ART MATRIX - LIGHTLINK
PO 880 Ithaca, NY 14851-0880
(607) 277-0959 Voice
(607) 277-8913 Fax
(607) 277-5026 Modems
homer@lightlink.com E-mail
jes@lightlink.com E-mail
07/21/11 6:17pm
Copyright (C) 2011 Homer W. Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
This material may be copied freely.
FOR THE EYES OF HIS HOLINESS, THE DALAI LAMA.
Dear Sir,
Please find enclosed a description of a new discovery about the
nature of consciousness, the consequences of which are probably
uncountable.
There are two complete versions, one for the average person in the
VAL directory, and one written for Arthur C. Clarke before his death a
few years ago.
If this material is not for you, feel free to give it to anyone
that might be able to benefit from it.
This is on the web at http://www.lightlink.com/theproof.
There is also some fun stuff on fractals.
Yours in good faith,
Homer Wilson Smith homerwsmith@lightlink.com
Jane Elizabeth Staller jes@lightlink.com
www.lightlink.com
www.artmatrix.com
www.clearing.org
www.adore.com
www.lightlink.com/theproof
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Tue Nov 22 00:06:01 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/clarke/README.txt
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
_______________________________________________
Clear-L mailing list
Clear-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/clear-l
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Monday, November 21, 2016
LOGIC2 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>The foregoing 2 posts by Homer refer to a way of thinking that's too
>limited for what I want to say.
If you use an IS statement to say something, you MUST remain
inside of the boundaries of the definition of IS and IS NOT.
It is quite possible that language and IS statments are not
suitable for what you want to say, but THEN DON'T USE LANGUAGE AND IS
STATEMENTS TO SAY IT.
>I could spend all day refuting each point
>and have comments at every juncture, but frankly I don't have the
>inclination and feel it would be fruitless for reaching agreement even if
>I documented all my comments. While your presentation may be persuasive in
>one sense, mine would be persuasive in another sense.
Well until we see a presentation on how Logic is useless and
without value, I doubt we will see how persuasive you can be.
I don't think you can do it.
I think if you tried you would make a laughing stock out of
yourself.
>In scn terms, the demand that I adhere to those standards without
>qualification "ARC-breaks" me and "my itsa line" in in real life.
>Anyone else is welcome to their own viewpoint. If there's enough
>misalignment on fundamentals, there are some futures you just can't build
>together. Why try to build a future on fundamentals you don't agree with?
People who build their futures on illogic are not sane.
All I ask is that if you use statements that PRESUME logic is
valid and useful, then obey the laws of that logic.
The minute you say ".... is true" or ".... is false" you
have asserted that logic is valid because you issuing IS statements,
If you assert that logic is valid and then deny logic is valid,
you are talking nonsense that not even you understand.
The very statement "Logic is not valid" is an IS statement
that assumes logic is valid to even make its statement.
You may know what you are trying to say, but you aren't saying
it.
A no one else can get it either.
Except those that like to fancy their own hallucinations of what
you mean are similar to yours.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Nov 21 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic2.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYMyl7URT1lqxE3HERAi6kAKCbFPtwhaYQCrtnB0SQfK9xq9F8DQCfQHCy
YM+FY1DwTzXNxvUT4Nqd4XY=
=UWpA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
CB Willis (cbwillis@adore.lightlink.com) wrote:
>The foregoing 2 posts by Homer refer to a way of thinking that's too
>limited for what I want to say.
If you use an IS statement to say something, you MUST remain
inside of the boundaries of the definition of IS and IS NOT.
It is quite possible that language and IS statments are not
suitable for what you want to say, but THEN DON'T USE LANGUAGE AND IS
STATEMENTS TO SAY IT.
>I could spend all day refuting each point
>and have comments at every juncture, but frankly I don't have the
>inclination and feel it would be fruitless for reaching agreement even if
>I documented all my comments. While your presentation may be persuasive in
>one sense, mine would be persuasive in another sense.
Well until we see a presentation on how Logic is useless and
without value, I doubt we will see how persuasive you can be.
I don't think you can do it.
I think if you tried you would make a laughing stock out of
yourself.
>In scn terms, the demand that I adhere to those standards without
>qualification "ARC-breaks" me and "my itsa line" in in real life.
>Anyone else is welcome to their own viewpoint. If there's enough
>misalignment on fundamentals, there are some futures you just can't build
>together. Why try to build a future on fundamentals you don't agree with?
People who build their futures on illogic are not sane.
All I ask is that if you use statements that PRESUME logic is
valid and useful, then obey the laws of that logic.
The minute you say ".... is true" or ".... is false" you
have asserted that logic is valid because you issuing IS statements,
If you assert that logic is valid and then deny logic is valid,
you are talking nonsense that not even you understand.
The very statement "Logic is not valid" is an IS statement
that assumes logic is valid to even make its statement.
You may know what you are trying to say, but you aren't saying
it.
A no one else can get it either.
Except those that like to fancy their own hallucinations of what
you mean are similar to yours.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Nov 21 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/logic2.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYMyl7URT1lqxE3HERAi6kAKCbFPtwhaYQCrtnB0SQfK9xq9F8DQCfQHCy
YM+FY1DwTzXNxvUT4Nqd4XY=
=UWpA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
ADORE574 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE NO CASE
Bud McDermot <self@location.org> wrote about Phil:
> I really would like to hear you explain the difference between the
> philosophy or belief system, and the fraud, crime wave etc.
> I've always gathered that you believed scientology had a flawed basis,
> but what is a better view of it?
> It would be good if you were more communicative of this rather than just
> appearing to emphasize one thing to achieve your point.
Forget it, Phil is a computing psychotic, dramatizing endlessly
about his hallucinations on the subject of Hubbard's more endless evil
intentions.
Everyone has a case, but to Phil, Hubbard was not only a dog pc,
but also a dog messiah.
Whether OT III happened or not, or some equivalent, is an
interesting question, it deserves further study and respect, not
ridicule.
Dropping down from Eternality and peace into Immortality and fear
of hell forever, and further down into mortality and fear of death
forever, is way worse than any physical or mental implant that one could
throw at a being anyhow.
Black V's are Black Infinity cases.
The Black V has no future, *THAT'S* what he can't or won't see.
Most of the nut cases on this group are "dramatizing NO" cases. NO
space opera, NO implants, NO war, NO other civilizations, NO melding, NO
joining, NO merging, NO compacting of beings together, NO nothing. They
have withdrawn from so many different places, times and universes, that
the only place they can be is in their heads.
Get on a meter and assess for how many 'NO's there have been.
Interiorization is exteriorization from everywhere else by going
deeper in.
Consider the sargasso sea, there you find Phil spouting off on a
log of driftwood amongst the seaweed and dead fish who listen
attentively.
People thus live their lives as dots in a universe of endless
universes.
Eventually they all become marbles on the thetan plane, rolling
around and around the drain to hell.
Run,
Spot Alone. Spot NO Alone.
Spot Together. Spot NO Together.
Denial of some cosmic history or another is one great big co
excused withhold, if you won't mention how I did this to others, I won't
mention how you did this to me.
Who did what to whom in the end is irrelevant, that's a desert of
death with no results because the being's own choice is at cause.
And above that there is no cause, as not only is the static
spaceless and timeless, it is also causeless.
Hubbard made a serious mistake in defining the static as spaceless,
timeless, massless, and energyless, but nonetheless had cause, could
make postulates. We are *WAY* down from static by the time the illusion
of cause comes into play. I mean so far into the abyss, that we have
forgotten we jumped, who we are, where we came from, *THEN* we get the
idea of cause.
"Man this place is dark, I think I will be cause around here!"
A zillion years later he's digging tar out of the bottom of the
abyss with a pick thinking "Who or what is cause around here and why is
it such an asshole?" Adore calls that religious insanity.
Run,
Cause - NO Cause
Causelessness - NO Causelessness
Timeless Cause - NO Timeless Cause
Causeless Time - NO Causeless time.
Phil has been asked politely to stop spewing his garbage on
alt.clearing.technology a number of times, he often goes away for a
while to 'preen his integrity' as he calls it, another notch in front of
a crazy house mirror, but then he comes back just as fucked up as
before.
You can tell this because he puts down Scn, without constructing
something better, faster and more accurate.
