In a sense Slip I'd rather be back to that!  The big problem in scrote
management is a lack of police power to give them choices they are
forced to accept.

On 29 June, 00:55, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> You must have heard of Billy Bob Town, population: 1
>
> Sheriff:  "your speeding through my town son and I'm going to have to
> write you up"
>
> Driver: "But I was only going 45 mph"
>
> Sheriff: "well you tell it to the judge, your court appearance is in
> 15 minutes"
>
> (sheriff changes his clothes and becomes the judge)
>
> Judge: "now let's see here, you have been charged with speeding"
>
> Driver: "I was only going 45mph"
>
> Judge: "yeah I know, fine will be set at $350."
>
> Driver: "But your Honor that is really high"
>
> Judge: "Well that's nothing compared to what it's going to cost to get
> your car out of impound"
>
> Driver: "this is outrageous! I refuse to pay such a ridiculous amount"
>
> Judge: "You are under arrest for contempt of court, please stand over
> by the door and wait for the Sheriff"
>
> On Jun 28, 6:03 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Pretty much anything can be faked Gabby - but then perhaps I knock
> > about with the wrong women?  Very few corruption cases even make it to
> > court in the UK Molly, and I'm afraid this is a sure sign we have a
> > lot of it.
>
> > On 27 June, 22:01, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > The divine by definition cannot be guessed or faked. But yes, writing
> > > or teaching about it makes room for more.
>
> > > On 27 Jun., 06:55, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I would guess we are all troubled by that focus on words that leads to
> > > > a myriad of books that only help in obscure ways and which makes an
> > > > industry out of the clutter.  I'm at the end of a long experiment I
> > > > need to write up.  Orn's a bit older than me, but we have both harked
> > > > back to a time when jobs could pay pretty well and didn't seem to be
> > > > in short supply.  These days, I despair that the main industry is
> > > > about providing useless training for jobs that aren't there.  I do see
> > > > a case for us all to need to be able to 'see the Emperor naked' and
> > > > further to be able to talk about the madness and not inventions about
> > > > the 'clothes'.
> > > > I was at a two-day training event this week, based on utter cock
> > > > derived from a book called 'Chicken Soup for the Soul' - all homilies
> > > > around being rejected 132 times before publication and the success of
> > > > self-made men and women who have triumphed over adversity.  Everyone
> > > > there could see this within minutes of the start.  All anyone there
> > > > wanted was a job that would bring some security - this being the very
> > > > thing not on offer.  All the stories were known to me to be as false
> > > > as claims made at pyramid selling events.  The book of invisible
> > > > thread had apparently sold 195 million copies - very scary.  The
> > > > trainer seemed to be a believer, though a fairly good egg who reminded
> > > > me of my Auntie Jean.  What capitalism offered once was the chance of
> > > > a decent wage and the ability to move on to another - my guess is that
> > > > what we liked about it was the freedom from the overbearing authority
> > > > of people with riches and the ranking system of education and
> > > > equivalents of the Domesday Book.
> > > > On my way home, I saw one of the idiots who was allowed to cause so
> > > > much grief to me and Sue when they lived next door.  He was driving a
> > > > car.  He is nearly always drunk or drugged and can't have a licence,
> > > > is probably disqualified, the vehicle probably unsafe and so on.  He
> > > > and his partner have lived by defrauding benefits and crime for over
> > > > 20 years.  She is on trial for arson and awaiting sentence for a
> > > > serious assault.  They are an industry - every year they cost around
> > > > £100,000 in benefits and in the legal system around their 'petty'
> > > > crimes (like throwing a fire-bomb at a family home).  One of the women
> > > > on the course applied for a gardening programme only to be told it was
> > > > only for people who had committed crimes.  One could go on, but this
> > > > is the problem - what is going on is so obvious we shouldn't have to
> > > > explain and describe it, but already be working on putting things
> > > > right.
> > > > My guess is that we need control of the small things that make life
> > > > reasonably free, and that we have actually become cowed by authority
> > > > systems we won't see.  The 'Baby P' case in the UK is a classic.  It's
> > > > clear none of the participants in this baby's cruel life and death was
> > > > prepared to act on the obvious evidence of eye and good sense.  These
> > > > people were cops, social workers, doctors and so on, all caught up in
> > > > cowardly kow-tow.  The whistle-blowers were all crudely stamped down,
> > > > as surely as the young child shouting out the 'Emperor is naked' would
> > > > be hung as a witch.  Our systems are already 'sacred' in that they
> > > > have eliminated fair criticism through a taboo of fear.  I am
> > > > materialist only in believing that anything divine should not simply
> > > > be attained by averting eyes, though I believe something more
> > > > spiritual has to be part of our daily affairs.  I believe it can be
> > > > organised - though the rub is we need control of the organising
> > > > through a system in which integrity is demonstrated, not made sacred
> > > > in a regime of truth.  The divine may be fine, but sadly it can be
> > > > faked.  Somewhere, somehow, we need to be able to contribute, have
> > > > this recognised and be left alone yet not isolated from support we
> > > > should expect from our contributions.  We probably have the technology
> > > > to organise this for the first time.
