Previous William Thomas Sherman Info Page quotes, observations, etc.
It is always good to deal with someone who knows himself honestly, because he knows that you know.
Picture the world as one great pond, and on one basic and fundamental level when you are at one point in that pond you thrive, yet at another point -- in that same pond -- you might die -- with variations in between. At the same there are subsidiary or ultra-dimensional layers of ponds (or say intersecting planes) within the one great pond, and similarly one might thrive or not thrive depending on his or her location in the given layer. Layers do overlap, and, for one reason or another and at various times, a given layer might experience greater levels of intensity or energy with respect to the quality and character of their existence, based on the effect of both internal and external existents.
That a person or thing could exist outside such an order (at least of one kind or another) does not seem to me possible. This sort of paradigm for entelechy is all very general and scratching the surface, I know, but not without what seems to me at least an essential truth and practical relevance (which make it worth mentioning.)
Should scientific data obtained by "evil" people, say for example some Nazi scientists, be used to benefit humanity (say medically) if it can? I would say yes, but this does not justify how the evil people obtained that information; and should not mitigate any prohibition of serious crime or be used as grounds to lesson what would otherwise be the severity of the wrong doer's punishment. Understandably this is an important point to bear in mind when dealing with spirit people who are professional criminals, for unlike Nazis, they don't just go away with time and history -- at least not just yet anyway.
Though I can't myself speak to the truth of this claim, I thought I would mention it for any who might find it of interest. Just the other day I was told by a spirit person that the reason little spirit people or sprites are the size they are is because they were sold or given as sacrifice by their parents to witchcraft or other malevolent spirit people. At what point in time in the child's life exactly this was supposed to have taken place (perhaps before the child's birth?) was not said.
They are so great, yet why did they need a whole army and fourteen years to fight "a poor man, all alone?" The simple fact you can't face is that while they know many and extraordinary things, they don't know how to live. But then perhaps that is because they're dead. And strange is it not that even after all these decades I still am not permitted to know who the Phantom of the Opera really is? Though in this last, I suppose in fairness it can be said I am no worse off than (most of) the rest of the public.
If one stops to considers the matter, I think one will find that there are essentially three kinds of people in this world:
a) Those and their accomplices (witting and otherwise) who calculatingly murder and enslave others in order to maintain a position of great wealth and power
b) Those who are enslaved and or are murdered
c) Those who fight the murderers, etc.
A person can be strong in many ways indeed tremendously so. Yet they cannot be strong in all, including some ways that are necessary for their very survival and existence. Hence God then is or becomes that strength and those strengths which any given person needs or lacks. It seems strange, but is it any less strange that beings so fraught with imperfections should presume such a degree of knowldge, wisdom, and universality as we sometimes do?
Is known materiality the only kind of materiality there is?
Here is some more James Thomson, in this instance taken from the "Winter" portion of his "The Seasons," and which I thought a few of you might also enjoy.
"Ah, little think the gay licentious proud
Whom pleasure, power, and affluence surround;
They who their thoughtless hours in giddy mirth
And wanton, often cruel, riot waste;
Ah, little think they, while they dance along,
How many feel, this very moment, death
And all the sad variety of pain:
How many sink in the devouring flood,
Or more devouring flame; how many bleed,
By shameful variance betwixt man and man;
How many pine in want, and dungeon glooms,
Shut from the common air, and common use
Of their own limbs; how many drink the cup
Of baleful grief, or eat the bitter bread
Of misery; sore pierced by wintry winds,
How many shrink into the sordid hut
Of cheerless poverty; how many shake
With all the fiercer tortures of the mind,
Unbounded passion, madness, guilt, remorse;
Whence tumbled headlong from the height of life,
They furnish matter for the tragic Muse;
Even in the vale, where wisdom loves to dwell,
With friendship, peace, and contemplation joined,
How many, racked with honest passions, droop
In deep retired distress; how many stand
Around the deathbed of their dearest friends,
And point the parting anguish. Thought fond man
Of these, and all the thousand nameless ills,
That one incessant struggle render life,
One scene of toil, of suffering, and of fate,
Vice in his high career would stand appalled,
And heedless rambling impulse learn to think;
The conscious heart of charity would warm,
And her wide wish benevolence dilate;
The social tear would rise, the social sigh;
And into clear perfection, gradual bliss,
Refining still, the social passions work."
Yesterday the ghost and the radio group happened to mention "Steel Magnolias," saying it was one of his, i.e. "Spielberg" or Wishnik the Great's, films. I don't know why they brought this up. I did not see "Steel Magnolias." Wasn't that a "tough, old broad" film or something? Then I thought of "Fried Green Tomatoes," which I also didn't see. I looked it up on Amazon.com and found this review:
"Reviewer: L. Sonnenberg (New Mexico) - See all my reviews
"'I searched for reviews of this movie before I saw it, and didn't find any. People I talked to had not seen it, but had heard it was good. So I finally sat down and watched it. The acting was top notch. It was a tightly scripted chick flick about two friendships. One in a nursing home, and one in the friendship retold by Cleo Threadgoode during those visits. On the down side it was very feministic, to the point of portraying men in general of being evil ogres. Women would be up in arms about any similar one sided portrayal of women. Kathy Bates' character went from being a trampled by everyone woman to a 'don't push me' type. While much of this was funny, this was one extreme to the other rather than a middle ground. In spite of this I enjoyed the first part of the movie. That is until the surprise ending. While this gives away a bit of a plot spoiler, the ending involved unwitting cannibalism. This made me sick, and I felt sick a long time after watching it. Had I known how sour the ending would be, I never would have watched this movie.'"
Is it a coincidence or what that in dealing with spirit people over the years I have come to learn that the splendor and holiness they display, whether of the religious or witchcraft sort, are Star Wars-like?
Context makes value, so that in one context someone is a criminal to be crucified, in another they are God to be adored. What then makes one context differ from another? A number of factors might be considered. Yet the criteria for justifying context which seem most crucial are truthfulness (as in and including honesty) and reasonableness.
The violence spirit person-directed organized crime perpetrate, and in secret and against all sorts of people (regardless of age or income, etc.), although carried out more or less covertly, the criminals themselves treat as normal, acceptable, or routine behavior. But we say to them if it is so normal to do those things, then come out in public and let everyone know what you are doing. Then see how normal all would see you as!
the picture of science
the picture of truth
the picture of authority
the picture of light
You would not believe the amount of absurdity upon absurdity I am forced regularly to contend with.
"I'm interesting too; only Sherman doesn't think I am."
