Damaged Integrity Of Tom Hanks - Refusing To Look Through Masks
Koos Nolst Trenite
28 September 2002
My question was about Tom Hanks not looking through Oprah Winfrey at
the recent Emmy Awards event, with public consequences.
Now addressing him (Tom Hanks, his soul) directly, his true thoughts
are, that he refuses to look through Oprah (he REFUSES to look -
through Oprah's very forceful mask or facade - at her soul). And
thus, in the same way, he must then refuse to look through many
others as well.
It's not that he can't - it is that he refuses to.
It is more comfortable to look at the mask, than to look through it.
It is also highly irresponsible, and his smirk or 'smile' that goes
with it, is simply an expression of how he has to twist the nature
of his soul: It's a kind of irresponsible ridicule without him being
aware of why he does so.
You see it in his early movies. It's a trait by which he keeps
himself unaware, not looking at, refusing to look at very intense
evil that he basically is capable of facing and once freely knew
about. He REFUSES to be aware of it: "Can't be - is not true - must
be rejected even as a possibility."
Added to that is of course that a mask, any mask, is designed to not
be looked through.
As you maybe know, by now, the mask is made up of brilliant Beauty
Energy.*
But, instead of being just attracted to it and hypnotized by it as,
in this case, Oprah intends (and as others intend - they mutually
protect each others' mask) you can just look AT the brilliant Beauty,
instead of admiring it as it demands, that is, instead of being drawn
INTO it.
And you can assign that Beauty back to the persons to whom it
belonged, from whom it was taken. Very simple if you want to, but
you must actually do it, actually take the effort not to be dazzled
by it, but to feel to whom that Beauty actually belongs.
This is one of the many ways of looking through a glittery show
business mask: You look at the glittering face, and you ask yourself
'Is that her own glitter, or is it taken from someone else?'
'How sincere is this glitter?' Which asks the same thing - sincere
equals genuine. (Audrey Hepburn is genuine Beauty, for example. James
Stewart shows, for example, his genuine, own Beauty Energy.)
Insincere is fake, and then the Beauty glitter is not backed up by
real care, but it is backed up by a pretense of care (and sometimes
by lots of charities too, to "prove the care") or by a pretense of
liking others.
The easiest thing (for me) to see, is that real care asks for and
wants real truth, wants true, genuine, own feelings, not 'socially
accepted' masks, not 'socially expected' feelings that create the
biggest effect, not 'caring, that is "proven" - like by saving
kittens or by donating blood or by supporting charities.'
People who care and like, don't show or prove it, they just do it,
like Gary Hobson in 'Early Edition.' HE does not go around showing
or proving to people how much he likes them and cares about them: He
just does! And he also does not ask people's permission for it, nor
does he let himself be guided by getting paid or honored or
recognized for it.
He just cares for people and likes people. And that's a revitalizing
show to look at, it restores genuine liking and genuine care that is
native to most of us: That's how we were, once, naturally, when we
were free of those who pretend and who destroy that. Coincidental or
not, also all the actors in that series are genuine, sincere people.
So, how I first detected Oprah Winfrey, is by using that mechanism -
she does not get to the real truth of her guests, but she even KEEPS
them in their mask or, if they lack a mask, she keeps them in
'social behavior.'
(And her Dr. Phil pretends to get them out of it, by substituting
one 'social behavior' with another 'social behavior.')
That's how I became suspicious, and I started to look at her, and
then of course, I began to see more and more of her, of who she is
(spiritually of course, because people are spirits, souls, whatever
condition they may be in): She makes people blind, unaware, while
pretending or making them believe that she does the opposite for them
- and that pays well.
But it is in direct opposition to my nature and to my work for you,
which is why I noticed it, and why I explain it to you.
I hope I have told this to you now in an understandable way, rather
than in terms of Fine Particle Physics, even though the concepts are
from that field of knowledge.**
Koos Nolst Trenite "Cause Trinity"
human rights philosopher and poet
* 'Envy In The Show Business War' (27 Sept 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0209270305.60ee3a10%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
** 'Mechanics Of Awareness, Perception, Memory And Forgetfulness'
(13 September 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.02091...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
Copyright 2002 by Koos Nolst Trenite - human rights philosopher
and poet
This is 'learnware' - it may not be altered, and it is free for
anyone who learns from it, and (or, if he can't learn from it)
who passes it on unaltered, and with this message included, to
others who might be able to learn from it.
