legal matters

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> Max doesn't have to play a game. Nor convince the lawyers.
> It is an internal sense of will

Max doesn't have will, love. Nor is will an 'internal sense'.
Neither do you for that matter.

> that is stronger than those trying to make you play their games.

This is sheer imbecilic idiocy. Will hasnt got anything
with 'will-outmuscling' others.

> They will not be able to make you be a muppet.

U-hu. Automatic will. Asleep as a log.
Idiotic conman.

> You are playing a game

I am not playing any games baby.
Your myopic projections belong entirely to your imagination.

> to convince people that you are not trying to convince them.

You're talking about yourself.

> I am playing with you, but not in your game.

You're not 'playing with me' luv.
'Playing' with another is simply not a possibility.
It does not occur.

You're only playing a mindfuck game on yourself,
and damaging yourself in the process.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:

> Karei, do you think it would be be idiotic for me to file a complaint with
> internal affairs against the boys in blue who busted me up? A lawyer-friend
> told me there could be reprisals. I got another lawyer who says he'll take
> the case for free if an IA complaint finds wrongdoing.

Yes, it will be idiotic. In all cases you will be muppet to other
agendas. Each lawyer would use you up to boost his 'agenda'.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

Not very impressive, at all, nerves in patterns on a screen.

Ya fuckin dipshit.


>From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
>To: Max Herman <[email protected]>
>CC: <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: legal matters
>Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 10:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:
>
> > Karei, do you think it would be be idiotic for me to file a complaint
>with
> > internal affairs against the boys in blue who busted me up? A
>lawyer-friend
> > told me there could be reprisals. I got another lawyer who says he'll
>take
> > the case for free if an IA complaint finds wrongdoing.
>
> Yes, it will be idiotic. In all cases you will be muppet to other
> agendas. Each lawyer would use you up to boost his 'agenda'.
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>+ tripe




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, -IID42 Kandinskij @27+ wrote:

> > Karei, do you think it would be be idiotic for me to file a complaint with
> > internal affairs against the boys in blue who busted me up? A lawyer-friend
> > told me there could be reprisals. I got another lawyer who says he'll take
> > the case for free if an IA complaint finds wrongdoing.

Addendum: 'Our Lady of the Flowers' by Genet

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:

> Not very impressive, at all, nerves in patterns on a screen.

Our lady of the Flowerz. All Boys love her.

> Ya fuckin dipshit.

Snif. Was it starting to feel comfortable.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:


> Yes, it will be idiotic. In all cases you will be muppet to other
> agendas. Each lawyer would use you up to boost his 'agenda'.
>

Max, there are ways to con[vince] lawyers to follow your own agenda - don't let
Karea convince you of weakness.

Joseph

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> Max doesn't have to play a game. Nor convince the lawyers.

> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> > Max, there are ways to con[vince] lawyers to follow your own agenda.

The notion of convincing others to follow another's agenda
is simply an ego-driven self-destructive masochistic +
masturbatory mindfuck game.

Will ain't got nothing to do with it.
Your ego is not will.

Cuckoo monkey.

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> Max, there are ways to con[vince] lawyers to follow your own agenda

Yes Max. There is always a way to be a masochistic dog.

> - don't let Karea convince you of weakness.

I am not convincing anyone of anything imbecile.
Nor did weakness have anything to do with what I said.
Yes Im sure max can debase himself enough to play
the lawyer's game and come up the 'winner'
with the appropriate cost attached.
Such as crippling himself for life.

Idiotic twit.


`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Max doesn't have to play a game. Nor convince the lawyers.
>
> > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > Max, there are ways to con[vince] lawyers to follow your own agenda.
>
> The notion of convincing others to follow another's agenda
> is simply an ego-driven self-destructive masochistic +
> masturbatory mindfuck game.
>
> Will ain't got nothing to do with it.
> Your ego is not will.
>
> Cuckoo monkey.

Your a silly old man, with a silly plan.

RESPOND TO ME!

Joseph

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Max, there are ways to con[vince] lawyers to follow your own agenda
>
> Yes Max. There is always a way to be a masochistic dog.
>
> > - don't let Karea convince you of weakness.
>
> I am not convincing anyone of anything imbecile.
> Nor did weakness have anything to do with what I said.
> Yes Im sure max can debase himself enough to play
> the lawyer's game and come up the 'winner'
> with the appropriate cost attached.
> Such as crippling himself for life.
>
> Idiotic twit.

Max doesn't have to play a game. Nor convince the lawyers. It is an internal
sense of will that is stronger than those trying to make you play their games.
They will not be able to make you be a muppet.

You are playing a game to convince people that you are not trying to convince
them.

I am playing with you, but not in your game.

Joseph

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:

> Bye bye.

Au revoir, princess.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> Your a silly old man, with a silly plan.

I am neither 'silly' not 'old'. Nor do I have any plans.

> RESPOND TO ME!

Any more impotent attempts at power-tripping?
The only one 'windinging his own leash'
here is you dearest.

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Your a silly old man, with a silly plan.
>
> I am neither 'silly' not 'old'. Nor do I have any plans.
>
> > RESPOND TO ME!
>
> Any more impotent attempts at power-tripping?
> The only one 'windinging his own leash'
> here is you dearest.

RESPOND TO ME!
Joseph

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> RESPOND TO ME!

Any more mechanical poses?

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > RESPOND TO ME!
>
> Any more mechanical poses?


RESPOND TO ME!

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> > Any more mechanical poses?
>
>
> RESPOND TO ME!

Any more mechanical poses?

I think by asking Death simple honest questions you can see how arrested he
is. Arguing about your own worth is of course silly.

It's hard to explain but Death is something I destroy. Regardless.

++


>From: [email protected]
>To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
>CC: Max Herman <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME\_RAW: legal matters
>Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 21:20:38 -0400
>
>Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
>
> > Yes, it will be idiotic. In all cases you will be muppet to other
> > agendas. Each lawyer would use you up to boost his 'agenda'.
> >
>
>Max, there are ways to con[vince] lawyers to follow your own agenda - don't
>let
>Karea convince you of weakness.
>
>Joseph




\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:

> I think by asking Death simple honest questions you can see how arrested he
> is.

