Subscription options
$3 / Month : $3.00 USD - monthly
$7 / Month : $7.00 USD - monthly
$10 / Month : $10.00 USD - monthly
$25 / Month : $25.00 USD - monthly
Subscribe to our e-mail list
Two years ago today, we switched on the circuits here in our underground bunker. The cats have been especially needy this week, anticipating our anniversary, and we made sure and stocked up on kibble and booze for today’s celebration.
For those of you who have been with us since the start — and many of you who were with us earlier, during our days at The Village Voice () or even before that, at New Times LA (; Tory Christman and Mark Ebner and Mark Bunker, among others) or even a few of you who stretch all the way back to the Phoenix New Times (; Rick Ross and Jeff Jacobsen, for example) — we humbly thank you for putting up with our adventures into the weird world of Scientology for so long.
So let’s kick off Year Three in the Bunker!
First up, before we get to this week’s Sunday Funnies, we asked Jonny Jacobsen about a raid that happened Thursday at the Scientology org in St. Petersburg, Russia. We heard about the raid early Friday afternoon, but our Russian translator cautioned us to be careful with the story. Our translator had concerns about the media organization reporting it, and said the involvement of the church itself was unclear.
So while the story came out on WWP yesterday, we waited and asked our man in Europe, Jonny Jacobsen, to make a quick study of what was going on. We’re glad we waited. Here’s what he sent us.
I have mixed feelings about this one.
So far as I can tell, Interior Ministry officers raided Scientology’s St Petersburg offices on Thursday looking for evidence on the Olympus property development business run by Scientologists Catherine and Michael Zaborsky.
Earlier this month fraud charges had been filed against Catherine Zaborsky after clients complained that the company had failed to deliver on promised property developments.
Is it just a coincidence that the European Court of Human Rights is about to hear a case on Russia’s failure to recognise The Church of Scientology in St Petersburg as a religion?
Here’s the relevant extract from page five of a recent ECHR press statement setting out forthcoming judgments:
Church of Scientology of St Petersburg and Others v. Russia (no. 47191/06)
The applicants in this case are the Church of Scientology of St Petersburg, an unincorporated group of Russian citizens formed for the collective study of Scientology, and six members of this group: Galina Shurinova, Nadezhda Shchemeleva, Anastasiya Terentyeva, Ivan Matsitskiy, Yuliya Bryntseva, and Galina Frolova, Russian nationals, born in , , 1977, and 1955 respectively. The case concerns their complaint about the authorities refusing to register their Scientology group as a legal-entity.
Between March 1995 and August 2003 the applicants’ Scientology group, led by Ms Shurinova since the late 1980s, submitted six applications for registration. The registration authorities rejected all their applications, each time citing new grounds for their refusal. The most recent refusal referred in particular to the alleged unreliability of a document confirming that the group had been in existence for 15 years, a legal requirement under Russian law for any new religious group to be registered. In October 2003 the applicants challenged the refusals in court and, in December 2005, the St. Petersburg District Court held that the refusal to register their group as a legal entity had been lawful, citing defects in the document confirming the existence of the religious group for 15 years.
This judgment was upheld on appeal in May 2006.
Relying in particular on Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion) interpreted in the light of Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association), the Scientology group complain that the decisions refusing to register them as a legal entity were arbitrary.
Back in 2007, the ECHR ruled that Russia had violated Scientology’s rights for failing to let the movement’s Moscow branch operate as a religion — and that case looks very similar to the summary of the St. Petersburg case about to come before the court.
So are the bad guys the Scientologists, who are ideologically committed to the notion that the end that it is acceptable to make money for the movement by any means necessary?
Or are real villains of the piece the Russian authorities?
For years now, they have been cracking down on Scientology and anyone else who doesn’t fit into the New Model Russia — again, by any means necessary.
It’s difficult to know who to dislike more.
The ECHR ruling in this latest case is expected this coming Thursday, according to the court’s statement.
— Jonny J.
We’ll have our Russian language friends keep an eye on the situation, and we’re grateful to Jonny to so quickly provide us with a preliminary look at this dispute — which appears messy, at best.
Now, let’s get on to our Sunday funnies!
You may remember the recent brochure Scientology put together boasting that it was about to unleash a television tsunami that would be magnitudes greater than any publicity campaign the church has ever produced. Naturally, we’ve wondered what “Scientology TV” would look like since David Miscavige picked up the KCET TV studios in LA. Well, could it be that Scientology is starting a soft launch — in Melbourne, Australia of all places?
