Enough is enough

[Terry]

It looks like in spite of the money and time expended this particular part of the board attracts the vulgar, and the thieves like a magnet, and nothing seems to stop them. Since Matt has the names and addresses of these people, why is it that we can't have them charged for the various crimes they commit apparently with impunity? Pornography, theft of space, public nuisance etc.
Surely they can be banned if nothing else, and in certain cases can be charged also via the morality laws... Certainly it is in the interest of all service providers that they be defanged, so perhaps Mat you should post the ISPs of offenders and the addresses of same so we can inundate them with complaints:cool: Bet they will act if we make it hot enough for them....:eek:

[Poodle]

if the Forum is totally operating at the full level yet. It's my understanding that when it is they will be unable to post. I dunno. Send an e to Dr. Matt or maybe Don knows. It seemed as if Dr. Matt got MSN lined out and in fast order. They would not listen to me and for some strange reason this place now comes up as #1 when before they denied it existed. I said: It comes up #1 on Yahoo, Google and Mozilla so what's your problem. They still denied it.

[skip]

I may be speaking out of school here ...

Matt appears to be buying specific upgrade modules to the forum software he purchased a couple of years ago.

Some of us remember that.

These are upgrade packages.

It isnt as if he is getting custom software written to his specifications.

Apparently in the most recent package purchased to handle spam, we got the little visual recognition module that forces the registrar to read a picture and input the numbers/letters they see. And they must respond to an email verification before they can post. This virtually eliminated all the spam bots posts.

So we are recieving considerably less spam. Don and I have estimated down by about 75%.

We obviously are still recieving spam that results from human registration, or perhaps some bots are sophisticated enough to decipher the jpeg. No one ever said spammers werent smart and dedicated.

Apparently our next available option in the recent package is to moderate/review ALL posts prior to their appearing on the forum.

We thought we were going to be able to specify, moderation on say all junior members and when people moved to senior, they would no longer have their posts held for review. But this doesnt SEEM to be the case. Matt is still learning the ins and outs of the package.

Don and I have both indicated that we would like to have all junior memebers posts held for review, if that is a possible next step. So if it is, I expect that will occur.

If the only 'next step' is reviewing ALL posts prior to their appearing, we will have to balance the desirability of posts appearing in a timely manner, and spam tolerance.

If we decide that we want a zero tolerance for spam, and are constrained to preview all posts, one option is to take on other moderators, in different parts of the world, so there is less potential 'holding' time for any given post.

cheers,

skip

[Terry]

Skip, I appreciate all that Matt, Don and yourself are doing, and indeed I would love to find some way to save you all work. Seems to me though, that letting these scum go free of punishment is not, and never will be the way to go for the rest of us.
Tracing and charging certainly would cut down if not out, much of the spam, and particularly when it is pornographic, since that brings a nice long sentence in jail, and notoriety for the perpetrator. Why should Matt for example, have to go to such trouble and expense just because of ignorant thoughtless people who steal space just because they can in most cases, and because they are perverted in others.
If I knew enough about computers, I would gladly put in some time to help, but I don;t, though I am sure there are many here who do, and would if asked. Problem is, there seems to be no end if drastic action isn't applied. Am I perhaps being stupid due to my ignorance of how the web works, or is it feasible to trace and attack? I am betting that if one web owner does it, others will follow quickly, and publishing results will put a stop to this garbage. Anger gets action from businesses, and ISPs would be quick to act if the public showed they were annoyed enough to push for it, and shun any who didn't perform in the public interest.

[Simon]

Terry the problem is, that mostly the computers that are spreading spam aren't under explicit control by spammers.
So basically the main cause for spamming are the computers without proper protection (anti-virus & firewall + spyware removal tools), which passively allow spammers to install malicious software.

So mostly people don't even know that their computer is spamming due to security holes.

[Terry]

That makes sense Simon, but if this is the main cause, surely tracking would not be hard to do, since the person passing the virus or spam is not aware, and not trying to hide. Once traced the problem would be solved by the owner of the offending computer, or they would be banned from posting.
I see the originators of that spam or porn as the real offenders, but tracing them might indeed be difficult, I don;t have the knowledge to make judgement on that. I do note however that only one segment of this board is badly affected by this garbage, so perhaps it's a clue as to how it gets to us? Something in the title perhaps, so that the spam or spammer looks for such a title as "Esoteric" or some such. They must have some target at which to aim.

