Previous posts from William Thomas Sherman Info Page
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
Ideally and preferably, and when at all possible, only well-informed, responsible and intelligent, scientists, philosophers, higher educators, and also more cultivated clergy (i.e. rabbis, ministers priests), should be authorized by civil authority to deal with spirit people of a more powerful than usual order. Otherwise, what will happen is that more manipulative and powerful spirit people will intermingle with some of the populace, confer secretly with them, and in this way end up wreaking havoc on the community – that is by coming through the back door so to speak. Once spirit people are better understood, civil regulations should be put in place to determine the civilly appointed “priest” representative’s obligations and responsibilities in their real or potential dealing with spirit people, i.e. obligations and responsibilities with respect to a democratic society’s freedom and well being. In short, if spirit people really need to deal with regular human society it should be done by way of a (more or less open and) public forum, where only the community’s most wise and best educated are the ones dealing with powerful spirit people, while at the same time empowering such “experts” in a way that duly conforms with public accountability, democratic principles, and those of a free society in general.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
If perhaps put in awe by their power or taken in by some trick, she believed these people, and if I saw her, I think I would laugh (affectionately, of course), because she is better than any and everything they have put together, and do believe me they do have some very, very beautiful girls working for them -- that is to say those same spirit people who have and still do take on (falsely) the guise of literal Heaven.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
Recently, Pete Rose came out with a book "Prison Without Bars,"
which is a title that can be likened to my own extraordinarily bizarre situation of over the past decade. Just yesterday I discovered that my website is no longer
listed on Google, even though it had been there previously for some time. As well, my name address, and phone are no longer listed in
the web directory/phone book as it was also previously. This all comes upon my regular mail, phone, and e-mail being interfered with which has been the case for a number of years ~ not to mention as well the outright violence and other vandalism too numerous to mention I have also been subject to. Just last December I was poisoned three times which resulted in my being seriously ill and in extreme pain for a few weeks.
I want to take this opportunity then to express my great annoyance at not being able to get feedback or to respond to questions on my work. In the past few months I wrote some poems for someone and I do not even know if they received them, which naturally is very galling to say the least.
I would appreciate it much therefore if, as well as before requesting that someone try to contact me (preferably by coming personally to my home if possible), that they write Google and request to have my URL reinstated on its search engine.
If all this sounds very strange, and for more details as to the cause of my being a human rights victim these past ten years, see my "New Treatise on Hell" below.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
People are talking about the need for doctors and health. The government must do something! Yet in this same country, if you regularly get beat up, and you're poor and they're rich, try to get someone to even hear you!
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
As customarily encounter or experience it, the conflict of “Good versus Evil” (as opposed to evil or an evil) ~ and after all who wants or needs it? ~ suggests that contraries and conflict are bad. But this is a great error. Contraries, or conflicts, are a greatest good, in fact are both necessary, and are a part of perfection. The problem with the contrary of “Good vs. Evil,” however, is that "Evil" will insist that all contraries are evil, a belief many “Good” minded people will naturally take exception to, and say instead contraries are good, but when one or both ends of a dispute takes on the character of actual "Evil" than that sort of contrary is a bad, regrettable or tragic thing. Further it need not be assumed that because there are instances where there are very real and actual conflicts being “Good” and “Evil,” it doesn’t necessarily follow that this is how it is in the greater order of things, though it certainly may be so in an individual instance.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
What thing is not potentially an agent of some mind? We are acted upon by mind, so if a puppet attacks us (matter) we look to the puppeteer, not so much the puppet. The question then becomes what process do we use to identify the puppeteer because everything lies in this, for it is from this identification that we next go if we are to seriously deal with the puppet. Reason is a process, and of course there are others.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
Questions for President Bush's Terrorism Policy
In his state of the union address this evening (Jan. 20th, 2004), President Bush stated that terrorism should be pursued as a war rather than a law enforcement matter. This rather puzzle me because it made me wonder on the basis of what reasoning is the former more wise than the latter?
It led me to think that it would be good idea if someone posed the following questions to the President in order than we, as Americans, better know quite what we are doing with respect to this in many ways rather amorphous problem of terrorism.