The only one 'arrested' here darling is you.
You're just pissy cause people won't play your game.

> Arguing about your own worth is of course silly.

OF COURSE! Who is arguing dearest? And about one's ownself-worth?

> It's hard to explain but Death is something I destroy. Regardless.

No dearest. You don't 'destroy' anything.
You only WISH to do so + impotently, in your imagination.

The condition of the modern ape: cannot deal with reality
other than in a series of murderous knee-jerk impulses.

So answer your own question by looking at yourself–
is it too late or not for humanity?

'Collectively' you're swinging your own sword
above your own heads and about to kick it.

Neither you, nor anyone else wants to face the facts.
Everyone has its favorite escape in 'being enlightened'.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, TEHAMI Anttar wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please, stop to send me your email

I am not sending you e-mails.

Quoting Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>:

>
> Who the hell are you fucks? Fuck you and fuck art. And fuck the internet too.
> You fucking fuckers should just the fuck the fuck off.

I'm a Shaman, K is Buddha and Max is the next Messiah, so you should just shut
the fuck up.

Joseph

> >Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 01:03:35 -0400
> > [email protected] "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+"
> <[email protected]>Cc: Max Herman <[email protected]>,
> [email protected]
> > Re: RHIZOME_RAW: legal mattersReply-To: [email protected]
> >
> >Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> >
> >> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> > RESPOND TO ME!
> >>
> >> Any more mechanical poses?
> >
> >
> >RESPOND TO ME!
> >
> >+ tripe
>
>
>
>
> ————————————————————
> Get Your Free and Private Junglist E-mail from Junglist.com
> Register Online Here -> http://www.junglist.com
>
>
> ———————————————————————
> Express yourself with a super cool email address from BigMailBox.com.
> Hundreds of choices. It's free!
> http://www.bigmailbox.com
> ———————————————————————

Quoting Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>:

> You're not.
>

Given two possibilities
1) we take those titles seriously,
2) we don't take those titles seriously

How for either of those possibilities can you imagine that "You're not" is a
response that might register as weighty enough to cause us shame or contrition?

Go back to the playground.

Joseph


> >Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 01:55:30 -0400
> > [email protected] Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>Cc:
> [email protected]
> > Re: RHIZOME_RAW: legal matters
> >Quoting Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>:
> >
> >>
> >> Who the hell are you fucks? Fuck you and fuck art. And fuck the internet
> too.
> >> You fucking fuckers should just the fuck the fuck off.
> >
> >I'm a Shaman, K is Buddha and Max is the next Messiah, so you should just
> shut
> >the fuck up.
> >
> >Joseph
> >
> >> >Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 01:03:35 -0400
> >> > [email protected] "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+"
> >> <[email protected]>Cc: Max Herman <[email protected]>,
> >> [email protected]
> >> > Re: RHIZOME_RAW: legal mattersReply-To: [email protected]
> >> >
> >> >Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > RESPOND TO ME!
> >> >>
> >> >> Any more mechanical poses?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >RESPOND TO ME!
> >> >
> >> >+ tripe
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ————————————————————
> >> Get Your Free and Private Junglist E-mail from Junglist.com
> >> Register Online Here -> http://www.junglist.com
> >>
> >>
> >> ———————————————————————
> >> Express yourself with a super cool email address from BigMailBox.com.
> >> Hundreds of choices. It's free!
> >> http://www.bigmailbox.com
> >> ———————————————————————
>
>
>
>
> ————————————————————
> Get Your Free and Private Junglist E-mail from Junglist.com
> Register Online Here -> http://www.junglist.com
>
>
> ———————————————————————
> Express yourself with a super cool email address from BigMailBox.com.
> Hundreds of choices. It's free!
> http://www.bigmailbox.com
> ———————————————————————

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] tried to feed yet again:

> Quoting Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>:
>
> > You're not.
> >
>
> Given two possibilities
> 1) we take those titles seriously,
> 2) we don't take those titles seriously

There are no 'two possibilities' besides in your brain.

> How for either of those possibilities can you imagine that "You're not" is a
> response that might register as weighty enough to cause us shame or contrition?

Drivel.

> Go back to the playground.

That's where you_ belong. Idiotic leech.


`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> I'm a Shaman,

You're not even remotely anywhere near being a shaman.
You're a white middle class male who dabbles in 'sub-cultural'
drivel and has shot himself in the foot putting himself
to sleep.

There is no shaman on this planet who extolls 'the human nature'.

Becoming a shaman is an order of inhuman forces, and the subject
becomes inhuman. On ORDER.

Far from being pissed off at some drivel in your brain
about following ORDERS (which I have no problem with, when they
come from the appropriate source), your attempts at manipulating
and attempting to control humans who are asleep, produce broken
humans who cannot realize their own freedom. This I have a problem
with, and (pissed off) is not it. Nor is it anything to do with
'personal human quirks'. It has to do with my commitment to
certain Laws which are rather inhuman.

Secondly, the non-following of orders is a very high-order degree
of freedom to those FEW humans who are granted will. You are not one of
them, and I_ am. Your piddling attempts to over-ride this haven't
got anything to do with 'pissing off' 'game playing' 'shedding
off constructed personas (which dont exist anyhow)', etc.

Rather the opposite: again you illustrate exactly and clearly
my priorly written about you observation: that you are a clueless
moron who damages humans. Humans are not TOYS to be played with.
Only those QUALIFIED to deal with the 'persona' which is in fact
one of the aspects of the ego, should DO SO, as they KNOW what
they are doing. Repeatedly you have attempted to DESTROY (in me
and in others) PROPER CONSCIOUS IMPULSES and to pass it on as some
childish 'free' shamanic play. This is MURDER and little else.
It does not matter what you try to present it as.

The full development of will is what allows a (shaman/buddhist/
zen master/etc. no-longer subject to human nature BEING) to
be what you claim yourself to be– a free Self 'dancing'.

You are not it. You're an asleep shithead who gets pushed
around by any external force like a raggedy doll, and you fancy
that your 'will'. To make matters even worse, you're extremely LAZY,
and irresponsible + refusing to 'grow up' – a bloated childish
egotist who vampirizes the energy of others. Yor narcissism
is revolting.