[MissPiggy]

I think even when the spammers use their own computers they are able to hide their ISP.

and particularly when it is pornographic, since that brings a nice long sentence in jail, and notoriety for the perpetrator

Depends where somebody lives. Maybe you can sue somebody who lives in the US or Europe, but what if the spammer lives in China, Nigeria or Romania?

[Poodle]

I had bought an old pc at a pawn shop. Apparently I was it's third owner. Thankfully I am honest as the nitwit before me left all of his bank records in it. After about a year I started having real problems that people would write back to me about that I had not done. Apparently the original owner of that pc had a back door and was having a great time sending out bad things under my name. Amazingly enough some were in Spanish too (mostly to Argentina) -- my second language. MSN was no help as they kept telling me the problem was coming from MY computer but I WAS NOT doing it. I finally got a hold of a guy that worked for my ISP that had the same problem previously. He told me what to buy to stop it and it did. Dead in it's tracks. That was the end of that problem and I continue to buy that product as it is rated #1 in the whole world. I had visions of the FBI coming to my house and trying to explain to them that I wasn't doing it.

When I got a new pc I sort of dismantled the older one so that original person could never have fun again on that old pc. Live and learn in cyberspace the hard way! Pood

[Poodle]

There is software available that will track all over the whole world now. It can be fascinating to see where something originates and from then on. It's actually really sad to think that these people have nothing better to do with their time. I have even mentioned maybe to Don that "Esoterics" be removed as that seems to be the favorite place to land, possibly because they have no idea of what the word means.

[Don]

Unfortunately, Terry, such tracking is useless. What Simon is describing is popularly known as a "zombie" computer. The spammer uses your computer (either unused processing cycles when you are using your computer, full processing power when you are not using your computer, or both) to send unwanted messages.

If I were to track it to you and tell you to rid your computer of being a zombie, and you did so, the same messages would go out from 10,000 other zombie computers. And if we traced it back to the source in Russia, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, or some other country, and actually found a way to get them to stop, they'd be back at it a day or two later with a new name, a new service provide, and new zombies.

Unfortunately, the way to go is to stop things just before they go on our servers. Matt is working on it...

[skip]

Well I hate spam.

All spammers must die!

But regulating the internet to rid us of spam would also allow for regulation that would limit the free speech the internet allows for.

We cannot let that happen.

You cant trust what is on the internet, and you cant trust what comes from the mass media either. Everyone has agendas, and the bias comes thru. Gather as much information as you can, and judge for yourself.

If that is too much work, stay stupid!

Here in America we voted in a law that limits free speech, and voicing opinions in a political election. It is called McCain/Feingold. It is bad law, and worse precedent. With a good supreme court it wouldnt survive the appeal.

Now we are firing people in the media for saying stupid things. Imus, Rosie, et al.

And the liberals are calling for legislation to censor the air ways.

Make no mistake, there is a lot of garbage out there, but the thrust of this movement is to get at people who disagree politically and silence them.

I hate spammers. I despise people like Rosie, Al Franken, and Michael Moore. But putting up with them is better than allowing one group, or another group, to silence those they dont like.

For spammers, Michael Moores, and other bottom feeders, if you dont like what you are hearing turn the damn thing off.

skip

Ah I feel better. ;)

[Don]

Rosie was not fired.
She quit in a salary dispute.

[Terry]

Unfortunately, Terry, such tracking is useless. What Simon is describing is popularly known as a "zombie" computer. The spammer uses your computer (either unused processing cycles when you are using your computer, full processing power when you are not using your computer, or both) to send unwanted messages.

If I were to track it to you and tell you to rid your computer of being a zombie, and you did so, the same messages would go out from 10,000 other zombie computers. And if we traced it back to the source in Russia, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, or some other country, and actually found a way to get them to stop, they'd be back at it a day or two later with a new name, a new service provide, and new zombies.

Unfortunately, the way to go is to stop things just before they go on our servers. Matt is working on it... Yes I understand, my own computer takes ages to open because the new devices I have to protect it want to check everything before allowing it to appear on my screen.
I just feel badly for you guys, the rest of us can ignore what seems to be a useless posting, but you have to check each one, and it must be a lot of work for very little profit.

[Terry]

Well Skip, glad you are feeling better, and I agree that spammers need to die. the problem I have, is that I want to do the killing, or at least be part of it, and getting one or two of them in court would be so enjoyable, and a lesson for the others. You rant and feel better, I don;t get that sort of relief, I want action, even if I am only part of it :D.....................