This then gives him the excuse to cause Sherman no end of unnecessary and ridiculous problems. For son of the gods as he is, they feel sorry for him and let him have his way. (And son of the gods he must be since how else is it possible for him to have gotten away with, and continue to get away with, as much as he does?)
A Poem Sacred to the Memory of Sir Isaac Newton
By James Thomson (1700-1748)
Shall the great soul of Newton quit this earth,
To mingle with his stars; and every muse,
Astonish'd into silence, shun the weight
Of honours due to his illustrious name?
But what can man?--Even now the sons of light,
In strains high-warbled to seraphic lyre,
Hail his arrival on the coast of bliss.
Yet am not I deterr'd, though high the theme,
And sung to harps of angels, for with you,
Ethereal flames! ambitious, I aspire
In Nature's general symphony to join.
And what new wonders can ye show your guest!
Who, while on this dim spot, where mortals toil
Clouded in dust, from motion's simple laws,
Could trace the secret hand of Providence,
Wide-working through this universal frame.
Have ye not listen'd while he bound the suns
And planets to their spheres! th' unequal task
Of humankind till then. Oft had they roll'd
O'er erring man the year, and oft disgrac'd
The pride of schools, before their course was known
Full in its causes and effects to him,
All-piercing sage! who sat not down and dream'd
Romantic schemes, defended by the din
Of specious words, and tyranny of names;
But, bidding his amazing mind attend,
And with heroic patience years on years
Deep-searching, saw at last the system dawn,
And shine, of all his race, on him alone.
What were his raptures then! how pure! how strong!
And what the triumphs of old Greece and Rome,
By his diminish'd, but the pride of boys
In some small fray victorious! when instead
Of shatter'd parcels of this earth usurp'd
By violence unmanly, and sore deeds
Of cruelty and blood, Nature herself
Stood all subdu'd by him, and open laid
Her every latent glory to his view.
All intellectual eye, our solar-round
First gazing through, he by the blended power
Of gravitation and projection saw
The whole in silent harmony revolve.
From unassisted vision hid, the moons
To cheer remoter planets numerous pour'd,
By him in all their mingled tracts were seen.
He also fix'd the wandering Queen of Night,
Whether she wanes into a scanty orb,
Or, waxing broad, with her pale shadowy light,
In a soft deluge overflows the sky.
Her every motion clear-discerning, he
Adjusted to the mutual main, and taught
Why now the mighty mass of water swells
Resistless, heaving on the broken rocks,
And the full river turning; till again
The tide revertive, unattracted, leaves
A yellow waste of idle sands behind.
Then breaking hence, he took his ardent flight
Through the blue infinite; and every star,
Which the clear concave of a winter's night
Pours on the eye, or astronomic tube,
Far-stretching, snatches from the dark abyss,
Or such as farther in successive skies
To fancy shine alone, at his approach
Blaz'd into suns, the living centre each
Of an harmonious system: all combin'd,
And rul'd unerring by that single power,
Which draws the stone projected to the ground.
O unprofuse magnificence divine!
O wisdom truly perfect! thus to call
From a few causes such a scheme of things,
Effects so various, beautiful, and great,
An universe complete! and O belov'd
Of Heaven! whose well-purg'd penetrative eye,
The mystic veil transpiercing, inly scann'd
The rising, moving, wide-establish'd frame.
He, first of men, with awful wing pursu'd
The comet through the long elliptic curve,
As round innumerous worlds he wound his way,
Till, to the forehead of our evening sky
Return'd, the blazing wonder glares anew,
And o'er the trembling nations shakes dismay.
The heavens are all his own, from the wild rule
Of whirling vortices and circling spheres
To their first great simplicity restor'd.
The schools astonish'd stood; but found it vain
To keep at odds with demonstration strong,
And, unawaken'd, dream beneath the blaze
Of truth. At once their pleasing visions fled,
With the gay shadows of the morning mix'd,
When Newton rose, our philosophic sun!
Th' aërial flow of sound was known to him,
From whence it first in wavy circles breaks,
Till the touch'd organ takes the message in.
Nor could the darting beam of speed immense
Escape his swift pursuit and measuring eye.
Ev'n Light itself, which every thing displays,
Shone undiscover'd, till his brighter mind
Untwisted all the shining robe of day;
And, from the whitening undistinguish'd blaze,
Collecting every ray into his kind,
To the charm'd eye educ'd the gorgeous train
Of parent colours. First the flaming red
Sprung vivid forth; the tawny orange next;
And next delicious yellow; by whose sidee
Fell the kind beams of all-refreshing green.
Then the pure blue, that swells autumnal skies
Ethereal played; and then, of sadder hue,
Emerg'd the deepen'd indigo, as when
The heavy-skirted evening droops with frost;
While the last gleamings of refracted light
Died in the fainting violet away.
These, when the clouds distil the rosy shower,
Shine out distinct adown the wat'ry bow;
While o'er our heads the dewy vision bends
Delightful, melting on the fields beneath.
Myriads of mingling dyes from these result,
And myriads still remain--infinite source
Of beauty, ever flushing, ever new.
Did ever poet image aught so fair,
Dreaming in whisp'ring groves by the hoarse brook?
Or prophet, to whose rapture heaven descends?
Ev'n now the setting sun and shifting clouds,
Seen, Greenwich, from thy lovely heights, declare
How just, how beauteous the refractive law.
The noiseless tide of time, all bearing down
To vast eternity's unbounded sea,
Where the green islands of the happy shine,
He stemm'd alone; and, to the source (involv'd
Deep in primeval gloom) ascending, rais'd
His lights at equal distances, to guide
Historian wilder'd on his darksome way.
But who can number up his labours? who
His high discoveries sing? When but a few
Of the deep-studying race can stretch their minds
To what he knew--in fancy's lighter thought
How shall the muse then grasp the mighty theme?
What wonder thence that his devotion swell'd
Responsive to his knowledge? For could he,
Whose piercing mental eye diffusive saw
The finish'd university of things
In all its order, magnitude, and parts,
Forbear incessant to adore that Power
Who fills, sustains, and actuates the whole?
Say, ye who best can tell, ye happy few,
Who saw him in the softest lights of life,
All unwithheld, indulging to his friends
The vast unborrow'd treasures of his mind,
oh, speak the wondrous man! how mild, how calm
How greatly humble, how divinely good,
How firm establish'd on eternal truth;
Fervent in doing well, with every nerve
Still pressing on, forgetful of the past,
And panting for perfection; far above
Those little cares and visionary joys
That so perplex the fond impassion'd heart
Of ever-cheated, ever-trusting man.
