Operation Hollywood

This interview is from 2004. With everything we are witnessing in the news today, it seems truer than ever, doesn’t it? -LW


How the Pentagon bullies movie producers into showing the U.S. military in the best possible light

—By Jeff Fleischer

To keep the Pentagon happy, some Hollywood producers have been known to turn villains into heroes, remove central characters, change politically sensitive settings, or add military rescues to movies that require none. There are no bad guys in the military. No fraternization between officers and enlisted troops. No drinking or drugs. No struggles against bigotry. The military and the president can’t look bad (though the State Department and Canada can).

“The only thing Hollywood likes more than a good movie is a good deal,” David Robb explains, and that’s why the producers of films like “Top Gun,” “Stripes” and “The Great Santini” have altered their scripts to accommodate Pentagon requests. In exchange, they get inexpensive access to the military locations, vehicles, troops and gear they need to make their movies.

During his years as a journalist for Daily Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, Robb heard about a quid-pro-quo agreement between the Pentagon and Hollywood studios, and decided to investigate. He combed through thousands of Pentagon documents, and interviewed dozens of screenwriters, producers and military officials. The result is his new book, “Operation Hollywood.”

Robb talked with MotherJones.com about deal-making that defines the relationship between Hollywood and the Pentagon.

MotherJones.com: How far back does collaboration between the U.S. military and Hollywood go?

David Robb: The current approval process was established right after World War II. Before that, the Pentagon used to help producers, but it wasn’t very formalized, like it is now. They helped producers going back to at least 1927. The very first movie that won an Oscar, “Wings,” — even that got military assistance.

MJ.com: What steps does a producer take to get assistance from the military? How does the process work?

DR: The first thing you have to do is send in a request for assistance, telling them what you want pretty specifically — ships, tanks, planes, bases, forts, submarines, troops — and when you want this material available. Then you have to send five copies of the script to the Pentagon, and they give it to the affected service branches — Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard. Then you wait and see if they like your script or not. If they like it, they’ll help you; if they don’t, they won’t. Almost always, they’ll make you make changes to the military depictions. And you have to make the changes that they ask for, or negotiate some kind of compromise, or you don’t get the stuff.

So then you finally get the approval, after you change your script to mollify the military, put some stuff in about how great it is to be in the military. Then when you go to shoot the film, you have to have what I call a “military minder” — but what they call a “technical advisor” — someone from the military on the set to make sure you shoot the film the way you agreed to. Normally in the filmmaking process, script changes are made all the time; if something isn’t working, they look at the rushes, and say, “let’s change this.” Well, if you want to change something that has to do with the military depictions, you’ve got to negotiate with them again. And they can say, “No, you can’t change it, this is the deal you agreed to.” As one of the technical advisors, Maj. David Georgi of the Army, said to me, “If they don’t do what I say, I take my toys and go away.”

After the film is completed, you have to prescreen the film for the Pentagon brass. So before it’s shown to the public, you have to show your movie to the generals and admirals, which I think any American should find objectionable — that their movies are being prescreened by the military.

MJ.com: At that stage, with the film finished, what can the military do if they have a problem?

DR: This happened on the Clint Eastwood movie “Heartbreak Ridge.” He finished the film, showed it to them, and they went through the roof. There was a scene in the script where he shoots an injured and defenseless Cuban soldier. They said, “You have to take that out. It’s a war crime. We don’t want that.” They hate having war crimes in movies. So with “Heartbreak Ridge,” Eastwood shot the film, and the scene ended up in the movie anyway. They said, “We told you to take that out.” He said he thought it was only a suggestion, that he didn’t know he had to. So they withdrew their approval. The film was still released, of course. But at the end of a movie that gets military assistance, there’s always a little tagline that says “thanks to the cooperation of the U.S. Army” or whatever branch. They said, “We’re not going to let you put that on there. We’re withdrawing cooperation.” And they can stop it from being shown in military theaters overseas or on bases in the U.S., which can really hurt the box office of a film. They’ve done this to numerous films. Also, at that time, Clint Eastwood was the chairman of Toys for Tots, the Marine Corps Christmas gift program for poor children. He wanted to screen the movie at a premiere to benefit Toys for Tots, and they said, “We’re not going to let you do that.” They can be very spiteful, they can hurt the box office of a film, and they don’t forget, either. So you do this at your peril. They can’t arrest you, they can’t stop the film. But if you want cooperation again, and you’ve screwed them like that before, you’re not going to get it. People almost never screw the Army on these deals.