[Jack]

Come back to England, Terry. You are needed here
for the revolution.:D

Jack


Well Skip, glad you are feeling better, and I agree that spammers need to die. the problem I have, is that I want to do the killing, or at least be part of it, and getting one or two of them in court would be so enjoyable, and a lesson for the others. You rant and feel better, I don;t get that sort of relief, I want action, even if I am only part of it :D.....................

[skip]

What is the difference between fired and contract not renewed, but ths show goes on, Don?

I dont want to get into a political argument, because here isnt the forum for it.

And Rosies departure is such a minor point in the entire thrust of my post I cannot help but wonder why that is what you chose to comment on.

Is it that you also agree that censorship is worse than spam?

wondering,

skip

[skip]

Oh Id happily join the killing team with you Terry.

It is just that we really do have bigger fish to fry.

skip

[Terry]

Come back to England, Terry. You are needed here
for the revolution.:D

Jack Ready and willing Jack. I even have my own gun, and am very competent in its use. My eyes are not as good as they once were so I will have to add a scope I think. Once that is done, God help anyone in front of me:eek:

[Poodle]

Let's just tell the truth. You don't like big government and believe life would be better with a more "local" control. McCain and liberal do not fit in the same sentence.

We do have censorship. We know our phones are or may be tapped and we have lost our freedom to the Patriot Act. I'm quite sure a lot of my email is looked at that goes to certain foreign countries. Let them look.

Now comes the question of what happened to all those lost billions of barrels of oil produced in Iraq. That was enough money at $20/bbl to pay for the stupid ill-conceived "war" in Iraq and I have my suspicions of where all that money went. That had to be a very large operation including oil tankers to ship it. I like Michael Moore. I adore Al Franken and love to read his books. Gosh it's strange that Michael Moore did an anti-Bush, anti-war movie and now the Feds are after him. It's also more strange that the young man in that "documentary" that said: "but do I have to die to get them (benefits)? Yes, he did die and did not get the benefits.

Imus made a nasty racial slur and also anti-female slur -- we is not "hoe's". White or black or yellow, we do have our dignity and should be treated accordingly. I understand he does good charity work but that does not give him the right to call any female a "hoe" on airways in any country of the world. He doesn't need the job or the money so maybe it's better he just shuts up.

As for Rosie - I don't care one way or the other.

I know! I'm a liberal dawg but you love me anyway! Back to work now! Anne :p

[Don]

The difference, Skip, is that she was offered a job renewal and refused it. She quit. She was not fired.

Yes, it was a minor point in your post, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be accurate.

I do feel that censorship is worse than spam, however I don't think it's worth the death penalty, even in jest.

Poodle is correct in that all of our communications are tapped under "Project Echelon" as revealed to Congress, however that started as early as 1988.

[Docresults]

Imus made a nasty racial slur and also anti-female slur -- we is not "hoe's". White or black or yellow, we do have our dignity and should be treated accordingly. I understand he does good charity work but that does not give him the right to call any female a "hoe" on airways in any country of the world. He doesn't need the job or the money so maybe it's better he just shuts up. :p


1) Imus is a shock jock
3) He was addressing something in a contextual content
2) He was speaking in the vernacular of Afro-American slang (where females regardless of color are labeled 'hoe's'-it ain't true but it is the vernacular)
4) Racial slurs (nasty or not) and anti-female slurs or anti-human slur is what a shock jock does.
5) This is not the first time he has slurred races, women, humans
6) This is what he gets paid for and his law suit has them back-pedaling all over the place.

Correction, Imus made comments (ungrounded assessments) that could easily be deemed racial and anti-feminist, they could have just as easily been deemed humorous after all it is an ungrounded assessment.

It requires more ungrounding on the part of the listener/read to move further from groundedness/reality to place the label 'nasty' on Imus's communication.

Ungrounded assessments if not taken as entertaining become stressful and detrimental to the one holding it. We use them as justifications as to what others should or shouldn't do. Again basing our happiness on what others do. Don't we know this has NEVER worked.

If what others say don't make you/me laugh, let it go, give it no-never-mind, leave judgment to others and focus on what you/I want to make us happy.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Connie]

If what others say don't make you/me laugh, let it go, give it no-never-mind

This is the part where people get hung up. :p

[Terry]

Doc, with respect, we are all therapists, and our success depends on our understanding of how the mind works, and how it is programmed specifically.
If we are told something often enough, even by someone we have no respect for, we tend to accept it as true and believe it.
I am not speaking of Imus specifically, but seems to me he has no right to slur those he knows nothing of regardless of what the motive, and since I suspect his motive is money, I certainly have no respect for the man.
As for the damage done, which is more to the point, yes he is bolstering the negatives of male blacks, and it is of little use his saying that he is only repeating their words, he knows better, or should.
You are correct in saying we should ignore in the sense that we have both the right, and the duty as decent people to turn that knob and shut him out, but by the same token, he does need to be SHUT UP as well, since ignorant people will welcome him into their homes and minds just because they know not what they are doing.
I am the last person to suggest we refrain from any negative comment when such may do some good to the recipient, my comments indicate that I have standards, and little time for those who fall short of those standards, but surely even the least pedantic among us must know better than to suggest the the harm he does to others will not affect us if we don;t listen?