This, Conduitt, from thy rural hours we hope;
As through the pleasing shade where nature pours
Her every sweet in studious ease you walk,
The social passions smiling at thy heart
That glows with all the recollected sage.
And you, ye hopeless gloomy-minded tribe,
You who, unconscious of those nobler flights
That reach impatient at immortal life,
Against the prime endearing privilege
Of being dare contend,--say, can a soul
Of such extensive, deep, tremendous powers,
Enlarging still, be but a finer breath
Of spirits dancing through their tubes awhile,
And then for ever lost in vacant air?
But hark! methinks I hear a warning voice,
Solemn as when some awful change is come,
Sound through the world--" 'Tis done!--the measure's full;
And I resign my charge."--Ye mouldering stones
That build the towering pyramid, the proud
Triumphal arch, the monument effac'd
By ruthless ruin, and whate'er supports
The worship'd name of hoar antiquity--
Down to the dust! What grandeur can ye boast
While Newton lifts his column to the skies,
Beyond the waste of time. Let no weak drop
Be shed for him. The virgin in her bloom
Cut off, the joyous youth, and darling child--
These are the tombs that claim the tender tear
And elegiac song. But Newton calls
For other notes of gratulation high,
That now he wanders through those endless worlds
He here so well descried, and wondering talks,
And hymns their Author with his glad compeers.
O Britain's boast! whether with angels thou
Sittest in dread discourse, or fellow-blest,
Who joy to see the honour of their kind;
Or whether, mounted on cherubic wing,
Thy swift career is with the whirling orbs,
Comparing things with things, in rapture lost,
And grateful adoration for that light
So plenteous ray'd into thy mind below
From Light Himself; oh, look with pity down
On humankind, a frail erroneous race!
Exalt the spirit of a downward world!
O'er thy dejected country chief preside,
And be her Genius call'd! her studies raise,
Correct her manners, and inspire her youth;
For, though deprav'd and sunk, she brought thee forth,
And glories in thy name! she points thee out
To all her sons, and bids them eye thy star:
While, in expectance of the second life,
When time shall be no more, thy sacred dust
Sleeps with her kings, and dignifies the scene.
One thing I would like people to learn is not to be unnecessarily intimidated by spirit people. For all their strengths, they have weaknesses like anyone else, only you might have to be more alert or perceptive than usual (perhaps) to pick up on what those are. For example, I have had this one Hell-raising/Heavenly group of spirit people for a number of years now and it is laughable how -- except as paranormal phenomena to be studied by scientists -- how really dull, trite, and uninteresting they are otherwise. I make no apologies about mocking them in this manner, not because my opinion matters so much, but rather because this particular group I speak of has spent so much time and trouble annoying and setting me up. I for my part do not even care about these people, and quite frankly see them as failures in life, hollow on the inside, and loaded up with perhaps great wealth and power, so that ever since they now work for the Evil One, trying to create importance for themselves by bothering us or intruding themselves on our lives in some way. While it is true they (again like anyone) have their strengths and good points, all in all they are very shallow, tiresome people and really so much noise and carrying on. And why some spend practically their whole lives paying tribute regularly to them -- while pretending to be respectable -- I will never know.
Say fellas, sit down a sec. There's something I want to say to you. Now you don't need to run those radios tonight. How about instead Mr. Magician taking you all down to see that new Coast Guard picture with Kevin Costner in it. Would you like that? Don't worry about this radio, it will take care of itself.
What better use and application of philosophy then to overthrow mind control, brainwashing, and hypnotism?
Each great work or work of art is, in some consequential way, an expression of God -- that is if it's any good.
They say "we have a vested interest in continuing to see these people to do the wrong thing," and then strive try to create an environment where the "good" they have to offer seems the most appealing. Of course, no matter how bad things get for them, they will always keep up the act if only just to fool a handful of deluded others.
Did we lose paradise because we could not live up to a high standard or because we could not meet a modest one?
It's so bad you could crash a semi into the pergola in Pioneer Square and no one would notice.
Oh to forget and never know about or never have known about these people! What a wonderful feeling that would be!
Every task or challenge, even the most elaborate and complex, is one step at a time, even those which require multiple steps simultaneously. Discipline and training then are essential components in keeping those steps going and in an orderly fashion.
Yes of course they would know Biblical history, perhaps even (at least for the sake of argument) from first-hand witnessing of some or many of the events described as having taken place. Yet despite this they still see that same history from a Hell perspective, and which bias is bound to drastically color their views, and therefore their reliability is not to be trusted, indeed is something to be kept at a considerable philosophical and religious distance (else one risks polluting one's understanding of history, philosophy, and religion, and in a most wretched making and debilitating sort of way.) And if this is true of their perspective of Bible history, what then can be said about how those views might be colored with respect to any number of other matters and subjects? I would go further and add that if a person feels very badly, yet with out strong rational grounds for doing so, it is as likely as not because they are seeing things (such as their circumstances which trouble them) the way or in the manner those people see those things, and yet without realizing that this is what’s going on.
Shades of Stinky Boika! Have you had the chance yet to visit mindyourownbusiness.com ? It is not a little astonishing the amount of effort put into this site. Take the time to go through the various pages and, I guarantee, you can't help but marvel.
The True Vision of the Good
I cannot but hurt
when I hear a child
or an animal cry.
Could I but smooth their care!
His mother of a thousand years ago,
how that beauty persists in this child!
And think how any creature
could be loved, loved, loved,
without injustice to another.
Yet most will die many times
before at last they last expire.
How strange it is going through life
to have suffered more than one mortal wound!
Nor do all fruit, leaves, and flowers
grow the same,
though they come from the same tree.
Some are small.
Some are large.
Some pass away before their time.
Some get what they need, some don’t.
Some have strength and vigor
but must seek the light
from out the mass
of bombed and burned out rubble.
Out on some corner,
or off on some exit,
begging with a sign
in the rain,
grizzled, fat, or lean,
weary eyed,
determined.
Determined toward what?
You are part of the trip to eternity,
to goodness.
Yet the world belongs to these no more.
except as the shadow of hope.
And where is even that shadow?
Why did I grow like this?
Sorrow can at times
take me up like a flood,
and I can but flow with it.
Then I awake
washed ashore
on a bank of quiet solitude.
Quiet late at night,
the cool drops
begin fall and clatter.
Quiet, alone.
a rustle in the ivy,
a stir in the leaves,
are all that matter.
Oh to be never
taken unawares again,
and instead stay and live here always!
