"I'm really sorry that you don't understand what I'm talking about.
That you put it off as some religious BS is totally wrong. I'm talking
about the mechanical action of a force.
If you would like to ask me questions about what I know that you do
not know, I'll be happy to answer them :-)
The 'direction' of Society is something that you would classify as
unknown. This is what stirs the fear in you to attempt to quiet me.

peace & Love - *I know how to make it the way of the world, and you are
**afraid** of me* :-P & I Love you."

This is the exact quote. Now, would you get over the "They're attacking me"
kick, and provide the clarification? I sincerely doubt anyone here is afraid
of you, but your constant assertion of such sounds like much chest puffery.



On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> The attack continues as you refuse to discus the idea I present.
> Where is the quote from? I'll be happy to explain it in context.
>
> peace & Love
>
> On Jun 18, 8:03 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Tink, where is the attack?
> >
> > Yes, for the record, you specifically said
> >
> > "They fear me because they know I can change the world."
> >
> > Your post is on the record here in the group. I have not attacked you. I
> have directly and honestly relayed to you how such statements sound, and
> asked for clarification. Will you provide it?
> >
> >
> >
> > [ Attached Message ]From:Tinker <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\""
> <[email protected]>Date:Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:39:29 -0700
> (PDT)Local:Thurs, Jun 18 2009 7:39 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Nomo Gitmo
> >
> > On Jun 18, 7:21 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > So you feel that someone noting confusion in the conversation (and not
> a solitary perspective) warrants your "satirical retort" (read: accusation)
> of self righteousness.
> >
> > No, the self-righteousness was established previously. I poked at her
> > for poking at me second hand, instead of confronting me.
> >
> > > This came on the heels of a string of replies which included the
> intimation that others were afraid of you because you had the power to
> change the world.
> >
> > Wrong again Mr. Jenkins. I incite 'the fear of the unknown' in people
> > by presenting the idea that we can change the world. It works just
> > like now where you are attacking me the person, and won't go near the
> > idea I present.
> >
> > > The combination of purported self assurance combined with a
> counterintuitive sensitivity to perceived attack, prompting subtle counter
> attacks cloaked in "satire", causes your message to come across in ways that
> are perhaps unintended. Orn said arrogant, but diagnostically, it smacks of
> textbook low level megalomania.
> >
> > And you both would kill the messenger, because you are affected by
> > 'the fear of the unknown, because of the idea. Megalomania? I have no
> > power (If I did I could do something about two moderators practicing
> > ad hominem :-)), I have nothing but knowledge.
> >
> > > This is the one major difficulty of text based exchanges; when all of
> our inflection and body language cues are removed from our messages, the
> underlying intent of our words is left to the interpretation of the
> listener.
> >
> > This is the major difficulty of introducing 'new knowledge' that blows
> > away that which has been previously accepted.
> >
> > > In order for me to understand you better, let's go back to that
> originating phrase. Who, exactly, do you think is afraid of your "power to
> change the world"?
> >
> > See above.
> > Try to understand what I'm talking about when I say "the 'direction'
> > of Society. Quit attacking me because you cannot put down my idea to
> > create unity amongst mankind by establishing common recognition for
> > the connection, "an ah ha moment the fantastic connection in my head",
> > that is the common link of mankind.
> >
> > peace & Love
> >
> >
> >
> > > [ Attached Message ]From:Tinker <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds
> Eye\"" <[email protected]>Date:Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:59:55 -0700
> (PDT)Local:Wed, Jun 17 2009 10:59 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Nomo Gitmo
> >
> > > No sir. It was a satirical retort earned by Ms Brogan.
> > > "the unstable muddle of illogical fancy" - Molly
> >
> > > peace & Love
> >
> > > On Jun 17, 10:01 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Tink, you accuse Orn of subtle ad hominem, and then in the next
> breath, do exactly what you complain of. Perhaps this is the kind od
> behaviour that led to Orn's perception?
> >
> > > > [ Attached Message ]From:Tinker <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds
> Eye\"" <[email protected]>Date:Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:19:27 -0700
> (PDT)Local:Wed, Jun 17 2009 9:19 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: Nomo Gitmo
> >
> > > > I sure wish I could bless somebody. I guess I need to work on my
> self-
> > > > righteousness :-)
> > > > I still Love you Molly.
> >
> > > > peace & Love
> >
> > > > On Jun 17, 5:40 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Bless you, Vam.  There is an enormous kindness in the patient
> > > > > extension into the unstable muddle of illogical fancy, like skating
> on
> > > > > broken ice or swimming in mud for the sake of a gracious
> connection.
> > > > > I wonder at the confusion in the discussion here lately.  It seems
> so
> > > > > much more emotion based, we rely less on valid information and more
> on
> > > > > highly personal opinion.  Maybe a reflection of the emotional state
> of
> > > > > the world at large, a reflection of the aftershocks of a global
> > > > > financial crisis.  Does uncertainty prevent clear communication?
> >
> > > > > "I know how to make it the way of the world and you are afraid of
> > > > > me."  (slowly shaking head)  Are we trapped in a desolate Bukowski
> > > > > poem:
> > > > > "If you think it's boring
> > > > > out there," he tells me, "you oughta be
> > > > > back here."
> > > > > so here I am
> > > > > propped up against my pillows
> > > > > again
> > > > > just an old guy
> > > > > just an old writer
> > > > > with a yellow
> > > > > notebook.
> >
> > > > > On Jun 17, 2:41 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Tinker, let me begin with Peace & Love for you !