Yesterday, Melbourne resident Michael Moore watched the debut of this fledgling effort, and posted his impressions to Facebook:
Started right in with a young Australian girl telling how she is winning with Scientology for about 5 minutes. This was followed by definition of ‘Thetan’ and a very brief summary of the parts of man, then a breakdown of the 8 Dynamics. This was the Australian Section. This was followed by a breakdown of the Admin Scale with dramatizations of the major points. This was evidently a US production slotted in and might have even come from a US video on the subject.
This was followed by a short piece on PR. I had to laugh as the data presented was right out of policy letters but not what the church actually uses. At the end there was a young Australian male explaining how Scientology has helped him. Noted was the Australian sections at the beginning and end was filmed in the Local Melbourne Church. It was a slick presentation and although some quotes by LRH were used, there was no acknowledgement of LRH or of source and no pictures of LRH. The closest to source was a background image of ‘L. Ron Hubbard‘ shown during the young man’s talk. I wondered how come the Church managed to get a half hour (less ads and sponsors) slot on community TV but this was followed by a Greek Orthodox program and possibly others. I finally worked out that as the current Federal Government is trying to get community TV disbanded so they can sell the wavelengths for money to other commercial stations, it is likely CTV are accepting ANY religious programs to boost their importance in the community and garner support for community TV, hence the willingness to accept what even here is a controversial church.
What, no LRH? Sacrilege!
Sounds like the perfect antidote to insomnia, to us.
Can any of our antipodean readers figure out how big of a check Mr. Ripley had to pay to make “Continental Emerald Humanitarian”?
Ever wonder what the hour-by-hour schedule was for a weekend Ideal Org conference? Probably not, but here you go anyway…
The Book-a-thon is on! And Dianetics is going like hotcakes.
Last week, there was yet another fundraiser for the San Fernando Valley org, and here are the results. As Mike Rinder pointed out over at his blog, if that crowd at the end is all they could pull together for a united Los Angeles area alliance — a geographical area with the greatest concentration of Scientologists in the world — then the end days really do seem upon us.
Oh yes! Stacy Francis! This means we get to pull out
Is there trick or treating going on? If someone were to show up in, say, a Guy Fawkes mask, would they get a trick or a treat?
We couldn’t pass this one by. It’s not every day we get a flier from the Las Vegas Celebrity Center, which brings to mind , ever.
Remember Mary? We’ve enjoyed
as one of the
trying desperately to raise money for the Ideal Org there. Is it just us, or is the passive-aggressive nature of this testimonial just off the charts?
We’ve heard Minty Alexander’s name occasionally over the years, but we’d appreciate it if one of our oldtimers let everyone in on her 411.
Last week, we wondered how Fearless Leader had voted in the Scotland independence referendum, and this week he’s saying — nae gonna tell, laddy! Oh, that rogue.
Oh yeah, this is just what your family and friends want to hear — how they can get back on the Bridge. We can imagine how that’s going to go over.
WHOA! Who is the 4th Sea Org member ever? Come on, oldtimers, fill us in! And he or she is going to talk about OT III! Won’t everyone in the room get pneumonia and die? (Curious about Ron’s Journal 67? We included all 40 minutes of it
we did with Jon Atack more than a year ago.)
Steve is the man in Philly.
For these next two fliers, have you noticed that some of the events have been fancified, with mere participation costing $100? Is this because too many people were bolting from events without even donating that much?
And finally, we’ll end this party with words from the Great Man himself. This is one of those quotes you just want to frame and put on the wall.
Wow, we really had a fun time putting together this week’s Funnies. We want to give a special thanks not only to our great tipsters, who have been so generous over the last two years, but also to Scott Pilutik, our attorney and webmaster, for keeping us from freaking out when technical problems cropped up from time to time.
Thanks to all of our readers for making the Bunker a thriving, living community.
——————–
Nanette Asimov on Jamie DeWolf: Superb!
Nanette Asimov has written for the San Francisco Chronicle about a guy
was going to blow up in a big way, L. Ron Hubbard’s great-grandson, Jamie DeWolf.
