Crime Versus Truth - What's Happening In Our Society
Koos Nolst Trenite
Crime Versus Truth - What's Happening In Our Society
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.
(...)
brian
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 hapened" is a perception by atleast one person. As you
know perseptions and opinion walk hand and hand with each other so
truth is just an idealic notion with no true basis.
William Mullin
>news:<3b6f518d.0210...@posting.google.com>...
<snip>
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cj871/koos.html
Koos Nolst Trenite: A Footnote
In late 1994, a netizen named Koos Nolst Trenite posted the first of a bizarre
series of posts to alt.religion.scientology and alt.clearing.technology. These
posts purported to be transcripts of auditing sessions conducted by Koos on
none other than L. Ron Hubbard himself. In these sessions, the shade of
"Hubbard" claimed that he was returning from beyond the grave to resume
control of the Church of Scientology.
Koos' posts became more bizarre as time went on. At some point he and
"Hubbard" had some sort of falling out, and he began posting all sorts of
vitriol about him. He "audited" various other Scientology officials,
celebrities such as John Travolta, Michael Jackson, and Diana Ross, and even
some of the critics of Scientology posting to a.r.s. If anyone dared to mock
him or even disagree with him, they were summarily declared an "Institutional
Case" or even a Suppressive Person.
This sort of behaviour earned Koos the Usenet Kook of the Month Award for
February 1995.
Sadly, Koos is not a well man, and it was learned in late 2000 that he was
abusing his family, and he actually killed his daughter before being confined
to a mental institution.
Carey Gregory
>> *huge snip*
>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 hapened" is a perception by atleast one person. As you
>know perseptions and opinion walk hand and hand with each other so
>truth is just an idealic notion with no true basis.
Is the delete key broken on your computer? 280 lines of quote
followed by a 5 line response.... sheesh.
And does the ridiculous cross-posting give you a tiny little hint that
it's a troll? Yes, no, maybe?
Koos Nolst Trenite
> 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.
> 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.
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 Cambodja 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, libellous 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
Copyright 2002 by Koos Nolst Trenite
William Mullin
Koos Nolst Trenite <Ambassador...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>You are confusing perception and condition.
>
>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.
An institutional Koos makes the most illogical statements
AS IF THEY ARE NORMAL STATEMENTS.
The Institutional Koos says:
''I have built a bridge from earth to heaven,
a most wonderous bridge
made entirely from bricks of chocolate fudge,
and elephants form part of the equipment;
for three and sixpence you too can cross
my bridge to the skies.''
You respond: ''Koos, your bridge is 30 cms long made from lego bricks,
and anyway it has just fallen over.''
The Institutional Koos says:
''a few hours of specialised auditing
will raise your tone,
so deeply invalidated by space invaders in moonsuits
brandishing plastic pepper-mills that go BapBapBapBapBap
that, in your pain, you refuse to remember
the past lives on your bleater-track...
raise your tone from DISBELIEF to UTTER CREDULITY
on the chart of emotions,
so that you too can now see my bridge is millions of miles long
and reaches to heaven itself.''
You respond: ''Koos, your bridge is 30 cms long made from lego bricks,
and anyway it has just fallen over.''
The Instutional Koos says:
''You do not realise, but your body in this world
of MEST [Matter, Energy, Space and Time],
is animated by two spirits which reincarnate,
the genetic-spirit and the bleata-spirit:
all illness comes from the accumulated telegrams
of your genetic-spirit,
from the various creatures we evolved from
such as molluscs and seaweed and clockwork plastic frogs.
Only cross my wonderful bridge, for a very reasonable toll,
and it will all become CLEAR(TM) to you.''
You respond: ''Koos, your bridge is 30 cms long made from lego bricks,
and anyway it has just fallen over.''
An institutional Koos makes the most illogical statements
AS IF THEY ARE NORMAL STATEMENTS,
and posts them interminably on alt.religion.scientology,
where he is greeted by annoyance and derision from the other users.
The Institutional Koos says:
''This is indeed a wonderful bridge,
the only bridge to true enlightenment,
and if I used a few of Yutta's old lego-bricks in the construction,
that is no handicap to a true believer.
For I am Ron's Dog Inspector,
and I am channelling the great phat philosopher
from his new home in the next galaxy.''
You Respond:
''Koos, you are channelling nothing but your own schizophrenia.
Even if this clam stuff were true, I doubt you are
channelling ElRon Phlubbard,
because Xemu would have sent him back
as a butt-thetan on a fruitbat long ago.
But in truth he is dead, Jim --erm, Koos--and the brain which computed
all this lunacy you cherish, which was the only channel of those
thoughts, is now returned to its mineral elements
and feeding the tomato plants he once audited. And
by the way, Koos, your bridge is 30 cms long made from lego bricks,
and anyway it has just fallen over.''
Who is this institutional Koos, who spews his spam
all over 'Alt.Religion.Scientology' (the Internet
computer network newsgroup)?
Well, he makes all sorts of fancy claims,
but the truth is he was always a little bit loonie,
borrowing people's paintings without paying for them
and burning them instead of returning them.
And the Curse of Scientology used him up and drove him PTS3
[which is clamspeak for 'barking mad'], and when he
was to crazy even for them, threw him out.
There are times when Koos behaves as if he is borderline sane,
and actually makes coherent replies to other people's messages;
he does not ALL the time respond as institutional.
His utterances are somewhat more predictable.
The borderline instutional Koos says:
''Well, OK, the truth is there is some lego used in the construction,
and it is not quite as large as I would like it ---
it is still under construction,
I will ask my cousins for their old lego kits to add to it.
But it is only a metaphor for the true bridge, which is in your mind,
and anyway I'm doing a special offer on the toll this week:
four four and tuppence farthing, I will let you
not only go up the bridge to heaven,
but back down to earth afterwards--two crossings
for the price of one.''
At these times, he makes more predictable utterances.
He is still strictly institutional,
but somehow one can know what he will say.
He doesn't say the totally baffling things
the fully institutional Koos
states AS IF THEY WERE NORMAL STATEMENTS.
This is why people who enter this newsgroup,
'Alt.Religion.Scientology', tend to get upset and repelled:
It is just too unbelievably insane
what the institutional Koos says or writes.
It is too unbelievable someone people who can read and write
and who knows the English language
posts up such complete bollocks
AS IF ANYONE ON A.R.S ACTUALLY WANTED TO READ IT !
It isn't that I actively dislike Koos;
I just wish he'd take his drivelling nonsense somewhere quiet
and stick it back up the orifice it came out of
to save me the trouble of killfiling it.
Scientology has always attracted some pretty strange people --
you have only to look at the geek who founded it ---
but Koos is a bit much even for the church of clams.
--
That would be hilarious if Bush won the popular vote but lost the
Electoral College.
That would be fuunnnnnnnnnnay!
Tim (Skidmark) Brown, Ralph Nader "supporter"
ban...@iglou.com