None of my writings may be used, ever, to support any political
or religious agenda, but only to educate and encourage people
to judge undominated and for themselves about any organizations
or individuals.
Send free-of-Envy and free-of-Hate, Beautiful e-mails to:
PlatoWorld at Lycos.com
(address unreadable for internet robots
- replace ' at ' with the '@' symbol)
Parakeet
"Koos Nolst Trenite" <Ambassador...@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
<snip of the biggest load of crap since I went to the circus and say
the elephant>
Next time I think I have no life I will remember this post, that there
is someone out there that takes the internet this seriously that they
would think someone who doesn't know they exist gives a shit about
them.
Almost as bad as Kansan.
<plonk>
David Johnston
L/Jam
"Parakeet" <ihat...@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:an5g0k$b9b4a$1...@ID-145544.news.dfncis.de...
was a lame attempt at an intelligent post.
Tom Betz
145544.news.dfncis.de:
This guy's a former Scientologist who thinks he and he alone has the sercret
to life; a certified nutcase.
You can find out more than you would ever care to know about him at
<http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cj871/koos.html>.
Tom Betz
>
This guy's a former Scientologist who thinks he and he alone has the secret
Morehits4u
>From:
>Ambassador...@hotmail.com (Koos Nolst Trenite)
>
>My question was about Tom Hanks not looking through Oprah Winfrey at
> the recent Emmy Awards event, with public consequences.
< SNIP > AND here I thought that the
only thing wrong with Hanks....was that
he izzzzzzzzz theeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee most
over rated actor in the history of acting......... shows u what i know ..and
no snickering please ":":":":
Linda Harms
ihat...@nospam.org says...
--
Linda Harms
onpe...@aol.com
X
refuse to look at their "soul" but run from most of them all the time if
there was somewhere to run away to and that's coming from a warrior in
spirit.
-X
G. M. Lupo
> My question was about Tom Hanks not looking through Oprah Winfrey at
> the recent Emmy Awards event, with public consequences.
But, she's opaque.
Matt Lupo
--
G. M. Lupo a.k.a. matt at lupo dot com
Up on the hill, they think I'm okay, or so they say...
David B.
>
> Ah. A new crazy person. How exciting.
Yeah, I'm just giddy over the prospect.
Koos Nolst Trenite
Detecting Criminal Minds By Their Intentional Omission Of Truth
19 Aug 2002
version 1.2
Contrary to their reversals of truth and contrary to their
intentionally false accusations, criminally-minded people do
actually know very well what the truth is, else they would not know
what so intensely to fight and destroy and to reverse, else they
would not know whom to falsely accuse.
I will repeat that, because it might be too simple, too un-confusing,
too clearly stated, for it to be grasped at first glance:
Contrary to their reversals of truth, and contrary to their
intentionally false accusations, criminally-minded individuals
actually do know very well what the truth is, else they would not
know what so intensely to hide and fight and destroy and what to
reverse, and else they would not know so well whom to falsely accuse.
This applies to all people who intentionally and knowingly omit
important truth which, by omission of it, causes harm to a person or
to people.
They know very well what the truth is, else they would not omit it so
very loudly.
Again:
They know very well what the truth is, else they would not know what
to omit so very loudly.
So you can go on and on with stating truth and submitting evidence
- but it is for them only a reason the more to deny it or to
invalidate it, and to more fiercely or more cleverly oppose and omit
what is true and relevant.
They reverse things even so far, that your good intentions are
actually called 'bad' intentions by them. And the evidence for your
good intentions is used by them to suggest or even to "prove you
have bad intentions."
These are not pleasant characters. It is their whole conviction and
feeling that any truly good intention - which always involves
connecting to truth - is "a bad intention." It's because you expose
what they are and what they do, it exposes criminals* like them, it
"harms them" and individuals like them - it exposes truth. And
that's too bad indeed ...for them.
And this includes those quiet and seemingly very "rational"
individuals who try to get themselves placed and then accepted as an
"authority," or as "a 'normal' person" and even as "an 'impartial'
person," or even more distasteful than that, as "a 'caring' person."