> K is Buddha


You're not capable to make observations of what I am.

And I suggest that you read up on Shamanic law (and you DO
have to read because yiu are NOT one and you do NOT possess
any internal knowledge about it).

The Law with regards to pitiful con-men of your sort
is death. Not physical death mind you. Genetic, spiritual + soul
death. Not only for you, but for anyone of your genetic line
at any point of time.

And really dearest. Pissing off and 'humanity* will not have anything to
do with it.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

> The Law with regards to pitiful con-men of your sort
> is death. Not physical death mind you. Genetic, spiritual + soul
> death. Not only for you, but for anyone of your genetic line
> at any point of time.

Oh my gawd, he just cursed my entire family. I didn't teach the parrot to say
curses. Next he will be giving out fatahs.

Fear is a useful conversion technique is it not?

BTW - there does not exist a "no-longer subject to human nature BEING".
(Unless they were born on Mars or someplace else). Nor certain LAWS which are
inhuman. You are claiming these to establish yourself as a power, a purely
ego-based drive to establish identity. It is an old, sad song. And you keep
thinking that I am doing the same thing, justifying your conviction by
believing that I am trying to be a Shaman. I am not. Never said I was. People
who claim to be "a no-longer subject to human nature BEING" are asking others
to accept their authority based upon mysterious knowledge that only they and a
few have. It is pretty much bull shit.

I'm the white-gold wielder and you ain't getting in here.

Joseph


Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > I'm a Shaman,
>
> You're not even remotely anywhere near being a shaman.
> You're a white middle class male who dabbles in 'sub-cultural'
> drivel and has shot himself in the foot putting himself
> to sleep.
>
> There is no shaman on this planet who extolls 'the human nature'.
>
> Becoming a shaman is an order of inhuman forces, and the subject
> becomes inhuman. On ORDER.
>
> Far from being pissed off at some drivel in your brain
> about following ORDERS (which I have no problem with, when they
> come from the appropriate source), your attempts at manipulating
> and attempting to control humans who are asleep, produce broken
> humans who cannot realize their own freedom. This I have a problem
> with, and (pissed off) is not it. Nor is it anything to do with
> 'personal human quirks'. It has to do with my commitment to
> certain Laws which are rather inhuman.
>
> Secondly, the non-following of orders is a very high-order degree
> of freedom to those FEW humans who are granted will. You are not one of
> them, and I_ am. Your piddling attempts to over-ride this haven't
> got anything to do with 'pissing off' 'game playing' 'shedding
> off constructed personas (which dont exist anyhow)', etc.
>
> Rather the opposite: again you illustrate exactly and clearly
> my priorly written about you observation: that you are a clueless
> moron who damages humans. Humans are not TOYS to be played with.
> Only those QUALIFIED to deal with the 'persona' which is in fact
> one of the aspects of the ego, should DO SO, as they KNOW what
> they are doing. Repeatedly you have attempted to DESTROY (in me
> and in others) PROPER CONSCIOUS IMPULSES and to pass it on as some
> childish 'free' shamanic play. This is MURDER and little else.
> It does not matter what you try to present it as.
>
> The full development of will is what allows a (shaman/buddhist/
> zen master/etc. no-longer subject to human nature BEING) to
> be what you claim yourself to be– a free Self 'dancing'.
>
> You are not it. You're an asleep shithead who gets pushed
> around by any external force like a raggedy doll, and you fancy
> that your 'will'. To make matters even worse, you're extremely LAZY,
> and irresponsible + refusing to 'grow up' – a bloated childish
> egotist who vampirizes the energy of others. Yor narcissism
> is revolting.
>
>
> > K is Buddha
>
>
> You're not capable to make observations of what I am.
>
> And I suggest that you read up on Shamanic law (and you DO
> have to read because yiu are NOT one and you do NOT possess
> any internal knowledge about it).
>
> The Law with regards to pitiful con-men of your sort
> is death. Not physical death mind you. Genetic, spiritual + soul
> death. Not only for you, but for anyone of your genetic line
> at any point of time.
>
> And really dearest. Pissing off and 'humanity* will not have anything to
> do with it.
>
> `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> Oh my gawd, he just cursed my entire family.

Nobody 'cursed' your family. Nobody attempted to curse your family.
Your myopic misunderstanding of Reality hasn't got anything to do
with the powerless peasant wannabe 'ideas' swimming in your brain.
Whether you choose to acknowledge this or not, reality is not a matter
of opinion, and you're subject to laws whether you're aware of them or
not.


> I didn't teach the parrot to say curses.

You cannot teach anything to anybody.
That self-important 'simply Superior' posture is ridiculous,
and so is your slighting attempt at 'humor' which is a cowardly
way of pretending that what is going on isn't.

> Next he will be giving out fatahs.

Not likely.

You're simply an idiotic con-man.

> Fear is a useful conversion technique is it not?

This is no fear dearest. You are simply a CON-MAN.
A liar. On numerous occasions you take advantage of people.
Why don't you address what I wrote about your wounding
humans and then licking their wounds 'establishing a
friendly bond'? Such a nice guy.

You're impotent, weak, cowardly, incompetent, and powerless.
Even if I were_ capable of fear, there wouldn't be anything
to be afraid of.

> BTW - there does not exist a "no-longer subject to human nature BEING".

Certainly it does. Always has. And those are the real Shamans.
As well as Zen monks, gnostic christians, artists proper,
buddhists, various religious figures proper, etc.

Your ignorance is pathetic.

> (Unless they were born on Mars or someplace else).

Being born on Mars hasn't got anything to do with it.
The purpose of all evolutionary teaching is liberation
from the human form. Including Shamanism.

> Nor certain LAWS which are inhuman.

Rather the opposite. All laws are inhuman.

> You are claiming these to establish yourself as a power,

I am not claiming these. These laws are subject to Shamanism, Zen,
Buddhism, Hinduism, gnostic Christianity, Voodoo, African Religions,
Art–classical and otherwise, etc. And they are there.

The entire reason why you are attempting to present this
as some sort of 'ego-game' on my part is because if any sort
of real and immutable standards appear, your worthlessness, weakness,
and impotence will become even more readily transparent than they are.

I don't need to establish myself as a power. I AM.