Nothing ever changes with the psycho.
We been up to something these last zillion years, what was it?
Don't like the axioms? Then build some new ones that don't start
with Q1: Hubbard was a nut case, Q2: Hubbard was an evil nut case, Q3:
Hubbard was a con man, and Q4: everyone interested in him has been
conned and brainwashed by him.
Perhaps something like the following.
Q1: Hubbard had a case.
Q2: Case is fear of future.
Q3: Future is an illusion.
Q4: Seek Eternality via Spacelessness, Timelessness, Causelessness
and Effectlessness.
Take 10 minutes of *NOTHING*.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Mar 16 16:29:15 EDT 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Nov 19 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore574.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYMIZ7URT1lqxE3HERAtreAKChx2Q0KKHY6L2QXp9fRNc6wZnzuwCfeyqR
pz/oMarxjUpZ4sf6faNPo/E=
=E3L1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE NO CASE
Bud McDermot <self@location.org> wrote about Phil:
> I really would like to hear you explain the difference between the
> philosophy or belief system, and the fraud, crime wave etc.
> I've always gathered that you believed scientology had a flawed basis,
> but what is a better view of it?
> It would be good if you were more communicative of this rather than just
> appearing to emphasize one thing to achieve your point.
Forget it, Phil is a computing psychotic, dramatizing endlessly
about his hallucinations on the subject of Hubbard's more endless evil
intentions.
Everyone has a case, but to Phil, Hubbard was not only a dog pc,
but also a dog messiah.
Whether OT III happened or not, or some equivalent, is an
interesting question, it deserves further study and respect, not
ridicule.
Dropping down from Eternality and peace into Immortality and fear
of hell forever, and further down into mortality and fear of death
forever, is way worse than any physical or mental implant that one could
throw at a being anyhow.
Black V's are Black Infinity cases.
The Black V has no future, *THAT'S* what he can't or won't see.
Most of the nut cases on this group are "dramatizing NO" cases. NO
space opera, NO implants, NO war, NO other civilizations, NO melding, NO
joining, NO merging, NO compacting of beings together, NO nothing. They
have withdrawn from so many different places, times and universes, that
the only place they can be is in their heads.
Get on a meter and assess for how many 'NO's there have been.
Interiorization is exteriorization from everywhere else by going
deeper in.
Consider the sargasso sea, there you find Phil spouting off on a
log of driftwood amongst the seaweed and dead fish who listen
attentively.
People thus live their lives as dots in a universe of endless
universes.
Eventually they all become marbles on the thetan plane, rolling
around and around the drain to hell.
Run,
Spot Alone. Spot NO Alone.
Spot Together. Spot NO Together.
Denial of some cosmic history or another is one great big co
excused withhold, if you won't mention how I did this to others, I won't
mention how you did this to me.
Who did what to whom in the end is irrelevant, that's a desert of
death with no results because the being's own choice is at cause.
And above that there is no cause, as not only is the static
spaceless and timeless, it is also causeless.
Hubbard made a serious mistake in defining the static as spaceless,
timeless, massless, and energyless, but nonetheless had cause, could
make postulates. We are *WAY* down from static by the time the illusion
of cause comes into play. I mean so far into the abyss, that we have
forgotten we jumped, who we are, where we came from, *THEN* we get the
idea of cause.
"Man this place is dark, I think I will be cause around here!"
A zillion years later he's digging tar out of the bottom of the
abyss with a pick thinking "Who or what is cause around here and why is
it such an asshole?" Adore calls that religious insanity.
Run,
Cause - NO Cause
Causelessness - NO Causelessness
Timeless Cause - NO Timeless Cause
Causeless Time - NO Causeless time.
Phil has been asked politely to stop spewing his garbage on
alt.clearing.technology a number of times, he often goes away for a
while to 'preen his integrity' as he calls it, another notch in front of
a crazy house mirror, but then he comes back just as fucked up as
before.
You can tell this because he puts down Scn, without constructing
something better, faster and more accurate.
Nothing ever changes with the psycho.
We been up to something these last zillion years, what was it?
Don't like the axioms? Then build some new ones that don't start
with Q1: Hubbard was a nut case, Q2: Hubbard was an evil nut case, Q3:
Hubbard was a con man, and Q4: everyone interested in him has been
conned and brainwashed by him.
Perhaps something like the following.
Q1: Hubbard had a case.
Q2: Case is fear of future.
Q3: Future is an illusion.
Q4: Seek Eternality via Spacelessness, Timelessness, Causelessness
and Effectlessness.
Take 10 minutes of *NOTHING*.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Sun Mar 16 16:29:15 EDT 2008
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sat Nov 19 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore574.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYMIZ7URT1lqxE3HERAtreAKChx2Q0KKHY6L2QXp9fRNc6wZnzuwCfeyqR
pz/oMarxjUpZ4sf6faNPo/E=
=E3L1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
ECO7 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Now I know you all don't like cops, but we have one on our system
and on this list, F. Brackin, and although I imagine that he and I
don't see eye to eye on about a million and a half different things,
he's a good guy and definitely one of Ithaca's finest.
As part of the effort to make downtown Ithaca safer for crime, I
had discussed with him providing an anonymous crime reporting e-mail
address, so that people could report crime without fear of
repercussion. This includes crime within the city and within the
police department itself.
I know this sounds like a 'Squeal Line' and frankly it is. But
it's meant to give good people a safe method of reporting crime to the
cops. However since it is anonymous, bad people can also abuse it by
false reports or turning in good people who happen to be toking or
whatever.
We haven't implemented it yet, but its still something I want to
do.
Comments are welcome.
Homer
You can stop reading now and hit the next button, there is
nothing further for intelligent mature reasonable or civilized people
below this line.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
</rant on>
THE SQUEAL LINE
Marijuana happens to be the Holy Sacrament of my religion.
Alcohol on the other hand is the Unholy Anti Sacrament.
Drugs should not be illegal in any case, because they are a
health problem and not a criminal problem. It's not criminal to smoke
a flower or snort some poppy dust.
Drugs may be bad for you, but they are not criminal.
Knowing that drugs are bad for you, and going out and selling
them to people in order to get them hooked against their will is
criminal.
But going out into a forest, and picking up a hooch bud and
smoking it is not a criminal thing to do.
Criminality is a very clear cut thing.
Criminality is the effort to enforce on you an unfair exchange
transaction against your will, either through force or deceit, treason
and treachery.
For example it is the effort to convince you that you are about
to engage in a fair exchange transaction that is in fact a rip off,
and is intended to be a rip off.
Killing you outright of course is the ultimate rip off, as is
enslaving you, either spiritually, mentally, emotionally or
physically. Drugs can be a form of physical enslavement.
Criminals can't produce, they can only consume.
They are the picture perfect dictionary definition of "Consumes
more than he produces."
Once they run out of their initial allotment of energy, they have
to consume what others produce in order to keep going.
The last effort of a spiritually dying being trying to give, is
to take.
Criminality is an effort to produce by taking your production
instead.
This is very clear cut, very mathematical. The criminal always
knows what he is doing.
The criminal will tell you that you have lots of duties and no
rights, and that he has lots of rights and no duties.
He can't produce by sowing, so he tries to 'produce' by reaping
what you have sown.
The criminal tries to make his, the fruits of your labor against
your will.
People will tell you how bad drugs are for people. In general
this is true. It is true of alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, speed, heroin
and novocaine.
In lesser degrees it is true of pot, shrooms and LSD.
Drugs are poisons that have a benefit. Thus they form a
dangerous double edged sword.
Some drugs like cocaine are very very bad for you. Cocaine in
particular makes you feel like you had perfect parents. It allows you
to feel like you had a perfect upbringing with no trauma or
unreasonableness at all, and you can look on all the nonsense of other
people with understanding. But then when you come down, its an
electronic hell that is hard to describe.
Cocaine can also kill you, you can do too much of it. You can
think if you do just a little bit more, you will hit that perfect
high, its like a inifinitely annoying little itch that just needs to
be scratched, and you do that little bit more and your central nervous
system just collapses and bye bye being.
Rats in a cage will drink cocaine impregnated water to the
exclusion of eating food or drinking anything else. They will
continue to drink the cocaine water until they starve to death.
