|
Richard’s Correspondence On The Actual Freedom Mailing List with Correspondent No. 53
RESPONDENT No. 87: (...) as though you know me ... RICHARD: No, I do not know you personally ... I know of you. RESPONDENT: ‘I know of you’?? A little mystico-pseudo-actualism on display here ... RICHARD: Not at all ... there are many people I do not know personally yet I know of them (via someone informing me of them, and so forth). * RESPONDENT No. 87: (...) during this unprecedented tragedy ... RICHARD: It is not ‘unprecedented’ ... seismic sea-waves have been occurring for aeons and possibly the most calamitous in recorded history, in terms of it being a (human) tragedy, was in 1703 at Awa, Japan, where more than 100,000 people perished. RESPONDENT: Do you not check the facts before you click off the send button ... RICHARD: Of course ... and in this particular instance:
RESPONDENT: It TIS ‘unprecedented’. RICHARD: In terms of it being a (human) tragedy it is not without precedence ... given that the whole thrust of my co-respondent’s argument is them trying to make out that I am unable to discern the difference in affective impact the recent seismic sea-wave is having/ has had on feeling beings, as contrasted to the around-the-clock deaths of over 54,000,000 people each year, it is most certainly not an [quote] ‘unprecedented tragedy’ [endquote]. RESPONDENT: A simple awareness of current events is all that’s needed. RICHARD: No, a simple awareness of the affective impact such events has on feeling beings – which impact is what (affectively) transmogrifies such an event into being a (human) tragedy – is all that is needed ... and it is rather telling that a person sans the affective faculty, in its entirety, knows this whereas a person with a full suite of affections does not. RESPONDENT: To my knowledge 150,000 tis still greater than 100,000. RICHARD: Aye – it always has been and always will be – but as it is a question of the measure of (affective) impact such an event has, and its resultant quantification in terms of it being a (human) tragedy, the scale of an event of that nature in 18th century Japan exceeds the scale of the recent 21st century event. Or, to put that another way, for the dead it is not a tragedy (death is oblivion) and it is those left alive who have to get on with the business of living – digging out the dead, burying the dead, ministering to water-borne disease, re-establishing the means of production, re-building domiciles and infrastructure, and so forth – and proportionate to the population left alive to carry out such necessities 100,000 deaths in 1703 is far larger than 150,000 deaths in 2004. If anything is unprecedented it is the amount of aid and assistance modern-day technology can provide – both in the rapid dissemination of information eliciting succour and the rapid mobilisation of relief effort – as contrasted to 300 years ago. RESPONDENT: And a simple check using any current internet search facility would reveal that the recent Asian tsunami was in fact the most deadly on record. (snip link to a web page which states right up-front that ‘notable tsunami events are surely missing from this table’). Perhaps you should hire a fact checker before you click off the send button? RICHARD: Methinks I will stay with the Encyclopaedia Britannica article until further notice. RESPONDENT: Peter or Vineeto should be available. I doubt No 37 has much interest. RICHARD: Ha ... 673 e-mails and you still cannot resist.
PETER: I thought to interject in your recent tirade against Richard. RESPONDENT: (...) I must point out that Richard has been tirading against moi – in his ahem, malice free way, of course. PETER: It’s quite clear that you still don’t get it … despite the fact that it has been spelled out in unambiguous terms many times over on this mailing list. (...) RESPONDENT: (...) Its quite clear that Richard thinks I ‘still don’t get it’ (...) whatever it is you both mean by ‘it’, I could care less. PETER: It is precisely because you care less that you don’t get it. (...) RESPONDENT: Whatever Peter ... repeat what you have been taught. (...) RICHARD: 674 e-mails and you are still at it.
