fear, confront it, and then understanding will arise. This is the simplest form of a miracle (a.k.a. "healing").

Innocence is the ability to understand without judgment (i.e. recognized by a complete absence of fear).

Ignorance is a form of false understanding that twists the mind's ability to perceive and understand anything (i.e. ignorance is insanity, which is also judgment without understanding). There can be no judgment with understanding (if you read the above carefully, with understanding (i.e. without judgment), this impossibility will be self-evident.

Judgment invokes fear, and hatred.

Understanding invokes faith, and love.

Understanding is the comprehension that occurs when we see the connection, and/or relationships between two or more principles. It's really very simple, once you see the relationships/connections, i.e. once you understand.

Part 3: P.S. They're watching me now

I can't even articulate how I know they're watching me; I just do. And I know why, even though I can't tell you that either. If I said (wrote) the reason then they'd just change it. They change the reasons for what they do all the time --- that's why they say "the reasons" don't matter in the end, only the consequence matters.

I agree that the reasons don't matter. They never do. Reasons are never more than a form of judgment that catch up with us in the end.

[J.D. Nov 5. 2020]

This Is Death

I do not seek death, though I know that death seeks me. 

So, I will welcome it when it comes, because I know in my heart that there is no reason to fear death. Yes, death is just a void, but it is not empty as most assume. In fact, it is within the void of death that everything we call life happens. We live within the void of death already, so fearing it makes no sense. Life is just a dream of death. Death itself might even consider life to be a nightmare, and in some ways it may even fear life more than we often fear death. In this sense, perhaps fearing death is the same as fearing life; it is equally nonsensical. To reject or fear death in one's heart/mind is no less than rejecting and/or fearing life.

J.D. Nov. 18, 2020

All Lives Matter

At a protest I saw on T.V. a couple of weeks ago there was a young black woman calling for all "whites" in the crowd to move to the front and face police in riot gear in order to feel what it's like to be "black" for at least a few minutes.

If I were in that crowd (protesting systematic racism and injustice), I would have been very offended by her suggestion, which directly implies that because I'm "white", I don't understand what it's like to be "black". THAT IS RACISM!

If any person is treated unjustly by our social system, then we are all responsible, and "victims" (i.e. we all suffer the consequences). The white police officer now facing murder charges for the callous murder of a black man is as much a "victim" of "systematic racism" as the man he killed. And so am I, even though I'm as "white" as they come, and was locked in a cell on death row when it happened.

The problem isn't racial, or sexual, or even ideological. The problem is that we can't see how connected we all really are! No person ever acts, or thinks, or feels, or suffers, independently. The illusion of independent experience is necessary for our survival (as animals). It permits us to behave in our own interest, which is necessary for motivation (to eat, find shelter, reproduce, etc.) and provides a sense of autonomy and self-worth.

But, when we become completely detached from the reality of our inter-dependence, not only with other people, but with the planet herself, then we lose touch with the one and only thing (literally) that can "save" us, and solve all our problems. We become fearful, and suspicious, seeing anything that is different than what we are use to as a threat, or "them"; bad guys, criminals, witches, Jews, druggies, homos, sex offenders, psychopaths, blacks, whites, men, woman; us, and them.

In the end we must realize that ALL lives matter, and stop using labels to define and separate ourselves from the broadest consequences of our experience. The "solution" is to stop believing in the illusion of independence, and see it instead for what it is. Like the sun, we need it to survive. But if we turn to it for solutions to problems that we create for ourselves, thinking we must "do something" as individuals in order to "fix" things, then we end up only making the problem worse.

Our individualism and independence are not sacred things that we need to protect, honor, and appease in order to prosper. It is there for a reason that if we ever hope to understand (and use to our advantage) we must first stop seeing it as something sacred and holy, and start looking at it - and the problems that come with it - as something to be objectively studied and understood. We need to stop pretending that if we can just come up with the right ritual, make the right sacrifice, or invent the right law, then everything will be okay. That's not how problems get solved.

We need to stop inventing slogans, punishing "bad guys" and making laws that usually end up doing more harm than good, and making the problem worse (often by pushing it "out of sight" where it can dig deeper and fester). Instead we should be applying the problem-solving tools we have and that we know work, like trial and error (not trial and punishment), or simply scientific analysis (not pseudo-science).

Instead of making laws meant to "fix" the problem, why not make a law instead that requires all laws to state clear objectives that if not met within a state time frame are repealed and analyzed so better laws, also subject to automatic appeal and analysis, can take its place? I know that sounds simpler than it would turn out to be, and it'd require a nearly complete overhaul of our current (dysfunctional) system. But, isn't that what everyone wants?

Imagine a law that requires police departments to reduce crime by clearly defined and measured margins, and provides the means (any means) for doing so. And if it doesn't work then we repeal the law and study why, just like a real scientific experiment.

Of course the naysayers will argue that we can't "experiment" on society. And I'd say, why not, if it works? Our current system clearly doesn't work, not even a little. I personally can't imagine any system of laws (which are imposed upon a population) that will ever "work" in the long run. I like to imagine a world (with humans in it) where order is allowed to arise from chaos, the way it does in nature (with or without us). But that world is a long way off. So for now, if we could just collectively admit that we don't know what the hell we are doing, and from there take steps in as many directions as necessary in order to find a path that goes somewhere (instead of in descending spirals), anywhere else!