Generally, and however unjustly to the animal kingdom it may be, such
individuals are - by those who look through them - compared to
various members of the domesticated or wild fauna.
Also these "very 'rational,' 'normal' and 'impartial' " types do know
very well what truth to intentionally omit, and what parts or
details not to omit to still seem credible and accepted.
They are no less criminal.*
They occur in any - also any trusted - profession, in any ideology,
any religion, any science, any race, any nation, any organization:
It's individuals that you have to look at, not just at systems which
hide or foster those individuals.
This then proves by the simple expedient of pointing out their
intentional and knowing, harmful omissions, that these individuals
are - knowing, fully aware, intentional and premeditating -
criminally and willfully, meaning intentionally, insane, that is to
say, destructively irrational, knowingly irrational with the
premeditated and organized intention to cause harm to another.
The observation is further corroborated (supported) usually by their
hidden or open Hate or Envy, which is a main ingredient of all
actual insanity and of all actual criminality.
They don't dare to define Insanity or Criminality - I do.
They don't dare to define Love - I do.
They don't dare to define Hate - I do.
They don't dare to define Tolerance - I do.
They don't dare to define Friendship - I do.
They don't dare to define Truth - I do.
They don't dare to define Civilization - I do.
It's because they are criminals,* and any correct and therefore
all-encompassing definition of the above-listed concepts would
largely contribute to their exposure.
I have spent two life times now to study them, and mind you, it was
no fun - but someone had to do it. And many claimed solutions and
explanations, but, obviously - telling from the state of affairs,
and from the data presented by them - nobody researched deeply
enough to understand why it keeps persisting, nor deeply enough to
detect, to understand and so to prevent crime, war, drug abuse and
similar ills ...before these are 'hitting.'
Not the very wise 'gurus', not the scientists, not the religious
leaders, not the clairvoyants, not the therapists. Everybody was
either too scared, or too irresponsible, or too narrow in scope, or
simply lacking the huge amount of Love and care and the total
absence of Hate, that is apparently necessary to be able to do so.
Koos Nolst Trenité "Cause Trinity"
human rights philosopher and poet
* Footnote:
As can be learned elsewhere in most of my writings, I am defining
'criminals' as individuals who have the permanent intention to
oppose, hinder or destroy Life, for instance per 'Definition of Love
and Hate - a Law of Life' of 29 July 2002
Copyright 2002 by Koos Nolst Trenité - human rights philosopher
and poet
This is 'learnware' - it may not be altered, and it is free for
anyone who learns from it, and (or, if he can't learn from it)
who passes it on unaltered, and with this message included, to
others who might be able to learn from it.
None of my writings may be used, ever, to support any political
or religious agenda, but only to educate and encourage people to
judge undominated and for themselves about any organizations or
individuals.
Send free-of-Envy and free-of-Hate, Beautiful e-mails to:
PlatoWorld at Lycos.com
(address unreadable for internet robots
- replace ' at ' with the '@' symbol)
References:
- Defining Love And Hate - A Law Of Life (29 July 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0208010221.73b4364b%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
- 'Mozart Remedying Spiritual Violence - Fine Particle Physics
- Beauty and Awareness' (20 August 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c172dd8d.02082...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
- The Second Mozart-Effect - Connecting To Your Own Past (3 Sept 2002
- Version 1.1)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.02090...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
- Religious Tolerance (01 Nov 1995, revised 22 Oct 1996)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=199610242259.XAA22021%40hera.easynet.de&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
- A Poem of Love and Adventure (17 July 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0207171309.1696976a%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
Koos Nolst Trenite
Koos Nolst Trenité "Cause Trinity"
human rights philosopher and poet
* Footnote:
As can be learned elsewhere in most of my writings, I am defining
'criminals' as individuals who have the permanent intention to
oppose, hinder or destroy Life, for instance per 'Definition of Love
and Hate - a Law of Life' of 29 July 2002
Copyright 2002 by Koos Nolst Trenité - human rights philosopher
and poet
This is 'learnware' - it may not be altered, and it is free for
anyone who learns from it, and (or, if he can't learn from it)
who passes it on unaltered, and with this message included, to
others who might be able to learn from it.