> > > > We now have two cats and an interloper called Arbuthnot with a
> > > > magnetic collar who sneaks in and sleeps on the spare bed.  My plan is
> > > > a little job that pays the bills and to write.
>
> > > > On 26 June, 23:21, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > “Orn, Neil spoke of practical levels of transparency, meaning 'who is
> > > > > governing what' in down to earth English. You are guessing your way
> > > > > to
> > > > > the domain of the divine and the new tools of deception. Calling this
> > > > > a parallel conversation would be an euphemism for lifting up the
> > > > > thinking lazy on the one hand of the scales.” – gabby
>
> > > > > Again, I’m glad to hear from you gabby; however, the above troubled me
> > > > > enough for a re-read of neil’s posts. I did find personal and read
> > > > > observations about the term transparency as well as preferences.
>
> > > > > I assume that we all have similar preferences…at least there has been,
> > > > > over the years, a lot of lip service to the same. So, since there was
> > > > > nothing that I could find that was practical in the sense of changing
> > > > > the status quo, unless perhaps one includes pointing out things to 
> > > > > see/
> > > > > observe, I followed suit. In this sense, yes, it is parallel.
>
> > > > > As for guessing, I used the term because of course, not having lived
> > > > > as long ago as my surmising was looking at, it is all I can do…guess.
>
> > > > > However, when it comes to how humans are, today at least, including
> > > > > myself, this I can say I do know about and did project this throughout
> > > > > much of history (as a guess).
>
> > > > > Oh, I did offer a suggestion too at the end about the need for the,
> > > > > perhaps obvious?.., observation this all started out with.
>
> > > > > So, all in all, I guess I don’t find the intellectual butcher shop you
> > > > > do…perhaps it is a Deutsch thing?
>
> > > > > On Jun 26, 1:05 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Orn, Neil spoke of practical levels of transparency, meaning 'who is
> > > > > > governing what' in down to earth English. You are guessing your way 
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > the domain of the divine and the new tools of deception. Calling 
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > a parallel conversation would be an euphemism for lifting up the
> > > > > > thinking lazy on the one hand of the scales.
>
> > > > > > On 26 Jun., 18:33, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "...I fear this is on the decline." - ARCHY
>
> > > > > > > ..not so sure myself. I do know that the art of deception has a 
> > > > > > > lot of
> > > > > > > new technology (tools) these days. My guess is that the nature of 
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > aspect of how one presents them self to others hasn't changed 
> > > > > > > much if
> > > > > > > at all for centuries, perhaps longer.
>
> > > > > > > This sort of ego image seems to be an innate aspect of our
> > > > > > > psyche...wishing to present a good or at least 'practical' "self" 
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > perceived others. The practical aspect of course has to do with 
> > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > one adapts to their environment, humans included.
>
> > > > > > > For us all to be able to say the emperor is wearing no clothes 
> > > > > > > means
> > > > > > > we all must see this clearly and not project other things upon it.
>
> > > > > > > On Jun 26, 8:27 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > A lot of people are certainly very disturbed by transparency - 
> > > > > > > > one can
> > > > > > > > read Freud as saying we push most of what's pretty obvious out 
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > consciousness or Norbert Elias as saying we sweep it all under 
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > carpet of manners.  Makes me queasy to be honest Orn, partly 
> > > > > > > > because I
> > > > > > > > think there are some basics where we shouldn't let deception 
> > > > > > > > rule.
> > > > > > > > The bugbear is the thought of bad government - power rarely 
> > > > > > > > allows
> > > > > > > > transparency.  I tend to like countervailing structures and to 
> > > > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > who is governing what.  I fear this is on the decline.
>
> > > > > > > > On 26 June, 15:33, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > "...more practical levels of transparency." - archy
>
> > > > > > > > > Not so sure how much I would have to do with such a 
> > > > > > > > > state...seems more
> > > > > > > > > to be the domain of the
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to