Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005 Status: offline
|
jlf, I am now responding to you. I don't know to whom you refer in that post, but whatever. It matters not, because people do have a tendency to interpret things no matter how crystal clear or vague they may be. I think this is fundamental to the problem but that is not the point right now. You see I can say "You are wrong" without addending it with an insult such as idiot, moron, liar or anything else. I have developed that apparently rare skill for some reason. I have explained my background on this board and I have no shame. I also have the ability to reject anger. I can explain how it is done and prove that it can be done. There are no cites or quotes because very few can even fathom it. I am what would be described in the old day as not short on temper. But know this, I have a long fuse but it is connected to a very big bomb. And the burnt part of the fuse regrows if I have a chance to chill out. The thing is I don't claim to know everything, and the last time I went to a lawyer he had to call a lawyer, and this guy is pretty sharp. It's just that my question was out of his perview, and I respect that he admitted it. No matter how professional you are, if you are working for me I want you to know your limitations. Some people think they have no limitations. They do not see beyond what they know or can find out, via whatever media. The words are clear, the meaning is clear but some don't see the spirit of the words. They will "read between the lines" and lose sight of the lines. What's more I am not a tinfoiler, I do not read between lines. Some read the lines and conclude that they can do whatever they want. Others read the lines and reduce it to simpler terms, like the notion that jurisdiction is determined solely by lines on a map. Neither conclusion is right, and of all people, Charlie Manson put it quite well in his interview with Joel Rose. You see the world through a filter. They way I see it is that really higher learning not only cleans this filter, but clears it. Manson described it as a photo negative in front of people's eyes, or minds. This is not a bad analogy. Remember that I have been studying psychology from before Manson met the media. The fact that I say this, but do also know the guy was crazy, indicates to any logical mind that I judge the facts, not the source. This is essential to really understanding WTF is going on. I am trying to convey this to othes. For one, if I owned CM I might possibly throw a shitload of people off, because we don't need to discuss this here. That would be my decision in this case. For the maximum bang for the buck, Real and Hunky would be outta here and Ken would stay despite the disagreements. Why ? Because we have an image to maintain, to show people that we are not sociopathic maniacs. But it is not my decision and really these people do bring up some valid points, topics that rightly should not be suppressed. Ken's Kounterpoints are a component of this whole mess. In fact he serves a useful purpose for the movement in contradicting it. People can bone up and get a bit of practice before they put their neck on the chopping block. As much as I might appreciate the sparring, eventually the majority of blood in the parking lot will not be mine. I will not just lay down and take it, and I respect other who also will not. But be aware, you are never going to convince me of certain things, and of course the same is true of others. We all have different backgrounds and life experiences and I understand why I am not believed all the time. My background differs greatly from the norm. It is hard to believe some of the the things I have experienced, actually even survived. Some things I say are personal experiences, and (lucky for me) in most cases there is no documentation. But one poster told of a story of him shooting a burglar and some people wanted online proof. What do you want the fucking address to go look for bulletholes? Why the fuck make that shit up ? My standards for belief are different, and first and foremost is the main thing, what does someone gain by lying ? I apply this same reasoning everywhere, even at dot gov sites, snopes and whatever. Snopes has been wrong, but they are pretty diligent keeping the errors down. Wiki is getting better, you see how they sometimes have "cite needed" and things like that. They are trying to improve. I think for some, the printed word at certain sites carries the weight of gold bullion, while personal accounts on the web do not, for no other reason than the souce. That is a trap into which I shall not fall. But I got some dandy shovels for sale. T
|