RESPONDENT: So No. 78, is it fair to say (...) RESPONDENT No. 78: That is certainly fair to say (...) RICHARD: (...) you are being side-tracked by an elaborate hall of mirrors which your co-respondent has erected in a vain attempt to disguise the fact that they will stop at nothing – up to and including outright confabulation – in order to promote their self-serving world-view/mind-set. If I were to be answering each and every commentitious allegation – with all the referenced detail required to prove false such made-up-on-the-spot/ off-the-cuff drivel – not only would I be giving myself an almost full-time job I would also be fuelling their fire ... such personalities thrive on attention (and any kind of attention will do). RESPONDENT: Yet barely 2 hours after stating that [snip quote from above] you are back to fuelling our fire since we thrive on attention and any kind of attention will do. [snip link to an e-mail to someone else]. RICHARD: As I was clearly referring to you, and not to your back-slapping fellow-crusader, this latest
lot of drivel
RESPONDENT: So No. 78, is it fair to say (...) RESPONDENT No. 78: That is certainly fair to say (...) RICHARD: (...) you are being side-tracked by an elaborate hall of mirrors which your co-respondent has erected in a vain attempt to disguise the fact that they will stop at nothing – up to and including outright confabulation – in order to promote their self-serving world-view/ mind-set. If I were to be answering each and every commentitious allegation – with all the referenced detail required to prove false such made-up-on-the-spot/ off-the-cuff drivel – not only would I be giving myself an almost full-time job I would also be fuelling their fire ... such personalities thrive on attention (and any kind of attention will do). RESPONDENT: Yet barely 2 hours after stating that [snip quote from above] you are back to fuelling our fire since we thrive on attention and any kind of attention will do. [snip link to an e-mail to someone else]. RICHARD: As I was clearly referring to you ... RESPONDENT: If I may interject (...)You CLEARLY said ‘fuelling THEIR fire’ ... THEIR refers to more than one Mr. grammar. RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel
RESPONDENT: So No. 78, is it fair to say (...) RESPONDENT No. 78: That is certainly fair to say (...) RICHARD: (...) you are being side-tracked by an elaborate hall of mirrors which your co-respondent has erected in a vain attempt to disguise the fact that they will stop at nothing – up to and including outright confabulation – in order to promote their self-serving world-view/mind-set. If I were to be answering each and every commentitious allegation – with all the referenced detail required to prove false such made-up-on-the-spot/off-the-cuff drivel – not only would I be giving myself an almost full-time job I would also be fuelling their fire ... such personalities thrive on attention (and any kind of attention will do). RESPONDENT: Yet barely 2 hours after stating that [snip quote from above] you are back to fuelling our fire since we thrive on attention and any kind of attention will do. [snip link to an e-mail to someone else]. RICHARD: As I was clearly referring to you ... RESPONDENT: If I may interject (...)You CLEARLY said ‘fuelling THEIR fire’ ... THEIR refers to more than one Mr. grammar. RICHARD This latest instalment of your drivel RESPONDENT: Snip snip snip snip snip ... stick lipstick on this pig named Richard. RICHARD: This e-mail is the 656st you have posted in your self-promotional No. 53-knows-better-than-Richard campaign.
RESPONDENT: (...)You CLEARLY said ‘fuelling THEIR fire’ ... THEIR refers to more than one Mr. grammar. RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel RESPONDENT: Snip snip snip snip snip ... stick lipstick on this pig named Richard. RICHARD: This e-mail is the 656st you have posted in your self-promotional No. 53-knows-better-than-Richard campaign. RESPONDENT: (...) If you are only a flesh and blood body then what exactly are you so busy defending ... (snip). RICHARD: That which you are attacking, of course (my usage of grammatical form), and this latest attempt at obfuscation makes it 682 e-mails you have frittered away both time and bandwidth on with your (eponymic) quixotism.
RESPONDENT: (...)You CLEARLY said ‘fuelling THEIR fire’ ... THEIR refers to more than one Mr. grammar. RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel RESPONDENT: Snip snip snip snip snip ... stick lipstick on this pig named Richard. RICHARD: This e-mail is the 656th you have posted in your self-promotional No. 53-knows-better-than-Richard campaign. RESPONDENT: (...) If you are only a flesh and blood body then what exactly are you so busy defending ... (snip). RICHARD: That which you are attacking, of course (my usage of grammatical form) ... RESPONDENT: No no no no no ... nice try though; I was most certainly not attacking your usage of grammatical form ... (snip). RICHARD: And this latest attempt at obfuscation makes it 683 e-mails you have frittered away both time and bandwidth on with your (eponymic) quixotism.