None of my writings may be used, ever, to support any political
or religious agenda, but only to educate and encourage people to
judge undominated and for themselves about any organizations or
individuals.
Send free-of-Envy and free-of-Hate, Beautiful e-mails to:
PlatoWorld at Lycos.com
(address unreadable for internet robots
- replace ' at ' with the '@' symbol)
Mike
is an "absolute" form of truth that can be known or acknowledge. I
believe that there are various forms of truth. If you're referring to
truth in ideas or belief systems than these would vary according to
the individual. If you're referring to truth in knowledge (i.e. is
the earth round) there must be an absolute in reality, but it can
never be known absolutely by the observer. It can only be a very
strongly held belief based on the evidence presented and sensory
perceptions. As far as people or systems avoiding definitions such as
love, hate, etc. and too narrowly focusing in their explanations, it
happens all the time and everywhere, especially in Western thought
systems. It is probably because the human mind feels more comfortable
working in smaller bites that it can handle more easily. But this
type of behavior leads away from "truth" not closer to it.
Unfortunately, to be able to understand the "truth" of all things we
would have to necessarily be able to factor everything together
simultaneously. This would not seem possible in a universe where our
brains and minds are but an infinitely small part (at least our
perceptions lead us to believe this is so). Anyway, there are many
reductionistic shools of though that suffer irreparably by the faults
you point. Not the least being psychiatry which never dares to touch
on love, hate, friendship or civilization. These "criminals" have
reduced it down to a few measly molecules in one's head. By the way,
your post was pretty heavy for a news group on celebrity gossip, don't
you think?
Mike
Ambassador...@hotmail.com (Koos Nolst Trenite) wrote in message news:<3b6f518d.02092...@posting.google.com>...
grey
---------------------------
A truly cool book:
The World Is Already Yours
Conscious living in the real world
www.alreadyyours.com (sample chapter, etc...)
The Girl Connor
Connor
--
"Why can't they use real numbers instead of
this Roman numeral crap. I mean, look, it's
one minute past X."
~Ozzy Osbourne
Linda Harms
n...@available.com says...
--
Linda Harms
onpe...@aol.com
Ashley Lambert-Maberly
<rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>Ah. A new crazy person. How exciting.
Nope, old crazy person. Haven't seen him recently, but he's been
around (and nuts) forever.
Ashley Lambert-Maberly
ANIM8Rfsk
Just to check the attributions here:
Are you saying David Johnston (aka rgorman) is nuts, or did he call somebody
else nuts?
Marianne Goodland
> Damaged Integrity Of Tom Hanks - Refusing To Look Through Masks
>
When did this nut get out of jail/mental hospital? (I'm assuming one or the
other given that he killed his daughter)
Koos Nolst Trenite
30 September 2002
I simply define truth as 'that what happened' - like a decent police
detective or any sane citizen would define it.
If you want to know how I came to that being a valid definition, then
you would look elsewhere.*
Truth is then, indeed, not ideas or belief systems, but that what
happened and that what is going on, including the motivating
intentions.
Again, it is what a decent police detective, or a sane citizen, would
consider to be truth.
And from it follows what he or she considers to be, and knows to be
correct as, 'being aware of truth.'
(Whoever were the ones who perverted or intentionally put doubt on
these simple facts, is the subject of the history of philosophy and
of religion on Earth - which is a fascinating matter indeed.)
And contrary indeed to what a criminal mind wants you to believe,
it is so that your mind is capable of holding an infinite amount of
data - all at the same time, and in fact it does so.
But the Life Energy to connect to these data and memories** has been
largely taken away, and is constantly being smashed away with great
spiritual violence,* on Earth.
Due to the circumstances here, it is impossible for you to maintain
high awareness for longer duration - the opposition is too
violent.***
So you have to fight, constantly, to REGAIN awareness of truth
achieved earlier.
Most people lose their awareness of their or others'
past, but it's all still there to REGAIN awareness of.
Criminal minds however, do not want to have their acts remembered,
and they do not want to be recognized as to who they are.
So they are then the ones who would smash away from others, the Life
Energy necessary to connect to memories of what happened.
And they would be the ones who fiercely deny the existence of Life
Energy - when they can get away with that without harming their
"authority."
