This seems distinctly unChristian to me but there y'go.
He has my name and address so he knows where I am. I'd merely ask while he goes Chuck Norris on me arse he leaves me brother out of it so someone can carry on taking care of me mother who's been going senile for the last twenty years not to mention she hasn't just got a very nasty tongue on her but can get very physically vicious at the best of times herself so I might just do the medieval thing an' nominate her as me champion.
I'd also ask him to leave enough of me for me kids to bury but other than them an' a few others it'll be a small funeral an' basic'ly nobody'll notice I've gone.
I have no property or money so that just leaves crushing me unless he wants to go down the destroyin'-me-through-destroyin'-me-kids route.
I've learned an enormous amount from this Christian an' I've even told him things I've never told anyone else. In fact I agree with him on so many many things almost 99% I'm not quite sure what my offense actually is.
It's possibly me daring to wonder whether Russell Brand wasn't just some ideological stooge but a genuine seeker giving voice to voiceless others somehow offended him.
He may even've been somehow offended by me me wond'rin' whether Brand as a seeker who seemingly thinks Jesus didn't exist an' seems to view him as just some destructive meme might actually gain something from reading this Christian guy's blogs especially if Brand proved as I suspect at all sensitive to this Christian guy's exousia or authority.
You don't have to be a Christian or a Muslim or a Hindu or Buddhist to know when someone's onto somethin' comin' from a very authentic place.
He may also've taken some offence at me wond'rin' aloud even if Brand was right about existence really being a hologram wouldn't this hologram still require God's Will to keep it in existence?
Again if even if turned out we were just holograms would it really mean we had no longer need morals would it really mean we'd all suddenly cease to be individuals with individual responsibilities?
Even in virtuality reality style video games you're still an individual y'still have to play the game right there's disastrous consequences when y'don't.
In my case at least even if there was no God I hope I'd still wan'o do the right thing even when others were falsely wrongin' me.
In fact for me it's the other way round I look up to prophets of all faiths precisely because they seem to confirm me own instincts which's why I have no problems with atheists until they start tellin' me I have no choice but t'believe what they believe.
Anyway unless Jesus decides otherwise I'm off to be destroyed by someone I still trust even if he doesn't trust a lowly scum of the earth nobody like me which's why I'm not tellin' y'who this person is.
Been nice knowin' y'guys an' don't blame Jesus for anything that happens to me.
In my previous blog MyTube or Hearken to Rumi's Reed Because It Doesn't Just Think as Blaise Pascal Points Out IT'S WHO WE REALLY ARE! I made some outlandish observations derived from weird personal experiences.
Fortunately you don't have to be batted about like a cosmic tennis ball to reach highly similiar conclusion if your Dave Harrison of Trade With Dave who in a sequence of emails very kindly presented me the following information about Gerald Pollack's 'pipe'
"I learned from Grigoro Perelman about the torus. The pipe is a torus.
"I started looking back on some companies and factories I ran. They are all based on a torus. Ricci flow with surgery on 3 manifolds. A coffee is a donut is a torus."
This comment and this link
"The bow tie as a torus..."
And this observation
"And finally it is the torus that allows Gresham law to reverse, which will fulfill the Rothschild meme 'money is a technology'.
I warn you though this guy's seriously clever and some of his stuff'll test y'u but what he writes's like those cheesy munchy type things y'u keep tellin' y'self that's it that's the last one I've had enough but then y'immediately start in on another one.
Put it this way a few weeks back someone didn't like what he was sayin' so much they hacked his site and shut it down for several days.
The amazing thing is he's also seems to be endlessly startin' up developin' or runnin' several businesses at the same time I don't know how he does it!
MyTube or Hearken to Rumi's Reed Because It Doesn't Just Think as Blaise Pascal Points Out IT'S WHO WE REALLY ARE!Posted by alanborky at 23:15, 30 Jul 2013
I'm over at Dave Harrison's Trade With Dave a site dedicated to trading an enormous wealth of wide ranging ideas as it to do with 'trade' and he's put up this Electric Universe Gerald Pollack lecture on his blog
Who Said Water & Electricity Don’t Mix? http://tradewithdave.com/?p=17807
As he puts it himself "watch this 30 minute video or simply go to the 29 minute mark."
[I'm putting up this shorter version of what appears to be the same lecture from the David Icke site http://www.davidicke.com/articles/new-ph... primarily because the screen shot actually shows the tube Gerald Pollack's refers to].
And it's that tube which absolutely electrifies me.
Anyone who's at all familiar with me probably's aware I claim to be prone to weird experiences so much so at one stage I put myself in the hands of various psychiatric and neurology people literally quite prepared to undergo brain surgery if that was what it'd take to put a stop to it.
One of the sets of experiences I SEEM to undergo particularly at that time was something which I refer to as the Something periodically taking me into The Void which's this enormous region of dark empty space completely devoid of stars which's also PARTLY why I sometimes refer to it as the World Cave.