This is what you are up against if you do cocaine.
Alcohol is similar, too much of it and your breathing will
stop, but usually the body pukes it up before it gets that bad.
Pot is almost impossible to kill you or overdose, and pretty soon
you smoke yourself straight which is like real boring. Most pot heads
slow down too so they become MUCH better drivers and coordination is
not thrown off. Driving accidents would go way down if pot bars
replaced alcohol bars.
The down side of course is more people would find religion and
give up the rat race and war games.
But all drugs have their down side.
Herion and the opiates are too horrible to imagine.
So its real easy to see why people start considering these drugs
bad and making them illegal. But the demand remains and criminals
step in to profit from that demand and the higher prices. Governments
too start to profit from the drug trade to fund their foreign wars,
and the whole thing just becomes a huge exercise in corruption,
temptation and seduction.
You can control criminality with illegality, but you can not
control addiction with illegality, and when you try, you make it
impossible to control criminality with anything, because you guarantee
that the criminals will always have more money, guns, and lawyers than
the government.
The government has to fight for every tax penny it gets, drug
war lords have money shoveled in their faces by everyone they meet.
Whose going to win?
But there's another lesson to be learned here.
A long time ago there was something called the Opium Wars. The
Emperor saw that the British were importing opium into his country
presumably in order to get them all addicted. So he declared war on
the British which turned out to be one of the bloodiest wars on the
planet and went on for YEARS.
So how many died or were tortured from the opium?
How many died or were tortured in the war?
How much pain did the opium cause?
How much pain did the war cause?
Did it get rid of opium?
So this is a tenet of my religion.
"Drugs are bad, drug wars are worse."
And remember that when someone starts ragging on pot in
particular, its almost a sure bet they are in a rotten mood because
they had caffein in the morning to wake up, they smoked cigarettes
*ALL* day long to work, they had brandy in the evening to 'unwind' and
took aspirin to kill the headache at night to go to sleep.
So please, do my God a favor and spot the hypocrisy where it is
ok?
Although I believe that drugs should not be illegal, in general
one must take full responsibility for the fact that they are and keep
your use of them to yourself. That means don't do them in public,
don't flaunt them, don't trade them with people you don't know, and
don't endanger yourself or others concerning them. You just help the
enemy win if you do.
AND DON'T MAKE A LIVING FROM THEM.
Anyone who has a vested interest in making a profit from drugs is
in fact in direct cahoots with the war criminals who made and keep
drugs illegal in the first place in order to profit from them. You
think the mafia wants drugs to become legal? They pay senators
millions of dollars a year to vote against legalization.
If some turkey thinks he's cool and tokes or trades out in the
open on the commons, and he gets caught, and those around him come
under suspicion and investigation, and its traced back and back, and
some brave producer in the fields is busted and the plants are
destroyed, then the wise ass turkey in the street has committed a
grave sin against my personal religion.
And the wrath of my God is not easy to watch that befalls on the
wretch who makes such a transgression.
Therefor if you are a good person who is quietly breaking
criminal laws written by criminal lawmakers that inure only to the
benefit of criminals, it is your duty to do so responsibily and
quietly and not ever ever get anyone else in trouble for it. This is
not a war where you go out into the middle of battle field, toking a
joint, with your stupid middle finger up in the air, you know what I
mean?
And if someone is doing something stupid that is endangering
things, for himself and for others, you take him aside and you explain
to him very clearly that what he's doing is not ok, and that he has to
stop it. If he claims that you are butting in on his profits, then he
is a criminal pure and simple and you turn him into the police
yourself.
Good people who are not used to anonymous communications tend to
be terrified of them, because they know anonymity can be abused by the
bad.
But frankly the bad are more terrified of anonymity, and if you
start turning in people who are stealing, beating on their children or
worse, or making an unreasonable profit from drugs that shouldn't be
illegal in the first place and making an ass of themselves in the
process then you will in fact take a big chunck out of the real crime
in the world, and make your own life safer to do the right thing, even
if its only to toke in your bedroom or the gorge.
Remember drugs are a Holy Sacrament, you don't just do them
because you can or its cool, and you certainly don't use them to prove
what a flying asshole you are.
If necessary you use them to help you find the God State within
you, or why you are all tied up in knots from a society gone mad.
They are for personal reflection and enhancement, they are not
for kicks or escape.
Also remember that when something desirable with a high demand
like pot is made illegal, lots of truely criminal elements step in to
profit from this. They have no interest in enhancing communication
with their inner selves, let alone for your well being.
They don't care that drugs have a poison aspect to them (ALL
drugs!) and need to be used only as Holy Sacrements, all they care
about is maximizing their profits.
Half the time they don't even USE the drug and hold it and its
users in contempt.
These people are real bad news, and they will ruin it for you and
the rest of your good friends if you just stand back and don't do
something about it NOW.
It's these people who get the cops and the drug dogs called in,
its not your buddies off toking in the woods listening to the sounds
of the waterfall or smelling the columbines.
I don't particularly buy into the idea that we are our brother's
keeper, but we are our own keeper, and criminals get away with what
they do because the good are afraid of them and don't know how to
communicate that fear in an effective manner.
They are also afraid that when the laws are criminal themselves,
that they might go down with the baddies, if they report them.
How many of you would feel comfortable inviting a cop into your
home. Not many right? That's because there are so many bogus laws,
that almost everyone is doing something wrong about something. The
cops know this, that's why when they come to your door and you invite
them in, they often refuse, they don't want to know about it.
If we just got rid of the surface layer of bogus laws to the
point where 80 to 90 percent of us felt totally comfortable with the
cops in our homes, the whole face of society would change.
Getting rid of the drug laws and the drug cold war would go a
LONG ways towards making this a peaceful place again, and the crime
rate would go way down because the communication and affinity levels
between civilian and cop would soar and the criminals wouldn't stand a
chance.
Homer
</rant off>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 E-mail, FTP, Shell Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Send mail to majordomo@lightlink.com saying
unsubscribe commons-L To unsuscribe from commons-L
subscribe commons-L-digest To subscribe to the digest
subscribe commons-L-announce To subscribe to the annnounce only list
index commons-L To get index of archives
get commons-L 199801 To get a specific archive
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Nov 16 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/eco7.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYLJH7URT1lqxE3HERAkVuAKC9f33BHbZ0USp1Cl2ZxaL+dOMz3QCeLR0m
UO6bnHTf6zThsjYl1uU8bFw=
=kXjO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
Now I know you all don't like cops, but we have one on our system
and on this list, F. Brackin, and although I imagine that he and I
don't see eye to eye on about a million and a half different things,
he's a good guy and definitely one of Ithaca's finest.
As part of the effort to make downtown Ithaca safer for crime, I
had discussed with him providing an anonymous crime reporting e-mail
address, so that people could report crime without fear of
repercussion. This includes crime within the city and within the
police department itself.
I know this sounds like a 'Squeal Line' and frankly it is. But
it's meant to give good people a safe method of reporting crime to the
cops. However since it is anonymous, bad people can also abuse it by
false reports or turning in good people who happen to be toking or
whatever.
We haven't implemented it yet, but its still something I want to
do.
Comments are welcome.
Homer
You can stop reading now and hit the next button, there is
nothing further for intelligent mature reasonable or civilized people
below this line.
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
</rant on>
THE SQUEAL LINE
Marijuana happens to be the Holy Sacrament of my religion.
Alcohol on the other hand is the Unholy Anti Sacrament.
Drugs should not be illegal in any case, because they are a
health problem and not a criminal problem. It's not criminal to smoke
a flower or snort some poppy dust.
Drugs may be bad for you, but they are not criminal.
Knowing that drugs are bad for you, and going out and selling
them to people in order to get them hooked against their will is
criminal.
But going out into a forest, and picking up a hooch bud and
smoking it is not a criminal thing to do.
Criminality is a very clear cut thing.
Criminality is the effort to enforce on you an unfair exchange
transaction against your will, either through force or deceit, treason
and treachery.
For example it is the effort to convince you that you are about
to engage in a fair exchange transaction that is in fact a rip off,
and is intended to be a rip off.
Killing you outright of course is the ultimate rip off, as is
enslaving you, either spiritually, mentally, emotionally or
physically. Drugs can be a form of physical enslavement.