And indeed, this was and is the result of the very extensive and
published research and investigation I have conducted on the subject
(about five thousand published documents) in this life time.
It's all so simple, once you know it.
Truth, as you point out, is not ideas or belief systems, or beliefs.
But it is what happened and what is going on: What has been done
to whom (how and when and where, including Illusions and Delusions
- and these are also projected at a time and at a location), with
what intentions apparent, and with which intentions hidden.
And you can be aware of many, and more and more, pieces of that
truth.
And when you have achieved THAT awareness, then, but only then, can
you start seeing mechanisms and patterns which then can be formed
into Definitions and Laws that fit all those persons and all their
past and present activities.(#)
Nobody on Earth has done that, but some have tried. It is not
different from physics and mathematics, which is the area I came
from. But my motivation was entirely and only to care and to love
people, on a very large scale.
And people needed a certain level of technical advancement for their
well-being, which they can have now, five hundred years after the
Renaissance in which this was postulated or decided by some, taking
up the intention of Plato, depicted in the body of Leonardo da Vinci
in the painting 'The School of Athens', as painted by Raphael.(+)
(Academies that we know now, are derived from the original Academy,
the 'Akademia' in Athens, where Plato - the broad-shouldered one -
taught people to know truth.)
And further they needed a certain level of communication and
cooperation, the starting point of which has been symbolized by the
United Nations Assembly of 10 December 1948. (Which is when I started
this life time, as some of you might know or care to know).
And this responsibility is progressing too.
People are undoing the custom that 'dictators are allowed to murder
their own population or to drive them into hunger or poverty, under
various pretexts of "defenses" and "sovereignty" or even labeled as
"governing".'
By themselves, a population does not work to get starved or get
stolen from or be murdered, you know. But very insane individuals do
bring that about for them, by projecting all kind of Delusions at
them - such as you are familiar with from also recent and current
history.
And you remove such people from a position of "responsibility" for
the population, you remove them especially if they are a head of
state or a head of police or of an army, or of an organization that
affects the lives or well-being of many. Simple criminal law for one
country: Earth. ****
This can now be done, after 10 December 1948.
Further, people need to get some idea of how crime actually is
motivated. And what crimes are actually being committed on them and
by whom and how and why, and this field is still new for them.(#)
Crimes and motivations that are heavily denied and hidden - heavily
denied by whom? Who would want most, to have such things hidden?
Who would deny crimes or blame them on others? Well, let's guess...
Anybody can murder anybody or cause somebody to faint or have a
heart attack or become ill etc. without even being suspected of
murder, AS LONG AS THE PERPETRATOR HEAVILY DENIES IT - that is, he or
she denies the existence of Life Energy* but uses IT to inflict IT
onto someone else's body and soul.
And Life Energy knows no distance.**
(Such as Oprah Winfrey did yesterday in her tantrum, which I became
the unpleasant effect of, to be precise at 16:04 GMT (UTC), after
she learned, by whatever means, of my intentions as posted in '
Damaged Integrity Of Tom Hanks - Refusing To Look Through Masks.'
She is NOT a "very kind and friendly" person, behind her mask.
Tom Hanks, on the other hand, was willing to have his
irresponsibility pointed out to him, and understood it was not "an
attack on him," but quite the contrary, helping him. That was
however a short lived awareness - gratitude is not the quality that
is nurtured in the monied circles. I believe they are made to
consider it a weakness to show gratitude. Now charity, THAT's a
different thing, then you are ABOVE someone - and not humbly
acknowledging that you are indeed owing gratitude to another, but
quite the opposite.
But then still, many are kept under the very forceful Delusion that
"they do not WANT to help me ...who has helped them so much," as one
confessed to me once, and others confessed later.)
In the current condition of the society, it is not against the law
to try and murder someone by the use of projection of harmful Life
Energy.
Yet anybody who becomes ill, etc. is the effect of such activities.
It is "normal" - yet "IT DOES NOT EXIST."
(This is a standard action that you will have to get used to detect:
It's the 'double lie' - mutually exclusive lies with which you are
being manipulated by such people. By it, whatever you think or do is
wrong.)