Nanette — niece to the great science fiction writer, Isaac Asimov — is responsible for one of the best Scientology exposes of all time, a 2004 series that convinced the State of California to rethink its connection to Narconon, Scientology’s deceptive drug rehab network. And she’s in great form here, with a sensitive and thorough portrait of the very talented man we’ve been getting to know.
Jamie is a star. And we can’t wait to see what he does next.
——————–
Posted by Tony Ortega on September 28, 2014 at 07:00
E-mail your tips and story ideas to
or follow us on . We post behind-the-scenes updates at our . Here at the Bunker we try to have a post up every morning at 7 AM Eastern (Noon GMT), and on some days we post an afternoon story at around 2 PM. After every new story we send out an alert to our e-mail list and our FB page.
Learn about Scientology with our numerous series with experts…
BLOGGING DIANETICS (We read Scientology’s founding text) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
UP THE BRIDGE (Claire Headley and Bruce Hines train us as Scientologists) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
GETTING OUR ETHICS IN (Jefferson Hawkins explains Scientology’s system of justice) , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
SCIENTOLOGY MYTHBUSTING (Historian Jon Atack discusses key Scientology concepts) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
PZ Myers reads L. Ron Hubbard’s
| Scientology’s
| Scientology’s
The Underground Bunker’s
| The Underground BunkerSubscribe:&&&&&&|&&&&&&
by Gary Gripp
penned 11 May 2013
The world we’ve gotten used to and thought of as normal now turns out to be an aberration — a bubble world based upon the ever-accelerating depletion of non-renewable resources. Fossil energy has fueled an industrial revolution as well as an agricultural revolution, which has doubled the population in less than a human lifetime, making the world unendurably crowded with resource- and energy-hungry humans. With peak oil, mass extinctions, ecological degradation (including the depletion of topsoil and growing scarcity of potable water), along with peak everything else–future prospects have been starting to look rather unpromising lately. But it gets worse. What started off as the greenhouse effect morphed into something called global warming, and it looked like it might get a bit warm for future generations. Then we started hearing about climate change, and with this slightly altered terminology the projections for change grew more severe and were expected to arrive a little sooner than formerly believed. As more climate science came online, the modifiers took on a more ominous tone, as in “climate chaos” and “climate emergency” — which again meant it was coming sooner and was going to be more extreme than we’d thought only yesterday.
Now, in 2013, we have scientific projections from reliable data that make near-term human extinction look like a real possibility. Guy McPherson’s website, Nature Bats Last, has become a home for some of the direst of runaway climate predictions, and here the phrase near-term-extinction has become so common as to be referred to by acronym: NTE. From the comment section of this blog, it is clear there is a group of the faithful who follow the science behind near-term extinction, and who try, in this forum, to come to terms with its implications. One such follower has written a very long piece on this subject called “The Irreconcilable Acceptance of Near-Term Extinction,” which attempts to address what it means to accept that your species is doomed to fail with finality, and very probably within your own lifetime. I was a sympathetic reader of this piece to begin with, as it seemed uncommonly thoughtful, and dared to broach a vitally important but taboo subject. As I made my way through this piece I was ready to object to various points along the way, but now I feel much more inclined to cover territory that was never addressed in this exhaustive feat of introspection. If near-term extinction is as real a possibility as it now seems, then there is much that needs to be confronted around this issue, and that is what I will attempt in what follows.
First let me say that I accept near-term human extinction as a real possibility, but not as a foregone conclusion. Methane release from melting Arctic ice, along with a number of other such runaway feedback loops, show every prospect of pushing climate regimes beyond the point of no return, and whatever the exact specifications of the new normal, they would not be friendly to life, human or otherwise. The science and the modeling techniques for all these doomsday projections seem sound, so far as a non-expert can tell. But, at the same time, science, along with its models and assumptions, has been known to be wrong in the past, and sometimes wrong in a very big way. So, for me, that means giving provisional credence to NTE science, but I’m not yet ready to bet the farm on what is still just speculation. Toward the end of his very long piece, author Daniel Drumright admits that he is not quite there, either. He’s convinced intellectually, but not emotionally, so he claims he will give it another couple years before he commits all the way. And here we come to some very fine points as regards attitudes, along with the words we use to describe them.