Criminals can't produce, they can only consume.
They are the picture perfect dictionary definition of "Consumes
more than he produces."
Once they run out of their initial allotment of energy, they have
to consume what others produce in order to keep going.
The last effort of a spiritually dying being trying to give, is
to take.
Criminality is an effort to produce by taking your production
instead.
This is very clear cut, very mathematical. The criminal always
knows what he is doing.
The criminal will tell you that you have lots of duties and no
rights, and that he has lots of rights and no duties.
He can't produce by sowing, so he tries to 'produce' by reaping
what you have sown.
The criminal tries to make his, the fruits of your labor against
your will.
People will tell you how bad drugs are for people. In general
this is true. It is true of alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, speed, heroin
and novocaine.
In lesser degrees it is true of pot, shrooms and LSD.
Drugs are poisons that have a benefit. Thus they form a
dangerous double edged sword.
Some drugs like cocaine are very very bad for you. Cocaine in
particular makes you feel like you had perfect parents. It allows you
to feel like you had a perfect upbringing with no trauma or
unreasonableness at all, and you can look on all the nonsense of other
people with understanding. But then when you come down, its an
electronic hell that is hard to describe.
Cocaine can also kill you, you can do too much of it. You can
think if you do just a little bit more, you will hit that perfect
high, its like a inifinitely annoying little itch that just needs to
be scratched, and you do that little bit more and your central nervous
system just collapses and bye bye being.
Rats in a cage will drink cocaine impregnated water to the
exclusion of eating food or drinking anything else. They will
continue to drink the cocaine water until they starve to death.
This is what you are up against if you do cocaine.
Alcohol is similar, too much of it and your breathing will
stop, but usually the body pukes it up before it gets that bad.
Pot is almost impossible to kill you or overdose, and pretty soon
you smoke yourself straight which is like real boring. Most pot heads
slow down too so they become MUCH better drivers and coordination is
not thrown off. Driving accidents would go way down if pot bars
replaced alcohol bars.
The down side of course is more people would find religion and
give up the rat race and war games.
But all drugs have their down side.
Herion and the opiates are too horrible to imagine.
So its real easy to see why people start considering these drugs
bad and making them illegal. But the demand remains and criminals
step in to profit from that demand and the higher prices. Governments
too start to profit from the drug trade to fund their foreign wars,
and the whole thing just becomes a huge exercise in corruption,
temptation and seduction.
You can control criminality with illegality, but you can not
control addiction with illegality, and when you try, you make it
impossible to control criminality with anything, because you guarantee
that the criminals will always have more money, guns, and lawyers than
the government.
The government has to fight for every tax penny it gets, drug
war lords have money shoveled in their faces by everyone they meet.
Whose going to win?
But there's another lesson to be learned here.
A long time ago there was something called the Opium Wars. The
Emperor saw that the British were importing opium into his country
presumably in order to get them all addicted. So he declared war on
the British which turned out to be one of the bloodiest wars on the
planet and went on for YEARS.
So how many died or were tortured from the opium?
How many died or were tortured in the war?
How much pain did the opium cause?
How much pain did the war cause?
Did it get rid of opium?
So this is a tenet of my religion.
"Drugs are bad, drug wars are worse."
And remember that when someone starts ragging on pot in
particular, its almost a sure bet they are in a rotten mood because
they had caffein in the morning to wake up, they smoked cigarettes
*ALL* day long to work, they had brandy in the evening to 'unwind' and
took aspirin to kill the headache at night to go to sleep.
So please, do my God a favor and spot the hypocrisy where it is
ok?
Although I believe that drugs should not be illegal, in general
one must take full responsibility for the fact that they are and keep
your use of them to yourself. That means don't do them in public,
don't flaunt them, don't trade them with people you don't know, and
don't endanger yourself or others concerning them. You just help the
enemy win if you do.
AND DON'T MAKE A LIVING FROM THEM.
Anyone who has a vested interest in making a profit from drugs is
in fact in direct cahoots with the war criminals who made and keep
drugs illegal in the first place in order to profit from them. You
think the mafia wants drugs to become legal? They pay senators
millions of dollars a year to vote against legalization.
If some turkey thinks he's cool and tokes or trades out in the
open on the commons, and he gets caught, and those around him come
under suspicion and investigation, and its traced back and back, and
some brave producer in the fields is busted and the plants are
destroyed, then the wise ass turkey in the street has committed a
grave sin against my personal religion.
And the wrath of my God is not easy to watch that befalls on the
wretch who makes such a transgression.
Therefor if you are a good person who is quietly breaking
criminal laws written by criminal lawmakers that inure only to the
benefit of criminals, it is your duty to do so responsibily and
quietly and not ever ever get anyone else in trouble for it. This is
not a war where you go out into the middle of battle field, toking a
joint, with your stupid middle finger up in the air, you know what I
mean?
And if someone is doing something stupid that is endangering
things, for himself and for others, you take him aside and you explain
to him very clearly that what he's doing is not ok, and that he has to
stop it. If he claims that you are butting in on his profits, then he
is a criminal pure and simple and you turn him into the police
yourself.
Good people who are not used to anonymous communications tend to
be terrified of them, because they know anonymity can be abused by the
bad.
But frankly the bad are more terrified of anonymity, and if you
start turning in people who are stealing, beating on their children or
worse, or making an unreasonable profit from drugs that shouldn't be
illegal in the first place and making an ass of themselves in the
process then you will in fact take a big chunck out of the real crime
in the world, and make your own life safer to do the right thing, even
if its only to toke in your bedroom or the gorge.
Remember drugs are a Holy Sacrament, you don't just do them
because you can or its cool, and you certainly don't use them to prove
what a flying asshole you are.
If necessary you use them to help you find the God State within
you, or why you are all tied up in knots from a society gone mad.
They are for personal reflection and enhancement, they are not
for kicks or escape.
Also remember that when something desirable with a high demand
like pot is made illegal, lots of truely criminal elements step in to
profit from this. They have no interest in enhancing communication
with their inner selves, let alone for your well being.
They don't care that drugs have a poison aspect to them (ALL
drugs!) and need to be used only as Holy Sacrements, all they care
about is maximizing their profits.
Half the time they don't even USE the drug and hold it and its
users in contempt.
These people are real bad news, and they will ruin it for you and
the rest of your good friends if you just stand back and don't do
something about it NOW.
It's these people who get the cops and the drug dogs called in,
its not your buddies off toking in the woods listening to the sounds
of the waterfall or smelling the columbines.
I don't particularly buy into the idea that we are our brother's
keeper, but we are our own keeper, and criminals get away with what
they do because the good are afraid of them and don't know how to
communicate that fear in an effective manner.
They are also afraid that when the laws are criminal themselves,
that they might go down with the baddies, if they report them.
How many of you would feel comfortable inviting a cop into your
home. Not many right? That's because there are so many bogus laws,
that almost everyone is doing something wrong about something. The
cops know this, that's why when they come to your door and you invite
them in, they often refuse, they don't want to know about it.
If we just got rid of the surface layer of bogus laws to the
point where 80 to 90 percent of us felt totally comfortable with the
cops in our homes, the whole face of society would change.
Getting rid of the drug laws and the drug cold war would go a
LONG ways towards making this a peaceful place again, and the crime
rate would go way down because the communication and affinity levels
between civilian and cop would soar and the criminals wouldn't stand a
chance.
Homer
</rant off>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith News, Web, Telnet Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 E-mail, FTP, Shell Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com info@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Send mail to majordomo@lightlink.com saying
unsubscribe commons-L To unsuscribe from commons-L
subscribe commons-L-digest To subscribe to the digest
subscribe commons-L-announce To subscribe to the annnounce only list
index commons-L To get index of archives
get commons-L 199801 To get a specific archive
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Wed Nov 16 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/eco7.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYLJH7URT1lqxE3HERAkVuAKC9f33BHbZ0USp1Cl2ZxaL+dOMz3QCeLR0m
UO6bnHTf6zThsjYl1uU8bFw=
=kXjO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Monday, November 14, 2016
JUNGLE LOVE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
JUNGLE LOVE
She is trying to be an angel while fucking a dog, namely you, so
her sexual performance will be a bit off.