Who is or are the present terrorists? Are they a unified group? under whose leadership are they? under whose values and ideologies? For example are their joint Sunni and Shiite terrorists groups? Are they in league say with North Koreans and exactly what prompts their hatred of "America?" Love of dictatorship? Is love of dictatorship an exclusively foreign phenomena? Are there no American terrorists acting in cooperation with these foreign ones? If you assume not, how can you be so sure that unknown domestic third parties did not incite, assist, and set up these foreign terrorists to act as they did (as in 9/11 for instance)? After all if they possessed enough money, is it entirely inconceivable that such could bribe or buy means of concealing themselves from the government, indeed possibly have controlling power in the government itself by means of say campaign funding and or possible corresponding infiltration of agencies? Again the problem is discerning motive. If terrorists are dictators are no Americans dictators or would be dictators?
Assuming we can agree to a clear definition of "terrorist" and exactly what process is used to designate someone as one? How fair, open, informed, and impartial is this process? For one thing, if the process is not open, are not citizens being denied the opportunity to provide evidence they might possess? And or denied the opportunity of knowing whether the fact finding process is credible? Why are there no 1-800 numbers (at least to my knowledge, which admittedly may be in error) for people to provide leads and tips? If a person is going to be warred on instead of arrested it would seem a very serious kind of power for someone to officially and formally apply such a designation, and one would very much hope the official process for identifying and designating others as terrorists be the one most consistent with reality.
I offer the above as matter of more constructive and profitable understanding for all, and not as political polemic.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
From one perspective Love could be seen as a Trinity. When we love a spouse, we love God first, then other people we may have loved or might have fallen in love with are second, and the spouse, though third in importance is the actual person, we love, yet who is the ordinarily central focus of the activity of love. God is known through personal contemplation, while true love which is charity is realized for those we might have loved. God as greater unity and highest vision is then, it would seem, all three united, that is a (if not the) beatific vision.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
Breaking the ice: Ask someone “are you ruled by wisdom?” Then ask them to explain what they think wisdom is.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
In human language that is intellectually intelligible (i.e. beyond very simplistic, and mere immediate, if-then causal inference or association), only what can be represented or diagrammed is communicable. So if there are persons or things which cannot be represented or diagrammed, then they cannot be spoken of, except perhaps indirectly and in a tentative and speculative way. In Christianity, the exception to this is that you can speak of God, or say Christ is God, by means of the Spirit. In this way “God” or “Christ,” is known to the believer, not as a representation or diagrammed, but in the Spirit, which in this case is the spirit of Love and Truth, according to Logos.
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
I am regularly told by these devils (both Orkonists and Goomerist), through various channels, how I miss out so terribly for not doing the wrong thing. In a way it is true, because since I won’t do the wrong thing in too bad a way, I have been cheated of, missed out on, or deprived of human rights, civil rights, privacy rights, family, relationships of all kinds, money career, peace, security, health, etc. etc. But then I say to them (this is all a literal and not rhetorical conversation by the way), “Listen its true all those things are bad. Even so, aside from seeing the innocent suffer cruelly, nothing is worse in the world than putting up with old Fogey the Ghost. I would suffer all those other things you mentioned and more, did I not have to put up with old Fogey the Ghost – bully, traitor, coward, hypocrite, maniac, tyrant, fraud, murderer of children, torturer, most disgraceful, dishonorable, truly the most worthless of people in all the world. And I know this, I have had to deal with him personally many times. Yet, old Fogey the ghost is your god, leader, commander, guide, CEO etc. I therefore think that no matter, how badly I do in these other ways as a result of your machinations and belligerence, you (and people not even nearly so bad as yourself), who have it “good” by cooperating with old Fogey, have it infinitely worse. You submit and cooperate as a slave to Fogey willingly. I, by comparison, would rather die first. I can speak to this with authority because I have suffered all these things, and can consequently speak as to what is truly the worst. Who you see as generous God, I see as the most damnable and accursed con artist. If I am wrong then I couldn't be more degraded than you already are. If right, than you can never really enjoy anything.”
~~~~~~*~~~~~~
Back to Main Page