It is not against the law, to cause someone's immune system to fail
or to cause someone a stroke or a heart attack in this manner, or a
black-out resulting in a car accident, nor to cause someone to
'have to commit suicide,' or to otherwise cause someone to have to
be admitted to a hospital.
It's "normal." Life Energy "does not exist."*****
The truth is of course, that it is NOT normal, and that Life Energy
DOES exist.
Koos Nolst Trenite "Cause Trinity"
human rights philosopher and poet
* 'Mozart Remedying Spiritual Violence - Fine Particle Physics
- Beauty and Awareness' (20 August 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=c172dd8d.02082...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
** 'Mechanics Of Awareness, Perception, Memory And Forgetfulness'
(13 September 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.02091...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
*** 'A Poem of Love and Adventure' (17 July 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0207171309.1696976a%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
**** 'Remembering Because Of Lindsay Lohan, And 'The Parent Trap''
(3 Aug 2002 - issued 24 Sept 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0209241608.52b21330%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
*****'Defining Civilized Society (Definition Part One)' (19 Sept 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0209191842.3ca74aa7%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
(#) 'Defining Love and Hate - A Law of Life (Definition)'
(29 July 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=9ed8f96d.0208041252.218c3dc6%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
(+) RAFFAELLO, Sanzio (Raphael): 'The School of Athens' 1509, Vatican
http://gallery.euroweb.hu/art/r/raphael/4stanze/1segnatu/1/athens.jpg
and
http://gallery.euroweb.hu/art/r/raphael/4stanze/1segnatu/1/athens1.jpg
Copyright 2002 by Koos Nolst Trenite - human rights philosopher
and poet
This is 'learnware' - it may not be altered, and it is free for
anyone who learns from it, and (or, if he can't learn from it)
who passes it on unaltered, and with this message included, to
others who might be able to learn from it.
None of my writings may be used, ever, to support any political
or religious agenda, but only to educate and encourage people
to judge undominated and for themselves about any organizations
or individuals.
Send free-of-Envy and free-of-Hate, Beautiful e-mails to:
PlatoWorld at Lycos.com
(address unreadable for internet robots
- replace ' at ' with the '@' symbol)
indi...@my-deja.com (Mike) wrote in message
news:<71be30bd.02092...@posting.google.com>...
in response to
'Detecting Criminal Minds By Their Intentional Omission Of Truth'
(19 August 2002 - Version 1.2)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.02090...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
> I would agree to much of this, except you seem to espouse that there
> is an "absolute" form of truth that can be known or acknowledged. I
> believe that there are various forms of truth. If you're referring
> to truth in ideas or belief systems, then these would vary according
> to the individual.
> If you're referring to truth in knowledge (i.e. is the earth round)
> there must be an absolute in reality, but it can never be known
> absolutely by the observer. It can only be a very
> strongly held belief based on the evidence presented and sensory
> perceptions. As far as people or systems avoiding definitions such
> as love, hate, etc. and too narrowly focusing in their explanations,
> it happens all the time and everywhere, especially in Western
> thought systems.
> It is probably because the human mind feels more comfortable
> working in smaller bites that it can handle more easily. But this
> type of behavior leads away from "truth," not closer to it.
>
> Unfortunately, to be able to understand the "truth" of all things we
> would have to necessarily be able to factor everything together
> simultaneously. This would not seem possible in a universe where our
> brains and minds are but an infinitely small part (at least our
> perceptions lead us to believe this is so). Anyway, there are many
> reductionistic schools of thought that suffer irreparably by the
> faults you point out.
> Not the least being psychiatry which never dares to touch
> on love, hate, friendship or civilization. These "criminals" have
> reduced it down to a few measly molecules in one's head.
(...)
peacebeuponyou2000
southerner accent down. 'he ..talks...real..slowwww' to mock the
southern drawl. I guess we all know what that racist thinks of
southerners by the way he portrays them.
Immortalist
"peacebeuponyou2000" <peacebeup...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:63267aa5.02093...@posting.google.com...
what if you lost everything, what is your everything, when you find it
again, what if it has past you by, what if you dont like what you lost
anymore, what if you could make such a trip a hit, and make it pass by the
meatheads unkown but still a hit? you are stranded on an island.... you must
survive....