Anyway during one of these jaunts I suddenly found myself seemingly back in normal space ie there were now stars everywhere gazing down at this glowing moon like rocky planet the only difference being instead of craters it was covered all over by these sort of concrete like tubes of all different kinds of heights and sizes.
Now at this stage I hadn't got a clue what was supposedly goin' on until I heard my voice say as if in answer to something that Something'd said something to the effect "Where? I can't see any signs of life...!"
Again as if Something'd exhorted me to look harder I heard meself responding "Wha'? All those tubes emitting smoke they're forms of life? No way! I'm no' havin' that'!"
The moment these words left my lips this mental video of a man exhaling a stream of cigarette smoke played out before me and as I watched he suddenly flung his head back so his mouth was now the topmost party of his body and blew this ring of smoke directly in the air above him. "Oh my god" I heard meself gasping "It's true all we are is walking tubes!"
Over the years my understanding and appreciation of what that particular episode and all the data which seemed to be downloaded in me at the time was teaching me's grown enormously.
For instance when Rumi says
Hearken to the reed the flute that complains
Lamenting at its banishment from home
"Ever since they tore me from the osier bed..."
He's not I suggest talking figuratively. He's literally identifying us as regions of empty space within space itself which only SEEM separated from the fabric of the rest of space because our tubes're adorned with the human body which's in turn used to distract us from this situation.
When he says
But he who's separated from those who share the same tongue
Though he speaks with a hundred other voices he is actually dumb
He's suggesting our minds too should be permanently open regions of space through which and from which everything should effortlesly flow and emerge but which instead're constantly blocked up and filled with propaganda petty worries endless fears greed etc etc etc.
Ditto when he says
Arise O son and burst your bonds
How long will you allow yourself to be shackled by silver and gold?
Even if you managed to take the ocean into yourself
You could at best store its provisions for a day
The pitcher of the covetous is never filled by desire
He is I suggest claiming our attempts to permanetly hold onto things and claim possession of them by way of protecting ourselves from everybody and everything else plotting to do much the same thing not only cuts us off from our true heritage the entire universe but everyone and everything in it including ultimately ourselves.
First of all we had the cannibal cop and his cohorts
Now we have the 17 year veteran cop and his cohorts pistol whipping drivers and stealing their cash and cell phones
Remind me again.
What's Prism for?
Were the Cave Painting Geniuses Revered by Picasso the Supposedly Hallucinating Psychotics of Today?Posted by alanborky at 20:58, 17 Jul 2013
I'm over at Gizmodo reading Adam Clark Estes' Scientists Think Cavemen Painted While High on Hallucinogenic Drugs and this was my response
Adam the hallucinogens explanation completely misses the point there've always been individuals called shamans prophets mediums etc who're accepted by the rest of the tribe as seers.
Even among those known to take hallucinogens there always seems to've been superstars who were variously styled by the rest of the tribe as having i) more visions ii) more potent visions iii) seeing further iv) travelling further v) greater revelatory capacity.
Strong evidence there where indeed such specialists in our past's the fact their descendants still live among us only we now variously style them i) frauds ii) self deceivers iii) hallucinatory iv) psychotic.
Put it this way you put the entire population of the planet on hallucinogens an' very few of 'em'll produce anything of the order of even the simplest cave art.
What hallucinogens DO provide us with though's a way of brushing aside all those people who naturally report seeing strange things as a bunch of crazies or liars instead of acknowledging and evaluating their possible role in human evolution and the emergence of civilization.
The story of Black Elk the Sioux Medicine Man Holy Man and Prophet.
Tony Blair's All New Who Needs Democracy Tank Wheels of Fortune Political Lottery's an Absolute Riot!Posted by alanborky at 22:44, 08 Jul 2013
I do hope I'm misunderstanding Tony Blair or at least the "striking development" in his thinking given by Toby Helm and Martin Chulov in the Observer isn't representative of a new definition of democracy covertly emerging amongst our masters and betters.
According to Blair it's perfectly legitimate for the military to decide they know best what the masses want and remove democratically elected presidents from office.
"The events that led to the Egyptian army's removal of President Mohamed Morsi confronted the military with a simple choice: intervention or chaos. Seventeen million people on the streets are not the same as an election. But it as an awesome manifestation of power."
I particularly like that "awesome manifestation of power".
Tony's very big on power.
Does this mean then it's alright for me an' the rest of Britain an' America to vote with our feet by way of persuading our military to remove Cameron and Obama from office?
And how many of us needs to be out there for them to be sure when to act?
And like in Egypt and Syria how do they work out who's the Fors who's the Againsts?
If I've understood him right though that doesn't really matter.
Apparently sheer decisiveness's the thing because events in Egypt for instance're just "the latest example of the interplay, visible the world over, between democracy, protest and government efficacy. Democracy is a way of deciding the decision-makers but it is not a substitute for making a decision."
