================= The Chinese Swaztika Newsletter =============== "Your Source of Secret Aryan and Chinese Knowledge" ----------------------------------------------------------------- Vol. 2, No. 1 January 9, 2003 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Gregory Delaney, Editor This newsletter is distributed by subscription only. If you wish to unsubscribe, you can find instructions at the end of this newsletter. Please feel free to pass this e-zine along to your friends. However, please keep it intact and forward it in its entirety. ----------------------------------------------------------------- IN THIS ISSUE ----------------------------------------------------------------- => Asian Eyes => Business Scams: Selling Short on the Stockmarket => Homeland Security Bill is another Hoax, But Whose? => Next Week: Belly Breathing to Lower Blood Pressure => Subscribe/Unsubscribe Information ================================================================= Asian Eyes by Dr. Wu Tao-Wei I was asked a question by a young American that puzzled me at first simply because it was too close and personal. The question was: "Dr. Wu, you seem, like, really Westernized and understanding and all, so please tell me: why is it that when some Asian people look at me, they look at me as if I am not really there? Like, it's really eerie the way I look into their eyes and it's, like, they aren't looking at me at all but are like looking right through me. Why is that?" I gazed at this young American who had a gold stud stuck through one nostril, gold ear rings stuck through each ear lobe and a sort of needle with screw-on end-fittings stabbed through one eye-brow. I looked at his hair which was shaved all the way around his head except that on top was allowed to grow long and was braided into a long pig-tail hanging down the back of his neck. I looked at his blue jeans which were hanging precariously on the same level as his crotch so that his underwear-covered buttocks stuck out. I gazed once again into his confused and questioning face and I didn't know what to say. "There! Now you're doing it, too!" he stated with exasperation and then turned around and walked away with the backs of his blue jeans somehow managing to stay below his buttocks without falling down around his ankles It took me a long while to understand what this young barbarian was asking. There are three reasons that I can think of to explain this young man's observation. And I am sure that the questioner was generalizing since his observation was concerned only with one method of "seeing" and not with the other methods or with the philosophy behind them. Those who practice meditation or Tai Chi Chuan can readily answer this young man's query in two ways while you must be Chinese (or at least Asian) to be able to answer in the third way. In the practice of that wonderful slow-motion martial art and exercise known as Tai Chi Chuan, it is a teaching that one should "look to the left and gaze to the right." This ability of the human eye both "to look" and "to gaze", has many meditational and spiritual applications for daily life. For example, when you are parking your car, you want to use your ability to "look" so as to very carefully observe exactly how close or how far are the cars hemming in your parking space. By "looking" you can see every reflection of sunlight from the cars' paint and chrome as well as every inch of space needed to squeeze your car into the parking slot. "Looking" is used by most people in the West. Indeed, "looking" at things, is all that they know. It is the binocular vision we all use to see and to focus upon specific, individual things. But the human eyes can also "gaze" at things so as to take in a lot of area all at once. For this, it is necessary to relax your vision and use more of your peripheral vision. You want to be able to see everything without concentrating on any one particular spot. You want to be able to take in the sky and earth all at once without focusing only on a specific leaf or flower. Walking down a city street, you might want to take in the whole street all at once and be aware of it all at once, perhaps on the alert for danger or just for the joy of it all. To concentrate your eyes on any one thing by "looking", makes everything else disappear from your awareness. So, by "gazing" you can be aware of it all without getting caught up in any one item to the exclusion of all others. However, "gazing" is not merely allowing your eyes to go out of focus so that everything is blurry; rather it is concentrating on everything at once so that everything is bright. With "gazing" you can see everything without just looking at any one thing in particular. You can try this for yourself. As you read these words, you are "looking" but if you shift to your peripheral vision and become aware of your surroundings, you are "gazing". While "gazing", you will still be aware of these words as well as everything else in your visual window, but you probably won't be able to read these individual words again until you "look" at them. Does this make sense? These two eye methods make up the ordinary physical skills of every human. However, there are Asian mental concepts that make these skills even more interesting. And this is where, I am sure, my questioner was so puzzled. In the West, "looking" is the main method of "seeing". You hear a lot about "making eye contact" as a means of social success and salesmanship. So, when a Westerner "looks" at an Asian and "sees" the Asian "gazing" back at him, he becomes somewhat uneasy. After all, it is a Western social grace to "make eye contact" and "to look them straight in the eyes" whenever you are talking with someone. And it is considered rude or anti-social to do otherwise. So, why doesn't the Asian return a "look" with a "look" instead of with a "gaze"? This is where philosophy enters the picture. It may surprise many white people to learn that the founders of both Hinduism and Buddhism were blue-eyed Aryans of Northern India. So, we have the Aryan white people to thank for these ancient discoveries which they passed along to their Oriental neighbors. One of the basic concepts of Hinduism and Buddhism, is the idea that the things of the world are temporary and forever changing. And because they are temporary, they are not actually real in the sense that you can hold onto them forever. How real is an ice cube if it melts away and vanishes even as you "look" at it? To the Asian