Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: for the WC people (Franky, Dottie, Tarjei)
- Oh Mike, please! did you just invite this man to
discuss his holocaust denial loveing Bondareving butt
here on line?
--- Mike helsher <mhelsher@...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.com,____________________________________________________________________________________
> Robert Mason
> <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:
> > Tarjei wrote:
> > >>The problem with Robert Mason is that he's an
> > apologist for holocaust denial and for a long
> > list of anti-Semitic weirdos who say that
> > Auschwitz was a benign and humane work camp. .
> > . . [etc., etc.]<<
> > Robert writes:
> > Tarjei, the last time around I gave up trying
> > to talk with you for much the same reason that
> > I quit the WC list: I don't want to spend my
> > time and energy in discussions that are plainly
> > doomed to futility. But you just keep at it
> > anyway. I had suggested that you read what I
> > actually did write to the WC, but you refused,
> > giving the obviously false excuse that "I have
> > not read your WC posts because I don't read the
> > WC." And you apparently still haven't read
> > what I wrote but just continue to promulgate
> > your hallucinations of things I supposedly
> > said or meant.
> > So I still have to wonder, "what could be
> > happening in your mind?" I had attributed your
> > attitude to prejudice, but now it seems to me
> > that something more pernicious than mere
> > prejudice is at work in you. Now I'm thinking
> > that maybe you do really smoke dope and that
> > your rants about me are the expressions of your
> > stoned, freaked-out sense of humor. Or maybe
> > you smoke so much dope that you don't know when
> > you are making stuff up or when you are joking
> > or when you are serious? But, to me, that
> > blatantly false excuse is an indication not of
> > a lack of seriousness so much as a lack of
> > sincerity. Still, maybe you are so permanently
> > stoned that you had forgotten that you do read
> > the WC? (Doesn't seem likely to me.)
> > Some years ago I read Ron Dunselman's book *In
> > Place of the Self*. So I Googled a little and
> > found the article "Not I: The Physical and Non-
> > Physical Effects of Drugs, and their Treatment"
> > <http://www.charlest.uklinux.net/arta.html>
> > This brief overview of Dunselman's work
> > includes this passage:
> > "Hashish (marijuana) and opium affect the link
> > between the life and feeling bodies [i.e. the
> > etheric and astral bodies -- RM] B. They induce
> > a dream consciousness as when asleep, though
> > the drug user is awake. Hash is metabolised
> > very slowly with traces still present in the
> > brain after some 30 days. Very frequent users
> > experience loss of memory and become confused,
> > producing the so called 'hash-thought'."
> > And so now I'm thinking that if you would get
> > off drugs, detox the poisons from your
> > organism, go through some therapy such as the
> > "Arta" program, and get your astral body re-
> > connected to your ethereal body, then *maybe*,
> > after time, we might be able to have a rational
> > conversation. I might still have to contend
> > with your prejudice, but at least I wouldn't
> > have to contend with your drug-induced
> > insanity.
> > -- The preceding is of course based on the hope
> > that your problem is something as simple as
> > Mary G. Whanna. But if that's not the problem;
> > if you just naturally are the way you are --
> > then the situation is probably a lot more
> > complicated, and lot more "pernicious". Maybe
> > the general, world-wide mass insanity
> > surrounding the "Holocaust" and related issues
> > has somehow hooked into your particular,
> > freaked-out psycho-organism in an unusually
> > virulent way . . . . I could only guess.
> > But right now, I don't see any basis for a
> > worthwhile discussion between us. And unless
> > and until you give me some evidence of some
> > real earnestness and sincerity on your part,
> > frankly, I don't want to spend my time on you.
> > This is sad, perhaps, but for me it's a matter
> > of *triage* with my time and mental energy.
> > I do wish for your health, in all aspects.
> > Robert Mason
> Hummm... Tarjei's remark must have hit home, for you
> to make such a
> personal attack, based on your assumptions about his
> I've found Tarjei's scope on this list to be broad,
> articulate, and rediculously funny - whilst hanging
> on to a certain
> sense irony that is imaginative, inspiring,
> else...(I must have done to much dope too).
> I personally haven't used any "trendy chemical
> amusement aids" in
> coming up on 17 years, and have amassed a solid
> understanding (I
> think) as to the motives involved with cronic drug
> abuse. I find your
> lack of empathy disturbing, though your lip service
> at the end of
> your post has potential.