> >
> > > > > > I take exception to you post in that you have not addressed what
> I did
> > > > > > point out.
> >
> > > > > > One, that :  " The direction of society includes the potential of
> '
> > > > > > change ' within it. Feudalism is largely not evident anymore ;
>  ask
> > > > > > yourself why."
> >
> > > > > > Two, that :  " Rules also include the learning society has
> accumulated
> > > > > > over the millenia. And, Right does not equal Truth ! "
> >
> > > > > > > I'm really sorry that you don't understand what I'm talking
> about.
> > > > > > > That you put it off as some religious BS is totally wrong. I'm
> talking
> > > > > > > about the mechanical action of a force.
> >
> > > > > > Indeed, I do not understand this " mechanical action of a force "
> you
> > > > > > are speaking of. What is this " force ?"  What is the "
> mechanical "
> > > > > > " action "  of this force ?
> >
> > > > > > > If you would like to ask me questions about what I know that
> you do
> > > > > > > not know, I'll be happy to answer them :-)
> >
> > > > > > How would I know what you know, without you revealing all you
> know ?
> > > > > > How would I know what I do not know ?  Please appreciate, these
> > > > > > difficulties are very real and massive, to say the least.
> >
> > > > > > > The 'direction' of Society is something that you would classify
> as
> > > > > > > unknown.
> >
> > > > > > No, Gruff and Molly has given me enough idea of that. Plus, I am
> not
> > > > > > exactly illiterate, if not erudite. I do read widely.
> >
> > > > > > > This is what stirs the fear in you ...
> >
> > > > > > Did you see, feel that fear within you ?  If yes, may it be that
> the
> > > > > > fear is yours ?
> >
> > > > > > Or, did you sense that fear as it arose in me ?  If so, by what
> means
> > > > > > did you sense it ?
> >
> > > > > > > ... to attempt to quiet me.
> >
> > > > > > On the contrary, I invite you to talk on this forum as much as
> you
> > > > > > wish or need to. Believe me, when people talk I get to know what
> they
> > > > > > know and, more importantly, what they do not know.
> >
> > > > > > > peace & Love - I know how to make it the way of the world, and
> you are afraid of me.
> >
> > > > > > See above.
> >
> > > > > > For now, I'd let my love for you be. But I do wish that Peace be
> upon
> > > > > > you !
> >
> > > > > >  :-P & I Love you.
> >
> > > > > > > On Jun 16, 10:08 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > " The 'direction' of Society, 'rule overrules right', ... "
> >
> > > > > > > > Tinker, I have heard you bring up this ' mantra ' umpteen
> times,
> > > > > > > > especially to end an argument, if not to win it. I believe it
> is
> > > > > > > > misplaced, if not entirely.
> >
> > > > > > > > The direction of society includes the potential of ' change '
> within
> > > > > > > > it. Feudalism is largely not evident anymore ;  ask yourself
> why.
> >
> > > > > > > > Rules also include the learning society has accumulated over
> the
> > > > > > > > millenia. And, Right does not equal Truth !
> >
> > > > > > > > I have nothing against the mantra per se, so long as it
> remains
> > > > > > > > yours !
> >
> > > > > > > > Peace & Love ... don't mind this borrowing.
> >
> > > > > > > > On Jun 17, 7:29 am, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > Rules from previous circumstances applied to similar
> present
> > > > > > > > > circumstances and enforced without consideration of the
> differences IS
> > > > > > > > > 'rule overrules right'.
> > > > > > > > > The 'direction' of Society, 'rule overrules right', is the
> root of
> > > > > > > > > every problem in the world and can be changed :-)
> >
> > > > > > > > > peace & Love
> >
> > > > > > > > > On Jun 16, 10:02 am, ornamentalmind <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > "The view behind is for retrospect in the hope that it
> will help us
> > > > > > > > > > turn the right way next
> > > > > > > > > > time to see it right." - sd
> >
> > > > > > > > > > Yes, looking at the past is often used as a method for
> making
> > > > > > > > > > decisions in the present. The main problem with this is
> that the past
> > > > > > > > > > is not the present.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > On Jun 16, 6:02 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Very well, it's all assumptive, either way there is no
> telling what
> > > > > > > > > > > the actual outcome would be.  The probability seems
> equal given any
> > > > > > > > > > > choice.   The trajectory of views are many, at least
> 360 and in
> > > > > > > > > > > between but we can only see one way at a time. The view
> behind is for
> > > > > > > > > > > retrospect in the hope that it will help us turn the
> right way next
> > > > > > > > > > > time to see it right.   I just don't see it going
> anywhere except
> > > > > > > > > > > onward like a broken record, both sides bloodied
> grooves.  Credibility
> > > > > > > > > > > and legitimization is hindsight, a crumpled ideal that
> once stood
> > > > > > > > > > > tall.  Strategy has now become fear of upsetting the
> enemy.  When
> > > > > > > > > > > sending a message of intolerance becomes damaging and
> destructive to a
> > > > > > > > > > > cause there is dilemma and stagnation.  The agreement
> all around is on
> > > > > > > > > > > the uncertainty of outcome and the unsureness of the
> forward path.  It
> > > > > > > > > > > is all out of my hands and out of my reach but in view,
> as spectator I
> > > > > > > > > > > can only watch and wait.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks everyone for your participation, thoughts and
> opinions.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Dona Nobis Pachem!
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 16, 2:17 am, Justintruth <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > You asked.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Your idea about "just killing" the prisoners on Gitmo
> would undermine
> > > > > > > > > > > > our attempts to de-legitimize the Jihadist movement
> without any
> > > > > > > > > > > > significant compensatory benefit. The scale of the
> damage it would
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more ยป
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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