For no matter no still,
no matter how quiet,
we must leave a space
for the unexpected.
But if so, what is the true vision of the Good?
So many times we saw them up and go,
full of hope and promise.
The knowledge that something
could or might happen
thrilled us every time.
But in their case,
it did,
and fear fully realized:
full of hopes and promise,
shooting toward the sun,
then like a comet or shooting star
exploded in pieces on the ocean.
And to think how some wept before they died,
knowing that they would not live...
Yet others not only accepted calmly,
but even welcomed death.
All in one great number,
All for one great name,
alone and naked they rose and died.
And yet what were they going to do?
Live?
Live, live, live....
The Heaven I want to go to...
Could I love and treat and care for another
The way I would want to be loved, treated and cared for?
Could I but smooth their care!
When it was paradise,
it was paradise for the animals too.
What on earth then did we do?
A strange, pretty bird I never saw before
appeared
and alighted deep between some branches
in the time and place of poems and poetry.
You smile,
and smile you may.
But there is such a place.
But is it only I,
or do you remember too?
Love and Reason are the rock of ages.
Nature is children and childlike,
even in gray aged wisdom,
as great as any one is.
And with that cute face!
Quench then what is negative.
Be without resentments.
Quell animosity,
and see
All in one great number,
All for one great name.
Go where they love,
see what they see,
know empathy,
even some Monday morning.
"We can gain intelligence if you just allow us to rough these people up."
Yet I would think that for a humane, rational, and scientific person there would be other ways, and many, to achieve that particular end.
Who's Who in Damnation
Speaking (again) of Bill Griffith, I just got through reading his strip for Saturday Sept. 16, and in it his characters "talk over" the topic of damnation. The very raising of the subject made me think it was worthwhile to write a few words on it, particularly given that I have had first person experience with literal damned people, in this case spirit people.
What in more practical terms it means to be damned is you have this person who is ever given over to torturing or abusing others -- or worse. He just can't or will not stop and can go on like this for years and years --- and still not stop.
Now put yourself in the position of one of his victims. Would it not occur to you, especially if you were subject to his violence for years and years, to conclude that his behavior could only lead to something like damnation? That one day he might be cast out from our midst (as understandably insufferable to have around) and perhaps also as a result be thrown into a place with sadistic others like himself? Well, perhaps it is far fetched to conclude that such will necessarily be the culprit's fate. Yet certainly it is a very natural and not illogical conclusion.
Now this makes sense for such an arrant monster as I describe. But how could a more ordinary person risk damnation? Simply by becoming his friend, not knowing what they were getting themselves into, and in consequence following him wherever he leads to or goes. The former thinks that he knows better, while at the same time the latter is not unusually a master confidence trickster and charade artist, indeed a very magician sometimes. So you see, there's ultimately a sound and plausible basis for these kinds of ideas and notions.
A DVD decoder for Windows Media Player? Isn't that about the same thing as a "Windows Media Player" Player?
Pope and such as he cannot be right in saying that existence justifies itself. For errors exist, and if errors are justified then they don't exist (which is obviously absurd.)
How can someone say they know the true light when they willfully act and live in darkness on a regular and ongoing basis?
For Bill Griffith.
The real war on terrorism is about like that some days.
Who or what dies easier than a gnat?
A stranger is someone who in war you might kill, but who in other circumstances might be a best friend.
And oh how it pleases them that you both suffer!
What would you say were the five worst things you ever did, and which you would not want the rest of us to know?
After 25 years, a toy store somewhere in the midwest, is going out of business and is presently selling some of their remaining stock on EBay. Below are pictures for two items for sale which (given what they depict) I liked so much I wanted to post.
"...All this long eve, so balmy and serene,
Have I been gazing on the western sky,
And its peculiar tint of yellow green:
And still I gaze--and with how blank an eye!
And those thin clouds above, in flakes and bars,
That give away their motion to the stars;
Those stars, that glide behind them or between,
Now sparkling, now bedimmed, but always seen:
Yon crescent Moon, as fixed as if it grew
In its own cloudless, starless lake of blue;
I see them all so excellently fair,
I see, not feel, how beautiful they are!
"III
"My genial spirits fail;
And what can these avail
To lift the smothering weight from off my breast?
It were a vain endeavour,
Though I should gaze for ever
On that green light that lingers in the west:
I may not hope from outward forms to win
The passion and the life, whose fountains are within.
"IV
"O Lady! we receive but what we give,
And in our life alone does Nature live:
Ours is her wedding-garment, ours her shroud!
And would we aught behold, of higher worth,
Than that inanimate cold world allowed
To the poor loveless ever-anxious crowd,
Ah! from the soul itself must issue forth
A light, a glory, a fair luminous cloud
Enveloping the Earth--
And from the soul itself must there be sent
A sweet and potent voice, of its own birth,
Of all sweet sounds the life and element!..."
~ from "Dejection: An Ode," written April 4, 1802, by Samuel Taylor Coleridge
Without imagination and soul the forms and harmonies of Nature are nothing. Yet what are the imagination and soul themselves without the forms and harmonies of Nature? Dreary, morbid things. And what is it that keeps us separate and apart from Nature? Our voluntary or involuntary tie or association with people who think little of it and who instead find pure selfishness of much greater and lasting (value and) significance. Moreover, that (what are seen as) Nature's defects arise from the same cause I would not wonder.
I saw this article from Netscape News this morning (Sept. 7, 2006.) If what this reports and reports as being said is true, I must say I am appalled like no time before by our president, and consider this stance (as descried below) respecting the interrogation of terrorist suspects as un-American as any possibly could be. Normally, I have hitherto taken much of the attacks against the Bush administration as typically a lot of knee-jerk negativity one can expect toward a sitting president and his ministry (especially given the circumstances of the war.) Yet in light of this argument to justify torture (and let's call it what it is) in order, it is claimed, to obtain vital information, I cannot help but feel the administration is simply caving in to powerful witchcraft interests which have embedded themselves, surreptitiously and not so surreptitiously, in some of the major corporate strongholds. Indeed, while it I know it will sound as simply so much rhetoric to some, the plain, candid fact of the matter is the attitude Bush is espousing reflects the real terrorism and hatred of America going on in this country and the world, and the president (again speaking frankly), if not an outright traitor, is nothing more than a paid actor, coward, and hypocrite being used as a pawn by those really in charge of things these days (which, incidentally, by way of chain of command, is ultimately some certain rotten spirit people, and which in turn certain of the managing "elite" listen to -- or such at any rate is my view certainly, as propounded any number of times here at this website.)
