Why do people all say they want to see change in the world around them?
So they don’t have to change themselves.
Why do people all say they want to see change in the world around them?
So they don’t have to change themselves.
“Compassion is to share the pain without sharing the suffering.” ~Shinzen Young.
How can one who claims to be a spiritual master be so oblivious of misguided nonsense that escapes from the depths of their brainpan? And yet, acclaimed and renowned “mindfulness” teacher Shinzen Young seems unaware of the violence of his redefinition-mangling in service of his metaphysical perspective. In his attempt to fuse “contemplative meditation” techniques of the East with the “scientific method” of the West, Shinzen Young has been lauded for his “innovative interactive, algorithmic approach to mindfulness.” “Mindfulness” refers to the Buddhist contemplative meditation techniques (Vipassanā) where the goal is to focus on the awareness of the mind and body and achieve knowledge of the nature of reality which then I suppose makes one a “Spiritual Master.”
But why do so many “Spiritual Masters” say such ridiculous, incomprehensible bullshit? Has their “mindfulness” meditation experiences left them with so much knowledge about the nature of reality that they can even see how far removed they’ve become from every-day common sense? Run through the above quote once more:
“Compassion is to share the pain without sharing the suffering.”
What’s the takeaway point of this sentence? Well, the unintended point made by Shinzen reveals the uselessness of compassion, which is commonly described as an emotional response within a person to the misfortune and suffering of another and wanting to do something about it to remove the other’s plight. But to create a situation where one can safely share one’s pain without sharing the other’s suffering is like having one’s cake and eating it too. Why would anyone want to share another’s suffering “out of compassion” without getting down into the dirty, painful and equality-based business of removing the suffering for everyone? Because nobody in their “right mind” would want to. It is the human design to avoid suffering at all costs, especially if one has enough money – and it takes money – to keep physical suffering at a manageable level.
But nobody, including Shinzen, would want to actually do something about the suffering of others in this world, or literally place their feet in the shoes of someone’s suffering. Much better to “feel bad” about the plight of human trafficking or hearing about children starving to death in the media. A brief, cheap, momentary emotional investment called “compassion” is enough for most people.
But one doesn’t really “share the pain” of others through compassion, do they? And this is where Shinzen misses the point. He could have said something more profound by revealing the uselessness of human compassion – where one could place the total amount of that human emotion one side of an equation against the totality of human suffering on the other side and see how effective emotions really are in dealing with the human condition of suffering. Or he could have gotten down into the shit with the misfortunate others like Mother Teresa – who despite her existential doubts spent her life amid the suffering of others  and could only cope with her own metaphysical doubts by linking her own spiritual suffering and the suffering of others with the “suffering of Jesus.” But that doesn’t seem to be any more effective in dealing with the removal of suffering, does it?
Spouting religious and spiritual language and meditative exercises to deal with human problems has simply never worked. Using human emotions like compassion, pity and sympathy to deal with human problems has simply never, ever worked in stopping the condition of human suffering. What statements like these do is allow the person who comes across them to become beguiled by the implied “wisdom” imparted. But it isn’t “wisdom.” It’s just ironic Zen-Buddhist bullshit. It’s bullshit because all statements made from the starting point of projecting a religiously philosophical perspective can only fail in providing real insight to humanity. Buddhism has been around for nearly 3000 years and it’s failed in bringing “enlightenment” to the people. It’s ironic because Shinzen obviously believes in the power of compassion without sharing another’s suffering but he simply fails to understand that such a point reveals compassion to be nothing more than an illusion. Then again, this is quite proper since all metaphysics deal with elevating illusions into meaningless life-long obsessions – while choosing to ignore and excuse real suffering and despair with pious blandishments and feel-good flowerhat philosophies And now you know what really matters to these spiritual shysters. Forget about trying to find a way to lift the peoples of this world out of an endemic of inequality. What is most important to these gurus is within the relation of their own knowledge and information about the nature of reality to others while making a buck. I can only hope against hope that people will wake up and reject that and choose equality for all and make it happen. But first, we have to stop listening and being bewitched by the deceptive spiritual nonsense these gurus love to share so much.