> I'm about as earnest, sincere, and earthy as they
> come (pardon my
> humility), but my cronic obcessive need for
> humorously pointing out
> stupidity sometimes gets in the way (Is there a
> twelve step
> fellowship for OCHD? (obcessive compulsive Humor
> disorder)). So if
> you wanna chat some of your Holocaust denial Jive
> with an
> inarticulate recovered dope fiend, that has fallen
> hopelessly in Love
> with the spirit of what RS was trying to put into
> WORDS, I might be
> willing to accomadate your seeming need for
> "earnestness and
> sencerity". And I promise that I will do my best and
> try not to
> write ANYTHING FUNNY.
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, dottie zold
>Actually Dottie, sweetie, love of my internet life....:) You know me!
> Oh Mike, please! did you just invite this man to
> discuss his holocaust denial loveing Bondareving butt
> here on line?
I'm way more into an individuals personal motives for their beliefs.
Logic smogic, if you are just ranting words and got a flaming
intellect (like some people we know..:) I think Tarjei might have hit
close to home with his reply...More MUST be revealed! And No better
to reveal it than a basementology expert like myself, down here in
the Basement department. But I get the feeling that Mr. Mason isnt
into slumming it much - Much less washing his own feet, revermind
- To Mike H, who wrote:
>>. . . . based on your assumptions . . . .<<Robert writes:
You might want to go back and take note of
words such as *maybe* and *if*.
>>So if you wanna chat some of your Holocaustdenial Jive . . . I might be willing to
accomadate [sic] your seeming need for
"earnestness and sencerity [sic]".<<
I don't much want to "chat" about what you
call my "Holocaust denial Jive"; I groan
inwardly at the thought of getting my
cyber-fingers stuck in that tar baby again.
But if you have a "need" or desire to
search for historical truth in that area,
I might be willing to try to accommodate
you, within reason. But I am no special
expert; you might have as much success
just by doing some Googling on your own.
. . . But I suspect that I am dealing with
another quirky sense of humor, and that
you are more interested in my "basementology"
than in history. Please be assured that I
look into my own basement regularly, and
that I have sometimes explored down there
with professional guidance and in "group
work". I don't intend to attempt such
"work" with this "group" of amateurs in
this very public cyberspace.
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
- Mike H wrote to Robert M:
>Hummm... Tarjei's remark must have hit home, for you to make such aWell, Mr. Mason must have done some deep digging into my biography,
>personal attack, based on your assumptions about his lifestyle.
because I did indeed smoke quite a bit of cannabis 40 years ago, when
I was a teenager, and I ended up being busted for it in 1969 and
spent six months behind bars that year. So Mr. Mason's rationale
appears to be, "Once stoned, always stoned," which indicates that
he's speaking from personal experience.
Since that time 40 years ago, my personal consumption of contraband
has been limited to 2-3 puffs of mild marijuana per annum on the
average, basically for political reasons (because it's illegal). So I
call these annual rituals my socio-political duty. It's been a long,
long time since I was stoned, however, and during the last 8-9 years,
I haven't had any alcohol. It's not abstinence based upon principle
or anything like that, it's just that I haven't enjoyed the taste or
effect of alcohol for a long time (nor of cannabis or marijuana for
that matter). A second reason for my non-use of intoxicants
(excepting my 2-3 puffs per annum) is that I drive my car on a daily
basis, and Norway happens to have some of the strictest laws in the
world when it comes to DWI. There's zero tolerance here, and I have
no intention of jeopardizing my driving privilege.
I'm not kidding, however, when I say that Mr. Mason is projecting his
own pathology. You have to be stoned on something very heavy and
dangerous to flirt with holocaust denial like that and mix this with
anthroposophy. This is a definite sign of a confused and decadent
soul-life, indicating that what Mr. Mason has been smoking is no
weed-reefer, but a glass crackpipe, in addition to shooting up and
swallowing down a fifth of vodka in the morning and a pint of Scotch
in the afternoon.
I've been listening to half a dozen interviews with Holocaust
survivor and 1986 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Eli Wiesel at the Open
Mind program with Richard Hefner, where he talks about the anatomy of
hate, the Holcaust, anti-Semitism and related issues. You may also
have seen that program with Oprah Winfrey, where she and Wiesel take
a cold winter's day walk around Auschwitz, the factory of death,
where Wiesel survived miraclulously, and to himself incomprehensibly,
at the tender age of 15. They look at all the evidence, the gas
chambers and the gas cannisters, all the clothes and shoes left
behind by rich and poor, young and old, and the tons and tons of hair
cut off the victims intended to be used for manufacturing something
useful. A factory of death with Eli Wiesel and many others as closeup
After making the movie "Schindler's List," Steven Spielberg
video-interviewed many Holocaust survivors who told their stories.