Certainly nothing to write home to mother about.
Worse she's been taught that sex is bad and so therefore having an
orgasm is bad, so she will try to have children without ever having an
orgasm.
By having children she fulfills her social contract of justifying
her existence, and by never having an orgasm, being fridig, she keeps
herself pure.
The man on the other hand HAS to have an orgasm to have children,
and he too feels degraded by the orgasm, but unlike the woman the orgasm
is required of him.
Thus the woman uses this degradation of the man against the man for
the rest of their lives.
This kind of woman thinks she is better than the man and will find
every fault she can in the man to prove it so.
People who can not partake freely of the more ecstatic experiences
of their physical existence will also find them selves lacking in the
love department also. Without sexual love between parents, there is
very little other emotional love than can grow in its absence.
So while he is a super nova of demanding and explosive sexual
energy, she is more like a cold burnt out dwarf star.
Children born of such marriages do not do well.
Most relatively sane people who as spirits can embrace their
temporal physicality are into extreme jungle love.
Children feel safe in that environment even if they get their
titties tickled once in a while.
The total physical separation between parent and baby or child
during sex is sick as sick comes.
Children know how to say no if it gets too much for them, and
parents who are into jungle love real time have no interest in 'abusing'
their children, only in teaching them by direct experience how to get
involved in jungle love themselves when they grow up.
You don't have to eat the child in order to teach them how to eat
by letting them be involved in the whole process of you eating yourself.
from hunt to toilet.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Nov 14 15:00:24 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1030.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYKhfYURT1lqxE3HERAsymAJ49oJdDi+3cse5p85ffOvir6+Hk8QCgzYh0
Syh2dt2/zgRVKMBecbBuSv8=
=aAny
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
JUNGLE LOVE
She is trying to be an angel while fucking a dog, namely you, so
her sexual performance will be a bit off.
Certainly nothing to write home to mother about.
Worse she's been taught that sex is bad and so therefore having an
orgasm is bad, so she will try to have children without ever having an
orgasm.
By having children she fulfills her social contract of justifying
her existence, and by never having an orgasm, being fridig, she keeps
herself pure.
The man on the other hand HAS to have an orgasm to have children,
and he too feels degraded by the orgasm, but unlike the woman the orgasm
is required of him.
Thus the woman uses this degradation of the man against the man for
the rest of their lives.
This kind of woman thinks she is better than the man and will find
every fault she can in the man to prove it so.
People who can not partake freely of the more ecstatic experiences
of their physical existence will also find them selves lacking in the
love department also. Without sexual love between parents, there is
very little other emotional love than can grow in its absence.
So while he is a super nova of demanding and explosive sexual
energy, she is more like a cold burnt out dwarf star.
Children born of such marriages do not do well.
Most relatively sane people who as spirits can embrace their
temporal physicality are into extreme jungle love.
Children feel safe in that environment even if they get their
titties tickled once in a while.
The total physical separation between parent and baby or child
during sex is sick as sick comes.
Children know how to say no if it gets too much for them, and
parents who are into jungle love real time have no interest in 'abusing'
their children, only in teaching them by direct experience how to get
involved in jungle love themselves when they grow up.
You don't have to eat the child in order to teach them how to eat
by letting them be involved in the whole process of you eating yourself.
from hunt to toilet.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Nov 14 15:00:24 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/ador1030.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYKhfYURT1lqxE3HERAsymAJ49oJdDi+3cse5p85ffOvir6+Hk8QCgzYh0
Syh2dt2/zgRVKMBecbBuSv8=
=aAny
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Sunday, November 13, 2016
ADORE31 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
THE PRIME DIRECTIVE
The basic prime directive on demonstrating OT powers is
"If you want to be accepted by people, don't do anything that
exceeds their acceptance level."
So what you demonstrate is relative to the crowd you live in,
that includes the whole planet, its space alien lords, and who knows
what demons and deities on higher planes that might be looking in.
First rule is don't miss withholds. If you come across as
KNOWING SOMETHING, they WILL crucify you. Hell *I* will crucify you
as my basic modus operandi is "to crucify anyone who makes a claim to
wisdom, let us see now how close they are to their God."
If it were safe to demonstrate OT powers, they would be widely
available and demonstrated. The very fact that so few have them and
even fewer want anyone to know that they do have them is absolute
testimony to how dangerous it has been to have these powers, use them
and let others know.
The people who don't have such powers and are the most eager to
receive proof from others are the one's who were the most involved in
making such powers and demonstrations dangerous and thus are the least
worthy of having such demonstrations.
They are "What power? What past life? What overt?" cases.
Thus don't ignore the hecklers, *THEY* are the ones who created
the problem in the first place.
Those seeking proof of the *EXISTENCE* or possibility of OT
powers want that proof so they can crush it out of existence.
Telepathy in particular will miss withholds on criminal or
governmental elements (same thing) as they will wonder if you know or
not what they are up to.
Telekinesis, telepathy, remote viewing are all basic weapons of
war, each side will want you to be their lab rat to find out why you
can do it and no one else can. You become a matter of significant
national security to them as your powers can benefit their criminal
ends.
It's one thing to demonstrate powers that no one will take
seriously, but demonstrate something serious and to the point, and you
won't last long.
If you can move the marble on the table, you can kill someone at
10 feet. *ANYONE* knowing this will become very afraid of you, lest
they anger you, as they know how much THEY would love to kill someone
with their minds, and soon they will take to scheming how to kill you
first before you kill them. Of course they will worry if you know
because you are telepathic, so that will speed the process of your
demise.
Or they will pick on your loved ones who do not have power to
keep you at bay.
First they will try to enslave your powers to their ends. Then
they will try to imprison you so no one can use your powers. Then
they will try to kill you as you are just too dangerous to have
around.
OT powers no longer are available because of the danger of having
them. It's that simple actually, there is no inability, just superior
unwillingness.
If you want to have them back, you need to solve the Prime
Directive first, which is basically how to have power, use it, and
have it not be more dangerous than it is worth.
OT powers make the person who has them dangerous, that is a good
thing, but BEING dangerous is itself a danger to the being, the
solution to date has been to not be dangerous by not having powers.
This is the 'schmoo effect', just how undangerous do I have have
to be in order to be safe?
Once a Prime Directive is in place in a being, powers will start
coming back automatically. The thetan is sitting on the volcano like
some guy sitting on the top of Pandora's Box trying to keep it closed.
Once the prime directive is in place, the guy can get off the box, and
it will start to open on its own accord letting everything out.
The Prime Directive Rundown can open Pandora's Box faster than
the pc wants it opened, so don't mess around with this stuff, either
do it for real or don't do it.
"What power would you have?"
"What would you do with it?"
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Nov 13 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore31.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYKJ17URT1lqxE3HERAtAMAJ9QYaBQrr0V7YsA8stWK1o2Nds1zACdFpQJ
d6xS/J3mMOAgxNzdedSnGlg=
=oENn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
THE PRIME DIRECTIVE
The basic prime directive on demonstrating OT powers is
"If you want to be accepted by people, don't do anything that
exceeds their acceptance level."
So what you demonstrate is relative to the crowd you live in,
that includes the whole planet, its space alien lords, and who knows
what demons and deities on higher planes that might be looking in.
First rule is don't miss withholds. If you come across as
KNOWING SOMETHING, they WILL crucify you. Hell *I* will crucify you
as my basic modus operandi is "to crucify anyone who makes a claim to
wisdom, let us see now how close they are to their God."
If it were safe to demonstrate OT powers, they would be widely
available and demonstrated. The very fact that so few have them and
even fewer want anyone to know that they do have them is absolute
testimony to how dangerous it has been to have these powers, use them
and let others know.
The people who don't have such powers and are the most eager to
receive proof from others are the one's who were the most involved in
making such powers and demonstrations dangerous and thus are the least
worthy of having such demonstrations.
They are "What power? What past life? What overt?" cases.
Thus don't ignore the hecklers, *THEY* are the ones who created
the problem in the first place.
Those seeking proof of the *EXISTENCE* or possibility of OT
powers want that proof so they can crush it out of existence.
Telepathy in particular will miss withholds on criminal or
governmental elements (same thing) as they will wonder if you know or
not what they are up to.