[Poodle]

How long have you lived in the West and how much history do you really know about this part of the USA? One side here came in 1884 and the other in 1902. "Cowboys" referred to females as "ho's". It doesn't bother me as I do know my own self-worth but those words can stick in some nitwit's brain and then..."Houston, we have a problem!"

I don't listen to trash radio or trash TV and I had no idea what Hillary Clinton was sooo upset about. I did some digging and did not like what I found.

Both of us know the importance of words. Words are our tools. Just because they have no vibrational attachment for us, does not mean in the least that they are not still out there finding people to hurt more people.



As ever,
Anne :)

[Don]

1) Imus is a shock jock
2) He was addressing something in a contextual content
3) He was speaking in the vernacular of Afro-American slang (where females regardless of color are labeled 'hoe's'-it ain't true but it is the vernacular)

You are correct that this is used in some Afro-American slang to refer to "females regardless of color." That is, it is a slang generalization.

However, I agree that we should take this in context. He was not referring to a non-descript general group of females. Rather, he was commenting on a select group of talented individuals. It's the difference between someone saying "all you guys are stinkers" and "of all the people in this group, only John and Paul are stinkers." It was a specific slanderous comment which could have cost the broadcasters millions of dollars (as has occurred with other shock jocks).

Since Imus was fired there have been a few other shock jocks who have also lost their jobs for racial and ethnic slurs. The real question to my mind is "why is this attracting so much attention when the firing of some other talkers for running stupid stunts (audio of having sex in a church, having a water drinking contents that resulted in death) have not?"

The answer, I think, it in the current nature of radio, especially "talk radio." The talkers, who over the last 20 years have become stridently conservative and further, came down in unison against the people who put on the stunts, but if they have said anything about Imus, they have come down in his favor. The reason for this, I believe, is clear.

It doesn't matter whether Imus was conservative or liberal (personally, I think he was just boring). The problem was that he said something that was racially disgusting. It was hate speech. And even if a person is a conservative, listening to talk radio objectively shows that it is filled with such hate speech against both individuals and groups. The hate has ranged from mild insults to saying people are "insane" (for daring to have a different opinion) to equating them with Nazis (a losing argument on the internet) and actually calling for mass murder of people they don't like.

If employers can fire Imus for slanderous, racist, misogynistic comments, what's to stop them from firing politically-oriented talk hosts for not only doing the same thing, but also encouraging murder and mass murder?

The talk show hosts are not supporting Imus for reasons of decrying censorship. They are fighting for their own jobs and their continued ability to spread lies, hate, and encouraging murder.

In my opinion the real debate here isn't about liberal or conservative, free speech or censorship. Rather, it's about being able to have a public discourse without lying and encouraging racism, hate, and even murder.

[Terry]

Doc, with respect, we are all therapists, and our success depends on our understanding of how the mind works, and how it is programmed specifically.
If we are told something often enough, even by someone we have no respect for, we tend to accept it as true and take it in as gospel.
I am not speaking of Imus specifically, but seems to me he has no right to slur those he knows nothing of regardless of what the motive, and since I suspect his motive is money, I certainly have no respect for the man.
As for the damage done, which is more to the point, yes he is bolstering the negatives of male blacks, and it is of little use his saying that he is only repeating their words, he knows better, or should.
You are correct in saying we should ignore in the sense that we have both the right, and the duty as decent people to turn that knob and shut him out, but by the same token, he does need to be SHUT UP as well, since ignorant people will welcome him into their homes and minds just because they know not what they are doing.
I am the last person to suggest we refrain from any negative comment when such may do some good to the recipient, my comments indicate that I have standards, and little time for those who fall short of those standards, but surely even the least pedantic among us must know better than to suggest the the harm he does to others will not affect us if we don;t listen? The man was IN MY "OPINION", a menace to society, not just to black females, and it is time for decent and knowledgeable people to act to stem the tide of ignorance and garbage that we are fighting daily, even on this board.
I can afford to speak without anger, since this is about someone in another country, but I am pleased to see action from South of the border, particularly at a time when the Government I support is showing some unexpected lack of spunk that disturbs me greatly. If decent people keep quiet in the face of slurs on others, it is certain that their time will come.