]”Now Father—since 49 or 50 this terrible sense of loss—this untold darkness—this loneliness—this continual longing for God—which gives me that pain deep down in my heart.—Darkness is such that I really do not see—neither with my mind nor with my reason.—The place of God in my soul is blank.—There is no God in me.—When the pain of longing is so great—I just long & long for God—and then it is that I feel—He does not want me—He is not there.—Heaven—souls—why these are just words—which mean nothing to me.—My very life seems so contradictory. I help souls—to go where?—Why all this? Where is the soul in my very being? God does not want me.—Sometimes—I just hear my own heart cry out—“My God” and nothing else comes.—The torture and pain I can’t explain.”
Letter to Father Joseph Neuner by Mother Teresa.
The question at the beginning of this Abraham-Hicks clip: “Is it fair to say that everything is thought?”
Before we continue with the answer given by Esther Hicks’ channeled personality “Abraham,” a bit of exposition.
The question comes from a historical spiritualist assumption most clearly expressed within Pre-Socratic and New Thought metaphysical traditions , and the nature of consciousness is the key point. The pre-Socratic sage Anaxagoras developed a theory that a Universal Mind he called, Nous was responsible for creation. Heraclitus assigned the creative principle to Reason, which he called the Logos. Within New Thought metaphysics (which is the direct forerunner of the New Age movement), mind is Divine (as in the Mind of God) and superior than the physical. Hicks-Abraham mentions this directly in answer to the questioner by relating that if one tunes into a certain “frequency of being” through “reaching for the best feeling thought you can find,” one is able to receive an “alignment.” Hicks goes on to remark:
“Without alignment, you are giving up all that assistance – not completely because you are never cut off from it – but then you have to rely more on your physical activities in order to move things around. And at best, it is mediocre and unproductive.”
With this New Thought schematic, Esther Hicks lays the framework of the Law of Attraction where the thoughts of humans are invisibly influencing the course of human events. But according to the question, which assumes that the channeler will corroborate with its premise that everything in Creation exists as thoughts within the Mind of God, the physical is relegated to irrelevance. We have Plato, among others, to thank for this, as this brand of cosmology has informed Western metaphysics that the physical is the imperfect copy of transcendent Forms, or Ideas.
So why is the answer given by the channeler a deception? This “tuning in to the frequency” of your being (whatever that means, but I’m assuming it relates to the “reaching of the best feeling thought possible” positive-thinking jazz) as the preferred course of action over physical activity is a great deception and a massive affront to common sense. The Great Wall of China and the Pyramids were not created by people sitting around reaching for the best thought feelings. They had to build the damn things. Just apply this crap to any real-world scenario and see if it makes sense. I suppose the half of humanity that are starving on their feet need only to “reach for the best possible feeling thought” to end their poverty.
But Hicks and her channeled personality are not that concerned with those outside of their targeted audience. Empty phraseology,word-games and regurgitated spiritualism makes sense only within that framework. “Leverage in alignment,” “tuning in to the frequency of who you really are” and ascribing anthropomorphic attributes to thought itself (“it existed in its presence and absence, and the combination of those two things caused it to become more “) forms a catalog of nonsensical truth-claims that will lead many well-intentioned people into a massive trap of self-deception, within the so-called Law of Attraction where the Right to be Selfish is elevated to a spiritual principle, and the search for the “better feeling thought” becomes one’s mantra and moral compass. These beliefs, however, only represent a catalog of deceptive magical thinking. This is the problem with these types of beliefs, they do nothing but focus on encasing self within a make-believe world in separation with the rest of humanity through avoiding and denying real-world issues that affect everybody. Nobody within Ester Hicks’ retinue seems to notice the obvious problem of contradiction between living in a world that isn’t “real,” yet focusing on the best possible feeling thoughts, abundance and preference. Why would preference or good feelings “matter” in an illusory, imperfect and irrelevant world? And if everything is thoughts, then why would the physical exist at all?
The questions become easier to answer when we are willing to flip the script. Moving things within the physical is much more practical and demonstrable than magical imagination. Test it out for yourself. Gather several books and arrange them into a single stack on one side of a table. Now search for the best possible feeling thought, tune into the frequency of who you really are and move that stack to the other side of the table. Golly. Why didn’t the stack move? Perhaps you’re not trying hard enough. Come on, tune into that frequency. Still nothing? Well, don’t feel bad. I doubt Esther Hicks could have moved it with her mind either.