When someone gives up before they have actually been defeated, we call it capitulation. The word surrender tends to connote that defeat is the fact, and surrender its acceptance on the part of the defeated. And that raises the question: at what point, short of the absence of all living humans on Earth, can extinction be considered a “fact?” At what point does something become so obviously inevitable as to be considered a “fact” in the making? When, in other words, does all resistance become futile? The answers to these questions can be highly subjective and personal, but for my own part, I’m not quite ready to capitulate.
Why not? Well, even apart from a certain stubborn contentiousness of character, it seems to me there are solid logical reasons not to cave in prematurely. In all the best stories, the tide turns for the good guys just when their defeat seems guaranteed. In The Lord of the Rings, the narrator reflects several times upon the unfortunate circumstance of being born into times of trouble, and how there is nothing for it but to do your very best for as long as you have life. Against all odds, a certain modest Hobbit does the best he can, and the dark powers are forced to retreat from the world — at least for a time. Likewise, in Avatar, things are looking pretty grim for the good guys when Eywa abandons her supposed neutrality and comes to their aid. In fact, something of the kind is my own best hope for planet Earth, but with a twist, at least in terms of who are the “good guys,” and who, or what, we should be rooting for.
If we think of near term extinction as some kind of battle, how do we frame the nature of the combat, and how do we characterize the opposing sides? Is it man against Nature?
Is it man against himself? Or is the human just a hapless pawn in a chess game run by forces much larger than himself? I’ve seen our climate catastrophe framed in all these ways, and I find a grain of truth in each, but no whole, clear picture emerges from any of these frames. Borrowing from each of these perspectives, I would say that what we are really looking at here is: humans, under the spell of the culture of civilization, pitted against Nature, the Earth, and the Community of Life. Within this framing, it is not Homo sapiens, as a species, who is contending with Gaia, Natural Law, and all the other species, but only those humans under the influence of civilization. Globally, that may be most humans, but not all, and this is a distinction I must insist upon. It is not our species that is fatally flawed, but our culture.
It is crucial to fully comprehend this distinction when it comes to choosing sides. And I’ll say right here that if I believed we were fatally flawed at the species level I would be very much in favor of our extinction — and the sooner the better. I can say this because I am not at heart instead, my primary identity is as an Earthling and as a member of the Community of Life. In other words, I want to see the whole show go on — the one that started 3.8 billion years ago, when Life first emerged on this planet. Anyone who has an inkling of how synergistic and interdependent the whole Gaian system is must realize that if the Earth goes down, humans go down with it. There is no way we can survive as a species without our life support system, and that system includes millions of other life forms — including the 80% of our innards that is bacterial. At this point in our dubious career, we are causing the extinction of our fellow species at the rate of at least two hundred a day. With ocean acidification and runaway climate chaos, especially after tipping points and thresholds have been breached, and irreversible regime changes have kicked in, the biotic collapse will be general. And if it comes to that, it will have been the handiwork of one particular culture within one particular species. These are my people, and this is my culture, but this is not who I am rooting for. I am not at all interested in civilization is the problem. It is the entire Project of Life that has my deepest loyalty.
A human die- a human die-off may or may not be. We have temporarily expanded the carrying capacity of the planet by mining non-renewable resources, and especially fossil fuels. At the moment, we are almost literally “eating oil.” For now, we are able to support a very unfavorable energy return on investment (EROI), of something like ten calories of energy to produce one calorie of energy in the form of food. Without fossil energy, the whole house of cards collapses, and we’re already past peak oil. So, again, we have to ask ourselves, what does “victory” actually look like? Is our ultimate aim to keep the present system going until it falls of its own weight, and no worries about anything or anyone but ourselves — we of the privileged few? This seems to be the game we’re playing now, but it is not a good long-term strategy for human survival, because you can’t take out your life support systems and expect to thrive–and continued climate disruption promises systems collapse and mass extinctions.
We seem to be stuck in what anthropologist Ronald Wright calls a progress trap, and the damnable thing about it is, there seems no way out of this maze. Our system, our way of life, our lives themselves, all seem to depend upon doing more of the same, even while we observe that what we are doing is killing us. That is a trap indeed. For a time, my own best hope was for a permanent global power failure that would immediately shut down industrial civilization, and save us from ourselves. Then it was pointed out to me that there are globally over four hundred nuclear power plants whose spent fuel rods depend upon electrically delivered water to keep them cool, and from spreading radiation around the globe. Backup generators might buy a few days, but then what? So, I’m no longer hoping for that particular Deus ex machina to come to our aid, but I’m still very much in favor of some sort of intervention — perhaps famine and plague — that will monkeywrench the Death Machine, and give the Earth a new lease on Life.