RICHARD: (...) My progenitors were farmers ... pioneer settlers carving a livelihood by hand out of virgin forest (I personally used axes and hand saws to help cut down the trees to make pasture land). RESPONDENT: How interesting Richard in that you have used ‘I’ to describe ‘your’ upbringing and your personal history. (snip) RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel
RESPONDENT: (...)You CLEARLY said ‘fuelling THEIR fire’ ... THEIR refers to more than one Mr. grammar. RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel RESPONDENT: Snip snip snip snip snip ... stick lipstick on this pig named Richard. RICHARD: This e-mail is the 656st you have posted in your self-promotional No. 53-knows-better-than-Richard campaign. RESPONDENT: (...) If you are only a flesh and blood body then what exactly are you so busy defending ... (snip). RICHARD: That which you are attacking, of course (my usage of grammatical form) ... RESPONDENT: (...) What are you so busy defending (...) if you are only the physical body yet your physical body is not under attack? RICHARD: That which you *are* attacking, of course (my usage of grammatical form), and this latest attempt at obfuscation makes it 689 e-mails you have frittered away both time and bandwidth on with your (eponymic) quixotism.
RICHARD: (...) My progenitors were farmers ... pioneer settlers carving a livelihood by hand out of virgin forest (I personally used axes and hand saws to help cut down the trees to make pasture land). RESPONDENT: But when it comes to the method ‘you’ developed, practiced for 15 years ... RICHARD: 1981 to 1992 = 11 years. RESPONDENT: ... [when it comes to the method ‘you’ developed ] and are currently marketing ... (snip) RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel
RICHARD: (...) My progenitors were farmers ... pioneer settlers carving a livelihood by hand out of virgin forest (I personally used axes and hand saws to help cut down the trees to make pasture land). RESPONDENT: But when it comes to the method you developed, practiced night and day for 11 odd years ... (snip) RICHARD: This latest instalment of your drivel
RICHARD: (...) My progenitors were farmers ... pioneer settlers carving a livelihood by hand out of virgin forest (I personally used axes and hand saws to help cut down the trees to make pasture land). RESPONDENT: Dearest Dissociative One ... (snip). RICHARD: This latest lot of drivel
RESPONDENT No. 56: Every exchange is an opportunity for you to demonstrate something to your followers RICHARD: As I do not have any ‘followers’ (actualism is neither religious/ spiritual nor mystical/ metaphysical) your query cannot be responded to as-is. RESPONDENT: Let everyone take note – and that includes you No. 27 – who aspire to respond to your fellow human like this chimp just responded to No. 56. (snip). RICHARD: This e-mail of yours makes it 695 you have posted, so far, in your anti-peace campaign ... and it is, of course, no mere coincidence that my co-respondent (above) is a back-slapping buddy of yours from way back, eh? Viz.:
That very effusive ‘and buddy ... a BIG BIG HUGE MONGO UP to you’ of yours was in response to this:
Here are a few of the back-slaps your buddy No. 56 gave to their mate No. 53:
Not to forget this fulsome praise:
And thus does the human condition parade itself across the screen in all its naked self-conceit ... and for no other reason than because yours truly advises his fellow human beings that it is possible for all the ills of humankind (all the needless suffering and savagery) to come to an end, totally and completely, once and for all. How odd it is that such a simple thing would provoke such compound reactions as are being demonstrated daily on this mailing list.