I have an “idea,” though. Let’s dispense with all forms of spiritualism, metaphysics and religions. These systems have not enhanced the human experience, ever. They just superimpose a layer of sweet-sounding bullshit within the minds of the gullible and desperate that keeps us divided and diverted from the stuff that really matters, like the survival of the human race. The physical is here and no amount of love ‘n light-tooti-fruity nonsense will ever be able to remove this reality. Deal with it.
While I don’t agree with everything he said, U.G. Krishnamurti got one thing right. “Enlightenment is a thought-induced experience.”
UGK correctly demonstrates how the very idea of “Enlightenment” is contingent upon accepting the claims of the “Great Sages” without question. This is very important to understand, as the mechanism of so-called enlightenment has only come down to us through the transmission of the traditions laid down by the sages and their proponents. In other words, “Enlightenment,” like the concept of “God” or the “Divine,” is something that one never experiences without first hearing all about it from somebody else. The narrative of “enlightenment” always involves a search for a guru who has experienced it and relates the alleged state to others. If one accepts the narrative of the Buddha, one has to imagine that nobody had ever experienced “enlightenment” before. Yet, the Buddha made it his mission, claimed to achieve it, and then told everyone else about it. But UGK hits the nail on the head when he remarks in this interview that,
“…once one questions the whole idea of enlightenment, or as you put it, the concept of enlightenment, we are questioning the teachers who have talked about it – and we have invested tremendous faith in them, so the sentiment comes into the picture, and we accept it as the gospel truth.”
According to the stories related by the Buddhists, Buddha actually achieved “enlightenment.” How he managed to convince others that he spoke the truth would be no great feat considering the way most people are willing to believe in any well – told story, the more grandiose the better. This is why religion and spirituality still reigns in a world where any evidence of the divine is completely lacking. When Nietzsche exclaimed in the 19th century that “God is dead,” it seems that he spoke only for himself and the minority of European intelligentsia who defined the role of religion as a control dynamic of the masses.
Nietzsche must’ve hoped that his view would become dominant in an empirical world of logical positivism, but could not have foreseen that the masses would never be able to give up their sentiment attached to religion, for sentiment, through its power of emotionalism and feeling is believed to be a higher form of knowledge (a “peace that passes understanding”), that ultimately breaks down all common sense and the ability for discernment.
UGK’s contention, which is very close to my own, is that enlightenment, the “soul,” or spirit, are all inventions and projections of consciousness which demands some assurance of survival. When the interviewer asks UGK that he imagines that the body does not survive after death but he hopes that his “ability to experience” (sentience) will continue at some level after death. UGK. asks in return, “Can you experience your body while you are living now?”
Of course, Western philosophy has always taken an interest in the nature of consciousness. When the interviewer brings up the famous maxim of Descartes: “I think, therefore I am,” UKG says that Descartes asked the wrong question and references an old Indian adage: “If you are not thinking, are you there?”
Clearly, UGK considers that consciousness and its production of analysing its understanding of experience, projections, thoughts, knowledge and emotions (etc.), creates a vicious circle of impediments to any understanding of the meaning of life. When the interviewer expresses (almost in exasperation), “It sounds like we’re trapped,” UGK offers only that “there is no answer” to getting out of the trap. Enlightenment, or rather, the enlightenment claimed to be in the possession of so-called spiritual masters throughout human history, has not elevated the whole of humanity one iota or solved a single problem confronting the human race. The enormous catalog of suffering, poverty, war and exploitation has grown larger with each passing century. UGK correctly surmises what enlightenment actually is: an imaginary “solution” within the metaphysics of “hope.” This leads UGK to say that there was no “answer” and “no escape” from the condition of the world, and this was his big miss. He did not see or accept his responsibility to this world or how universal equality is the answer.
It’s a pity, because UGK perhaps could have offered us even more than what he left behind.
