How can liberalism cause terrorism if there's no such thing as terrorism? Over a hundred thousand people die everyday, most of it preventable. Government cuts, government spending, buying a nintendo for yourself, voting for the wrong party, all of these things kill people, just not in overt ways. If people are simply ignorant, does it take them off the hook? These two bombers believed most likely in some ideology or philosophy or suffered from a psychological affliction, but what about corrupt government officials or big business executives, who often kill more people with open-eyed deliberateness merely out of personal greed?

Why focus on these two bombers? To find scapegoats, to cling to one's sense of patriotism, as an act of mental evasion to ignore the larger reality? The larger reality used to upset me, but I dealt with it, I don't let anger and fear control my life. I realized that everyone, not just bombers and murderers, suffer from psychological afflictions, which does not bring them happiness. I didn't want that.

Evil doesn't kill people, ignorance does.

here's some words from Justin Trudeau about the Boston bombing, who wants to be the future  prime minister of Canada.

“Now, we don’t know now if it was terrorism or a single crazy or a domestic issue or a foreign issue,” he said. “But there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded. Completely at war with innocents. At war with a society. And our approach has to be, where do those tensions come from?

“Yes, there’s a need for security and response,” Trudeau added. “But we also need to make sure that as we go forward, that we don’t emphasize a culture of fear and mistrust. Because that ends up marginalizing even further those who already are feeling like they are enemies of society.”


For him the terrorists could be considered as victims.

They are victims. Before that interview I had always dismissed Trudeau, but lots of what he said (including what you quoted) really encouraged me about him. Although I'm sure Tom Mulcaire of the official opposition feels exactly the same way about terrorism, but just can't say so because then he'd be labeled a socialist again (and just this weekend his party officially gave up that term).

I'm saying the vessel and the consciousness are co-existent as an individual agent of consciousness.

It's like there's an ocean of consciousness unlimited in quantity and identical in quality, non-local and timeless, just existing. Pieces of it extend into denser realms. A piece of something infinite in quantity and otherwise identical is not delineated by any physical form since its quantity is unlimited. Its delineation into form is precisely the form itself, the vessel, which incidentally is also consciousness but much denser. Of course, then, there's nothing there, except certain denser forms have the magical potential for sentience, whereby they can be the ego of the unlimited ocean and give it the experiences it could never have on its own. Spirit ensouled in flesh.

Consciousness is consciousness. The only difference is what surrounds it, what shape it flows into. Knowing myself I do know Emptiness because I am emptiness.

I certainly change as a result of discoveries I make. I become more empty.

You can't remember something you never forgot, you can only discover it by exploring.

Is there no discovery and excitement in your life? That's all I mean.

The trouble is, we don't have capitalism. We have a rigged system. And yet we think we have capitalism, so we're not only robbed but we're duped as well.

In order to truly have a capitalist economic system in the world, money and industry mustn't be able to buy government and the free market's regulatory structure must be properly upheld.

Right now we have capitalist governments, and that ain't no good.