[postscript written later in the day. I would add, and as I have said before, that I like President Bush as a person, and despite what I wrote I don't think him at heart a bad one certainly. It's just that it rankles to no end why torture or inhuman methods of interrogation should even be an issue. Since when in our nation's history, and at the top level no less, was it ever? Yet have there not been almost always dangerous and serious enemies to this country and its citizens?]
"Bush: Secret CIA Prisons a 'Vital' Tool By DEB RIECHMANN
"WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Wednesday acknowledged for the first time that the CIA runs secret prisons overseas and said tough interrogation forced terrorist leaders to reveal plots to attack the United States and its allies.
"Bush said 14 suspects - including the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks and architects of the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole and the U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania - had been turned over to the Defense Department and moved to the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for trial.
"``This program has been, and remains, one of the most vital tools in our war against the terrorists,'' Bush said.
"``Were it not for this program, our intelligence community believes that al-Qaida and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland.''
"Releasing information declassified just hours earlier, Bush said the capture of one terrorist just months after the Sept. 11 attacks had led to the capture of another and then another, and had revealed planning for attacks using airplanes, car bombs and anthrax.
"Nearing the fifth anniversary of Sept. 11, Bush pressed Congress to quickly pass administration-drafted legislation authorizing the use of military commissions for trials of terror suspects. Legislation is needed because the Supreme Court in June said the administration's plan for trying detainees in military tribunals violated U.S. and international law.
"The president's speech, his third in a recent series about the war on terror, gave him an opportunity to shore up his administration's credentials on national security two months before congressional elections at a time when Americans are growing weary of the war in Iraq.
"Democrats, hoping to make the elections a referendum on Bush's policies in Iraq and the war on terror, urged anew that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld be made to step down. They argued that the White House has mishandled the war, mismanaged the detainee system and failed to prosecute terrorists.
"``For five years, Democrats have stood ready to work with the president and the Republican Congress to establish sound procedures to bring terrorists to justice,'' said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. ``Unfortunately, President Bush ignored the advice of our uniformed military and set up a flawed system that failed to prosecute a single terrorist and was ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.''
"With the transfer of the 14 men to Guantanamo, there currently are no detainees being held by the CIA, Bush said. A senior administration official said the CIA had detained fewer than 100 suspected terrorists in the history of the program.
"Still, Bush said that ``having a CIA program for questioning terrorists will continue to be crucial to getting lifesaving information.''
"Earlier this year, an anti-torture panel at the United Nations recommended the closure of Guantanamo and criticized alleged U.S. use of secret prisons and suspected delivery of prisoners to foreign countries for questioning. Some Democrats and human rights groups argued that the CIA's secret prison system did not allow monitoring for abuses and they hoped that it would be shut down.
"``He finally acknowledged the elephant in the room that everybody had always been talking about,'' said Jumana Musa, advocacy director for Amnesty International USA.
"``I think what surprised me is he seemed to be asking Congress to legalize it through statutes, essentially allowing him to continue to detain people in secret by sort of putting forth all this information that they got from these folks and somehow using that to justify what has been recognized by U.N. committees as an unlawful act and contrary to our treaty obligations.''
"The president declined to disclose the location or details of the detainees' confinement or the interrogation techniques.
"``I cannot describe the specific methods used - I think you understand why,' Bush said in the East Room, where families of some of those who died in the Sept. 11 attacks heartily applauded him when he promised to finally bring the perpetrators to justice.
"``If I did, it would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning and to keep information from us that we need to prevent new attacks on our country. But I can say the procedures were tough, and they were safe and lawful and necessary.''
"Bush insisted that the detainees were not tortured.
"``I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture,'' Bush said. ``It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it, and I will not authorize it.''
"Bush said the information from terrorists in CIA custody has played a role in the capture or questioning of nearly every senior al-Qaida member or associate detained by the U.S. and its allies since the program began.
"He said they include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused Sept. 11 mastermind, as well as Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be 9/11 hijacker, and Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al-Qaida cells.
"He said interrogators have succeeded in getting information that has helped make photo identifications, pinpoint terrorist hiding places, provide ways to make sense of documents, identify voice recordings and understand the meaning of terrorist communications, al-Qaida's travel routes and hiding places,
"The administration had refused until now to acknowledge the existence of CIA prisons. Bush said he was going public because the United States has largely completed questioning the suspects, and also because the CIA program had been jeopardized by the Supreme Court ruling.
"The Supreme Court ruled that prisoner protections spelled out by the Geneva Conventions should extend to members of al-Qaida. In addition to torture and cruel treatment, the treaties ban ``outrages against personal dignity'' and ``humiliating and degrading treatment.''
"Administration officials said they were concerned the ruling left U.S. personnel vulnerable to be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act because the language under the Geneva Conventions was so vague.
"The Supreme Court ruling put a damper on the CIA's program, virtually putting the interrogation of detainees on hold until such prohibitions like ``outrages against personal dignity'' could be defined by law.
"``We're not interrogating now because CIA officials feel like the rules are so vague that they cannot interrogate without being tried as war criminals, and that's irresponsible,'' Bush said in an interview with ``CBS Evening News.''
"The administration-drafted legislation would authorize the defense secretary to convene a military commission with five members, plus a judge to preside. It would guarantee a detainee's access to military counsel but eliminate other rights common in military and civilian courts. The bill would allow reliable hearsay and potentially coerced testimony to be used as evidence in court, as well as the submission of classified evidence ``outside the presence of the accused.''
"Senate Republican leaders hailed Bush's proposal.
"``It's important to remember these defendants are not common criminals,'' said Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. ``Rather, many are terrorists, sworn enemies of the United States.''
"But Democrats and GOP moderates warned that the plan would set a dangerous precedent, ensuring the legislation would not likely sail through Congress unchanged.
"Republican Sens. John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham have drafted a rival proposal. Unlike the administration's plan, the senators' proposal would allow a defendant to access to all evidence used against them. The plan by Warner, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, also would prohibit coerced testimony.
"Graham, R-S.C., said withholding evidence from a war criminal sets a dangerous precedent other nations could follow. ``Would I be comfortable with (an American service member) going to jail with evidence they never saw? No,'' Graham said.
"Also on Wednesday, the Pentagon put out a new Army field manual that spells out appropriate conduct on issues including prisoner interrogation. The manual applies to all the armed services but not the CIA. It bans torture and degrading treatment of prisoners, for the first time specifically mentioning forced nakedness, hooding and other procedures that have become infamous during the war on terror.
"Associated Press writer Anne Plummer Flaherty contributed to this report.