Freedom of Belief: Narratives of Mental Enslavement
The ancient Greek philosophers that lived before Socrates (d. 399 BCE) tried to devise cosmologies that offered a more naturalistic explanation of how the world worked, as they found the religious and mystical explanations lacking. They sought a unifying principle which they believed to consist of a singular substance from whence all things were made. Thales believed that water was the principle. Others believed it was fire or air. To the modern mind, such theories, in light of what we believe we now today, are laughable and quaint, but these speculations actually formed the beginning of the scientific process. We are intrigued at how the element of spinning stories to explain the visible world is essentially all philosophy and religion has ever done. Buddha found “enlightenment” under the bodhi tree. Adam and Eve at the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. Jesus as the Son of God, died and came back to life. The earth is flat. I think, therefore I am. Human beings are inherently good. Man is born with Free Will. There are supernatural powers that control reality and human destiny. And so on. But it is important to realize that these narratives, while they are quite handy in providing cover for our fears, when it comes to religious beliefs, they can never escape what they are: constructions of human consciousness in response to fear of the unknown.
Have you ever wondered why there are so many expressions of supernatural belief? How about that first person who convinced another that they saw a “god” or some spiritual event actually happened? What has to happen to someone for them to believe in something that they don’t understand? Let me give you an example of what I mean.
A colleague of mine was explaining to me why he was a Christian. The story he shared centered on this point; that there was a person he knew that had some sort of medical problem and he prayed about and was miraculously healed. “What else could it be,” he asked me. The unspoken answer that obviously formed in his mind was that it had to be “God.”
“Can’t you see,” I replied, “that all you did was create a story to explain something you don’t understand?”
“You must be a free-thinker.” (I’ve been called this many times in my life). He continued,” I respect your beliefs, why don’t you respect mine?”
In other words, he is asking me to believe that what he believes in is actually true. But I wasn’t claiming that he made the story up. “Your mind just created an answer. You can’t prove God healed your friend.” 
“You can’t prove God didn’t,” he replied.
“Then explain why God healed your friend and not the thousands who died today?” Because, wait for it… it was God’s will. See how wonderfully the different narratives dovetail into each other to form a perfect circle of logic of theology? Unless this person can find it within himself to break out of this mental fun house of crucified gods and miracles, he will be trapped within this for the rest of his life.
I bet some are asking, “But what’s the harm in believing in religion and its stories? Isn’t it a basic human right to freely express one’s religious belief?”
Take a look at the wars that are occurring now in this world. The Israeli–Palestinian conflict (which is part of the larger Arab – Israeli conflict) which has its roots in the desperate religious competition between Muslims and Jews. In Nigeria there are murders galore being committed by religious fanatics representing Christianity and Islam. The Lord’s Resistance Army led by Joseph Kony has been running religious war in the central Africa for over 20 years, killing, torturing, raping all in the name of Kony’s twisted Christian theology. In Yemen a civil war is being fought between Islamic Sunni and Shi’a sects and both sides are not above recruiting child soldiers to fight each other.
I could go on and on. These religious atrocities are occurring in modern times, never mind the voluminous catalog of vaguely ignorant fears the Unexplained conjured up in centuries past. Needless to say, humanity has not benefited from the religious narratives in any way.
Sai Baba is quoted to have said, “ The mind carries the divine principle (the light of love) and conveys it to all who contacts it.” From what I’ve seen in this world, the mind is a repository of unimaginable cruelty where the “light of love” only exists as a denial of the horrors that befall most people on this planet on a daily basis, almost of it committed by competing economic, political and religious systems. Sai Baba may have actually believed his slogan of the light and love principle of the mind, but the fact remains that all he could do was provide a nice-sounding story for his followers.
Isn’t religion the most subtle form of brainwashing? Isn’t spirituality the most subtle form of Mind Enslavement?
Now, what does this have to do with the notion that people have the “right” to choose and express their religious beliefs?
 Reminds me of the story of Diagoras of Melos, the notorious Greek atheist who allegedly threw a wooden statue of Hercules into a fire and commanded it to either miraculously save itself or perform his 13th Labor and boil his pot of turnips. For this, a price was laid upon his head by the city fathers of Athens, causing Diagoras to skip town. But the story I want to tell comes from the Roman philosopher and statesman Cicero: Diagoras was being lectured by a friend who tried to convince him of the existence of the gods by showing him the many votive pictures lovingly rendered by those who were saved from storms at sea by “dint of vows to the gods.” Diagoras replied, “Where are the pictures of those who had been shipwrecked and drowned at sea?”