RESPONDENT (to Peter): (...) as an aside on ‘caring’ or not, please note what Respondent No. 18 has to say on the subject, regarding a former sincere practitioner of your boss’s method and his subsequent condition and the concern & responsibility for him expressed by avoidance & disclaimer of the subject by the three amigos. http://lists.topica.com/lists/actualfreedom/read/message.html?mid=911385670 (...) ps .... please note Respondent No. 18’s comments on this, your latest brain puke. http://lists.topica.com/lists/actualfreedom/read/message.html?mid=911385670 RICHARD: I draw your attention to the following:
RESPONDENT: Lets take a look at the actual track record of your method: (...) And last but certainly not least, you had one very sincere and devoted practitioner who is now under the care of one of No. 66’s colleagues at an undisclosed location. Any acts demonstrating the care you go on and on about for your fellow human being has been sorely lacking in this case, not to mention any care from those 2 chimps who were known to converse with him at length dispensing their expert wisdom until his departure which was precipitated by what you like to call a PCE. RICHARD: Again I draw your attention to the following:
RESPONDENT No. 56: Every exchange is an opportunity for you to demonstrate something to your followers RICHARD: As I do not have any ‘followers’ (actualism is neither religious/spiritual nor mystical/metaphysical) your query cannot be responded to as-is. RESPONDENT: Let everyone take note – and that includes you No 37 – who aspire to respond to your fellow human like this chimp just responded to No. 56. (snip). RICHARD: This e-mail of yours makes it 695 you have posted, so far, in your anti-peace campaign ... RESPONDENT: Life must indeed be full for you. RICHARD: Aye ... but not for the reason you give, immediately below, as I have a computer to do my counting for me (and in a matter of milliseconds at that) as well you know. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: I couldn’t think of any way better to spend my days and nights than counting your fellow human beings posts. (snip). RICHARD: This latest lot of drivel
RICHARD: (...) My progenitors were farmers ... pioneer settlers carving a livelihood by hand out of virgin forest (I personally used axes and hand saws to help cut down the trees to make pasture land). RESPONDENT: Dearest Dissociative One: This latest instalment of your drivel ... (snip). RICHARD: As there is nothing drivelling about (a) having pioneer settlers, carving a livelihood by hand out of virgin forest, for progenitors ... and (b) having personally used axes and hand saws, to help cut down the trees to make pasture land, it would appear that you have excelled yourself, this 697th time around, in your on-going promotion of your No. 53-does-not-know-better-than-Richard campaign. O what a tangled web they weave when first they practice to deceive.
RESPONDENT (to Peter): (...) as an aside on ‘caring’ or not, please note what No. 18 has to say on the subject, regarding a former sincere practitioner of your boss’s method and his subsequent condition and the concern and responsibility for him expressed by avoidance and disclaimer of the subject by the three amigos. (snip link). P.S. ... please note No. 18’s comments on this, your latest brain puke. (snip link). RICHARD: I draw your attention to the following:
RESPONDENT: I suppose this drawing of my attention to the following is yet another demonstration of your famous art of copy/pasting ... (snip). RICHARD: No, it is a drawing of your attention to how you (uncritically) took another’s beat-up and ran with it in this, and your next e-mail, thereby providing a public demonstration of how your mind works ... to wit: you will stop at nothing – up to and including outright confabulation – in order to promote your self-serving world-view/mind-set.
RESPONDENT: Lets take a look at the actual track record of your method: (...) And last but certainly not least, you had one very sincere and devoted practitioner who is now under the care of one of No. 66’s colleagues at an undisclosed location. Any acts demonstrating the care you go on and on about for your fellow human being has been sorely lacking in this case, not to mention any care from those 2 chimps who were known to converse with him at length dispensing their expert wisdom until his departure which was precipitated by what you like to call a PCE. RICHARD: I draw your attention to the following:
RESPONDENT: I suppose this drawing of my attention to the following is yet another demonstration of your famous art of copy/pasting ... (snip). RICHARD: No, it is a drawing of your attention to how you (uncritically) took another’s beat-up and ran with it in this, and your previous e-mail, thereby providing a public demonstration of how your mind works ... to wit: you will stop at nothing – up to and including outright confabulation – in order to promote your self-serving world-view/ mind-set.
CORRESPONDENT No. 53 (Part Nine) RETURN TO THE ACTUAL FREEDOM MAILING LIST INDEX RETURN TO RICHARD’S CORRESPONDENCE INDEX The Third Alternative (Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body) Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.
Richard's Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust:
1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