MJ.com: What criteria does the Pentagon use in deciding whether to help a film?

DR: The most important one is that the film has to “aid in the retention and recruitment of personnel.” I don’t want to say that’s the whole thing, but it’s the main thing. They also say it has to reasonably depict military operations. And if it’s based on history, they say it has to be historically accurate, which is really a code. They’re much less interested in reality and accuracy than they are in positive images. They often try to change historical facts that are negative. Like with the movie “Thirteen Days,” which was very accurate but very negative toward the military during the Cuban missile crisis, showing that they would have taken us down the path toward World War III. During the negotiations with the producers, Peter Almond and Kevin Costner, the military tried to get them to tone down the bellicose nature of Gen. Maxwell Taylor and Gen. Curtis LeMay — who the record is very clear on, because before Nixon was taping in the White House, Kennedy was taping in the White House, and all the conversations from October 1962 are on tape. When Kennedy rejected LeMay’s insistence that we attack Cuba — when Kennedy said let’s put up a naval blockade, we don’t want to get into war — you can hear Curtis LeMay say, “This is the worst sellout since Munich.” He actually said that, when he didn’t think anybody was listening. Well, the military wanted to change it anyway, saying he was too bellicose and they had to tone it down. To their credit, Kevin Costner and Peter Almond stood up to the military, refused to buckle under, and made their film without military assistance.

MJ.com: Why don’t more producers take that approach?

DR: A lot of the studio heads tell their producers, “We’re not going to make this film unless we get military assistance, because it would be too expensive. So you’d better make sure the script conforms to what they want.” Also, what you don’t see in these documents is the self-censorship that goes with knowing you need their assistance and that they’re going to be your first audience. Writers write stuff to get that military assistance. So there’s no documents saying, “In “Black Hawk Down,” let’s leave out the whole part about the soldiers being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu.” Jerry Bruckheimer knows that if they have that in there, the military’s just going to tell them to take it out or they won’t help them. I asked Ridley Scott, the director, if “Black Hawk Down” could have been made without military assistance. He said, “Yeah. We just would have had to call it ‘Huey Down’.” So there’s this self-censorship. When you know the government is looking over your shoulder while you’re typing, that’s a very bad situation.

MJ.com: Aside from showing war crimes, what are some of the other things the military balks at?

DR: They never — at least that I’ve seen — help movies with aliens. Usually in those movies, the military is shown to be ineffective in combating the aliens, and it’s always some tricky, enterprising person who figures out how to defeat them. Like in “Mars Attacks!,” a grandma playing Slim Whitman over her radio blows the aliens’ heads up. Well, the military didn’t want to help them. They don’t want to help any movie that shows them being ineffective, even in combating aliens. They have no sense of humor! They wouldn’t help “Independence Day.” The military could not get over the fact that one of the key plot points was that the U.S. was secretly working on a spaceship captured at Area 51, so the film ended up not getting assistance.

Another thing, they don’t like drinking or drugs in the military. They’ll make you change that. Like in “Stripes,” they made them take out all drug references, and the original script had lots of drug references. They don’t want to see any pot smoking, even in Vietnam. The former Navy Secretary James Webb, after he left that post, he became a book writer. He’d been a Marine in Vietnam, and one of his books was semi-autobiographical, with many of the things he saw and knew for a fact happened in Vietnam: fragging of officers, smoking pot, burning Vietnamese villages. He had a screenplay and wanted to turn it into a movie. They said, “No, you have to change all this stuff,” and he wouldn’t do it. So that’s a film that never got made. Many films have never been made because they couldn’t get assistance.

MJ.com: In the book, you give examples of how the Pentagon won’t allow military characters to be depicted as bad guys.