Yesterday we briefly looked at the Father of the 2012 Mayan Code Prophecy, the late Jose Arguelles. Another New Age prophet of the Last Days is Drunvalo Melchizedek (birth name: Bernard Perona, born in 1941). Drunvalo, like Arguelles, foresees a major future event happening on Earth that isn’t all that different from the Christian eschatology found in the pages of the Book of Revelations. Yet, one major difference is that God and Jesus is not going to be coming back to lead their children home. Instead, the cataclysm to come will be resolved through the light of consciousness. In this 2007 interview at a workshop in Washington DC, Drunvalo is asked why he had grown less “optimistic” about the current world situation.
Marie: During our last interview some time ago, you did not seem as optimistic about what is happening in the world as you are today. What has changed?
Drunvalo: I know we are going to make it because I have been allowed to see into the future. However, even though I optimistically say “we make it” we are still going to pass through this little “eye of the needle” where it is going to look like it is hopeless. And they [my guides] wouldn’t let me see what this was — but something happens and what looks so hopeless turns around very quickly.
Marie: Is it like the three days of darkness that we used to talk about?
The “three days of darkness” (which was originally thought to last five days) was an anticipated event built upon the claim that the Earth was passing through a cosmic field called the “photon belt” and that “three days of darkness” would be followed by a shift in energy and consciousness. This idea was presented in the mid-1990’s by many New Age authors, notably Barbara Hand Clow and Sheldon Nidle. The “three days of darkness” referred to the result of the Earth passing through this multi-dimensional light field; all electrical devices would cease to operate for three days and the world would experience 72 hours of “night.” This idea would later pop up again in the Y2K scare at the end of the 20th century.
Drunvalo: No, this doesn’t have anything to do with that. It looks as if the outer environment we live in will completely and totally die, as well as everything in it. We are going to come to that stage. So it is going to look hopeless. My angels didn’t show me that part of it. All they would say is that you are going to witness in your life a place where it looks like it is just over. Then this “thing” is going to happen. And the world situation is going to be quickly and completely turned around.
Yes, Drumvalo says that his “angels” showed him a vision that “look as if” everything around us will “totally die,” and then miraculously, everything will be better.
Marie: In the workshop you spoke about “waves” of people who will die. Can you explain what you were talking about?
Drunvalo: The waves are spoken about in Native American prophecy. There was an American Indian from a long time ago that was allowed to go to all the various tribes and secret societies (the Grandmother societies) and to collect and write down the prophecies from these tribes to find out what they had in common.
He found one thread which ran through all the prophecies which talks about the time which is approaching. There are three waves of people on the earth who are said to die in a very short amount of time. I don’t know what that is about exactly, but when I was reading about it, it felt like it occurs in about 10 days time. Something very quick — something VERY BIG happens and kills an enormous number of people.
Outwardly it looks horrible. It could be Atomic war, the bird flu or who knows what. Outwardly, to the survivors, it looks like a catastrophe, but inwardly the people who leave this way have planned it. They want to leave, and they want to leave together. When they collect over the top of the earth, the first wave goes to a specific place in time/space dimension so they can be with their own kind. Because they are not really in tune with the Earth they can be in harmony together (elsewhere).
Drunvalo turns to Native American eschatology to legitimate and populate his own desire for achieving a solution in the world he doesn’t believe he has the power to carry out. He reads this passage and within his imagination he builds a scenario in his mind where some kind of genocide occurs. And then he says those that die wanted to leave anyway! Obviously, if most of these people were so unhappy with there lives, it had to have something to do with the relationships they formed with others. Does anyone really believe that these miserable murdered would want to go off to another place to hang around the with the other miserable murdered they tried to get away from? It’s a very neat and tidy trick. Nobody has to take responsibility for anything in this scenario. Don’t feel bad about other people’s suffering: they chose to suffer. This is a great, although sinister, New Age trope.
Then it is said that there is another bigger change coming with another wave of people leaving the planet. Again this is by choice on the inner levels — not a kind of suicide — but on the inner these people know something is about to occur and they come together to go to another place in space time.
In the third wave, a massive amount of people die. This group called “hitchhikers” in the prophecies doesn’t know where their home is so they leave, looking for that place and eventually they do find their home.
After these waves pass there are only millions (not billions) of people left in the world — a much smaller number. The people that are left over will come together in one heart according to Native American prophecy — they become as one living being.