"The coward dies a thousand deaths, the brave man dies but once".

[Docresults]

Terry,

Here is where our patterns differ...

The number one standard in my patterns is "Freedom", second is "Flexibility". People often fall short of my standards and most of my comments are an attempt to up lift another wherever they are to "possible" experience more personal freedom (which requires accountability and responsibility to self first).

(I personally don't think much about if I respect someone or not, I look for what I can appreciate and use the frame that what I see (+/-) in others is the area that is most active in my life and the question that comes to my mind is how do I use it?)

Freedom (for me) presupposes an underlying oneness and equality of every thing and person.

One of the things that struck me as funny is, in the name of fairness, how an entertainer known for his ability to push the limits in the most shocking ways is accused of doing/causing harm to someone (ignorant, etc.). IF and let me repeat that IF Imus, etc. is doing harm it is in doing something that gets people focused on what they don't want instead of what they do want. (Again my patterns suggest he is not doing it; the individual is giving their attention, Imus is not taking their attention. The responsibility is with the individual not the antagonist.) That includes choosing to listen and/or believe shock jocks. I'm for Freedom over fairness.

(Side note) I am stating the belief that regardless of what someone else believes, speaks or does if I am not a match vibrationally (thinking, feeling, believing) I will not be affected by what the other does or doesn't do. Every single thing that happens in my life (accident or otherwise) I created it consciously or unconsciously and the fun is accepting this and learning how to use it to get what I want create less accidents and more of what I desire. The Universal Laws work the question is how am I going to use them?

Freedom is designed so that the ignorant are allowed to be ignorant. Imus is allowed to be an idiot. And that everyone can be both and more at the same time.

I've never listened to Imus on purpose (I've heard him on TV as I'm flipping through the channels) and yet my patterns suggest that he doesn't need to, nor should he "shut up" or "be quiet". Besides the idea that someone is willing to pay him to talk as he does, his views simply adds to the diversity that each of us get to choose from so we can better determine what it is we do want.

Imus may be Tabasco in this big well stocked kitchen called life and if we don't want Tabasco in our cake, don't put it there (with attention). Trying to get Tabasco out of the kitchen not only doesn't get it out of the kitchen it gets it in your cake as well. If we don't like a particular ingredient don't pick it up, leave it where it is and it won't get in our cake.

TO Your Best,
Doc

[Docresults]

Anne,

This is not about history for me it is all about energy and vibration. I don't believe that you, nor I, nor anyone else came forth to help, protect, look out for or anything else for nitwits or how they use their brains.

If you don't listen to trash talk (radio or TV) how did you hear Hillary? (I had to ask because I know Skip would if I didn't.)

Words ARE Important and yet more important than words are the ENERGY BEHIND THEM.

From the level of spirituality I come from there is not victims or villains, all are victors. Hurt is a perception that can be changed and all is well and unfolding as it should. Diversity is here so that we can better choose what we want. We can't get it wrong and we never get it done. We are all the non-physical expressing itself in the physical and we don't really die. When we croak we simply pull back into the larger experience of ourselves (Oneness).

(The above is my opinion and the filters I look through things with.)

To Your Best,
Doc

"If all I have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." MY Grampa Vetter

[Terry]

Doc, in a perfect world I also would be in support of "freedom of speech", it has a nice ring to it don;t you think? In this world however, I see more problems than values in that approach at times.
If you call me an A..hole, out of respect for you I would consider what you said as against what caused the comment, and reach a conclusion most likely that you had misunderstood or whatever. On the other hand, I happen to like and respect me in spite of my warts. What about our neighbour who is perhaps less self confident, and open to being put down by your comments? Is he or she not deserving of my support if such seems to be needed? I feel that this is so, and when I see female, black, uneducated, etc, sometimes all in one person, sometimes not, I see certain comments as damaging, and permanently debilitating... Being human, I might of course be wrong, but that is the chance we all take when we take any action.
When I see blacks who often though not always get a less than decent education because of lack of money in the gettos were they live, I feel sorry for them, but helpless. When I see the results of such lack as being unemployed, again I feel sorry and helpless. However, when I see someone deliberately pushing them further into depression by rude and disgusting comments and put downs, I am not helpless, and must as a decent human being who knows better, do whatever I can to rectify such comments.
It seems, that a large number of others agree with my attitude. They demanded Imus go, and he went. God bless decent people, I hope all who were affected by that action will cherish it and know that others do care, and most of them were white by the way, so it isn't a racist thing, it affects all of us when such comments go unchallenged.