Deniers of the Holocaust are calling all these people liars. This is
not a simple matter of erroneous revision of history; it's something
far worse, namely the claim that the Holocaust is not a historical
fact but a lie created by Jews, based upon false evidence created by
Jews and the lies of innumerable Jewish survivors. And that is indeed
so disgusting that if anyone claiming to be an anthroposophist
adheres to this type of sickness, he or she must be wacked on crack.
I won't venture to guess what Peter Staudenmaier may of may not be
smoking, but his historical revisionism is very similar to that of
holocaust deniars, so it's understandable that Mr. Mason hangs out in
the Hole where he can find people with similar mental and spiritual defects.
Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: for the WC people (Franky, Dottie, Tarjei)Dear Mr Mason,
write me your biography, dark sides included, and I maybe will find a place in Sweden for you to recover, if you are sincere enough.
P.S. A friend of mine arranges "pagan crucifixions". You will survive...
06-12-01 20.42, skrev Robert Mason på robertsmason_99@... följande:
To Mike H, who wrote:
>>. . . . based on your assumptions . . . .<<
You might want to go back and take note of
words such as *maybe* and *if*.
- Mr. Mason, one does not have to be a historial expert
to converse on the human tragedy that took place at
the hands of the Nazis. To think one does seems to
leave open the question that you and other holocaust
deniers bring and that is that 'it's not all what you
think it was'. It was! all that we think it was and
I am thankful that Vorstand stood up against such
ignorance posing as spiritual science with Rudolf
Steiner's name attached to give it more weight.
Shameful is what it is and very hurtful to the
Society. You promote his work as well as say 'well if
you have a need for historical truth...', as if, as if
what you and Bondarev are pushing is the real truth
that we just all have been hoodwinked by. What a
--- Robert Mason <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:
> To Mike H, who wrote:____________________________________________________________________________________
> >>. . . . based on your assumptions . . . .<<
> Robert writes:
> You might want to go back and take note of
> words such as *maybe* and *if*.
> Mike wrote:
> >>So if you wanna chat some of your Holocaust
> denial Jive . . . I might be willing to
> accomadate [sic] your seeming need for
> "earnestness and sencerity [sic]".<<
> Robert writes:
> I don't much want to "chat" about what you
> call my "Holocaust denial Jive"; I groan
> inwardly at the thought of getting my
> cyber-fingers stuck in that tar baby again.
> But if you have a "need" or desire to
> search for historical truth in that area,
> I might be willing to try to accommodate
> you, within reason. But I am no special
> expert; you might have as much success
> just by doing some Googling on your own.
> . . . But I suspect that I am dealing with
> another quirky sense of humor, and that
> you are more interested in my "basementology"
> than in history. Please be assured that I
> look into my own basement regularly, and
> that I have sometimes explored down there
> with professional guidance and in "group
> work". I don't intend to attempt such
> "work" with this "group" of amateurs in
> this very public cyberspace.
> Robert Mason
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited____________________________________________________________________________________
> Access over 1 million songs.
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com. Try it now.
- Dottie wrote:
>I am thankful that Vorstand stood up against such ignorance posingI'm also thankful to Mr. Mason for revealing his true colors with his
>as spiritual science with Rudolf Steiner's name attached to give it
last couple of posts.
- I wrote:
>I've been listening to half a dozen interviewsUncle Taz continueth:
>with Holocaust survivor and 1986 Nobel Peace
>Prize laureate Eli Wiesel at the Open Mind
>program with Richard Hefner, where he talks
>about the anatomy of hate, the Holcaust,
>anti-Semitism and related issues. You may also
>have seen that program with Oprah Winfrey, where
>she and Wiesel take a cold winter's day alk
>around Auschwitz, the factory of death, where
>Wiesel survived miraclulously, and to himself
>incomprehensibly, at the tender age of 15. They
>look at all the evidence, the gas hambers and
>the gas cannisters, all the clothes and shoes
>left behind by rich and poor, young and old, and
>the tons and tons of hair cut off the victims
>intended to be used for anufacturing something
>useful. A factory of death with Eli Wiesel and
>many others as closeup eyewitnesses.