Parakeet
"Immortalist" <Reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:upi5haf...@corp.supernews.com...
With only a volleyball as your friend?
Immortalist
> it
> > again, what if it has past you by, what if you dont like what you
> lost
> > anymore, what if you could make such a trip a hit, and make it pass
> by the
> > meatheads unkown but still a hit? you are stranded on an island....
> you must
> > survive....
> >
> >
>
> With only a volleyball as your friend?
>
...imagine that you are on a camping trip. you wake up in the morning with
an empty stomach and a need to piss. as you go about your bussiness, the sun
beats down on yer head and thirst parches your throat and you quickly come
to appreciate the nearby stream with its cold clean water. but its tim to
head off for the day. you pack your vollyball and look around. your growling
stomach signals the need to eat, you want to venture out but there are
possible dangers, wild animals snakes ans perhaps hostile humans,
now imagine this camping trip last not a few days or weeks (couple hours of
movie) but lasts for your entire lifetime. that is what our anscestors
faced, roaming the savannas of Africa, ee ee oo oo AH HA AH AH!
>
Linda Harms
ihat...@nospam.org says...
The volleyball's name was "Wilson."
Tom Hank's wife's name is Rita WILSON.
Coincidence?
I DON'T THINK SO.
--
Linda Harms
"I was saving up for a divorce, in case I ever got married."
-- It's a Wonderful Life
Linda Harms
they're really long, and I can't read them and watch TV at the same time.
--
Linda Harms
"I was saving up for a divorce, in case I ever got married."
-- It's a Wonderful Life
In article <3b6f518d.02093...@posting.google.com>,
Ambassador...@hotmail.com says...
Koos Nolst Trenite
reasoning all mixed up.
There is no relation that has any value, between being fat and
being evil. And any possible statistical (number of people)
relation is and can only be used to be destructive and fascistic.
(For Definition of 'Fascistic,' see below.)
The same applies to homosexuality.
There is no relation that has any value, between being homosexual
and being evil. And any possible statistical relation is and can
only be used to be destructive and fascistic.
I know two of the most friendly and caring people you can think of,
(a man and a woman, and they are married to each other), and they
both are pathologically very, very fat. They are very kind, very
caring, intelligent and hard-working people. Sometimes they manage
to control and slim their body, but most of the time not. They know
not the cause of their compulsion, and I have not been in contact
with them long enough to take up the issue with them.
To my somewhat limited understanding of homosexuality - which yet
may be considerably bigger than the understanding of those who
practice it, who are 'in it' - the same seems to apply:
That it is a compulsion based on a craving for Life Energy, or the
compulsion to respond to someone else's craving for it.
Many people use heterosexual activity, and also just marriage
itself, for those very compulsions.
Having said this, I can now proceed to the other issue.
The poster (who posted in this thread) I am talking about, IS very
fat (very fat bodied) AND she is extremely ugly, AND violently evil,
and "defending Oprah Winfrey" - by knowingly posting intentional,
criminal libel.**
And she thinks, she is made to believe by others, that her body
condition must be "the cause of her being evil," while at the same
time, she feels, that that can't be the truth.
I explained to someone the behavior of a similar person in another
newsgroup:
There, I write in response to:
> Your definition of truth is "that which happened". I am sorry to
> disagree with you but I feel as though you are using faulty logic.
> "That which happened" is a perception by at least one person. As
> you know, perceptions and opinion walk hand in hand with each
> other. So truth is just an idealic notion with no true basis.
You are confusing perception, and condition [state of affairs].
That confusion, or that reversal, of perception and condition, is
promoted by criminal minds.
They want, that you think, that only what you see or perceive
is happening.
They want not only that you think so, but they want, that you are
completely convinced, that what happened, is "only what you saw or
perceived or noticed."
(When you want to talk about logic, I suggest that you read the
references I specifically pointed to. And that you read the
whole first post.)*
Example:
In the case of posters who intentionally post criminal libel:
They murdered someone, whether you saw it or remember it, or not,
they still did, as I explain below.
That's what happened - whether they murdered one or two hundred
thousand people, or two million people, and whether it was in this
or in a previous life time, that does not matter. It happened. They
did it. Whether it was in Treblinka or in the Gulag or in China or
in Cambodia or in Egypt or on Mars, it is what happened.