"09/07/06 06:33 © Copyright The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press."
As we ever seek to broaden our horizons, I thought I would share with some of you something you might never see or come across. It is a recent U.S. Army field manual for leading a tank platoon, "FM 17-15," click here for a pdf. version.
While all but the most jealous demonist will deplore (literal) war taking place, there is much yet we can learn from the military outlook which can protect us in peace from those who are not disposed to be so open, civil, or reasonable. One thinking you will perhaps discover (if you read thoughtfully) is that it will not do to be irrational and cognitively evasive in a real life battle environment. Recognize this or you will die.
Now if lawful and peace seeking society is ever going to deal seriously with the problem of trouble-making spirit people a military approach is very much called for. Nor should anyone need to apologize for doing so. In actual point of fact some spirit people themselves work evil in our midst with a relish of a military commander, and have no scruple when it comes to ruthlessly using violence when they think it will serve their purpose. And yet who is there amongst us who is prepared to take them head on? Let there then be no kidding ourselves about this. If you ever really want to hope to solve life's worst problems, and live in a world that makes some kind of sense (societaly speaking) you need to be prepared to get tough and forceful with these kind of people.
Now if some of the careful thought and planning that went into FM 17-15 were applied to combating criminal spirit people nothing could be more decisive in getting us out of the rut mankind has been since (almost) the beginning of time. If such a thing has not been attempted before, doesn't it only make sense to see to it now, when we can, and the collective rational and scientific faculty has not quite yet entirely decayed? Do this and you won't need any more (such as) FM 17-15.
As we ever seek to broaden our horizons, I thought I would share with some of you something you might never see or come across. It is a recent U.S. Army field manual for leading a tank platoon, "FM 17-15," click here for a pdf. version (2.5 MB. Left click open now or else right click save as.)
While all but the most jealous demonist will deplore (literal) war taking place, there is much yet we can learn from the military outlook which can protect us in peace from those who are not disposed to be so open, civil, or reasonable. One thinking you will perhaps discover (if you read thooughtfully) is that it will not do to be irrational and cognitively evasive in a real life battle environment. Recognize this or you will die.
Now if lawful and peace seeking society is ever going to deal seriously with the problem of trouble-makng spirit people a military approach is very much called for. Nor should anyone need to apologize for doing so. In actual point of fact some spirit people themselves work evil in our midst with a relish of a military commander, and have no scruple when it comes to ruthlessly using violence when they think it will serve their purpose. And yet who is there amongst us who is prepared to take them head on? Let there then be no kidding ourselves about this. If you ever really want to hope to solve life's worst prolems, and live in a world that makes some kind of sense (societally speaking) you need to be prepared to get tough and forceful with these kind of people.
Now if some of the careful thought and planning that goes into FM 17-15 where applied to combating criminal spirit people nothing could be more decisive in getting us out of the rut mankind has been since(almost)the beginning of time immemorial. If such a thing has not been attempted before, doesn't it only make sense to see to it now, when we can, and the collective rational and scietific faculty has not quite yet entirely decayed? Do this and you won't need any more FM 17-15.
Why you would want to live in a society ruled by the King of the Vampires (posing as God), where people are paid according to the degree they do (or are party to doing) the wrong thing, versus one where people are rewarded according to worthwhile merit and ability -- I am at a loss to comprehend.
[And oh yes, if ever a spirit person or spirit person voice ever comes suggesting to you they are or represent God, do mock them (or, in the case of messengers, those they serve by) by calling them "King of the Vampires." Among other things, you will see how sensitive they are to such accusations (at least if you know how to deal intelligently with such people.)]
At present, and for a while now, I am and have been gathering materials to do a major update of Ben Turpin Central. The above from "Salome versus Shenandoah" (1919), is one sample what is (or at least might be) to come. In the meanwhile, in order to prove to you Hooligan, in view of his promise, is not going to just leave you in the lurch, here is the music (transcribed for midi) from that same sheet music for "Hooligan Will Help You'se Out" (1919) posted earlier this week (in the way of the cover.) Left click to play now, or right click to "Save as..." and play later.
Most of the time, and certainly if we would be honest with ourselves, we can never be too humble about what we could or don't know. It goes without saying, I hope, that there is such an infinite amount of it. Yet at the same time, and oddly, the divine order of things is such that it is not all that strange for the meanest, most humble, most innocent, most irrational to have some advanced understanding or wisdom of one thing or another which is entirely lost on the rest of us. In our more serious judgments then let us be reminded to proceed with caution.
In continuing our now-and-then survey of eighteenth century authors, I am presently (again) reading Alexander Pope. In much of his writing, try as I might to pick up on more than a bright epigram or colorful turn of sentence, I tend not to find all that much being said or expressed (howsoever so finely and elegantly put) that strikes me as either all that moving, funny, or profound. There are, however, exceptions to this, and his "Essay on Man" is one of them, though I can't say I agree with him on every point there.
In the "Essay" he seems to adopt the view that spirits are superior to man, or that the greatest excellence of spirit people is superior to the greatest excellence among regular people. Why he should assume this to be the case one is logically curious to know, but I rather suspect it is something inculcated by spirit people themselves on us over the ages. But do understand that if you assume that spirit people are the highest beings in God's creation, there are in actual point of fact very bad spirit people who can pretend to be such! Why then philosophical or religious minded sorts don't consider this more carefully when taking such a stance as Pope's is, as far as I'm concerned, a mark of our fallen, irrational natures as much as anything else.
If there is room for doubt, appreciate the possible, albeit unknown, virtue of a stranger, despite the negative impression they might leave. There may be, if you knew the true story, something very good (or admirable or respectable) about them you (or even which they themselves) do not or cannot possibly know about. And if they are actually bad, how bad can most people really be?
If it were possible for a person to remain always anonymous they could commit all manner of crimes and never be caught or prosecuted. This is one of the key advantages of witchcraft and sorcery, which are after all, the ultimate arts of illusion.
The people who work for the worst people in the world are rarely themselves (also) among the worst. This should not be so surprising because earnest evil needs such to hide behind.
Often the way the culture is is the way people are. Those then who selfishly seek greatest power understandably seek to control the culture. As a matter of course the latter will obtain phenomenal money and power from doing or being a party to great evil. Yet they want to act like they earned that money and power. They would seem as if they are full of sweetness and light. The reality however is bitterness and gall are what drive them on.
And all the riches of the world can never buy them truth or the approval of truth, reality, the facts.