DR: Right. For example, there was an HBO movie “The Tuskegee Airmen,” where the military made them replace the villain. This was a movie about the first black airmen during World War II, where the bad guy was a general at the base where these guys were training, and the good guy was a white congressman. Well, the army said they didn’t like that, so they ended up changing it. I have a letter where the producers wrote to the military, to Phil Strub, who’s the head of the Pentagon’s film office. The producers wrote, “The following changes are in the works and will soon be fully executed by the writer. It is our intention to reverse the characterization of General Stevenson and Senator Powell, making the senator the source of bigotry. General Stevenson will be revealed as someone who is loyal to the efforts of the Tuskegee Airmen.” Now when people saw that film, they had no idea that the good guy and the bad guy had been reversed, just so the military could meet its recruiting goals.

MJ.com: You also talk about the military targeting children by encouraging pro-military storylines in shows like “The Mickey Mouse Club” and “Lassie.”

DR: In those cases, they recognized that children are the future recruits. With the “Mickey Mouse Club,” it’s kind of a long story, but they used to show these little documentary films called “Mouse Reels.” For example, they took these kids out on the U.S.S. Nautilus, which was the first nuclear submarine. And there’s a Pentagon document that says, “This is an excellent opportunity to introduce a whole new generation to the nuclear Navy.” It was all military propaganda to show how “child-friendly” nuclear submarines are – there’s hardly any radiation, the food is great, they even have a jukebox that plays the “Mickey Mouse Club March” in the cafeteria.

As far as reaching children, I think one of the best examples — and they’re very candid in these documents, because I don’t think they ever expected anybody to be looking at this stuff — there was this movie “The Right Stuff” about the early days of the space program. The original script was filled with vulgarity and cussing, and the military sent the producers a letter. It reads, “The obscene language used seems to guarantee an ‘R’ rating. If distributed as an ‘R’, it cuts down on the teenage audience, which is a prime one to the military services when our recruiting bills are considered.” Of course, an ‘R’ rating means children under 17 have to be accompanied by a parent, so a lot of 16- and 17-year-olds couldn’t see this picture. And the Air Force wanted young people to see this so they’d get a good, positive image of the military and join up. So they changed it.

MJ.com: Among the films you looked at, which went through the most radical change from the script to the final, military-assisted movie?

DR: There was a movie called “Air Strike” by a guy named Cy Roth. Now, Ed Wood is often credited as being the worst director in Hollywood history, but Cy Roth would really give him a run for his money. Roth decided around 1953 that he’d made a Western, he’d made a space movie, now he wanted to make a war movie. This movie was set on a World War II aircraft carrier, and the lead characters were a young Jewish flyer and a young black flyer who are constantly being subjected to anti-Semitism and racism on the ship. The military said, “No, we don’t want to show any kind of racism or anti-Semitism in this picture, you’ve got to change that.” They also said, “We don’t want a World War II-era picture, we want a movie set in the modern jet age.” And Roth went nuts. He called his congressman, he wrote a letter to President Eisenhower — and the day after the White House got his letter of complaint, they sicced the FBI on him to see whether he was a Communist or not. Well, he finally caved in; he made the picture the way they wanted. So it was no blacks, no Jews, no propellers. If you look at this film, it’s so bad, it looks like a home movie shot on an aircraft carrier. So this film was completely changed.

MJ.com: You argue that this military screening process violates the First Amendment.

DR: The First Amendment doesn’t just give people the right to free speech; fundamentally, it prevents the government from favoring one form of speech over another. There’s a great 1995 Supreme Court case called Rosenberger v. University of Virginia that says, “Discrimination against speech because of its message is presumed to be unconstitutional. It is axiomatic that the government may not regulate speech based on the substantive content of the message it conveys. In the realm of private speech or expression, government regulation may not favor one speaker over another.” And yet that’s what they’re doing every day. Not just 50 years ago on “Air Strike,” but right now. This is a holdover from the Cold War, and it should be abolished. Or at least Congress, which has oversight over the Pentagon, should really look into what’s going on.

Congress has only looked into it twice, when Robert Aldrich made a stink about not getting assistance for the movie “Attack,” and then again in the 1960s when it turned out the government had footed the entire bill for all the military stuff on John Wayne’s “The Green Berets.” In these two investigations, the Pentagon basically said it’s not their intention to influence the content of movies. And Congress just accepted that. If they looked at these documents, they would see that clearly the intent is to influence the movies.