mind, everything is of the same nature as an ice cube - rocks, trees, oceans, people, everything changes and disappears and then reappears in other times and other places. Rocks turn into dust and blow away a lot slower than an ice cube melts, but that does not mean that rocks are any more "real" than the ice cube because both exist in the presence of infinite Time. And this is where most Asian "gazing" appears so illusive. While a Westerner "looks" at an Asian to see him as a specific individual, the Asian "gazes" at the Westerner as a non-specific entity surrounded by non-specific illusion. By viewing the world as a temporary phenomenon rather than as something solid that you can "look" at and grab hold of, a whole new universe is discovered behind it all. Meditation upon the Great Void, is a Buddhist method of "seeing" another level of Creation that cannot be perceived if you merely "look" at it. This is all very simple, but thinking about it too much makes it complicated. And because this involves "seeing" with the Third Eye and meditational breathing, I do not want to make this too complicated so I will end the philosophy here. Now, people who practice meditation (or incessant prayer) tend to carry their meditation with them wherever they go. After a while, whatever they look at, they believe to be nothing more than a shimmer of sunlight on a windy pond, beautiful but ceaselessly changing. And these people tend to "gaze" at the world rather than to "look" at it. After all, they are looking inside of themselves so what they observe on the outside is not as "real" to them as what they see on the inside. And so, you cannot expect these people to "look you in the eyes" and to recognize you as an individual when what they are doing is "gazing" at the universe and seeing everything as an empty manifestation of their own minds. Look into their eyes and you will not find anyone home. But you will "see" a deep and limitless Void. This deepness of inner vision, is confusing to Western People who believe that the only reality is the one that they can see and touch. So, do you understand the difference between "looking" and gazing"? There is a lot more to this which I will cover in later articles. So, if you practice "looking" and "gazing" in your daily life, your awareness of the universe will be really great. And finally, there is a particularly Chinese Taoist way of looking at Westerners that is not well known. You see, in Mandarin, a Westerner is often called a "yang gwei" or a "foreign ghost". And as everyone knows, a ghost is there but not there. And so, perhaps it is this that so puzzled the young man. He met some Chinese people who gazed at him as if he was a ghost, a non-human, a spirit. They did not react to him or "look" at him as he expected simply because they were merely waiting for him to disappear. Asian eyes have no mystery behind them that you cannot discover for yourself. After all, it was the blue-eyed conquerors of Northern India who taught the various yogas to the brown-skinned castes of that country; and it was that blue-eyed, Aryan prince -- Gautama Buddha -- who taught the secrets of the Third Eye to his disciples. And these disciples passed this knowledge along to China and Japan; they, in turn, passed it along to Western People once again. So, do you "see" what I am saying? Or must you "look" at your thoughts once again? Yes, you must "look" at your thoughts because to "see" them clearly, you cannot "gaze" at them or you will fall asleep. Those who understand this essay are awake. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: William Forrest is still on vacation. His regular column will appear next week. A short newsletter this week with some short advice ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Business Scams: Selling Short on the Stockmarket When you buy stock in a company, that is known as "going long". But what is "selling short"? Here's how it works. Instead of buying 100 shares of stock in some company, let's say Coca-Cola, for example, at $50 per share, you borrow 100 shares from someone who already owns Coke and then sell those shares immediately for $5,000. You still have to return the borrowed shares sometime in the fututre (that is, you are "short" the 100 shares and need to make them up), but your hope is that Coke's price will drop from $50 to, say, $40 in the meantime. If that happens, you go into the marktet and buy 100 shares of Coke for $4,000, return the borrowed shares and pocket the $1,000 profit. This is a form of gambling, of course, but when the stockmarket manipulators all know each other and can sway public moods and confidences through their Media control, they can influence future stock prices and there-by "get an edge" on future swings in prices. The only gamblers in the stockmarket are the people who are not one of the "in crowd" of Wall Street. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Homeland Security Bill is Another Hoax, but Whose? Do Jew Know? Homeland Bill Sets Up Police State by Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) Excerpt from the Floor Speech to Vote Against Homeland Security Bill (Dec. 2, 2002) I remember years ago, when I was in the House of Representatives, sending out a little booklet to the people in my then-congressional district on how our laws are made. That is how the American people expect this Congress to operate. That is the way we are supposed to operate. But the way this bill was brought in here, less than 48 hours ago, a brand-new bill. It had not been before any committee. It had undergone no hearings. It is a bill on our desks that has 484 pages. There have been no witnesses who were asked to appear to testify on behalf of the bill or in opposition to it. It did not undergo any such scrutiny. The American people expect us to provide our best judgment and our best insight into such monumental decisions. This is a far, far cry from being our best. As a matter of fact it is a mere shadow of our best. If I had to go before the bar of judgment tomorrow and were asked by the eternal God what is in this bill, I could not answer God. If I were asked by the people of West Virginia: "Sen. Byrd, what is in that bill?" I could not answer. There are a few things that I know are in it by virtue of the fact that I have had 48 hours (sleeping time included) in which to study this monstrosity. I know a few things that are in it, and a few things that I know are in it that I don't think the American