And see this's where I start to get confused.
I always thought democracy was about our would-be political servants presenting us with proposals they intend to carry out in office and the rest of us voting for the ones we like best.
But according to Blair what we've really been voting or rioting for's whoever's the most decisive.
"I am a strong supporter of democracy. But democratic government doesn't on its own mean effective government. Today efficacy is the challenge."
Hell who needs the piddly fuss and inconvenience of democracy if y'can have decisiveness!
Then again doesn't that reduce politics to the level of a lottery where we're given tickets covered with all manner of goodies on offer by the various political parties only the moment we scratch 'em off to find out we're g'ttin' wha'ever they say we're g'ttin'?
*ttt!* Silly me.
That's the old definition of democracy.
In Blair's new definition if we ain't happy with whatever they're fobbin' us off with we keep takin' to the streets till the army finally sets everything right.
I'm over at the BBC reading how an MI5 spy's been cleared of assaulting and harassing his ex-girlfriend also an agent.
Wond'ring 'bout all the marvellous technological developments available to paranoid vindictive spy couples to spy on each other reminded me of the NYPD Cop and his cohorts who'd been using state surveillance resources to monitor potential victims in preparation for cannibal feasting.
President Obama affects puzzlement over all the fuss about the spying revelations of Edward Snowden.
Yet if the likes of Prism can't detect cannibal rings operating among its users' ranks but rather facilitates if not positively encourages that type of controlling mindset then maybe it'll only be when someone finally turns those same facilities against him and his he'll get what the rest of us were on about.
Years ago when my daughter was about six I noticed she had her fierce eyes on ferociously staring into space as her two little dimples took turns bouncing up and down on either side of her face as her thinly squeezed lips pulsated in and out against each other as if she was simultaneously chewing on something very tiny and having an imaginary argument with someone.
I could all but hear invisible steam hissing out her ears and she was obviously furious about something.
"What's the matter sugar plum?" I asked.
For a moment she seemed speechless with fury as if she'd've much preferred continuing her incandescent inner rant rather than run the risk of feeling less aggrieved by explaining what was up before hissing "It's me mum..."
"What about y'mum?"
"She said 'What d'you wan'o do? Go to Nanny's or stay with Gran'ma?' and I laughed and said 'Much as I love Gran'ma I really do I'd rather be with me Dad and go to Nanny's' and she snapped 'Well y'goin' to Gran'ma's anyway'! Why do people do that? Everyone does it. Even teachers. They pretend like they're givin' y'u a choice but they're not given you any choice a' all."
That statement of my daughter's about pretending to give people a choice when they're being given no choice at all I suggest's the essence of the new wonder of the age Nudging*.
They dress it up with terms like cognitive this and algorithm that but it boils down to how can we convince the masses we're giving them more choice more democracy indeed when in fact they're in the process of completely taking all our choices all our democracy away?
And the cosmic joke of it all's it's not even new!
Anyone's who's ever been raised by a parent especially a mother knows that chilling moment when you suddenly realise that friendly approach of a few minutes ago when the parent concerned seemed to idly ask your opinion on a topic vaguely touching on your future was merely a ruse to at first cajole then attempt to persuade then finally bludgeon you into submission.
So now we've not only got to be paranoid about our governments hacking into each others' emails files and phonecalls etc as well as the emails files and phonecalls of us their own citizens but we've also got to to be paranoid whether all those algorithms they're so kindly in the process of providing us with to ensure we don't make any wrong choices've been hacked into in such a way we make wrong choices even they haven't allowed for.
*by a curious coincidence nudger's English slang for penis so decide for yourself what Nudging might be slang for.
I'm over at This Can't Be Happening! reading Dave Lindorff's Is Naomi Wolf working for the NSA?
Noting Naomi Wolf's wondering whether Edward Snowden's who he's supposed to be Dave Lindorff now finds himself wond'ring whether Namoi Wolf who SHE'S supposed to be?
Which makes me now wonder whether Dave Lindorff's who HE'S supposed to be...?
...not because this's something which genuinely concerns me but simply to underline how everyone's completely missing the point.
Let's consider two possibilities
1) Edward Snowden's an attention seeking narcisist who's got his fifteen minutes in the limelight by revealing Prism to the world.
Which's more important?
Snowden's a glory freak?
Or as a result of his character imperfections we now know about Prism?
2) Edward Snowden's some sort of cybermach[evellian] a CIA operative/stooge who's been used/set up to tell the world about Prism as a result of some incredibly arcane and abstruse geopolitical manoeuvering [possibly involving America try'n'o bludgeon China into some sort of exclusive economic relationship which'll resurrect her financial prospects].
Which's more important?
Snowden's a spook masquerading as a hero?
Or as a result of some as yet unclear strategy [the failure or success of which may never be known] we now know GCHQ monitors America enabling the President and the NSA etc to plausibly deny they're doing any such thing?