Major Georgi, who had been the military minder on many movies, said that one of the targets of this program is Congress; that Congress goes to movies, and that when they see positive images of the military, that makes it easier for them to vote for that $500 billion military appropriation. They also target voters, the people who are really footing the bill. Really, if you talk to soldiers and sailors and Marines, many of them will tell you they joined the military because of some movie that they saw. The former head of the Marine Corps film office, Matt Morgan, he told me he joined the military after seeing “Top Gun.” After “Top Gun” came out, there was a huge spike in recruitment for the Navy flying program. They know that it works. People are going off to war and getting killed, in part because of some movie that they saw that was adjusted by the military.

MJ.com: What would it realistically take to change this system?

DR: I think that if just 50 people wrote their congressman and asked, “what’s going on here?,” I think it wouldn’t take much. It’s not going to happen otherwise. The Writer’s Guild, whose stated mission is to protect the creative and economic rights of its members, has never made a single protest that its members’ scripts are being manipulated and changed by the military. Congress has done nothing. Hollywood likes the way it is, and the military likes the way it is; they don’t want to change it. The only people who have a real interest in this are the American people. They’re being saturated with military propaganda in their mainstream movies and TV shows, and they don’t even know. But I think there’s a very good argument that can be made that over the past 50 years, this chronic sanitization of the military and what war is has affected the American character; that we’re now a more warlike people than we were 50 years ago. Clearly, there are also other reasons, but I think when the world’s most powerful medium colludes with the world’s most powerful military to put propaganda in mainstream films and television shows, that has to have an effect on the American psyche.

Source.

CDC Suggests “Hermetically-Sealed Coffins” for Ebola Victims (aka. “FEMA Coffins”)

Has the CDC stockpiled such coffins in places like Madison, Georgia specifically in preparation for a viral outbreak?

I remember years back when I was still writing for my original website, Neithercorp.us, we came across a then little known video of air tight “coffin liners”, hundreds of thousands, stacked in a field in the middle of Madison, Georgia in close proximity to Atlanta and the home of the CDC.  We helped break that story which immediately swept through independent media circles.  Owners of the property leased to store the hermetically sealing plastic coffins stated that it was the CDC that had rented the land for storage of the coffins.  Confirmation from the CDC has not been forthcoming.

I have been keeping my eyes open for any mention of these kinds of coffins since that story was released, knowing that one day, they would suddenly be touted by the government as if they had always been in use.  It appears that day is close at hand…

In a story for Yahoo News, the CDC says that in the event of an Ebola outbreak in the U.S., bodies of the deceased would be required to be buried within “hermetically sealed caskets”, which would prevent the escape of microbes during funerals.  An administrator of the Dallas Institute Of Funeral Service interviewed in the article states that he has never come across any such caskets in his industry, meaning, hermetically sealed coffins are NOT common in the slightest for burial.  The CDC coffins in Madison, Georgia, though, ARE designed to prevent spread of infection.  In fact, the patent for these coffins confirms that they are meant for the burial of bodies exposed to infectious diseases.  You can read the patent here:

This would suggest that the CDC has stockpiled such coffins in places like Madison, Georgia specifically in preparation for a viral outbreak.  Meaning, the CDC has been expecting the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans due to infection for at least the past six years.  That is a LONG period of preparation.  Such preparation requires certainty, not hypothesis, especially were the federal government is involved.  Our government was so certain of a viral catastrophe they purchased fields full of sealing coffins to be ready for it; not to prevent it, but to have the means to clean up after it.  Let that thought settle for a moment, and then read my latest article, ‘An Ebola Outbreak Would Be Advantageous For Globalists’, to understand the bigger picture…

Source.

Coming Soon: Major Turning Point in Sandy Hook Shooting Hoax

I had mixed feelings about posting this video because it’s long and strikes me as a wee bit of fear-mongering. Wolfgang makes some good points, but there is a lot more drama in his presentation than I feel is necessary. On the positive side, it seems that there are common law grand juries getting ready to expose the truth of Sandy Hook. -LW


Wolfgang Halbig on Sandy Hook ~ Staged Government Community Event- It was a DHS/FBI/FEMA HSEEP/ICE Drill- an “INTEGRATED CAPSTONE EVENT” (see DHS website)

“There WILL BE a proper Coronial Inquest where all the witnesses (including the cops/feds) are put on the stand and cross-examined under oath and where ALL the evidence (forensic, ballistics, eye-witnesses, documentary) is also presented and carefully analysed and tested again, under oath.