[Poodle]

Skip and I have had our discussions on politics. We totally disagree but have a darn good time discussing it. In fact it is such a wonderful anchor I am laughing right now. Skip well knows from whom I receive a lot of emails and now you do too. I am enough to vex any man.

I do agree with "your" filters and I am excitedly awaiting learning more in time. But for right now in my model of the world there are still villans.

Hugs,
Anne

[Connie]

This thread is an interesting read, because I agree with most of everything written, even when it conflicts!! :eek: Bottom line (for me), I had never paid the slightest attention to the Imus stuff, in fact had never heard of him before this incident. I'm more on the side of Doc. He's a jerk. I don't have to give him or his messages my attention. I haven't. I won't. Or people like him. But anyone who does care about his messages, and wants to take action, that's fine by me, too. Do what you like! Do what makes YOU feel good. As Doc said: "Freedom." Where I take personal exception is someone (anyone) telling me how I should respond to a stimulus such as Imus, or that I am less decent if I don't choose to focus on an issue.

I'm a natural for this Law of Attraction stuff, because I've been doing it all my life--ignoring things that I don't want to see/know. Only I called it "avoidance" and thought it was bad. :p When I was younger I read the daily newspaper cover to cover every day. Now I don't read it at all, save for an occasional huge or local story. I turn off the news. I don't want to read about this disease and that mass killing and this abuse and this war at the moment. I don't want to! So, I'm not.

[Don]

I'm for Freedom over fairness.

I'm for freedom as long as it includes personal responsibility and truth.

According to Talkers magazine, the industry's "bible," Imus had a weekly audience of over 2.25 million people. That give him a lot of power when others don't have. And as a certain comic book and move spider guy has learned, "With great power comes great responsibility."

It would seem that most of these talk radio hosts are only interested in the money, so honesty, truth, and taking responsibility for their actions comes in far from the top.

[Don]

I've been...ignoring things that I don't want to see/know.... I turn off the news.

Connie, if that is your wish you are free to do it. However I don't think the law of attraction says anything about ignoring the world so much as focusing on what you want to bring into your life. How can we know what we want if we don't know what is going on?

The last group I know of that ignored things they didn't want to see/know lived in Germany during the 1930s. I would hate to think that a majority of people in any culture are modeling that behavior.

Santayana wrote, "Those who ignore the past are condemned to repeat it." Unless one sees what is going on now and compares it to the past, in my opinion they are open to repeating it again.

[Don]

It seems, that a large number of others agree with my attitude. They demanded Imus go, and he went. God bless decent people, I hope all who were affected by that action will cherish it and know that others do care, and most of them were white by the way, so it isn't a racist thing, it affects all of us when such comments go unchallenged.

While I'm not sure it was a good thing that Imus was fired (it's too easy for him to cry that he is a victim and absolve himself of any responsibility for his actions), I am very much in favor of reacting to hate mongers, racists, and liars who wield so much power over the public airwaves. I strongly agree with Terry when he says that "it affects all of us when such comments go unchallenged." The problem is, Terry or Doc or Poodle or Skip can't reach the millions of people that an Imus reached. And further, as has been pointed out, if the hate mongers repeat their trash enough, people will believe it and not even be willing to hear from those who dare to stand up to power with facts and truth.

Freedom without responsibility is not freedom, it is license. Spreading hate is still spreading hate.

[Connie]

For some reason, this conversation is reminding me of a story my hubby made me listen to from the paper a few days go. See, I still do get my news, even when I don't want to. :p (Plus, the internet headlines.) I haven't found a mountain top or cave to go hide in yet.

There was a kid who was in a literature class in high school. Creative writing. He wrote some disturbing poetry--about death and killings and necrophilia. They posted an excerpt from one of his poems in the paper--my immediate sense was that it was a joke of some kind on the kid's part, not his true feelings. It was a cartoon, exaggerated expression of what the kid thought these type of writings would be like. (That's my psychic sense.) Anyway, the school had him arrested!!! Carted away (in handcuffs?). For something he wrote on a creative writing paper in which the students were told "no holds barred." I don't remember what crime he was charged with!

This seems an incredible, absolutely ludicrous over-reaction, even taking into account the recent events at Virginia Tech. You think the kid is disturbed, you direct him to counseling--not have him arrested!! I don't like when people try to control others with a sledgehammer (or in this case a wooden gavel).