I've done some thinking around the topic of
anti-Semitism and arguments presented here by
previous contributors against Jews collectively,
such as "Christ-rejection", decadent and
atavistic monotheism, fuelling the brutal
shadow-side of Israel's politics through Zionists
in Israel itself and the Jewish lobby in the US,
being responsible for all wars and arms
productions - these allegations against Jews in
general go on and on and amount to something
where Peter Staudenmaier has a valid point for a
change, namely the phenomenon of anti-Semitism
from the political left in the light of justified
increasing criticism against Israel's politics.
And it's precisely because this anti-Semitism
comes from the left, that Mr. Lightsearcher jumps
in and showers me with praise for opposing it. He
wouldn't have been so fast on that trigger of his
if it had been easier for me to make certain
points on this issue that the time in question.
This was very difficult, however, in the face of
so much weird stuff that was being written about
the Jews here by certain individuals.
Before I get to those points, it should be made
clear, however, that Israeli political
propagandists have been abusing history, the
Holocaust, and the charge of anti-Semitism for
many decades in an endeavor to silence criticism
against Israel. The claim that anti-Semitism is
on the rise today, also in the West, is pure
propaganda not based on fact. Norman G.
Finkelstein has written some books on this issue:
"The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the
Exploitation of Jewish Suffering" and "Beyond
Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History."
Finkelstein has frequently criticized the
Anti-Defamation League as an organization
dedicated not to defend against anti-Semitism,
but to defamation of critics of Israel.
Ultimately, he argues, the ADL trivializes real
anti-Semitism by "crying wolf" with fraudulent
allegations of Holocaust denial and "New anti-Semitism".
In a letter to Georgetown University, the ADL
referred to Finkelstein as a "known Holocaust
denier". This is very ironic indeed when we take
into account that not only is Finkelstein Jewish;
his parents were Polish Auschwitz survivors. And
by accusing Finkelstein of Holocaust denial, the ADL prove him right:
Finkelstein has routinely dismissed this charge
as spurious, pointing to his various descriptions
of the Holocaust as an indisputable fact, and
referring mockingly to "each of the many
occasions that ADL has slandered this writer as a
'well-known Holocaust denier.'" More recently,
the Washington Post said of the ADL's allegation
against Finkelstein that it "proved baseless."
In an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy
Now, Finkelstein argued that in the eyes of the
ADL "anyone who's a critic of Israel becomes an
anti-Semite. And the truth of the matter is, the
real anti-Semites, they don't really care about
-- or the real Holocaust deniers, which is their
other favorite epithet to hurl at people or
expectorate at people who are critical of
Israel." In that same interview, Finkelstein went
on to say that genuine instances of Holocaust
denial such as Mahmoud Abbas's doctoral
dissertation (which claimed that less than a
million Jews were killed by the Nazis) or Silvio
Berlusconi's claim that Mussolini was a "benign
dictator" who "never killed anyone" (thousands of
Italian Jews were sent to their deaths under
Fascism) are routinely downplayed by the ADL if
the perpetrator is regarded an ally of the U.S. and Israel.
In other words, Robert Mason is safe from
criticism by the ADL, in spite of his *real*
Holocaust revisionism, if he only proclaims support of Israel.
The accusation of Holocaust denial and Holocaust
revisionism against Finkelstein have been
periodically echoed by other writers, including
Phyllis Chesler, David Hornik, and Steven Plaut,
all writing in Front Page Magazine, Martin
Peretz, the Publisher of The New Republic, and
Marc Fisher in the Washington Post. After several
exchanges of letters and phone calls with
Finkelstein, the Washington Post issued a
retraction, in which Fisher wrote "Finkelstein
has never denied the existence of the Holocaust,
and I did not intend to suggest that."
Finkelstein says that he relies on the work of
Raul Hilberg for historical facts about the
Holocaust, and cites as authoritative Hilberg's
figures for the numbers of Holocaust Jewish
victims killed (5.1 million). He has also written
that "no rational person disputes that the Nazis
systematically exterminated 5-6 million Jews" and
"whether the actual figure was closer to 5 rather
than 6 million might have historical significance
[...] but zero moral significance". In The
Holocaust Industry Finkelstein took issue with
the numbers of Holocaust survivors as quoted by
groups seeking Holocaust reparations. Finkelstein
told an interviewer, "There's not a single word
in the book that can be interpreted as Holocaust
denial. Rather the contrary, I insist throughout
the book that the conventional view of the Nazi
holocaust - i.e, an assembly-line, industrialized
killing of the Jews - is correct, and that the
conventional figures on those killed are (more or less) correct."