people would approve of if they knew what was in there. Even Sen. [Joseph] Lieberman, who is chairman of the committee which has jurisdiction over this subject matter, saw new provisions in this legislation as he looked through it. As his staff looked through it, they saw provisions they had not seen before, that they had not discussed before, that had not been before their committee. This is one of the most far-reaching pieces of legislation I have seen in my 50 years. I will have been in Congress 50 years come Jan. 3. Never have I seen such a monstrous piece of legislation sent to this body. Our poor staffs were up most of the night studying it. They know some of the things that are in there, but they don't know all of them. It is a sham and it is a shame. We are all complicit in going along with it. I read in the paper that nobody will have the courage to vote against it. Well, Robert Byrd is going to vote against it because I don't know what I am voting for. Listen, my friends: I am an old meat cutter. I used to make sausage. Let me tell you, I never made sausage like this thing was made. You don't know what is in it. At least I knew what was in the sausage. We ought to demand that this piece of legislation stay around here a while so we can study it, so our staffs can study it, so we know what is in it, so we can have an opportunity to amend it where it needs amending. Several senators have indicated, Sen. Lieberman among them, that there are areas in here that ought to be amended. What the people of the United States really care about is their security. That is what we are talking about. We don't know when another tragic event is going to be visited upon this country. It can be this evening, it can be tomorrow, or whatever. But this legislation is not going to be worth a continental dime if it happens tonight, tomorrow, a month from tomorrow. To tell the American people they are going to be safer when we pass this, is a hoax. We ought to tell the people the truth. They are not going to be any safer with that. I was one of the first in the Senate to say we need a new Department of Homeland Security. I meant that. But I didn't mean this particular hoax that this administration is trying to pander off to the American people, telling them this is homeland security. That is not homeland security. Mr. President, the attorney general and director of Homeland Security have told Americans repeatedly there is an imminent risk of another terrorist attack. Just within the past day, or few hours, the FBI has put hospitals in the Washington area, Houston, San Francisco, and Chicago on notice of a possible terrorist threat. [But] this bill does not even go into effect for up to 12 months. It will be 12 months before this goes into effect. The bill just moves around on an organizational chart. The Senate Appropriations Committee, on which Sen. [Ted] Stevens (R-Alaska) and I sit, along with 27 other senators, including the distinguished senator who presides over the chamber at this moment, the senator from Rhode Island, Mr. [Jack] Reed (D), tried to provide funds to programs to hire more FBI agents, to hire more Border Patrol agents, to equip and train our first responders, to improve security at our nuclear power plants, to improve bomb detection at our airports. That committee of 29 senators -- 15 Democrats and 14 Republicans -- voted to provide the funds for these homeland security needs. Those funds have been in bills that have been out there for four months. But the president said no, he would not sign it. President Bush is the man I am talking about. He would not sign that as an emergency. These are actions that would make America more secure today. Did the president help us to approve these funds? No. Instead, the president forced us to reduce homeland security funding by $8.9 billion, and he delayed another $5 billion. This is shameful; this is cynical; this is being irresponsible. It is unfair to the American people. And then to tell them Congress ought to pass that homeland security bill -- that is passing the buck. Listen, senators. This is what "The New York Times" is saying to you, to me, to us: "If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you: Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every web site you visit and email you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend -- all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as 'a virtual, centralized grand database.' Political awareness can overcome total information awareness, the combined force of commercial and government snooping. In a similar over-reach, Attorney General Ashcroft tried his Terrorism Information and Prevention System (TIPS), but public outrage at the use of gossips and postal workers as snoops caused the House to shoot it down. The Senate should now do the same to this other exploitation of fear." How is it that the Bush administration's No. 1 priority has evolved into a plan to create a giant, huge bureaucracy? How is it that the Congress bought into the belief that to take a plethora of federal agencies and departments and shuffle them around would make us safer from future terrorist attacks? ================================================================= Comments? Suggestions? Please Email them to: ================================================================= "The Chinese Swaztika Newsletter" is published every Thursday. Subscriptions to this e-zine are free. ARCHIVES OF PAST ISSUES are located at: To SUBSCRIBE: send a blank e-Mail to: To UNSUBSCRIBE: click the Unsubscribe link below or send an e-Mail to with "Unsubscribe" or "Remove" typed in the subject line ================ newsletter@bamboo-delight.com ================== http://www.bamboo-delight.com/ Gregory Delaney, Editor (408)236-2128 P.O. Box 2792, Saratoga, CA 95070 USA =========== The Chinese Swaztika Newsletter ===================== NOTE: This material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for research and educational purposes only. ----------------------------------------------------------------- All reprinted materials in The Chinese Swaztika Newsletter, are the opinions of the authors and not necessarily the newsletter editors and staff. Individual articles may be re-published as long as the following contact information is included with the article: The Chinese Swaztika Newsletter, Copyright 2002-2003 Bamboo Delight Company Subscribe eMail to: -----------------------------------------------------------------