Never really grudge a fool, a bad person, or anyone their happiness. My God, the world needs more, not less, happiness! Grudge only wrong doing, and then only when you can be specific.
Though friendship, justice, law, truth and religion all fail you, always remember...
The Boy from Oz
We are yet again prompted to make social commentary while drawing on a cereal box cover. I saw this at the grocery store the other days, and it struck me. Is this what he really is? Is this how he sees himself? You naturally would think I am joking, but I ask these questions seriously. He does act like this in a way you know. Well, even if the answer is yes, his desire to be the center of the show is far from being the worse thing about him. As a matter of fact, it does actually give him a certain sympathetic and human quality, and does not necessarily have anything to do with his making a fool of himself and being a curse to others otherwise.
"...Thus in a civil state or public we see that a virtuous administration and an equal and just distribution of rewards and punishments, is one of the highest service, not only by restraining the vicious, and forcing them to act usefully to society, but by making virtue to be apparently the interest of everyone, so as to remove all prejudices against it, create a fair reception for it, and lead men into that path which afterward they cannot easily quit. For thus a people raised from barbarity or despotic rule civilized by laws, and made virtuous by the long course of a just administration, if they chance to fall suddenly under any misgovernment of unjust and arbitrary power, they will on this account be the rather animated to exert a stronger virtue in opposition to such violence and corruption. And even where, by long and continued arts of a prevailing tyranny, such a people are at last totally oppressed, the scattered seeds of virtue will for a long time remain alive even to a second generation, ere the utmost force of misapplied rewards and punishments can bring them to the abject and compliant state of long-accustomed slaves...
"And as the case of reward and punishment stands thus in public, so, in the same manner, as to private families. For slaves and mercenary servants, restrained and made orderly by punishment and the severity of their master, are not on this account made good or honest. Yet the same master of the family using proper rewards and gentle punishments towards his children teaches them goodness, and by this help instructs them in a virtue which afterwards they practise upon other grounds, and without thinking of a penalty or bribe. And this is what we call a liberal education and a liberal service; the contrary service and obedience, whether towards God or man, being illiberal and unworthy of any honour or commendation..."
~~ from Inquiry Concerning Virtue, Book I, part III, section III, by Anthony Ashley Cooper, Third earl of Shaftesbury (1671-1713)
For more such as this see Eighteenth Century Collections Online .
It used to be the question was: what does everyone think? Now it has come intead to: who is it even really thinks at all?
Megalomania XIII, Lord Doink, Zombo the Deistical, Dr. Insane, the Mad Magician with angels who are actors on behalf of them, or else stooges of them, or else co-partners with them, or all three.
The life of hell and damnation is no life for me, and I sure do hope the rest of you make it out alive also because these must be (some of) the most hateful people that ever lived.
A very good writer, artist, or musician overly relies on no single audience. Rather any given audience he is capably of communicating to he can dispense with if need be (say that audience was whisked off of a moment somewhere), and yet still be able to make his point effectively to any one or number of others who think and or feel deeply.
Bad can be good, but Evil (by mutual consent of both the most good and most evil people) can never be, and when bad can be good that is the exception.
Not all good things can be realized according to their best worth in all circumstances; in some circumstances what is otherwise good can actually be bad. What then is true worth? If there can be said to be such a thing (as opposed to mere relative worth), I suppose we have to think of true worth as the value of something taken with respect to and in the context of the sum of all possible circumstances (and or eternity.)
"Two heads are better than one" they say in that group. Only for them, if one head goes out, both are done for.
I will be blunt and tell you have little or no patience with people who inveigh sarcastically or mockingly about what is supposed to be wrong in this world, and yet who complain not at all about arrant mendacity and falsehood. For if we stop and consider the matter, it is mendacity and falsehood that will be found at the root of most all serious wrong that takes place around us. And how childish it is for people then to bemoan or cavil at the absurdity of life when so much of that absurdity has its sole origin in people's stubborn insistence on seeing lying, dissembling, and keeping secrets as socially acceptable forms of conduct.
God I have been made so alone by these people (and their dirty trick tactics)! How it galls how that my enemies get to cheat as much as they do and get away with it! Yet at least, unlike them I can deal openly and honestly with the facts. They, on the other hand must ever live in darkness in order to prosper. Now I ask you, who between us makes more sense? What good is prospering or being happy if one cannot live, without fear, in truth and in the light? Remember also that in my case they came to me. I do not now, nor ever, want to have anything to do with them. Indeed the greatest present standing grief of my life by far and away is my inability to get away from or get rid of them. But then such a circumstance as this exists because it is not the rational, courageous living who presently rule things but rather the wily, demented dead (and their humanoid servants.)
If he lies all the time, he cannot, or at least is certainly less able to, tell the truth. And how can someone sing, or write or love in either a convincing or moving way if he can't tell the truth very well? And are not singing, writing or loving well simply forms of expressing the truth? What then will he sing us lies? Either that of course or else he doesn't sing at all.
The other day I received from my uncle, who among his number of accomplishments is a classical Greek and Latin scholar, a translation of the terms used in this quote by John Dryden (which quote is also posted at my MP3 page):
"For the Spirit of man cannot be satisfied but with truth, or at least verisimility; and a Poem is to contain, if not ta etyma [i.e. truths] yet etymoisin omoia [things similar to truths], as one of the Greek Poets has expres'd it."
My uncle remarks as well that the Greek author Dryden cites uses the plural "truths" rather than "truth" (singular.)
Some music is less enjoyable, perhaps even disagreeable, when heard in public because it is so much, much more treasured privately or in a domestic setting.
Even if we say, and as they themselves argue, Accursed Filth and his gang of rapists did receive divine permission to rape and torture, it is nonetheless much more clear they have not been divinely empowered to contend at being interesting, admirable or attractive -- at least not in any way which would begin to justify their utter self-fantasizing in those regards. Hence also, and not surprisingly, their ongoing opposition to free speech and fair competition, and their hypocritical insistence that money, manipulated public opinion, and worldly influence are all that really matter.
In The Spectator, no. 120, of Wednesday, July 18, 1711, we find Joseph Addison writing:
"....It is astonishing to consider the different Degrees of Care that descend from the Parent to the Young, so far as is absolutely necessary for the leaving a Posterity. Some Creatures cast their Eggs as Chance directs them, and think of them no farther, as Insects and several Kinds of Fish: Others, of a nicer Frame, find out proper Beds to deposit them in, and there leave them; as the Serpent, the Crocodile, and Ostrich: Others hatch their Eggs and tend the Birth, 'till it is able to shift for it self.