And here I want to directly confront the contentious issue of our loyalties, and with what or whom we take sides in this life-and-death struggle that faces us. The vast majority of civilized humans believe civilization to be a good thing, and see it as something to be protected, nurtured, and preserved. I strongly disagree with this point of view. To me, that is like saying you want to save the patient and the cancer, too. The culture of civilization is, and always has been, a culture of empire, and empire is built upon theft, deception and deadly violence. Even a casual reading of our history confirms this. And consider exactly what it is that is poisoning us, our planet, and our atmosphere: it’s all that stuff we have helped ourselves to from beneath the Earth’s surface, all of it contaminated with poisons, and not least the fossil fuels. No other culture could or would condone such wanton recklessness, but our culture authorizes and validates taking all from the Earth that can be taken. Some would blame our economic system for encouraging our others would pin the blame on oi neither would be wrong. But both our economic system and our corrupt executive class are products of this culture, and it is this culture that gives them their marching orders and its blessing. For those who believe that civilization is all about libraries and air conditioning and symphony orchestras, it will come as a shock to discover that what civilization really is, is a program whose effect is to devour the Earth. It is precisely for this, and its violence against all life forms, that I hold civilization accountable for our present sorry state of affairs. So: just as you can’t save both the patient and the cancer, neither can you save civilization and the world, too. You have to choose one or the other, and the wrong choice will be fatal.
Absurdly enough, the days of civilization are numbered anyway, no matter whether it succeeds in devouring the world, or if it falls short. If it succeeds, there will be no humans left to carry out its directives, and it will die content in its accomplishment of entropic equilibrium. If enough humans somehow manage to break its spell and come to understand how they’ve been manipulated into this untenable situation of collapse by the very institution that seemed to represent their best interests, then this instigator of dark deeds might just die from disuse. And in any case, civilizations of empire inevitably fade when the booty they depend upon grows too scarce, or hard to come by, to be worth the effort–and that day will soon be upon us.
If we decide that our loyalty belongs to Life rather than to the culture of civilization, what exactly do we mean by Life? Is the human pitted against all the other species of Earth in a zero-sum game of winner take all? No, it’s not us or them, no matter all the stories we’ve heard about the fierce competition for survival. It is either us and them, or it is death all around. Our supposed separation from Nature and the Community of Life has been a fiction all along. We are we are O and we only succeed as part of the larger Community.
When things fall apart, clarity will be hard to come by. Knowing, or believing, that this day is coming soon, it seems wise to work on clarity now. When the unraveling begins, and we are plunged into chaos, we won’t be in a position to know how far things might go. It could be the beginning of human extinction, or it could be the correction to our numbers made inevitable by our so drastically exceeding the carrying capacity of the planet. Cheap available energy, in the form of oil, created a bubble economy and a bubble population to match. That bubble has got to burst, and there is no way around it. Since we seem collectively incapable of downsizing our own population, Nature will be doing it for us, and it is bound to be traumatic. People we love and care about are going to die prematurely of natural causes (as may we ourselves), but natural causes born of an unnatural condition, a one-time-only aberration in biological history. It seems counter-intuitive, unnatural even, to be cheering on a human die-back, and wishing for it to arrive soon. Thinking in terms of all those who are alive today — all 7+ billion of us — such thoughts seem callous and cruel. But if we are thinking beyond our most immediate circle of significant others, and take into consideration the fate of the species,
the sooner this correction comes, the better for them (and for all of Life.) Leaving them a less damaged planet, with its life support systems reasonably intact and functional, would give future humans, and all Life, much better odds of survival. Knowing this to be true, how far are we willing to go to preserve our present way of life, recognizing that it can’t last, anyway, and that the more we consume, pollute, and destroy, the less likely there will be a human future here?
What does the human family owe itself at the species level? Are continuity and longevity something to be sought for the species as a whole, and is this something for which each human generation bears responsibility? All the other animals on Earth manage to address this issue by way of instinct. They take care of their young, perform their ecosystem functions, and the species seems to take care of itself. As the oddball cultural animal, our instincts seem to have been overridden and overwritten by the memes and imperatives of our culture—a culture that has inverted the natural order of things. According to our myths, the individual is more important than the group, and one particular species is eleva indeed, that species is elevated above Nature herself. Only under such a topsy-turvy worldview could this putative Master Species claim all the world for itself, for as long as it lasts, then, with a ruined Earth, declare the game over.