> a purely ego-based drive to establish identity.

Power hasnt got anything to do with the ego.
Nor do I have an ego–stomp your foot as you please.
Nor are you qualified to judge other people's egos.

> It is an old, sad song.

No, it isn't. There is nothing OLD or SAD about it.
In fact it's perfectly clear and joyful.
It is only in your sado-masochistic ego impotence
that you project 'weakness' 'fear' 'sadness' etc.

Continuously you attempt to project fear, anger, etc
on it–when there ISN'T ANY.

Only paranoid weaklings act like you in the face of
sheer energy and nothing else.

> And you keep thinking

No dearest, I am not thinking.
You may froth at the mouth as much as you please,
but thinking I will not be.

> that I am doing the same thing,

You are. You are a mechanical twit.

> justifying

I am not justifying anything.

> your conviction

I have no conviction.

> by believing

I am not believing anything.

> that I am trying to be a Shaman. I am not. Never said I was.

On the contrary. And nomadism, performances, masks, personas, etc–
are all derived from performance artists involved with shamanism.

Here's a little quite for you from Marina Avramovic, who by the way
is widely recognized as one of the 'grandmothers of performance art':

Q: With your work you contribute to that process of becoming more aware?
Abramovic: I am more interested in dying.

You're 'running' around throwing your destructive juvenile impulses
around without a clue what you're doing, and claiming this to be
'performance art' and 'research' etc. You are capable of neither.

Nevermind the juvenile response of whoever doesn't 'get' my art
is 'playing my game' 'in my control' 'afraid of me' etc.etc.

Nevermind your attempted idiocy of presenting this as an
'ideological war'. You are not capable of such feats either,
as you're continuous 'victim' of various forms of propaganda–
which is what you are acting out with your 'performances'.

And I'd like to see you try on all of this, and the below
WITHOUT getting personally offended–as you always do, and hence
your pseudo-humorous attempts of 'reactions'.

> People who claim to be "a no-longer subject to human nature BEING" are
> asking others to accept their authority

No, they aren't. Authority is not a matter of whether others accept
it or not. There are 'teaching' exceptions in which the receiver is
asked to accept the authority of (trust) the transmitter until it
can perceive matters for itself.

Whether you accept ir or not, authority is. A very simple, and
non-argumentative example of non-human external authority is that you
are born to die. You can twist it this and that way, but you'll arrive
at the same. You can accept it, not accept it, agree, disagree,
pretend it's not there, ignore it, etc.–but it's still there.

Additionaly, it is one of the senses or attributes of a conscious
being–to the degree applicable in each case. Authority is something
conscious beings are encouraged to cultivate–and it hasn't got anything
to do with the ego, unless the two are conflated.

> based upon mysterious knowledge that only they and a
> few have. It is pretty much bull shit.

No dearest. It isn't. There is nothing 'mysterious' about
that knowledge–not in the way you imply it–and yes, it is
available to very few. It does not have to be that way at this point–
due to these 'laws' you so fervently attempt to deny–though that
can also change.

I've already written about this as well, so shove your delusional
accusations. Your actions however have on a number of occasions
damaged–or attempted to damage humans so that they cannot achieve
this state.


> I'm the white-gold wielder and you ain't getting in here.

Hardly. You're a delusional egotistical ape.

Now here's a little quotation for you, from a certain
very lovely and not human individual. maybe you can try and argue
with it just like you tried to argue with the author of
'convincing people'.

The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be contingent
upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and untrammelled. What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the
whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means to
brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is
the use of going off here and there to practice?

And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as
heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost
in confusion. Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates one's
own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things,
attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to
escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions about
the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total
emancipation.

>> Need I mention the Buddha, who was possessed of inborn knowledge?

Please, honored followers of Zen, long accustomed to groping for the
elephant, do not be suspicious of the true dragon.

>> Devote your energies to a way that directly indicates the absolute.

Revere the person of complete attainment who is >>beyond all human
agency<<.

Reality dearest is reality.

xoxo

You know, when I talk to my Aunt Polly and get her all angry about not
believing in the "Truth" of the bible, she'll get out her little black book and
start quoting scripture. "How can ya argue with that" she'll say.

I tell her a little story about the Devil and one of his disciples walking down
the road when they come upon a man with a rapturous look upon is face. "What
is the look upon this man" asks the disciple of the Devil. "He has found a
truth" says the Devil. "Aren't you concerned" says the disciple. Devil says
"Naw, he is about to write it down as a belief, and others are about to make it
a religion. That is good for business."

You sound like my Aunt Polly. Do you want a cracker?