And then they go and accuse decent people of murdering others, in
order to divert from themselves being looked at and found out.
They know or feel what they did, else they would not want that the
truth, that what happened, is denied so violently.
Else they would not want so vehemently to falsely accuse decent and
innocent people, let alone burn them at the stake...
But truth is what happened - whether it is perceived or not.
Criminal minds reverse that... for very obvious reasons.
I expose them because I love people. I protect people.
They hate people and they don't want to be exposed nor stopped.
They try to drive people insane with INTENTIONAL lies and
INTENTIONAL, criminal, libelous reversals of truth, reversals of
what happened. THEY are the murderers, as I described above.
They know or feel what they did, else they would not want that the
truth, that what happened, is reversed so violently, else they
would not want to falsely accuse and destroy decent and innocent
people so fiercely.
Get it now? It's all a matter of facing the extreme evil and the
extreme ugliness of criminal minds and their deeds.
That's the logic of it.
Koos Nolst Trenite "Cause Trinity"
human rights philosopher and poet
* 'Crime Versus Truth - What's Happening In Our Society'
(30 Sept 2002)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.0210010006.5ee5b38%40posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
** 'Detecting Criminal Minds By Their Intentional Omission Of Truth'
(19 August 2002 - Version 1.2)
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b6f518d.02090...@posting.google.com&oe=utf-8&output=gplain
- Definition of Fascistic: Practiced ideas like "They are worthless,"
and "We are good" and (not voiced) "Truth will be whatever lie
is projected most forcefully and cleverly" - in order to blind
people so as to make them work for and defend and protect evil
individuals, and to make them not work for, or utterly destroy,
decent and caring people.
marika
> One poster who thinks she is evil because she is very fat, has her
> reasoning all mixed up.
>
> There is no relation that has any value, between being fat and
> being evil. And any possible statistical (number of people)
> relation is and can only be used to be destructive and fascistic.
> (For Definition of 'Fascistic,' see below.)
I just watched Jimmy Neutron the Bomb Kid on Nik, the one that Tom
Hanks voices, and they have a fat kid on that show who talks about
llamas alot. And his kinship with bears - he calls himself a sleeved
one. Presumably he is also very hairy? So in this one episode, Tom
Hanks Nuetron Kid decides it is too hot but instead of going into the
cute girls's swimming pool, because that would be terrible, he
quantamizes a bottle of sunscreen because the fat kid mentions how it
blocks the sun, and then Jimmy The Bomb shoots a guided missile full
of quantimized spf50 at the sun. And so he blocks it and he becomes
like all the evil villains in all the movies about terrorists from the
70's and maybe Austin Powers, he changes the weather but he stupidly
forgets to build himself and island to hide on where the weather is
good, and he stupidly forgets to ask the presidents of the wolrd for
one billion dollars apiece. It is snowing and snowing and snowing and
snowing. So he has to change the weather back because he is too cold
(but he doesn't realize how this gets him out of school for a really
good long time) but he doesn't know how to change it back. Til his
fat very pale by the way friend says that he wears sunblock eevn in
the cold because the rays are still damaging to him, but that it
washes off because of the sweat. So Neutron the Hanks kid reads the
label o fthe bottle and it says that the spf50 washes off with water.
HA! So how come the snow did not wash it off the horizon. ALl that
water mist shoulda did the spf50 in.
So it turns out the role of the fat kid it appears is to constantly
say congenial things, which the bomb kid then misinterprets and always
causes something evil.
So the message of this child's show is that no fat people are not
evil, it is skinny little boy geniuses that are evil.
mk5000
"Your rich relative cannot really help you ..."--stuart brook
peacebeuponyou2000
is super-charged nerve food and the loss of it causes insanity, then,
when women get it put into their bodies, it probably energizes them.
It is a loss for men, but a infusion of energy for women, or men. It
is a gift of life.
I have thought that the reason some boy children may be born more
masculine and some women are born more feminine may have to do with
sex during pregnancy. Guys who pump their wife full of semen during
their pregnancy will infuse large amounts of testosterone into their
wife's blood stream, therefore making the girl child more butch, or
the male child more masculine. Just a theory.
wait, why am i talking to this homo?