Telekinesis, telepathy, remote viewing are all basic weapons of
war, each side will want you to be their lab rat to find out why you
can do it and no one else can. You become a matter of significant
national security to them as your powers can benefit their criminal
ends.
It's one thing to demonstrate powers that no one will take
seriously, but demonstrate something serious and to the point, and you
won't last long.
If you can move the marble on the table, you can kill someone at
10 feet. *ANYONE* knowing this will become very afraid of you, lest
they anger you, as they know how much THEY would love to kill someone
with their minds, and soon they will take to scheming how to kill you
first before you kill them. Of course they will worry if you know
because you are telepathic, so that will speed the process of your
demise.
Or they will pick on your loved ones who do not have power to
keep you at bay.
First they will try to enslave your powers to their ends. Then
they will try to imprison you so no one can use your powers. Then
they will try to kill you as you are just too dangerous to have
around.
OT powers no longer are available because of the danger of having
them. It's that simple actually, there is no inability, just superior
unwillingness.
If you want to have them back, you need to solve the Prime
Directive first, which is basically how to have power, use it, and
have it not be more dangerous than it is worth.
OT powers make the person who has them dangerous, that is a good
thing, but BEING dangerous is itself a danger to the being, the
solution to date has been to not be dangerous by not having powers.
This is the 'schmoo effect', just how undangerous do I have have
to be in order to be safe?
Once a Prime Directive is in place in a being, powers will start
coming back automatically. The thetan is sitting on the volcano like
some guy sitting on the top of Pandora's Box trying to keep it closed.
Once the prime directive is in place, the guy can get off the box, and
it will start to open on its own accord letting everything out.
The Prime Directive Rundown can open Pandora's Box faster than
the pc wants it opened, so don't mess around with this stuff, either
do it for real or don't do it.
"What power would you have?"
"What would you do with it?"
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth and Peace. Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Nov 13 12:06:02 EST 2016
WEB: http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP: ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore31.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYKJ17URT1lqxE3HERAtAMAJ9QYaBQrr0V7YsA8stWK1o2Nds1zACdFpQJ
d6xS/J3mMOAgxNzdedSnGlg=
=oENn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, November 12, 2016
ACT56 (fwd)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
OT'S AND VIOLENCE
ACT - 56
18 March 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
In thinking about the problem of what to do with super powers
should I ever manage to get them, the following comes to mind.
As people begin to wake up to what reality is all about, they go
from being a no power Black 5 case to to being a full OT. First they
regain the ability to make mockups in their own universe with crystal
clarity, then in the OS2 universe where they can share them with others,
and then in the OS3 universe where they can manifest things that all can
see and the Scientists can measure.
Each level of ability has its corresponding measure of
responsibility and ethics that go with having the ability.
It is ridiculous to assume, as most humans do, that for some
abilities if you have that ability, you must NEVER use it.
The truth might be more like, if you have an ability, you have a
DUTY to use it in its proper time and place, however rare that might be.
For example its not true that nuclear weaponry should NEVER be
used, only that maybe it should rarely be used against people. Using it
against incoming asteroids is a different matter.
So each ability has with it a proper time and place for its use, and
a set of duties and rights that go with it.
At a higher level, when you have disengaged from all your
agreements and contracts, of course all Duties are ended, so there is no
compulsion moral or otherwise to do anything.
But while in the game, duty and ability are closely connected, and
the more a being is aware of his duties, and generates duties for
himself to hold a sacred trust to, the more ability will come to him,
including the ability to kill others at a distance.
The raw facts are that if you have the ability to throw sparks at a
distance or even marbles around a room, then you have the ability to
kill people at a distance whether or not you want it, and like all other
areas of life, there will be pressures both ethical and unethical for
you to use and not use these abilities.
The real problem comes in that OT's become dangerous long before
they have the ability to do such obvious OS 3 abilities like throw a
spark. A tremendous amount of OT ability and growing time is spent in
the OS 2 band which has to do with sharing mockups with others, and
effecting the mockups OF others, even if they can't do it themselves.
All of OT VII for example used to be devoted to 'Projection of
Intention' which simply put is the ability to intend that others intend
things.
Thus if you want someone to do something, you don't FORCE him to do
it with brute force of will, but you subtly project into him the
intention to do it, and he takes it on as his own and does it.
Even if you only limited yourself to creating intentions in others
that they would normally agree with, you still have a very wide margin
for creating effects that would otherwise go uncreated.
However with a fully developed ability to project intention, such a
being could get just about anyone to do just about anything.
Thus it is at OT VII that the government really starts to get
worried. Below OT VII you are mainly getting a being OUT of the
universe. But at OT VII and above you are bringing him back IN with
power to spare.
The government doesn't like losing people across its slave camp
walls, which is what the lower Bridge accomplishes, but it really
dislikes having people around who can direct the minds of others merely
by thinking at them, however subtly.
You also have to understand the fact that as a being goes more OT,
he becomes more and more pan determined which means he begins playing
BOTH sides of the game against each other. He loses his intention that
one side win, and regains his intention that the game go on. So an OT
will have a tendency to fight for the underdog no matter who he is, good
guy or bad guy.
There is nothing more boring than a Perfect Golden Age forever for
free.
Now the truth is that the ever present background forces of chaos,
destruction and enturbulation from the physical universe alone are quite
sufficient to erode any permanent peace beings might think they have
won, so it is rare that the OT needs to give the 'bad' side of the game
any help. But OT's are more concerned with the Artistry of History
rather than everyone having a 'good time', so if one should decide that
the canvas could use a volcano here or there, well then a volcano there
will be, along with all of its eruptions and death and demise.
Just as an exterior pc can move the anchor points of space around
him so to be anywhere he wants to be, an OT can move the anchor points
of possible future HISTORY around him, so that the direction of the flow
of consciousness through history is changed and history takes another
course.
All it takes is changing the decisions that some people make.
If a planet becomes too engrossed in the 21 kinds of Evil, or was
it 16, I forget, then there are OT committees who will start the clean
slate process for the planet and everything will get kind of shoveled
under to start anew. And yes beings die during these times.
So KILLING people is not some kind of fundamental no no to an OT,
in fact they are quite able see that sometimes NOT killing people is a
high crime of magnitude.
Now most humans will admit that killing people in self defense is
an acceptable and even morally mandatory kind of behavior, especially if
you are defending yourself, your family, your children, your wife, your
country, or some ideal.
We don't have to wait for the law to sanction our killing in these
circumstances, and on the other side we don't have to obey the law when
during times of war it directs that we kill at its bidding. The LAW
doesn't enter into it.
Believe it or not the law exists to control the government, not the
people. Yes the law says what people may or may not do, but really what
it is saying is what the GOVERNMENT may or may not do when people do the
things that OTHERS have decided they should not do.
There is however no moral mandate for PEOPLE to follow the law,
there is only a moral mandate for the GOVERNMENT to follow the law.
Each individual is Sovereign. Of course he has to accept the
consequences of breaking the law if he is at odds with other Sovereigns
in the group, but Sovereign individuals can choose to do anything they
want to and accept any consequences they want to, its not a moral
problem.
When the GOVERNMENT starts breaking the law though, then you have a
moral problem because they are in violation of a sacred trust. The
GOVERNMENT AGREED to uphold the law, the individual sovereign did not.
Of course low tone cases try to twist this around, usually because
they work for the Government and they want the Government to be
Sovereign and the people to be cattle.
So the point of all this is that if you have various abilities of
some kind, the only source of guidance and control over those abilities
is yourself and your own internally generated sense of duty.
A being can find that he has ENORMOUS power to affect how things
turn out long before he enters the OS 3 range of demonstrable physical
abilities. An OS 2 Class being who can project intention does not
affect things by brute force of will, or total mind control, he just
doesn't have that kind of power. He can however nudge the course of
history just ever so slightly here or there and thus create enormous
effects many years down the road.
History is full of murder, mayhem, torture, chaos and destruction.
If you take the responsibility to nudge that history a little bit off
its chosen course of death, perhaps to lessen the pain of life for
everyone, you will find that although FEWER people get murdered perhaps,
DIFFERENT people also get murdered. Thus your choice to change the
course of history is a choice that this new group of innocent victims
gets destroyed rather than the original group of innocent victims that
would have gotten it had you left things alone.