[Docresults]

Doc, in a perfect world I also would be in support of "freedom of speech", it has a nice ring to it don;t you think? In this world however, I see more problems than values in that approach at times.
If you call me an A..hole, out of respect for you I would consider what you said as against what caused the comment, and reach a conclusion most likely that you had misunderstood or whatever. On the other hand, I happen to like and respect me in spite of my warts. What about our neighbour who is perhaps less self confident, and open to being put down by your comments? Is he or she not deserving of my support if such seems to be needed? I feel that this is so, and when I see female, black, uneducated, etc, sometimes all in one person, sometimes not, I see certain comments as damaging, and permanently debilitating... Being human, I might of course be wrong, but that is the chance we all take when we take any action.
When I see blacks who often though not always get a less than decent education because of lack of money in the gettos were they live, I feel sorry for them, but helpless. When I see the results of such lack as being unemployed, again I feel sorry and helpless. However, when I see someone deliberately pushing them further into depression by rude and disgusting comments and put downs, I am not helpless, and must as a decent human being who knows better, do whatever I can to rectify such comments.
It seems, that a large number of others agree with my attitude. They demanded Imus go, and he went. God bless decent people, I hope all who were affected by that action will cherish it and know that others do care, and most of them were white by the way, so it isn't a racist thing, it affects all of us when such comments go unchallenged.

Terry,

What you talkin' bout Willis, dis is a perfect world...

While we are all entitled to our opinions and we may often think the same thing about others opinions as what a chair thinks (Oh No here comes another a...hole!) I choose to respectfully tell another story... It is a perfect story for this perfect world.

If anyone has the right to be bitter and blame others it would be me.

I think I feel a trirate (sp) coming on...

I was born naked and it went down hill from there. I started out as a child thrown across the room by his father, hit the wall and slide down. A kid who's father walked out and never was heard from again before the age of 1. I went into an orphanage at the age of 3, went to an old school house which had all 12 grades in the same building. Was raped when I was 12 years old. Have been unemployed and unemployable off and on for years through out my life. etc., etc., etc.

I had less than low self esteem, I had no self esteem, I didn't live in the ghetto (that was up town compared to living in an orphanage-talk about lack of money because of where you live). I had worse than poor education for I am a part of the smallest minority out there orphans. I was put down all the time because I was an orphan by every race, you name the race and they put me down. There was and is no national group looking out for orphans, there is no NAAOP or other organization to lobby for us or our rights. There is no one that will put us on TV when we are discriminated against. We don't even have family to fall back on. I had no one to count on. Do you understand, I had no family, no race, no particular religion to count on or fall back on for help. All I've every had is the friends I've made to depend on. NO government, no nothing, no one looking out for me.

There was no one to pay the bills, no one to pay for college. I'm the one who worked through college. I'm the one who paid for college. There is no United Orphan Funds or Orphan Colleges out there that give orphans a break. I didn't even have family, black or white, to borrow money from, then or now.

(BTW the only really discrimination is the color 'green' MONEY. If ya don't have it you get discriminated against.)

When people call me names like short, fat, ugly orphan, white-trash where are the people to stop the scars and keep the hurt away? Where are all those decent people you speak of when orphans are ignored and given no special handout or even hand ups? What about those that deliberately pushed me away and shunned me because I didn't measure up to a mummy and daddy grade?

Who cared about the depression that others rude, disgusting and put downs comments I received because I played basketball in the park and I wasn't black, tall or fast? (I was the only white boy on the school basketball team, during practice in the afternoon I would ask the brothers how come you won't throw me the ball? They told me I was white and they couldn't see me in the light.)

Today, I'm successful happy, health, wealthy and loved, not because I'm a man, or white, or orphan or black or blue or female. NONE of that has ANYTHING to do with anyone's success and if someone tells you it does they are manipulating you for their purposes and good and not yours. (Think government!)

Terry you are a decent human being but where and when did your decency have ANYTHING to do with what I did with what life presented me with or anyone else for that matter. Your decency has nothing to do with anyone else, you are decent regardless of whether you do anything or say anything or not. I suspect that a large number of people don't realize the truth of what I just wrote.

If I were going to do something decent... I teach others to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain". IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT ANYONE ELSE THINKS OR SAYS ABOUT ANYTHING. THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IT. (It ain't just a nice slogan it is the key to a happy life.)

If we are going to be our brothers keeper let's learn how to teach them to be self-sufficient, self-reliant, self-responsible and accountable to and for themselves. Not excuse makers , "I can't make it cause... he said this, they believe that, I'm not this, they are not that".