A Common Law Grand Jury constituted of WE THE PEOPLE will challenge the state’s assertions that Sandy Hook really happened as they say it did, their assertions will be vigorously contested.

Their completely discredited and bogus “narrative” wouldn’t stand up for two seconds under competent and rigorous cross-examination.”

GREENLAWN, NY– Wolfgang Halbig, former teacher, law enforcement, and current national school safety assessment & emergency management consultant, maintains that the so-called Sandy Hook CT shootings were a staged cooperative government – community “Capstone” exercise planned years before December 2012, for the purpose of banning commonly-used firearms and limiting free speech. Halbig asserts the incident was a financial bonanza for the Newtown community and involved parents, all of whom moved into the CT community only between 2009-2011, and all receiving over $200K each for their involvement in the exercise.

Halbig’s questions are returned with silence and contempt; threat of arrest. Many details don’t add up… record shows no report of actual shots fired; no social security numbers for the dead students; 16 state troopers pre-positioned 45-60 minutes before the alleged shootings, and much more. Halbig also presents the proper safety procedures that schools must follow in a code-red event and urges parents to study your local school emergency management plan.– FULL LENGTH VIDEO– October 6, 2014

For more information visit: www.sandyhookjustice.com.

Benjamin Fulford Update for Jan 28th

Benjamin FulfordThe Sabbatean Mafia and Vatican P2 Lodge Are on What Will Be Their Final Offensive

The Vatican P2 lodge, with their plan for a fascist world government, has started a massive world-wide offensive on multiple fronts. In Davos, Switzerland, for example, they are making wonderfully optimistic pronouncements that are totally in contrast the underlying reality. In Japan, meanwhile, they handed out massive bribes via Lord Sassoon to set up an 82-member faction of MPs within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, according to White Dragon Society sources. In the US, their man Obama and his gun-grabbing campaign has blown up in their faces. Also, old and powerless old war-horses like Henry Kissinger are being trotted out (and ignored) as they threaten war with Iran for the umpteenth zillionth time.

These moves are all nothing but symptoms of severe panic as underlying moves, that are being coordinated purely by hand-delivered letters, are taking place outside of their ability to monitor. For example, the letter from the Japanese Prime Minister delivered to the Chinese President led to an agreement to shelve the dispute over the Senkaku/Daiyu Islands and concentrate instead on kicking the Sabbatean mafia out of Asia, according to Japanese military intelligence sources. There was a lot more in the letter and accompanying tape-recording but, much of the information will never be made digitally available for reasons of security.

Meanwhile, the wholesale bribery and blackmail of Japanese politicians aimed at setting up an 82 MP faction of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party led by Shinjiro Koizumi, the son of the traitorous Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is not going to make any difference. The powers that be in Japan know that he is just the slave boy of Mossad agent Michael Green. Michael Green has slandered me in the past by saying I was a woman beating amphetamine addict. What are you still doing in Japan, Green?

There has also been a significant heating up of talk and maneuvers concerning the Japanese royal family. Essentially, there are two rival claimants to the throne. One, Naoshi Onodera, is based in Yokohama and has the backing of a powerful Buddhist group. The other is the three-legged crow secret society based in Kyoto that is promoting a rival clan. This group has powerful backing among the Shinto priesthood.

Inside the Royal Family now located in the palace, meanwhile, strife continues between Emperor Akihito, his eldest son Naruhito and his second son Akishino. The Sabbatean mafia and their Japanese slaves were hoping to take over the throne by using Princess Masako and Crown Prince Naruhito as puppets of a junior royal family member working for the Rockefeller family. The traditionalists are not going to let that happen.

In any case, a fundamental decision has been made in Japan to shift the focus of Japan’s foreign policy closer to Russia and China and further away from the fascist regime in Washington D.C. (not to be confused with the Republic of the United States), according to Japanese military intelligence.

Meanwhile in North Korea, elderly military types are being encouraged by the Sabbatean Mafia to continue to make provocations and to marginalize Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un. The Chinese are not going to allow this to happen, according to North Korean sources.