And now I'll get to my point. It's very
interesting to note - very interesting indeed! -
that all the most radical, dangerous, fierce,
analytical critics of Israel and of US foreign
policy are Jews: Norman Finkelstein, Amy Goodman,
Noam Chomsky (who was once an advisor to
Mossad!), Seymor Hersh (who in addition to
reporting The My Lai Massacre and exposing the
sinister side of the current administration's
policy with regard to Iraq, Iran, and Lebanon,
has also written a myth-busting book about JFK,
"The Dark Side of Camelot", which should interest
Frank and others), professor Howard Zinn (the
historian, social critic, and political scientist
who wrote "A People's History of the United
States"), innumerable ACLU lawyers, and the list
goes on and on. The so-called radical left, which
flirts with anarchist ideas, seeks to protect
Latin America's turn to the left from US right
wing intervention, defends Muslims against ethnic
profiling and against meddling in Arab countries,
stands up for Palestinians against Israeli
brutality - this movement carries lots and lots and lots of Jews.
What does this mean? It means a lot of things.
For starters, what does it mean for Mr.
Lightsearcher? It means when Mr. Lightsearcher
defames and libels "liberals" and "leftists" with
all kinds of moral character assassinations like
cowardice, hypocrisy, criminality, fraud,
untruthfulness and so on, he's defaming an awful
lot of Jews. So although Mr. Lightsearcher is
primarily interested in defaming Muslims and
allegedly in defending Jews, he is hypocritical
to a tee offering his support to my opposition to anti-Semitism.
Secondly, what does this mean for Peter
Staudenmaier? It means that he's facing a problem
of contradictions, although he'll have little
trouble acrobating himself around it through his
well-knwn feat of juggling words and phrases with
his usual sleight of hand. Peter S has pointed
out that there's this phenomenon of anti-Semitism
from the left, where criticism of Israel is
conflated with criticism of all Jews collectively
and of Judaism. In addition to this, whenever
someone has pointed out to him that
anthroposophists are close to Jews and that there
are many Jewish anthroposophists, PS comes up
with some phrases about philo-Semitic Anthros and
anti-Semitic Semites. But what Peter S is doing
when he starts rabbling about anti-Semitic
Semites, is echoing certain false accusations,
such as those of ADL against Norman Finkelstein.
Even Noam Chomsky, whom Peter S seems to admire
(they're both anarchists, more or less), would
have to be a so-called anti-Semitic Semite
according to such twisted definitions. And then
Staudenmaier is left with his problem of old,
once brilliantly pointed out by Bradford, namely
how many anti-Semites he can squeeze into a VW bug.
Thirdly, what does this mean for Robert Mason?
He's busted, pure and simple. From the start. He
has defended the views of even the most notorious
Holocaust deniers with mean axes to grind against
the Jews, people who are only featured in a
positive light on neo-Nazi websites and similar
far-right or bizarre anti-Jewish campaigns. And
when I once asked him how he felt about Jews, he
refused to answer, and this silence speaks
volumes. He could have said something like, "It
depends upon which Jews you're talking about," but he didn't. He's busted.
Fourthly, what does all this mean for the legacy
of Rudolf Steiner? For starters, Robert Mason
exposing his true colors when challenged is a
huge plus for this legacy, a smelly taint
removed. The problem of Dan Dugan and Peter
Staudenmaier, with quacking ducks like the
thoroughly confused Diana Winters on their tail,
is that when they're accusing Rudolf Steiner of
anti-Semitism, they're guilty of the same
intellectual dishonesty as the evangelical
Religious Right, Mossad, and other one-sided
defenders of Israel who say that any criticism of
Israel or of anything associated with Jewish
culture, is by definition anti-Semitic. So in
order not to be an anti-Semite, one would have to
utter nothing but praise of Israeli militarism or
any other issue with Jewish connotations. Other
than that, one would have to shut up.