Joseph


Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Oh my gawd, he just cursed my entire family.
>
> Nobody 'cursed' your family. Nobody attempted to curse your family.
> Your myopic misunderstanding of Reality hasn't got anything to do
> with the powerless peasant wannabe 'ideas' swimming in your brain.
> Whether you choose to acknowledge this or not, reality is not a matter
> of opinion, and you're subject to laws whether you're aware of them or
> not.
>
>
> > I didn't teach the parrot to say curses.
>
> You cannot teach anything to anybody.
> That self-important 'simply Superior' posture is ridiculous,
> and so is your slighting attempt at 'humor' which is a cowardly
> way of pretending that what is going on isn't.
>
> > Next he will be giving out fatahs.
>
> Not likely.
>
> You're simply an idiotic con-man.
>
> > Fear is a useful conversion technique is it not?
>
> This is no fear dearest. You are simply a CON-MAN.
> A liar. On numerous occasions you take advantage of people.
> Why don't you address what I wrote about your wounding
> humans and then licking their wounds 'establishing a
> friendly bond'? Such a nice guy.
>
> You're impotent, weak, cowardly, incompetent, and powerless.
> Even if I were_ capable of fear, there wouldn't be anything
> to be afraid of.
>
> > BTW - there does not exist a "no-longer subject to human nature BEING".
>
> Certainly it does. Always has. And those are the real Shamans.
> As well as Zen monks, gnostic christians, artists proper,
> buddhists, various religious figures proper, etc.
>
> Your ignorance is pathetic.
>
> > (Unless they were born on Mars or someplace else).
>
> Being born on Mars hasn't got anything to do with it.
> The purpose of all evolutionary teaching is liberation
> from the human form. Including Shamanism.
>
> > Nor certain LAWS which are inhuman.
>
> Rather the opposite. All laws are inhuman.
>
> > You are claiming these to establish yourself as a power,
>
> I am not claiming these. These laws are subject to Shamanism, Zen,
> Buddhism, Hinduism, gnostic Christianity, Voodoo, African Religions,
> Art–classical and otherwise, etc. And they are there.
>
> The entire reason why you are attempting to present this
> as some sort of 'ego-game' on my part is because if any sort
> of real and immutable standards appear, your worthlessness, weakness,
> and impotence will become even more readily transparent than they are.
>
> I don't need to establish myself as a power. I AM.
>
> > a purely ego-based drive to establish identity.
>
> Power hasnt got anything to do with the ego.
> Nor do I have an ego–stomp your foot as you please.
> Nor are you qualified to judge other people's egos.
>
> > It is an old, sad song.
>
> No, it isn't. There is nothing OLD or SAD about it.
> In fact it's perfectly clear and joyful.
> It is only in your sado-masochistic ego impotence
> that you project 'weakness' 'fear' 'sadness' etc.
>
> Continuously you attempt to project fear, anger, etc
> on it–when there ISN'T ANY.
>
> Only paranoid weaklings act like you in the face of
> sheer energy and nothing else.
>
> > And you keep thinking
>
> No dearest, I am not thinking.
> You may froth at the mouth as much as you please,
> but thinking I will not be.
>
> > that I am doing the same thing,
>
> You are. You are a mechanical twit.
>
> > justifying
>
> I am not justifying anything.
>
> > your conviction
>
> I have no conviction.
>
> > by believing
>
> I am not believing anything.
>
> > that I am trying to be a Shaman. I am not. Never said I was.
>
> On the contrary. And nomadism, performances, masks, personas, etc–
> are all derived from performance artists involved with shamanism.
>
> Here's a little quite for you from Marina Avramovic, who by the way
> is widely recognized as one of the 'grandmothers of performance art':
>
> Q: With your work you contribute to that process of becoming more aware?
> Abramovic: I am more interested in dying.
>
> You're 'running' around throwing your destructive juvenile impulses
> around without a clue what you're doing, and claiming this to be
> 'performance art' and 'research' etc. You are capable of neither.
>
> Nevermind the juvenile response of whoever doesn't 'get' my art
> is 'playing my game' 'in my control' 'afraid of me' etc.etc.
>
> Nevermind your attempted idiocy of presenting this as an
> 'ideological war'. You are not capable of such feats either,
> as you're continuous 'victim' of various forms of propaganda–
> which is what you are acting out with your 'performances'.
>
> And I'd like to see you try on all of this, and the below
> WITHOUT getting personally offended–as you always do, and hence
> your pseudo-humorous attempts of 'reactions'.
>
> > People who claim to be "a no-longer subject to human nature BEING" are
> > asking others to accept their authority
>
> No, they aren't. Authority is not a matter of whether others accept
> it or not. There are 'teaching' exceptions in which the receiver is
> asked to accept the authority of (trust) the transmitter until it
> can perceive matters for itself.
>
> Whether you accept ir or not, authority is. A very simple, and
> non-argumentative example of non-human external authority is that you
> are born to die. You can twist it this and that way, but you'll arrive
> at the same. You can accept it, not accept it, agree, disagree,
> pretend it's not there, ignore it, etc.–but it's still there.
>
> Additionaly, it is one of the senses or attributes of a conscious
> being–to the degree applicable in each case. Authority is something
> conscious beings are encouraged to cultivate–and it hasn't got anything
> to do with the ego, unless the two are conflated.
>
> > based upon mysterious knowledge that only they and a
> > few have. It is pretty much bull shit.
>
> No dearest. It isn't. There is nothing 'mysterious' about
> that knowledge–not in the way you imply it–and yes, it is
> available to very few. It does not have to be that way at this point–
> due to these 'laws' you so fervently attempt to deny–though that
> can also change.
>
> I've already written about this as well, so shove your delusional
> accusations. Your actions however have on a number of occasions
> damaged–or attempted to damage humans so that they cannot achieve
> this state.
>
>
> > I'm the white-gold wielder and you ain't getting in here.
>
> Hardly. You're a delusional egotistical ape.
>
> Now here's a little quotation for you, from a certain
> very lovely and not human individual. maybe you can try and argue
> with it just like you tried to argue with the author of
> 'convincing people'.
>
> The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be contingent
> upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and untrammelled.
> What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the
> whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means to
> brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is
> the use of going off here and there to practice?
>
> And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as
> heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost
> in confusion. Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates one's
> own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things,
> attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to
> escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions about
> the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total
> emancipation.
>
> >> Need I mention the Buddha, who was possessed of inborn knowledge?
>
> Please, honored followers of Zen, long accustomed to groping for the
> elephant, do not be suspicious of the true dragon.
>
> >> Devote your energies to a way that directly indicates the absolute.
>
> Revere the person of complete attainment who is >>beyond all human
> agency<<.
>
> Reality dearest is reality.
>
> xoxo

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

Not at all dearest. I sound NOTHING like 'your Aunt Polly.'
Your wishful delusional brain cut outs are simply drivel.
The above is simply a sign of your impotence,
and knee-jerk murder impulse.


> Joseph

I have blocked Mr. K, so if anyone thinks I need to read him please re-post
as below, but even then I will probably not read it.