Also, if anybody is wondering why more bankers are not being arrested, they should take note of what is going on in Singapore:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/28/us-singapore-probe-ndfs-idUSBRE90Q0IF20130128?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

Massive arrests have already begun in this place as well as in Hong Kong and China as part of an ongoing purge of Sabbatean influence in the region, according to multiple sources.

One focus of particular interested is the trading room located on the 11th floor of HSBC’s headquarters in Hong Kong, according to CIA sources. This is going to be shut down, according to a CIA source. A White Dragon Society asset in London is attempting to get comment about this and about the bribery of Japanese politicians from Lord James Sassoon.

The other new development in Asia has been an agreement between the CIA and certain Chinese factions to set up Myanmar as a major heroin, amphetamine and other illegal drug manufacturing and distribution center to replace North Korea in the amphetamine trade and Afghanistan in the Heroin business, according to a CIA source.

Meanwhile, back in Europe, here is how an MI5 source described the big cabal conference at Davos:

“It seems that several contributors form outside the EU were not very optimistic about the world economy whilst the event became bouyant in mood as EU-centric speeches were given about the EU being strong now a banking system was being proposed. This was of course accompanied by massive market manipulation as the dark pools of liquidity were brought into play and saw stock markets, including the FTSE 100 on highs. Meanwhile simultaneously out in the real world, the UK is in a greater slowdown than in the Depression, Spain has 26% unemployment, and Catalonia is proposing to sell it’s assets to Deutsche bank in a split from Spain. Whole countries are being sold to banks at cents to the dollar. This is the Great Depression but on a much larger scale. The Euro is suddenly set to strengthen. If not by market manipulation, how? This kind of bubble-like activity can only be happening because vast support funds are being brought into play for the Euro markets via Goldman Sachs and JPM and many of these funds are the direct funneling of QE which is avoiding real economies and being channeled via bonds into banks. The optimism at Davos is about the banks seizing the chance to use taxpayers support funding to buy taxpayer’s assets and leave countries crippled with debt and without the economic structures to recover, ever. The corporate government plan as envisaged by Fascists such as Mussolini and latterly praised by Berlusconi has been endorsed at Davos.”

End of quote.

There is really not much to add to what he says other than to say that the situation in the US is quite similar. The only difference is that in the US the cabal is now back-pedaling furiously away from their attempt to grab guns following the Sandy Hook psy-ops.

Finally, a Vatican Middle East expert responded to the CIA claims in last week’s report that Shah Pahlavi will be returning to Iran by noting the following that the Shah was so hated for the murders and torture carried out by his secret police that he would be killed as soon as he returned. Also the Shah could not even speak Persian very well because “he was sent to LE ROSAY in Switzerland to give him European polish and this alienated him even more from his people.” The best claimant, the source said, is Prince Amini Khajar, heir to the Khajar dynasty removed by the Western powers .” He just happens to live in a splendid villa in Rome.

The story about the Shah is probably similar to the story of many proxy leaders installed by the cabal worldwide. When the cabals access to the money creation process is finally cut off, doubtless the repercussions will be felt all over the planet.

As usual, there is a lot that cannot be written at this point in order not to tip off the Satanic Sabbatean cabal and give them an opportunity to sabotage efforts to remove them from world power. The news is good but please only believe it when you see it.

Source

You can get a subscription to Ben’s weekly updates at his website.

 

 

 

 

What is Fear? Nearly Every One of Us Experiences it

Each of us is at a unique stage in our understanding of Life, how we got where we are, what the problem is, and how to rectify it.

Panic attacks, anxiety, depression, insomnia, phobias, aggression, substance abuse, compulsive disorders…all ways of dealing with and experiencing fear, both emotionally and physiologically.

Fear ruins lives because emotions have physical manifestations. Negative emotions can and do cause dormant genes to express and cause dis-ease.

If any one of us can say we have “NO FEAR”… I posit that you may need to revisit your definition of what FEAR actually is.

One common acronym is “False Evidence Appearing Real”, and that would be correct, but being able to label Fear when we experience it so we can let it go and calm the heart and mind is something else.

A regular meditation practice does wonders for Fear—that, and knowing we are not alone; that we are all One. No one is in this by themselves, and as the slumbering ones gradually awaken, the One grows exponentially.