But there is a more subtle problem which has to do with power and
how people GET power in the political process. It might be very
tempting to just off some head of state who is causing more trouble than
he is worth, perhaps make him slightly less attentive one day so he
trips down a flight of stairs and breaks his back, or push the idea ON
THE MENTAL PLANE to some would be freedom fighter or assassin that he
really does have the courage to go through with it. You see OT's in the
OS 2 class have a LOT of power, because they draw upon the operating
power of millions of people. One thought can effect a whole continent.
But the problem is that once this despot is removed, someone else
will take his place. In the first place people don't take the deaths of
their leaders lightly, it's really hard to just kill someone who has
been causing a stir for a long time without creating an even bigger stir
yourself. There will be investigations, and power plays, and civil
instability, perhaps even civil war, and then how many will die?
Civilization is a highly balanced system of good and bad, and you
can't just rush in like an elephant and take out the King Pin bad guy
without possibly knocking down the whole house of cards. Life is like a
deadly chess game, and OT's with the power to play the chess game, and
the power to move and take each other's pieces, know this damn well.
Its fine to just take out the Evil Queen, but look what happens next.
The OT can ride bigger waves, but he still can't ride a tsunami.
One of the biggest problems is the guy that takes the place of the
guy you knocked off. HE didn't have the power to remove the despot, so
now he is in a position of power that he didn't have the ability to
attain for himself, because you had to make it available to him.
The original guy at least got there on his own forte, so he may
have been evil as hell, but at least he wasn't stupid or a coward or
inexperienced. You knock him off and some asswipe from the lower ranks
swaggers into position and he thinks he knows it all, that fate and the
gods are on his side, and all of a sudden HE is making moves in the
chess game that will destroy everyone, and the OT won't be able to stop
the process.
So that's the first thing to look out for when you want to take
someone out from the game of life, who is going to replace him, and how
worthy of that position will he be?
You also want to make the final down fall of your guy so smooth and
slick that it seems absolutely normal in the flow of history so that
people drop him and the whole subject the next day and get on with their
lives. For example killing JFK was NOT the way to do it, they will be
investigating that one FOREVER and eventually those that had a hand in
it will fall.
On the other hand look at Romania. They took Ceausescu and his
wife out back and shot them, and then forgot all about them the next
day. So the OT's who were playing that game did it right, they made a
clean cut surgical strike out of it and there is very little left to mar
the rest of history that follows. But it took those OT's a LONG time to
make that move and they probably did so with a certain amount of
trepidation, as with the rest of the fall of communism.
Now you see the fall of communism is still a problem. It had to
go, but its one thing to bust apart a parliament with only a few lives
lost, and quite another to bring the entire fragmented nuclear arsenal
under control when it is now owned by highly separate warring ethnic
parties loyal to no one but themselves and their own personal timetables
for Armageddon.
I assure you there are OT's sweating at the table of the chess game
of life over this one.
Everytime they make a move, people live, people die, and hopefully
the course of History is imbued with a little more Artistry.
So anyhow, when a new born OT first starts wandering out into the
real world, and he sees what is really going on, and he sees that he can
actually DO something about it, he finds himself in an enormous arena of
death, murder, mayhem, torture, chaos, enturbulation and entheta. Life
immediately becomes a self defense proposition to him.
He, his family, his friends, his country, his whole damn race, all
of life on Earth and everything decent that ever stood, are being
threatened with an early grave from any one of a number of sources. The
new OT's first impulse is to dive in shooting, with both six guns
ablaze. You see he CAN shoot, he's got the power back again.
He finds though that it just doesn't work out that easily, he takes
out one bad guy, and something else shifts that he didn't see and
suddenly all those friends he was trying to help and protect are crushed
in the relentless stream of History. It's new course had an unseen
twist.
Every new OT wants to just take out all the bad guys, but he finds
that he CAN'T take out ANY bad guys without also taking out good guys.
If he does nothing, he is accountable for NOT doing anything when he
could.
If he does something, he is accountable for DOING something when
maybe he shouldn't have. Either way people die, often good people,
usually more good people than bad people. That's because there ARE more
good people than bad people and most of the killing is random.
The OT can't stop the killing completely, he CAN shift it possibly
to LESS killing, but that will ALWAYS shift it to DIFFERENT killing, so
he will have to make a choice to let things be and have more killing, or
take action and have less killing but probably have innocent people
killed now that before were safe. Some of whom will be his closer
friends.
So you know auditing all this is a good thing. Rather than making
a new born killer out of someone, what it does is show him the source of
his rage, and puts it all back into his control again, so that he is not
going out on murderous rampages either has a human or as an OT. He can
become a master chess player at the game of Life and Death again, and
actually do the world some good.
So let's not go screaming about how Homer is a death monger, the
people who do this are just broadcasting their own unpulled regrets
along this line.
You know you don't have to go OT to become involved in killing
people. All you have to do is become President.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Nov 12 16:13:30 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act56.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYJ4X6URT1lqxE3HERAqi2AKDNH4RKWRtQk8PMO1dy7Uzw4PDxZwCeIBnO
Qe6BHXqMF2cToHhQr00MOfc=
=q7vC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
((My comments in double parentheses - Homer))
OT'S AND VIOLENCE
ACT - 56
18 March 1994
Copyright (C) 1994 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.
In thinking about the problem of what to do with super powers
should I ever manage to get them, the following comes to mind.
As people begin to wake up to what reality is all about, they go
from being a no power Black 5 case to to being a full OT. First they
regain the ability to make mockups in their own universe with crystal
clarity, then in the OS2 universe where they can share them with others,
and then in the OS3 universe where they can manifest things that all can
see and the Scientists can measure.
Each level of ability has its corresponding measure of
responsibility and ethics that go with having the ability.
It is ridiculous to assume, as most humans do, that for some
abilities if you have that ability, you must NEVER use it.
The truth might be more like, if you have an ability, you have a
DUTY to use it in its proper time and place, however rare that might be.
For example its not true that nuclear weaponry should NEVER be
used, only that maybe it should rarely be used against people. Using it
against incoming asteroids is a different matter.
So each ability has with it a proper time and place for its use, and
a set of duties and rights that go with it.
At a higher level, when you have disengaged from all your
agreements and contracts, of course all Duties are ended, so there is no
compulsion moral or otherwise to do anything.
But while in the game, duty and ability are closely connected, and
the more a being is aware of his duties, and generates duties for
himself to hold a sacred trust to, the more ability will come to him,
including the ability to kill others at a distance.
The raw facts are that if you have the ability to throw sparks at a
distance or even marbles around a room, then you have the ability to
kill people at a distance whether or not you want it, and like all other
areas of life, there will be pressures both ethical and unethical for
you to use and not use these abilities.
The real problem comes in that OT's become dangerous long before
they have the ability to do such obvious OS 3 abilities like throw a
spark. A tremendous amount of OT ability and growing time is spent in
the OS 2 band which has to do with sharing mockups with others, and
effecting the mockups OF others, even if they can't do it themselves.
All of OT VII for example used to be devoted to 'Projection of
Intention' which simply put is the ability to intend that others intend
things.
Thus if you want someone to do something, you don't FORCE him to do
it with brute force of will, but you subtly project into him the
intention to do it, and he takes it on as his own and does it.
Even if you only limited yourself to creating intentions in others
that they would normally agree with, you still have a very wide margin
for creating effects that would otherwise go uncreated.
However with a fully developed ability to project intention, such a
being could get just about anyone to do just about anything.
Thus it is at OT VII that the government really starts to get
worried. Below OT VII you are mainly getting a being OUT of the
universe. But at OT VII and above you are bringing him back IN with
power to spare.
The government doesn't like losing people across its slave camp
walls, which is what the lower Bridge accomplishes, but it really
dislikes having people around who can direct the minds of others merely
by thinking at them, however subtly.
You also have to understand the fact that as a being goes more OT,
he becomes more and more pan determined which means he begins playing
BOTH sides of the game against each other. He loses his intention that
one side win, and regains his intention that the game go on. So an OT
will have a tendency to fight for the underdog no matter who he is, good
guy or bad guy.
There is nothing more boring than a Perfect Golden Age forever for
free.