"What can we call the Principle which directs every different Kind of Bird to observe a particular Plan in the Structure of its Nest, and directs all of the same Species to work after the same Model? It cannot be Imitation; for though you hatch a Crow under a Hen, and never let it see any of the Works of its own Kind, the Nest it makes shall be the same, to the laying of a Stick, with all the other Nests of the same Species. It cannot be Reason; for were Animals indued with it to as great a Degree as Man, their Buildings would be as different as ours, according to the different Conveniences that they would propose to themselves.
"Is it not remarkable, that the same Temper of Weather, which raises this genial Warmth in Animals, should cover the Trees with Leaves and the Fields with Grass for their Security and Concealment, and produce such infinite Swarms of Insects for the Support and Sustenance of their respective Broods?
"Is it not wonderful, that the Love of the Parent should be so violent while it lasts; and that it should last no longer than is necessary for the Preservation of the Young?
"The Violence of this natural Love is exemplify'd by a very barbarous Experiment; which I shall quote at Length, as I find it in an excellent Author, and hope my Readers will pardon the mentioning such an Instance of Cruelty, because there is nothing can so effectually shew the Strength of that Principle in Animals of which I am here speaking. 'A Person who was well skilled in Dissection opened a Bitch, and as she lay in the most exquisite Tortures, offered her one of her young Puppies, which she immediately fell a licking; and for the Time seemed insensible of her own Pain: On the Removal, she kept her Eye fixt on it, and began a wailing sort of Cry, which seemed rather to proceed from the Loss of her young one, than the Sense of her own Torments...'
"Reason shews it self in all Occurrences of Life; whereas the Brute makes no Discovery of such a Talent, but in what immediately regards his own Preservation, or the Continuance of his Species. Animals in their Generation are wiser than the Sons of Men; but their Wisdom is confined to a few Particulars, and lies in a very narrow Compass. Take a Brute out of his Instinct, and you find him wholly deprived of Understanding. To use an instance that comes often under Observation.
"With what Caution does the Hen provide herself a Nest in Places unfrequented, and free from Noise and Disturbance! When she has laid her Eggs in such a Manner that she can cover them, what Care does she take in turning them frequently, that all Parts may partake of the vital Warmth? When she leaves them, to provide for her necessary Sustenance, how punctually does she return before they have time to cool, and become incapable of producing an Animal? In the Summer you see her giving her self greater Freedoms, and quitting her Care for above two Hours together; but in Winter, when the Rigour of the Season would chill the Principles of Life, and destroy the young one, she grows more assiduous in her Attendance, and stays away but half the Time. When the Birth approaches, with how much Nicety and Attention does she help the Chick to break its Prison? Not to take notice of her covering it from the Injuries of the Weather, providing it proper Nourishment, and teaching it to help it self; nor to mention her forsaking the Nest, if after the usual Time of reckoning the young one does not make its Appearance. A Chemical Operation could not be followed with greater Art or Diligence, than is seen in the hatching of a Chick; tho' there are many other Birds that shew an infinitely greater Sagacity in all the forementioned Particulars.
"But at the same time the Hen, that has all this seeming Ingenuity, (which is indeed absolutely necessary for the Propagation of the Species) considered in other respects, is without the least Glimmerings of Thought or common Sense. She mistakes a Piece of Chalk for an Egg, and sits upon it in the same manner: She is insensible of any Increase or Diminution in the Number of those she lays: She does not distinguish between her own and those of another Species; and when the Birth appears of never so different a Bird, will cherish it for her own. in all these Circumstances which do not carry an immediate Regard to the Subsistence of her self or her Species, she is a very Ideot.
"There is not, in my Opinion, any thing more mysterious in Nature than this instinct in Animals, which thus, rises above Reason, and falls infinitely short of it. It cannot be accounted for by any Properties in Matter, and at the same time works after so odd a manner, that one cannot think it the Faculty of an intellectual Being. For my own part, I look upon it as upon the Principle of Gravitation in Bodies, which is not to be explained by any known Qualities inherent in the Bodies themselves, nor from any Laws of Mechanism, but, according to the best Notions of the greatest Philosophers, is an immediate impression from the first Mover, and the Divine Energy acting in the Creatures."
Now envision this maternal caring and wisdom, widely found in nature, personified and you have one of the rational foundations of religion. For when we associate this loving and dutiful force with God, it is not hard to see how such as the Virgin Mary is arrived at. So that what might for some seem merely a product of mystical imagining has, as its basis, a very real and palpable phenomena in empirical experience.
If you are the happiest one of all, that's fine. That's no problem. Only what are you bothering us for?
If we had money, we could really do some things, couldn't we? I sometimes have ideas and dreams for projects that I think would be beneficial to people, whether to serve philanthropic, educational, or philosophical and scientific, or cultural ends -- that is if I had the financial resources to pursue or achieve them.
Below is list of some of what I would do if I had the money.
If as per Plotinus' All Soul, the universe is and has a soul, then we need never, if we are thoughtful, think of ourselves as being alone.
When we sin we lose ground. (But how much ground can we afford to lose?)
A warning to the monopolists, and the enemies of innovation, free trade and free enterprise! You forget at your peril one of the first principles of digestion, namely what goes in must come out.
The Google quote of the day for Aug. 13, 2006 is this:
"The price of freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is that we must put up with a good deal of rubbish." - Robert Jackson
The natural and logical response to which of course is:
The price of not having freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is that we must put up with even more.
What does contemporary psychiatry and clinical psychology say about demons, devils, and the occult? I can't say I am all that familiar with the literature to properly answer that question. But then perhaps, however, others can.
There are certain skin diseases which expire or go into remission when exposed to sunlight. It is as if they feel it is all right to grow and spread until a law, in the form of sunlight, steps in and says "you are not supposed to be here." They then reply, "sorry, we didn't know" (or at least say so), and then disappear.
There are spirit people like this, and the light to get rid of them with is the truth.
The very worst thing you can do is to continually see good and bad the way they see good and bad. For the result of your doing so will ultimately be your undervaluing true good while honoring what is bad (including what is evil.)
I may be dealing with someone who is very wrong, yet who do or may have good points which put me to shame (if I knew and appreciated them properly.) At the same time it obvious they have suffered and terribly. Therefore although I will want to continue contesting them in the matter at hand with great determination, may I still be just and not treat them as I wouldn't want to be treated in their situation.
In being open minded you risk falling for a bad idea, but that is part of the price of being open minded. Yet it is a price well worth it. For even if you do succumb to such your disposition to be open minded will ultimately empower you to rid yourself of it.