I think D and Sophia do a good job of illuminating the emotion of Fear. I share it in hopes that we all make a more concerted effort to transmute it—because Fear is NOT innate and there is no need to punish ourselves with this powerful emotion that is the polar opposite of LOVE, emotionally and energetically speaking. We can’t feel one at the same time we feel the other.

No one can intimidate us unless we “let them”. It’s a conscious choice, and a muscle that requires regular exercise lest we succumb to the manipulation and strangle our Spirit. To live in fear robs those we love of the experience of the True US—who we really are. What sculpts who we show to others? Is it Fear? Or is it Love?

When we eliminate Fear, we usher in Love… and Peace…and the freedom to BE—in all our authentic magnificence.

—from Removing the Shackles

Turn on the Light

Posted: 25 Jan 2013 10:21 AM PST

Written by my lovely friend Sophia.  This struck me as very NOW.  I have been talking about FEAR with my kids and with several other friends.

Fear is generated as a Psy-Ops against the people.  Keep them in Fear so that they are so preoccupied with dealing with the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual side effects they’ll never notice that you’ve stolen their physical, mental, emotional and spiritual bodies right out from under them.

Government = fear
Authority = fear
Religion = fear
Education = fear
Medical = fear

The use of FEAR has been a constant attack on us our whole lives- the ultimate control by those who would place themselves above you.

We are all ONE.  We are all EQUAL.

No person has the Right to Control you.  So Don’t let them Control you.

“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”

Turn on the Light

It is up to us now to become free.
Yesterday I identified fear, took note and contemplated what it means.  It did not occur while being chased by a wild beast.  It occurred in my automobile, on a quiet street, early morning, just outside a school.  The sun was shining. The sky was blue.  I was warm and dry and driving well within the posted speed limit.  Then I spotted a police car.  It was parked off to the side.  In my gut a bloop of panic erupted and cascaded up to my brain where it registered; fear.
This was a “school zone” and it is swarming with speed traps.  I don’t exceed the limit because of it and yet the part of me that feels panic got triggered anyway.  Why?
Fear is a control mechanism.  We have learned well.  It keeps us docile, aging, needy and quiet.  It is neither necessary nor desired.  It is based on a non-truth; someone else holds authority over your actions, indeed, over you. This is so engrained as to be unquestioned.  Many consider it truth.  It is not.
Looking at fear from a distance, it is immobilizing and knee-jerk. Consciousness exposes the option of fearless.  It is not one we’ve considered before.  Fear makes sense as a spark to get us running from physical harm, and only then.  It exists to ignite adrenaline.  Fear makes no sense when confronting “make believe”.
As children, we may have been afraid of the dark, afraid it would hurt us. Then we understood the room didn’t change without light, it was only our perception and imagination that made it scary.
We are learning to turn on our light.  The tales of power by an imaginary “other”, often wearing a uniform and/or title, are meant to keep us in the dark – afraid, docile, compliant and unquestioning.  It is up to us to expose the fraud, turn on our light and tell our gut to pipe down – all is well.
The papers have been filed to legally declare our freedom; it is true.  Yet with fear of any kind of authority – the shackles are still in place.
In order to really be free, it must be felt in every moment of our lives.  As we adjust we will notice the moments that ignite panic.  One day they won’t.  For now we can deal with them as markers – pointing the way to what needs our focus.
For once we see ourselves as free; the ferocity of our spirit will hold steady our authority – regardless of who is in the room.  It is this state we are heading towards.  Absolute conviction is untouchable.  As we set our sights on the truth of who we are, we’ll notice moments of who we have been, of who we are not.  This is good; awareness facilitates clarity.
Your truth is absolute.  You are a living breathing fragment of Source in every way equal to any “other”.  You are beholden to none.  There are none more important than you and none your worth surpasses.  We are One.
Love every particle because it’s all part of the package.  The really great part of this is that it is yours.  As you see it, recognize it, absorb it and re-work it – your spirit is fortified.  You own it.  No one has given it to you and no one can take it away.

You are the One you’ve been waiting for.

http://www.lightworkerseries.blogspot.ca/2013/01/turn-on-light.html

Source

BE FREE!  FREE TO BE…OPPT IN