The Hole Dwellers have criticized Steiner
severely for mentioning that a Jewish friend of
his had "outgrown his Jewishness". This was
supposed to be anti-Semitic. Have they ever tried
to contemplate what the Doctor meant? To me, it
looks fairly simple: To think outside one's
ethnic, religious, or national box. (The opposite
of this is patriotism, "My country right or
wrong," which literally means, "My mother drunk
or sober," which is ridiculous.)
By this definition, Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky,
Norman Finkelstein, Seymor Hersh and all the
others have "outgrown their Jewishness".
Political opponents are prone to accuse them of
self-hatred, treason, extremism, and every other
derogatory and politically charged liberal-hating
epitaph farted out by our very own Mr.
Lightsearcher. Outgrowing one's ethnicity or
nationality, becoming a homeless soul, has a
price. You'll be attacked from the right by
orthodox conservatives and from the left by the likes of Peter S.
And Uncle Taz concludeth with a few final words of wisdom:
They have to stop all this nonsense about
left-wing and right-wing. It has no place in the
21st century. Left and right wings belong on a
bird or an airplane up in the sky, not on the
ground, and certainly not in politics. By the
same token, they have to stop talking about "the
West Wing" and call it something else, like "the
West Office" or something. The White House
doesn't fly to the best of my knowledge.
> Dottie wrote:Me too. It just puts everything into perspective.
> >I am thankful that Vorstand stood up against such
> ignorance posing
> >as spiritual science with Rudolf Steiner's name
> attached to give it
> >more weight.
> I'm also thankful to Mr. Mason for revealing his
> true colors with his
> last couple of posts.
Have a burning question?
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
- --- In email@example.com, Tarjei Straume
> The Hole Dwellers have criticized SteinerClearly a Mountain out of a Mole hill. And it would seem that those
> severely for mentioning that a Jewish friend of
> his had "outgrown his Jewishness". This was
> supposed to be anti-Semitic. Have they ever tried
> to contemplate what the Doctor meant? To me, it
> looks fairly simple: To think outside one's
> ethnic, religious, or national box. (The opposite
> of this is patriotism, "My country right or
> wrong," which literally means, "My mother drunk
> or sober," which is ridiculous.)
who see Modern anti-semitism in the words on paper, can't seem to
think out of what ever Box they are thinking in. Indeed the big
picture that Steiner puts forth is Monumental in the direction of
thinking past Dogma and propaganda and any sectarian orthodoxy. But I
suppose if your looking for a gnat, on a cows ass, in the middle of a
100 acre farm field in up state Vermont - you could find one.
>Priceless! Brain chemistry inspired deualistic simplicity gives off
> By this definition, Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky,
> Norman Finkelstein, Seymor Hersh and all the
> others have "outgrown their Jewishness".
> Political opponents are prone to accuse them of
> self-hatred, treason, extremism, and every other
> derogatory and politically charged liberal-hating
> epitaph farted out by our very own Mr.
> Lightsearcher. Outgrowing one's ethnicity or
> nationality, becoming a homeless soul, has a
> price. You'll be attacked from the right by
> orthodox conservatives and from the left by the likes of Peter S.
the same kind of comforting braingasms as a boat load of chocolate
does to a chocoholic. And where is the learning in all these
calculated concepts stated with so much one-sided arrogance?
Humm, I have a new theory...it's not so much the Gandalf denial, as
it is....GRINCH DENIAL!...that seems to pleauge all these ACCUSERS,
and wagging finger pointers. As Stewart Smally as it may sound, there
are always three times as many fingers pointing right back at the
finger pointer. I personally only trust those who are not prone to
telling the truth about their own shit, as well as that of others. Mr
lightsearcher, and Mr. Mason pay lip-service to this.
Seems also that being attacked by both left and right could be a sign
that yur doing something truly Moral..IMO.
>Yeee Haaa! (words that scared Richard Prior).
> And Uncle Taz concludeth with a few final words of wisdom:
> They have to stop all this nonsense about
> left-wing and right-wing. It has no place in the
> 21st century. Left and right wings belong on a
> bird or an airplane up in the sky, not on the
> ground, and certainly not in politics. By the
> same token, they have to stop talking about "the
> West Wing" and call it something else, like "the
> West Office" or something. The White House
> doesn't fly to the best of my knowledge.
And they should be Honest and revert to the "Defence departments"
THE WAR DEPARTMENT!
- I wrote:
>I personally only trust those who are not prone toThat should read:
> telling the truth about their own shit, as well as that of others.
I personally only trust those who ARE prone to
telling the truth about their own shit, as well as that of others.