Previous William Thomas Sherman Info Page postings, quotes, observations, etc.
For the Orientals it's the air. For the Indians it's the earth. For the Aryans it's the sea. For the Semites and Blacks it's the fire; and that is why naturally it is important for each to be in tune with each and all.
Although the actual singing artists, somewhat strangely, are not named, here, again via YouTube, is another favorite, "Over the Hills and Faraway." No, this is not the more familiar for some Led Zeppelin title, but rather that from John Gay's "The Beggar's Opera" (1728.) If there is one thing, however, which I have just about always hated about this song is that it's so very brief. But perhaps someone someday will perform and or compose something more full and that musically fills out or elaborates upon it (who knows?)
The book title you fear most ---
The Greatest Story Ever Told: the autobiography of Megalomania the Great, with a foreword by the ghoulish magician.
Also, by chance, I came across the following while searching the web yesterday --
"...Cons: Movie sometimes makes a thumping noise."
What comes around (as a gift from God) goes around -- that is, if they let it (or what's a soul brother for?) My question then is why should we have to answer to them if they can be obliterated and wiped out by the military?
JFK shooting investigator Mark Lane, and whom we mentioned recently, did, as some of you already know, a film documentary (1967) that accompanied his book "Rush to Judgment" and which remains to this day one of the most useful and very best, possibly the best, of its kind. Notwithstanding, it suffers at certain points from what I feel is a certain (albeit at the time the film was made perhaps understandable) unfairness and bias against the Dallas Police (i.e. the latter taken as a general whole.) Specifically in what on YouTube is part 8 of the 90+ minute film, at points 3:40 and 8:35, with the respective interviews with Nancy Hamilton and Joseph W. Johnson, both former Carousel Club employees, and both of whom also I personally would suspect of being somehow under the influence at the time, and in error in their testimony. They (and apparently others also) claim Ruby knew half of the 1200 men on the Dallas Police force; with Police Chief Jesse Curry in response saying only 4 men of the dept. were known to have any off duty contact with Ruby and his club -- quite a divergence from the Hamilton and Johnson assertion.
Let's say, at least for the sake of argument, that Hamilton and Johnson's versions were the less than correct of the two varying accounts; what might we educe as the cause of their error? The following is a list of possible explanations:
1) They were prompted to lie or distort the facts by "someone" but for what they believed was a "good" purpose in doing so.
2) Men masquerading as DPD officers frequented the club (this fact being known or unknown to Ruby himself.)
My point then is to suggest how someone might not fully or at all be telling the truth yet in their own mind feel justified that they were actually doing good by acting so; while bringing out the other possibility that they are telling the truth as they know it but were purposely deceived by some other. In any case and as ever, you can judge for yourself.
Although, in fairness to Lane's early account, Curry looked very bad at the time of Oswald's arrest and seemed like one of those ready to join the lynch mob; another view of him, years later, is seen in this clip in which he sounds a good deal more credible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT4Gy6_rt_o
Last, just in passing and on a separate but related note and in case you missed it, I came across this clip of Connally's doctor at Parkland saying that the bullet had not yet been removed from the Governor's leg. If this statement is correct then presumably the bullet found on the stretcher is not what the Warren Commission believed it to be.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ8NJwq58Fg
If you want my two cents, you can skip this "2012" swindle ("from the makers of 'Independence Day'") with here being basically the same thing or idea only done much, much better.
The way "these" people see things is usually so bad that in many instances they would be better off being fully blind, rather than only partially so. A perfect case in point is their views or perspective on romance and sex, and which by default of their "doing the wrong thing a certain way" principle takes no or little account of love. For many of you at least, I don't need to elaborate on to what I am referring or what that is all about. What could be more utterly disgusting and nauseating? So that in response all the more reinforced in us is the notion that romance, including sex, outside the spirit is lust and lust too far so removed is not unlike feeding out of a dumpster; where the chances of comforting or emotionally nourishing yourself and or someone else are less while, at the same time, the risk of making yourself and or another sick are drastically increased.
If we have to ask of this spirit person "is he a god (or of God) or a wretch requiring our pity?" then you can easily see how the question answers itself.
For convenience sake, I've now gathered my collective remarks and analyses respecting the JFK murder (and which were previously posted among the "Oracles") in a .pdf document that can be dowloaded here; and if and as such observations and related comments arise in future they will be added to it in the way of updates.
Despite it's use of Saturday Evening Post thematic graphics and Scott Joplin ragtime music from the turn of the century for a gangster oriented film set in 1936 Chicago -- or that to watch it today it looks a lot like some run-of-the-mill mid-70's movie you used be able to catch on your local channel 11 or 13 on Saturday afternoon, "The Sting" if you can believe it took home SEVEN Academy Awards. For me, even when it first came out, the film marked the beginning of Hollywood trying to pass off phony-baloney on us as high quality while overtly making crime and con-artists seem cute and attractive (not unlike "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" which this film, of course, harkens to.) It was also, as it turns out, roughly about this same time that the "Spielberg" people were commencing to take over the movie industry -- then going on to make their dramatic debut with "Jaws." In any event, what a depressing memory it is to recall it all now.
A personal note to s. and gm.: I'm the "Big Mick." You are Robert Redford and Paul Newman. Which among other things, Redford and Newman, means you cannot be pulling this on me, since I can have you put in concrete foot-warmers and thrown into Puget Sound.
Some good news (for once)! The economy is moving again; as proof of which see here. (Allow sufficient time for the page to fully load.)
The ghost of Satan: "Business! Megalomania was my business. Self-pity, envy, jealousy were my business; avarice, ruthlessness, arrogance, and cruelty, were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"
Later Note. The theology (or more appropriately, propaganda) justifying or excusing all this, as commonly understood by many, is that Jesus feels sorry for Megalomania the Great, and so the latter is to be indulged and put up with -- so mum's the word. But not to worry, oh you who suffer at the monster's (or his henchmen's) hands! For you will be entitled to a special Heavenly Gift® for your woes and troubles. On the other hand, for those who will not so cooperate and accommodate this arrangement, you are to blame for the pain it predictably can be expected you will incur. And this is what, again for many, is passed off (and falsely, of course, by M the G himself, etc.; using "angels," visions of false heaven and similar) as Christianity.
"My God, I'm hit!" -- JFK as quoted by Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman (though no one else present testified to the same exclamation.)
"This fellow Kellerman is about as low a man as you can find, but he was about as dumb as an ox." -- LBJ.
Later Note. BTW, I learned of the Kellerman testimony from a 1966 "Firing Line" interview by William F. Buckley with attorney Mark Lane; which you can see at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmNAwI5DVdQ. It is actually quite fascinating, on different levels, and among others things disproves and discredits the scorning, of such as Noam Chomsky, that Buckley (leaving your politics aside) wasn't actually witty (except by reputation.)