[J.D. June 18, 2020]

"Science is not a body of facts. Science is a method for deciding whether or not what we choose to believe has basis in the laws of nature or not." - Marcia McNutt, Editor, Science Magazine

No Hope

I heard a Christian say the other day, "If you have life, then you have hope; and if you have hope, then you have everything."

That sounds to me like the sort of thing Christians are taught to say without thinking, because when you think about what it means it doesn't make any sense.

The definition of hope is a desire with the expectation of fulfillment. Put simply, it is the anticipation of something you don't yet have. So it makes no sense at all to claim that with hope you have everything, when in fact in order to have hope you must lack the thing you hope for.

It appears that equating hope with having everything is some sort of Orwellian doublespeak that authoritarian institutions (governments and churches) use to emotionally rationalize the need for their authority. The message of hope is one that says, "You don't have what you want yet, but if you do what we tell you then you will get everything you desire."

Doesn't it sound at least a little suspicious when you put it that way?`And isn't that exactly what "they" are telling you when they say hope is everything? And most shockingly, isn't that the exact opposite of what Jesus Himself purportedly died on a cross in order to teach us? (Jesus was a teacher and a messenger, wasn't he? So shouldn't his message and lessons be more important than his being?)

When I read the Bible the message of unconditional love that Jesus preached (and demonstrated) seems like the opposite of hope. He insisted over and over that we already have God's unconditional love (and forgiveness, which goes hand-in-hand). So, we have no more we need to hope for? Isn't that the core of his message, that we already have everything that matters, and the only thing that matters? Did he not insist that we should not look here, or there, for heaven (i.e. God's Love), because it already exists within us?

And doesn't the Christian "message of hope" in effect circumvent the very "message of Love" that Jesus preached?

You tell me. is there some flaw in my reasoning, some blindness to my insight that I am missing? I try to remain open to such errors, so tell me where I am mistaken and I will consider it carefully. But, I will not accept some emotionally charged oxymoronic doublespeak as "logic", when it is anything but; especially when it contradicts the One True Authority given to each and every living thing to think and be for themselves, but not by themselves; to be happy, loved, and alive, right here, and right now, with no need for desire, or "hope" at all.

Japanese Perversion

Years ago in Japan the government made it against the law to publish pictures or drawings that depict sexual penetration. And for the purpose of enforcing these laws they made it very specifically against the law to show a penis penetrating the human (i.e. female) body (orally, anally, or vaginally). The result of this has been interesting, to say the least.

Japanese pornographers, in particular those working in graphic arts (i.e. comic books, per se), quickly found alternate ways to sell their sex rags (magazines) by using illustrations of everything but the taboo "sexual act". And in the process they created whole new genres of sexual perversion.

One of the most popular and widely distributed forms of this new sexual deviation is commonly referred to as "tentacle sex". It shows monsters, aliens, and mutant humans having sex with super sexy young females, and showing full penetration, only with tentacles instead of penises. Not surprisingly this "art" is very popular in Japan, where "xxx" porn is otherwise outlawed.

But, there is still another even more popular genre of perverted sex in Japan that also results directly from the governments attempt to suppress basic human nature, and it is one that most Americans would (pretend) to find even more "disgusting" (even though it is widely embraced in America in its "milder" forms).

I'm talking about "sexy school-girls", commonly depicted as young as six to sixteen. This form of "child erotica" bordering on "child porn" is very popular in Japan, and commonly accepted. People don't realize that it became popular around the same time and for the same basic reasons that tentacle sex became popular.

People need sex. If you take away open sexual expression in its most prevalent form (penetration) then people will naturally and instinctively seek "substitutes". Tentacle sex is an obvious substitute. And while the sexualization of children is not as obviously a substitute, it is undeniably a result of the same self-righteous attempts of those who pretend to be "above sex" (and hence, above their "animal nature") by passing laws that attempt to suppress said nature.

In Japan, "sexy school-girls" stand in for "naughty desire" when ordinary "naughtiness" is against the law. In the United States we will allow "naughty" pictures and movies, but we still criminalize "naughty" behavior (prostitution, rape, and increasingly any open display of sexual interest). [Note: in most states the definition of "rape" is non-consensual "intercourse", defined as sexual penetration of the (usually female) body... sound familiar?]

I believe that the reason "sex crime" is so prevalent in the United States is because sexual behavior is so heavily repressed. Just like the rise of "tentacle sex" and "sexy school-girls" in Japanese magazines resulted from laws that restrict sexual expression in published form, the rise of criminal sexual behavior in the U.S. is the result of restrictions against sexual behavior. We resort to rape, murder, and/or children for sex, when we have no other outlets, just as the Japanese resort to such things in their popular publications.

Not everyone in Japan buys tentacle sex magazines, and not everyone in the U.S. resorts to crime for sex. I'm only observing a connection here that those who make our laws would rather we not know about. (I saw a forensic psychology "expert" insist on T.V. the other day - for no apparent reason - that "sex crime is NOT on the rise in America", which, of course, it is, and has been since the 70s when they started passing so many sex laws along side, or I'd say "behind" in the covert sense, all the drug laws.) Check my facts, and reasoning, and comment below if you like. But let me leave you with this one telling clue: Less than 1% of the illegal "child porn" on the Internet shows anal or vaginal penetration (or so I have been told). So what is it that so-called "pedophiles" really want? Think about it, I dare you!

[J.D. February 12, 2020]