Now the truth is that the ever present background forces of chaos,
destruction and enturbulation from the physical universe alone are quite
sufficient to erode any permanent peace beings might think they have
won, so it is rare that the OT needs to give the 'bad' side of the game
any help. But OT's are more concerned with the Artistry of History
rather than everyone having a 'good time', so if one should decide that
the canvas could use a volcano here or there, well then a volcano there
will be, along with all of its eruptions and death and demise.
Just as an exterior pc can move the anchor points of space around
him so to be anywhere he wants to be, an OT can move the anchor points
of possible future HISTORY around him, so that the direction of the flow
of consciousness through history is changed and history takes another
course.
All it takes is changing the decisions that some people make.
If a planet becomes too engrossed in the 21 kinds of Evil, or was
it 16, I forget, then there are OT committees who will start the clean
slate process for the planet and everything will get kind of shoveled
under to start anew. And yes beings die during these times.
So KILLING people is not some kind of fundamental no no to an OT,
in fact they are quite able see that sometimes NOT killing people is a
high crime of magnitude.
Now most humans will admit that killing people in self defense is
an acceptable and even morally mandatory kind of behavior, especially if
you are defending yourself, your family, your children, your wife, your
country, or some ideal.
We don't have to wait for the law to sanction our killing in these
circumstances, and on the other side we don't have to obey the law when
during times of war it directs that we kill at its bidding. The LAW
doesn't enter into it.
Believe it or not the law exists to control the government, not the
people. Yes the law says what people may or may not do, but really what
it is saying is what the GOVERNMENT may or may not do when people do the
things that OTHERS have decided they should not do.
There is however no moral mandate for PEOPLE to follow the law,
there is only a moral mandate for the GOVERNMENT to follow the law.
Each individual is Sovereign. Of course he has to accept the
consequences of breaking the law if he is at odds with other Sovereigns
in the group, but Sovereign individuals can choose to do anything they
want to and accept any consequences they want to, its not a moral
problem.
When the GOVERNMENT starts breaking the law though, then you have a
moral problem because they are in violation of a sacred trust. The
GOVERNMENT AGREED to uphold the law, the individual sovereign did not.
Of course low tone cases try to twist this around, usually because
they work for the Government and they want the Government to be
Sovereign and the people to be cattle.
So the point of all this is that if you have various abilities of
some kind, the only source of guidance and control over those abilities
is yourself and your own internally generated sense of duty.
A being can find that he has ENORMOUS power to affect how things
turn out long before he enters the OS 3 range of demonstrable physical
abilities. An OS 2 Class being who can project intention does not
affect things by brute force of will, or total mind control, he just
doesn't have that kind of power. He can however nudge the course of
history just ever so slightly here or there and thus create enormous
effects many years down the road.
History is full of murder, mayhem, torture, chaos and destruction.
If you take the responsibility to nudge that history a little bit off
its chosen course of death, perhaps to lessen the pain of life for
everyone, you will find that although FEWER people get murdered perhaps,
DIFFERENT people also get murdered. Thus your choice to change the
course of history is a choice that this new group of innocent victims
gets destroyed rather than the original group of innocent victims that
would have gotten it had you left things alone.
But there is a more subtle problem which has to do with power and
how people GET power in the political process. It might be very
tempting to just off some head of state who is causing more trouble than
he is worth, perhaps make him slightly less attentive one day so he
trips down a flight of stairs and breaks his back, or push the idea ON
THE MENTAL PLANE to some would be freedom fighter or assassin that he
really does have the courage to go through with it. You see OT's in the
OS 2 class have a LOT of power, because they draw upon the operating
power of millions of people. One thought can effect a whole continent.
But the problem is that once this despot is removed, someone else
will take his place. In the first place people don't take the deaths of
their leaders lightly, it's really hard to just kill someone who has
been causing a stir for a long time without creating an even bigger stir
yourself. There will be investigations, and power plays, and civil
instability, perhaps even civil war, and then how many will die?
Civilization is a highly balanced system of good and bad, and you
can't just rush in like an elephant and take out the King Pin bad guy
without possibly knocking down the whole house of cards. Life is like a
deadly chess game, and OT's with the power to play the chess game, and
the power to move and take each other's pieces, know this damn well.
Its fine to just take out the Evil Queen, but look what happens next.
The OT can ride bigger waves, but he still can't ride a tsunami.
One of the biggest problems is the guy that takes the place of the
guy you knocked off. HE didn't have the power to remove the despot, so
now he is in a position of power that he didn't have the ability to
attain for himself, because you had to make it available to him.
The original guy at least got there on his own forte, so he may
have been evil as hell, but at least he wasn't stupid or a coward or
inexperienced. You knock him off and some asswipe from the lower ranks
swaggers into position and he thinks he knows it all, that fate and the
gods are on his side, and all of a sudden HE is making moves in the
chess game that will destroy everyone, and the OT won't be able to stop
the process.
So that's the first thing to look out for when you want to take
someone out from the game of life, who is going to replace him, and how
worthy of that position will he be?
You also want to make the final down fall of your guy so smooth and
slick that it seems absolutely normal in the flow of history so that
people drop him and the whole subject the next day and get on with their
lives. For example killing JFK was NOT the way to do it, they will be
investigating that one FOREVER and eventually those that had a hand in
it will fall.
On the other hand look at Romania. They took Ceausescu and his
wife out back and shot them, and then forgot all about them the next
day. So the OT's who were playing that game did it right, they made a
clean cut surgical strike out of it and there is very little left to mar
the rest of history that follows. But it took those OT's a LONG time to
make that move and they probably did so with a certain amount of
trepidation, as with the rest of the fall of communism.
Now you see the fall of communism is still a problem. It had to
go, but its one thing to bust apart a parliament with only a few lives
lost, and quite another to bring the entire fragmented nuclear arsenal
under control when it is now owned by highly separate warring ethnic
parties loyal to no one but themselves and their own personal timetables
for Armageddon.
I assure you there are OT's sweating at the table of the chess game
of life over this one.
Everytime they make a move, people live, people die, and hopefully
the course of History is imbued with a little more Artistry.
So anyhow, when a new born OT first starts wandering out into the
real world, and he sees what is really going on, and he sees that he can
actually DO something about it, he finds himself in an enormous arena of
death, murder, mayhem, torture, chaos, enturbulation and entheta. Life
immediately becomes a self defense proposition to him.
He, his family, his friends, his country, his whole damn race, all
of life on Earth and everything decent that ever stood, are being
threatened with an early grave from any one of a number of sources. The
new OT's first impulse is to dive in shooting, with both six guns
ablaze. You see he CAN shoot, he's got the power back again.
He finds though that it just doesn't work out that easily, he takes
out one bad guy, and something else shifts that he didn't see and
suddenly all those friends he was trying to help and protect are crushed
in the relentless stream of History. It's new course had an unseen
twist.
Every new OT wants to just take out all the bad guys, but he finds
that he CAN'T take out ANY bad guys without also taking out good guys.
If he does nothing, he is accountable for NOT doing anything when he
could.
If he does something, he is accountable for DOING something when
maybe he shouldn't have. Either way people die, often good people,
usually more good people than bad people. That's because there ARE more
good people than bad people and most of the killing is random.
The OT can't stop the killing completely, he CAN shift it possibly
to LESS killing, but that will ALWAYS shift it to DIFFERENT killing, so
he will have to make a choice to let things be and have more killing, or
take action and have less killing but probably have innocent people
killed now that before were safe. Some of whom will be his closer
friends.
So you know auditing all this is a good thing. Rather than making
a new born killer out of someone, what it does is show him the source of
his rage, and puts it all back into his control again, so that he is not
going out on murderous rampages either has a human or as an OT. He can
become a master chess player at the game of Life and Death again, and
actually do the world some good.
So let's not go screaming about how Homer is a death monger, the
people who do this are just broadcasting their own unpulled regrets
along this line.
You know you don't have to go OT to become involved in killing
people. All you have to do is become President.
Homer
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Nov 12 16:13:30 EST 2016
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/act56.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFYJ4X6URT1lqxE3HERAqi2AKDNH4RKWRtQk8PMO1dy7Uzw4PDxZwCeIBnO
Qe6BHXqMF2cToHhQr00MOfc=
=q7vC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)