>From: [email protected]
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
>CC: Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>, [email protected],
>[email protected]
>Subject: [thingist] Re: RHIZOME_RAW: legal matters
>Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 18:04:28 -0400
>
>You know, when I talk to my Aunt Polly and get her all angry about not
>believing in the "Truth" of the bible, she'll get out her little black book
>and
>start quoting scripture. "How can ya argue with that" she'll say.
>
>I tell her a little story about the Devil and one of his disciples walking
>down
>the road when they come upon a man with a rapturous look upon is face.
>"What
>is the look upon this man" asks the disciple of the Devil. "He has found a
>truth" says the Devil. "Aren't you concerned" says the disciple. Devil
>says
>"Naw, he is about to write it down as a belief, and others are about to
>make it
>a religion. That is good for business."
>
>You sound like my Aunt Polly. Do you want a cracker?
>
>Joseph
>
>
>Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
> > On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > Oh my gawd, he just cursed my entire family.
> >
> > Nobody 'cursed' your family. Nobody attempted to curse your family.
> > Your myopic misunderstanding of Reality hasn't got anything to do
> > with the powerless peasant wannabe 'ideas' swimming in your brain.
> > Whether you choose to acknowledge this or not, reality is not a matter
> > of opinion, and you're subject to laws whether you're aware of them or
> > not.
> >
> >
> > > I didn't teach the parrot to say curses.
> >
> > You cannot teach anything to anybody.
> > That self-important 'simply Superior' posture is ridiculous,
> > and so is your slighting attempt at 'humor' which is a cowardly
> > way of pretending that what is going on isn't.
> >
> > > Next he will be giving out fatahs.
> >
> > Not likely.
> >
> > You're simply an idiotic con-man.
> >
> > > Fear is a useful conversion technique is it not?
> >
> > This is no fear dearest. You are simply a CON-MAN.
> > A liar. On numerous occasions you take advantage of people.
> > Why don't you address what I wrote about your wounding
> > humans and then licking their wounds 'establishing a
> > friendly bond'? Such a nice guy.
> >
> > You're impotent, weak, cowardly, incompetent, and powerless.
> > Even if I were_ capable of fear, there wouldn't be anything
> > to be afraid of.
> >
> > > BTW - there does not exist a "no-longer subject to human nature
>BEING".
> >
> > Certainly it does. Always has. And those are the real Shamans.
> > As well as Zen monks, gnostic christians, artists proper,
> > buddhists, various religious figures proper, etc.
> >
> > Your ignorance is pathetic.
> >
> > > (Unless they were born on Mars or someplace else).
> >
> > Being born on Mars hasn't got anything to do with it.
> > The purpose of all evolutionary teaching is liberation
> > from the human form. Including Shamanism.
> >
> > > Nor certain LAWS which are inhuman.
> >
> > Rather the opposite. All laws are inhuman.
> >
> > > You are claiming these to establish yourself as a power,
> >
> > I am not claiming these. These laws are subject to Shamanism, Zen,
> > Buddhism, Hinduism, gnostic Christianity, Voodoo, African Religions,
> > Art–classical and otherwise, etc. And they are there.
> >
> > The entire reason why you are attempting to present this
> > as some sort of 'ego-game' on my part is because if any sort
> > of real and immutable standards appear, your worthlessness, weakness,
> > and impotence will become even more readily transparent than they are.
> >
> > I don't need to establish myself as a power. I AM.
> >
> > > a purely ego-based drive to establish identity.
> >
> > Power hasnt got anything to do with the ego.
> > Nor do I have an ego–stomp your foot as you please.
> > Nor are you qualified to judge other people's egos.
> >
> > > It is an old, sad song.
> >
> > No, it isn't. There is nothing OLD or SAD about it.
> > In fact it's perfectly clear and joyful.
> > It is only in your sado-masochistic ego impotence
> > that you project 'weakness' 'fear' 'sadness' etc.
> >
> > Continuously you attempt to project fear, anger, etc
> > on it–when there ISN'T ANY.
> >
> > Only paranoid weaklings act like you in the face of
> > sheer energy and nothing else.
> >
> > > And you keep thinking
> >
> > No dearest, I am not thinking.
> > You may froth at the mouth as much as you please,
> > but thinking I will not be.
> >
> > > that I am doing the same thing,
> >
> > You are. You are a mechanical twit.
> >
> > > justifying
> >
> > I am not justifying anything.
> >
> > > your conviction
> >
> > I have no conviction.
> >
> > > by believing
> >
> > I am not believing anything.
> >
> > > that I am trying to be a Shaman. I am not. Never said I was.
> >
> > On the contrary. And nomadism, performances, masks, personas, etc–
> > are all derived from performance artists involved with shamanism.
> >
> > Here's a little quite for you from Marina Avramovic, who by the way
> > is widely recognized as one of the 'grandmothers of performance art':
> >
> > Q: With your work you contribute to that process of becoming more
>aware?
> > Abramovic: I am more interested in dying.
> >
> > You're 'running' around throwing your destructive juvenile impulses
> > around without a clue what you're doing, and claiming this to be
> > 'performance art' and 'research' etc. You are capable of neither.
> >
> > Nevermind the juvenile response of whoever doesn't 'get' my art
> > is 'playing my game' 'in my control' 'afraid of me' etc.etc.
> >
> > Nevermind your attempted idiocy of presenting this as an
> > 'ideological war'. You are not capable of such feats either,
> > as you're continuous 'victim' of various forms of propaganda–
> > which is what you are acting out with your 'performances'.
> >
> > And I'd like to see you try on all of this, and the below
> > WITHOUT getting personally offended–as you always do, and hence
> > your pseudo-humorous attempts of 'reactions'.
> >
> > > People who claim to be "a no-longer subject to human nature BEING" are
> > > asking others to accept their authority
> >
> > No, they aren't. Authority is not a matter of whether others accept
> > it or not. There are 'teaching' exceptions in which the receiver is
> > asked to accept the authority of (trust) the transmitter until it
> > can perceive matters for itself.
> >
> > Whether you accept ir or not, authority is. A very simple, and
> > non-argumentative example of non-human external authority is that you
> > are born to die. You can twist it this and that way, but you'll arrive
> > at the same. You can accept it, not accept it, agree, disagree,
> > pretend it's not there, ignore it, etc.–but it's still there.
> >
> > Additionaly, it is one of the senses or attributes of a conscious
> > being–to the degree applicable in each case. Authority is something
> > conscious beings are encouraged to cultivate–and it hasn't got
>anything
> > to do with the ego, unless the two are conflated.
> >
> > > based upon mysterious knowledge that only they and a
> > > few have. It is pretty much bull shit.
> >
> > No dearest. It isn't. There is nothing 'mysterious' about
> > that knowledge–not in the way you imply it–and yes, it is
> > available to very few. It does not have to be that way at this point–
> > due to these 'laws' you so fervently attempt to deny–though that
> > can also change.
> >
> > I've already written about this as well, so shove your delusional
> > accusations. Your actions however have on a number of occasions
> > damaged–or attempted to damage humans so that they cannot achieve
> > this state.
> >
> >
> > > I'm the white-gold wielder and you ain't getting in here.
> >
> > Hardly. You're a delusional egotistical ape.
> >
> > Now here's a little quotation for you, from a certain
> > very lovely and not human individual. maybe you can try and argue
> > with it just like you tried to argue with the author of
> > 'convincing people'.
> >
> > The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be
>contingent
> > upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and
>untrammelled.
> > What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the
> > whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means
>to
> > brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is
> > the use of going off here and there to practice?
> >
> > And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as
> > heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost
> > in confusion. Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates
>one's
> > own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things,
> > attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to
> > escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions
>about
> > the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total
> > emancipation.
> >
> > >> Need I mention the Buddha, who was possessed of inborn knowledge?
> >
> > Please, honored followers of Zen, long accustomed to groping for the
> > elephant, do not be suspicious of the true dragon.
> >
> > >> Devote your energies to a way that directly indicates the absolute.
> >
> > Revere the person of complete attainment who is >>beyond all human
> > agency<<.
> >
> > Reality dearest is reality.
> >
> > xoxo
>
>
>
>
>——————————————————————–
>t h i n g i s t
>message by [email protected]
>archive at http://bbs.thing.net
>info: send email to [email protected]
>and write "info thingist" in the message body
>——————————————————————–