So New Age eschatology is nothing more than an appeal to Native American mythology where everything is reversed. As if living on a Native American reservation is somehow an uplifting spiritual goal. No, Drunvalo mythologizes the Native American spiritualism into something that only exists inside his mind. My point is this: if the Native Americans are not of “one heart” now, why would anyone believe they could be in the future? As far as I can tell, Native American spirituality has not helped any Native American who’s broke, bored and looking for something to do on the reservation. It’s not as if there’s a lot of money in it.
Regardless of race or religion, all the divisions are dropped and the remaining people become as one family. Then, with this new found higher consciousness, those that are left take the earth and they fly it — as if the earth is turned into a space ship which is flown to a new place, and a beautiful new way of living emerges on earth.
Why would “all the divisions” be “dropped?” Because there are fewer people? Because this is only a claim made in the vacuum of desiring a solution without having to work towards one? What would be a “beautiful new way” of living on Earth?
Marie: So the actual earth is used as a space ship… so do you mean that Mother Earth is going to clean herself in this process?
Drunvalo: Yes, everything is solved. We totally fix everything through pure Consciousness, not through technology or anything like that but through our very being. From a Melchizedek point of view, we actually change orbit.
And there you have it: better living through higher consciousness, guaranteed by Drumvalo’s “angels.” All we have to do is sit back and wait for the good times to roll.
Further into the interview, Drunvalo paints a vivid ascension scenario:
Marie: But hearing you this week, it feels like humanity (we) will be “going home”…
Drunvalo: Oh, yes, because after that, we leave the earth altogether. There comes a point where we completely leave the earth, we transcend it, we go into another level of existence and that is the beginning of a very rapid, but very long journey. And we end up completely beyond the stars and planets. We end up existing in another way and in another octave of existence.
Marie: Do we leave with our body?
Drunvalo: Initially we do. We leave with our body and then our body mutates into something that would look more like an ET. After that we become Everything. But that is only the beginning of the journey.
The New Age’s preoccupation with the primacy of consciousness over the physical can be seen here within this ascension scenario. It has its beginnings with the 19th century Indian sage Ramakrishna, who claimed that the purpose of life was to realize God through consciousness. According to these folks everything that is worthy or “real” happens through consciousness. All else is an illusion, especially the physical which is seen as an abomination in some Eastern sects and something to be overcome and denied in Western religious and philosophical systems. Very few want you to do deal with what is here on the physical plane of existence, which is, by the way, the only part of existence we can verify that something is occurring. The 2012 eschaton is an imaginary event that people have attempted to make “true” simply by having beliefs about it. Busybodies will weave all sorts of threads to gain legitimacy and traction, but unfortunately for them, 2012 will come and go with nothing to show for it – just like the Photon Belt and Y2K. And they will be asked to drop their beliefs and to stand up within their physical frame that they have and honor it by treating it, and others, with respect.
Welcome, back. It’s been a while since I’ve made a post here, but I’ve been working on several writing projects and just completed one of them, so that’s good news.
My goal at the beginning of last year was to boost the readership of the blog, and I am happy to report Mission: Accomplished. Views nearly quadrupled over the previous year, and I attribute that to several reasons, the main one being that I actually posted more blogs than I ever have before.
In looking back at the events of 2011, it seems that the old adage of, “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” The “Arab Spring,” which began almost a year ago when a young Tunisian fruit merchant set himself on fire in protest against the crushing economic climate he was forced to participate within, we wonder how much has changed. Ironically, according to this Al Jazeera, the young man’s family had to leave Sidi Bouzid out of fear.
In Egypt, President-for-life Hosni Mubarak was toppled from power after the military repeatedly fired on its own citizens. With Mubarak gone, guess what the military is up to these days? Firing on its own citizens.
In Libya, the story is far from over. Although Qadhafi has been toppled from power and killed, his prescient comments made in 2008 to his fellow Middle Eastern leaders seem to carry more weight as time goes on.
Syria of course, has resisted the uprisings by brutally repressing its citizens. In reports that can only be termed as “surprising,” former pals Syria’s Assad and Hamas (the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement in Israel) are not on speaking terms.
Osama bin Laden was allegedly assassinated by American Navy Seals. We don’t know for sure because the man’s body was thrown into the ocean. Allegedly.
Steve Jobs, the leader of Apple died. His reported last words: “Oh, wow.”
Excuse me, but didn’t you used to be Occupy Wall Street?
Okay, we’ll be back soon with even more great blogs.