Our way of life, and its supporting myths, seems to suppose that we have arrived at the pinnacle and end point toward which this 3.8 billion year experiment with Life and evolution has always been headed. That is the underlying implication. But is the deepest Meaning of life on Earth really only about us making payments on our standardized boxes in the suburbs, with both parents holding down unfulfilling jobs so that we can drive our air-conditioned SUVs to middle school soccer games, stopping along the way at our favorite fast foods franchise, finally to end our day collapsed in the blue glare of Fox News? Was it for this that we took this country away from the Indians, and turned it into freeways, parking lots, suburban malls and inner city ghettos? Are we dismantling the Earth, ecosystem by ecosystem, species by species, for no better reason than to make bankers, corporate executives, and hedge fund managers filthy rich? Are our excesses of appetite, all at the expense of a living planet, really the ultimate significance of Life on Earth? That seems to be our story — the one we are living in and doing our utmost to make real.
If the human species goes down, as in near term extinction, and we take out the Community of Life and the animate Earth along with us, it won’t be our extinction itself that would leave me inconsolable. E species fail. Were I able to see with the long eye of the Life Force, what I would find irreconcilable is the incommensurability between the ongoing promise of Life’s self-renewal and the paltry, self-serving species that brought it all down.
“No, it’s not us or them, no matter all the stories we’ve heard about the fierce competition for survival. It is either us and them, or it is death all around.”
pretty much sums it up, doesn’t it?
having spent the past five years living in a little cabin on the edge of (relatively) pristine wilderness, i find myself occasionally embarrassed, perhaps even ashamed as i look back at my past and the lies that i bought into… i’m a recovering capitalist, if you will, an ex-wall street cheerleader, if you will, once thoroughly steeped in the myth of individualism and our culture’s mythology around competition for survival… if there’s one thing that my experience in letting go of my past and all the materialistic bull$hit that went with it – and immersing myself in the wilderness has taught me it’s that in fact it is us AND them, that we’re all connected… and not in some “new agey” spiritual sense but as a matter of fact – our survival depends on the RELATIONSHIPS between all things, between all creatures… the earth is a system, a system that works and has worked, evidenced by its mulit-billion year track record of success… EVERYTHING IS A RELATIONSHIP.
there are NO individuals…
i too thought for some time that humanity, our species was the problem, that there was something inherently flawed with homo sapiens… but no, we are a creature, an animal like any other, vested with some “special” and “unique” gifts (for example the “intelligence” we so frequently pat ourselves on the back for), JUST LIKE every other creature with their own special brand of gifts and abilities… the fact that we evolved on this planet suggests that we are not inherently flawed but that our problem lies elsewhere… and that elsewhere is in this insane social structure we have organized ourselves under — civilization.
this is a structure that ENCOURAGES the worst in all of us, that makes deception profitable, that confers a survival advantage to over-consumption, greed and “one-upping” the other guy – and other species.
to be sure, humans are a mix of “good” and “evil” capable of every variation on the spectrum of behavior… to that end, perhaps our “flaws” are in fact inherent… but in a small community of say 25 people, a tribe, selfishness, greed, destruction of the environment are simply not possible… possible, yes, but the resultant reaction from the rest of the tribe would put the kibosh on those behaviors pronto… but in our huge, anonymous culture, it’s so very easy to get away with the worst of our inherent possibilities…
unless and until we realize that WE’RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER, and by “all” i mean humans, animals, bacteria, fungus, ALL OF US AND EVERYTHING, i have little hope for our species nor most other species.
while i don’t want particularly relish the idea of living in the chaos of a plummeting civilization, in fact it frightens me, for the good of everything, i hope for it… i can no longer bear to see everything i love being systematically destroyed by this insance culture and all it stands for…
and i apologize to all for ever having contributed to the worst of it…
July 8, 2014
If you are contemplating suicide, please re-consider. And then click here for awareness, prevention, and support on the topic of suicide. I'm not advocating for or against suicide.
updated their cover photo. ...
Follow MeNBL Archived Posts
NBL Archived Posts
Select Month
September 2015
August 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007