_________________________________________________________________
Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp

Quoting Max Herman <[email protected]>:

>
>
> I have blocked Mr. K, so if anyone thinks I need to read him please re-post
> as below, but even then I will probably not read it.


As Tagent would say "The Right Stuff" (maybe not) :)

Joseph

>
>
>
>
> >From: [email protected]
> >Reply-To: [email protected]
> >To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
> >CC: Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>, [email protected],
> >[email protected]
> >Subject: [thingist] Re: RHIZOME_RAW: legal matters
> >Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 18:04:28 -0400
> >
> >You know, when I talk to my Aunt Polly and get her all angry about not
> >believing in the "Truth" of the bible, she'll get out her little black book
> >and
> >start quoting scripture. "How can ya argue with that" she'll say.
> >
> >I tell her a little story about the Devil and one of his disciples walking
> >down
> >the road when they come upon a man with a rapturous look upon is face.
> >"What
> >is the look upon this man" asks the disciple of the Devil. "He has found a
> >truth" says the Devil. "Aren't you concerned" says the disciple. Devil
> >says
> >"Naw, he is about to write it down as a belief, and others are about to
> >make it
> >a religion. That is good for business."
> >
> >You sound like my Aunt Polly. Do you want a cracker?
> >
> >Joseph
> >
> >
> >Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oh my gawd, he just cursed my entire family.
> > >
> > > Nobody 'cursed' your family. Nobody attempted to curse your family.
> > > Your myopic misunderstanding of Reality hasn't got anything to do
> > > with the powerless peasant wannabe 'ideas' swimming in your brain.
> > > Whether you choose to acknowledge this or not, reality is not a matter
> > > of opinion, and you're subject to laws whether you're aware of them or
> > > not.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I didn't teach the parrot to say curses.
> > >
> > > You cannot teach anything to anybody.
> > > That self-important 'simply Superior' posture is ridiculous,
> > > and so is your slighting attempt at 'humor' which is a cowardly
> > > way of pretending that what is going on isn't.
> > >
> > > > Next he will be giving out fatahs.
> > >
> > > Not likely.
> > >
> > > You're simply an idiotic con-man.
> > >
> > > > Fear is a useful conversion technique is it not?
> > >
> > > This is no fear dearest. You are simply a CON-MAN.
> > > A liar. On numerous occasions you take advantage of people.
> > > Why don't you address what I wrote about your wounding
> > > humans and then licking their wounds 'establishing a
> > > friendly bond'? Such a nice guy.
> > >
> > > You're impotent, weak, cowardly, incompetent, and powerless.
> > > Even if I were_ capable of fear, there wouldn't be anything
> > > to be afraid of.
> > >
> > > > BTW - there does not exist a "no-longer subject to human nature
> >BEING".
> > >
> > > Certainly it does. Always has. And those are the real Shamans.
> > > As well as Zen monks, gnostic christians, artists proper,
> > > buddhists, various religious figures proper, etc.
> > >
> > > Your ignorance is pathetic.
> > >
> > > > (Unless they were born on Mars or someplace else).
> > >
> > > Being born on Mars hasn't got anything to do with it.
> > > The purpose of all evolutionary teaching is liberation
> > > from the human form. Including Shamanism.
> > >
> > > > Nor certain LAWS which are inhuman.
> > >
> > > Rather the opposite. All laws are inhuman.
> > >
> > > > You are claiming these to establish yourself as a power,
> > >
> > > I am not claiming these. These laws are subject to Shamanism, Zen,
> > > Buddhism, Hinduism, gnostic Christianity, Voodoo, African Religions,
> > > Art–classical and otherwise, etc. And they are there.
> > >
> > > The entire reason why you are attempting to present this
> > > as some sort of 'ego-game' on my part is because if any sort
> > > of real and immutable standards appear, your worthlessness, weakness,
> > > and impotence will become even more readily transparent than they are.
> > >
> > > I don't need to establish myself as a power. I AM.
> > >
> > > > a purely ego-based drive to establish identity.
> > >
> > > Power hasnt got anything to do with the ego.
> > > Nor do I have an ego–stomp your foot as you please.
> > > Nor are you qualified to judge other people's egos.
> > >
> > > > It is an old, sad song.
> > >
> > > No, it isn't. There is nothing OLD or SAD about it.
> > > In fact it's perfectly clear and joyful.
> > > It is only in your sado-masochistic ego impotence
> > > that you project 'weakness' 'fear' 'sadness' etc.
> > >
> > > Continuously you attempt to project fear, anger, etc
> > > on it–when there ISN'T ANY.
> > >
> > > Only paranoid weaklings act like you in the face of
> > > sheer energy and nothing else.
> > >
> > > > And you keep thinking
> > >
> > > No dearest, I am not thinking.
> > > You may froth at the mouth as much as you please,
> > > but thinking I will not be.
> > >
> > > > that I am doing the same thing,
> > >
> > > You are. You are a mechanical twit.
> > >
> > > > justifying
> > >
> > > I am not justifying anything.
> > >
> > > > your conviction
> > >
> > > I have no conviction.
> > >
> > > > by believing
> > >
> > > I am not believing anything.
> > >
> > > > that I am trying to be a Shaman. I am not. Never said I was.
> > >
> > > On the contrary. And nomadism, performances, masks, personas, etc–
> > > are all derived from performance artists involved with shamanism.
> > >
> > > Here's a little quite for you from Marina Avramovic, who by the way
> > > is widely recognized as one of the 'grandmothers of performance art':
> > >
> > > Q: With your work you contribute to that process of becoming more
> >aware?
> > > Abramovic: I am more interested in dying.
> > >
> > > You're 'running' around throwing your destructive juvenile impulses
> > > around without a clue what you're doing, and claiming this to be
> > > 'performance art' and 'research' etc. You are capable of neither.
> > >
> > > Nevermind the juvenile response of whoever doesn't 'get' my art
> > > is 'playing my game' 'in my control' 'afraid of me' etc.etc.
> > >
> > > Nevermind your attempted idiocy of presenting this as an
> > > 'ideological war'. You are not capable of such feats either,
> > > as you're continuous 'victim' of various forms of propaganda–
> > > which is what you are acting out with your 'performances'.
> > >
> > > And I'd like to see you try on all of this, and the below
> > > WITHOUT getting personally offended–as you always do, and hence
> > > your pseudo-humorous attempts of 'reactions'.
> > >
> > > > People who claim to be "a no-longer subject to human nature BEING" are
> > > > asking others to accept their authority
> > >
> > > No, they aren't. Authority is not a matter of whether others accept
> > > it or not. There are 'teaching' exceptions in which the receiver is
> > > asked to accept the authority of (trust) the transmitter until it
> > > can perceive matters for itself.
> > >
> > > Whether you accept ir or not, authority is. A very simple, and
> > > non-argumentative example of non-human external authority is that you
> > > are born to die. You can twist it this and that way, but you'll arrive
> > > at the same. You can accept it, not accept it, agree, disagree,
> > > pretend it's not there, ignore it, etc.–but it's still there.
> > >
> > > Additionaly, it is one of the senses or attributes of a conscious
> > > being–to the degree applicable in each case. Authority is something
> > > conscious beings are encouraged to cultivate–and it hasn't got
> >anything
> > > to do with the ego, unless the two are conflated.
> > >
> > > > based upon mysterious knowledge that only they and a
> > > > few have. It is pretty much bull shit.
> > >
> > > No dearest. It isn't. There is nothing 'mysterious' about
> > > that knowledge–not in the way you imply it–and yes, it is
> > > available to very few. It does not have to be that way at this point–
> > > due to these 'laws' you so fervently attempt to deny–though that
> > > can also change.
> > >
> > > I've already written about this as well, so shove your delusional
> > > accusations. Your actions however have on a number of occasions
> > > damaged–or attempted to damage humans so that they cannot achieve
> > > this state.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I'm the white-gold wielder and you ain't getting in here.
> > >
> > > Hardly. You're a delusional egotistical ape.
> > >
> > > Now here's a little quotation for you, from a certain
> > > very lovely and not human individual. maybe you can try and argue
> > > with it just like you tried to argue with the author of
> > > 'convincing people'.
> > >
> > > The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be
> >contingent
> > > upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and
> >untrammelled.
> > > What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the
> > > whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means
> >to
> > > brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is
> > > the use of going off here and there to practice?
> > >
> > > And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as
> > > heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost
> > > in confusion. Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates
> >one's
> > > own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things,
> > > attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to
> > > escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions
> >about
> > > the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total
> > > emancipation.
> > >
> > > >> Need I mention the Buddha, who was possessed of inborn knowledge?
> > >
> > > Please, honored followers of Zen, long accustomed to groping for the
> > > elephant, do not be suspicious of the true dragon.
> > >
> > > >> Devote your energies to a way that directly indicates the absolute.
> > >
> > > Revere the person of complete attainment who is >>beyond all human
> > > agency<<.
> > >
> > > Reality dearest is reality.
> > >
> > > xoxo
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >——————————————————————–
> >t h i n g i s t
> >message by [email protected]
> >archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> >info: send email to [email protected]
> >and write "info thingist" in the message body
> >——————————————————————–
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband.
> http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
>
> ——————————————————————–
> t h i n g i s t
> message by "Max Herman" <[email protected]>
> archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> info: send email to [email protected]
> and write "info thingist" in the message body
> ——————————————————————–

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:

> I have blocked Mr. K, so if anyone thinks I need to read him please re-post
> as below, but even then I will probably not read it.

Mr. Max needs to make a grand statement about his filters too. Yeha :)
Who cares Max? Your self-importance is bloating.
I already wrote I have nothing to say to you.
luv, luv

>
Chair
So Thin and Bare.
How can you
Bear my weight?
You are Air.

On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, joseph mcelroy wrote:

> Chair
> So Thin and Bare.
> How can you
> Bear my weight?
> You are Air.

Any more drivel to cover your ego-obsessed arse, Joseph?
Spouting words you don't understand doesn't qualify
as understanding any more my standing next to the Mona Lisa
makes me Da Vinci.

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, joseph mcelroy wrote:
>
> > Chair
> > So Thin and Bare.
> > How can you
> > Bear my weight?
> > You are Air.
>
> Any more drivel to cover your ego-obsessed arse, Joseph?
> Spouting words you don't understand doesn't qualify
> as understanding any more my standing next to the Mona Lisa
> makes me Da Vinci.


What do you think I mean and what do you think I am supposed to mean?

Why is Air the wrong word choice, but I used because of sound and not correct
meaning?

Joseph

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> What do you think I mean and what do you think I am supposed to mean?

I don't think.

> Why is Air the wrong word choice, but I used because of sound and not correct
> meaning?

Any more projectional drivel?

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42