All excuses for not using the Universal laws (it's like not using gravity and blaming everything and everybody except oneself). No one can use gravity for the individual, no one can think for the individual, no one can believe for the individual, no one can act for the individual EXCEPT THE INDIVIDUAL. That is the way the universe is set up.

We can help others and the best help is to be an example. I'm the best example I know for anyone who has ever been discriminated against. I don't care what their excuse is for where they are I know cause I've been there and done that and the power lye's with the individual not what other, society or the government does. That is all ancillary, secondary to what the individual does first. How is it that we attempt to make it primary?

The attitude of those that agreed and got Imus fired is going to cost his former employee's a pretty penny because this misplaced or misguided political correctness was contractually illegal in Imus's case it seems.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Terry]

Sorry, I somehow posted twice. Me velly bad fella.....:D

[Connie]

Doc, come here and get a hug. I found your tirade uplifting!

[Connie]

Connie, if that is your wish you are free to do it. However I don't think the law of attraction says anything about ignoring the world so much as focusing on what you want to bring into your life. How can we know what we want if we don't know what is going on?

Hi, Don! I do know and I mentioned several items. Disease, abuse, hate, intolerance, war, injustice, killings, etc. I don't need to know the specifics of each crime to have an EXCELLENT sense of what I don't want in my life and what I do.

[Don]

I agree, Connie. In ten years he'll probably be selling more books than Steven King.

[Docresults]

Freedom without responsibility is not freedom, it is license. Spreading hate is still spreading hate.


Don,

Nice thought but which is more important Freedom, responsibility or hate. For me Freedom trumps.

Freedom allows the spread of hate. I hate floods but getting all the other people up here on the top of the mountain to hate floods is a full-time job and it don't pay as well as hating people.

Responsibility to whom, when , where and how does it limit freedom? (if it is outside the individual it limits.)

If freedom is limited is it really freedom?

IMHO teach Freedom and how to achieve it. Which has nothing to do with what another single person or group thinks, says or does.

To Your Best,
Doc

P.S. Instead of getting caught up in the word meanings look at it as energy flow and notice how it changes perception.

[Connie]

I'm for freedom as long as it includes personal responsibility and truth.

As Doc points out, that's not freedom. It's something else. I feel like people should and do have the freedom to be irresponsible and liars--if they choose. CHOICE. That's what it's about for me. Doc, for instance, chose to rise above his beginnings and create a more desirable life for himself. So can anyone.

[Docresults]

"it affects all of us when such comments go unchallenged."

Don,

I don't mean to be cantankerous and yet. The only reason any comment can affect another is if the other is not focused on what they want.

It really isn't about challenging another, it is about focusing one's attention (thoughts, beliefs, feelings and actions) in the direction of where one wants to go and encouraging others to do the same as well. (And allowing others to challenge if they so choose. Even if challenge creates more challenge.)

Challenging what one doesn't want only brings more of what one doesn't want. We can not change the hearts and minds of people without congruency in the direction of what is wanted with extremely little attention to what is not wanted.

(While driving the majority of my attention is in the direction of where I want to go as I look through the front windshield. I do check my mirrors for split seconds at a time and use my energy (peripheral vision) for calibration purposes and yet my attention and focus is through my front windshield in the direction of where I want to go. Challenging is like trying to drive down the highway only using my mirrors to move forward.)

This is not a limited universe. There is room for the sick, the well, the hater, the lover, the stupid, the smart, the idiot, the a...hole, the excluder and the includer. Whichever we focus on or challenge we will have more in our experience.

There is that ole' quote from Edmund Burke, "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing"

It can be misleading because for evil to prevail in this universe of movement, all that is really required is not doing nothing (as it is virtually impossible to do nothing) but resistance of evil is all that is required for evil to prevail (it is a focus on what one doesn't want and energy flows where attention goes. It doesn't matter if the attention is on what we don't want the energy goes to whatever we focus on and enlivens it.)

One of the scriptures even quotes Jesus saying "Resist not evil (what you don't want) but instead turn the other cheek (look in the other direction of what you want)

All that is required for evil to fail is for good men and women to focus on what they want instead of what they don't want.

A good example of focus on what is wanted and focus on what is not wanted is playing out in America right now over the war on terrorism including Iraq. For those who focused vibrationally on America's safety there is one side and for those who focused on fairness and victims and villains there is the other side. Both sides see what they want to see thus creating more of both.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Don]

Don,
I don't mean to be cantankerous and yet.
Doc, you are welcome to be as cantankerous as you desire! :D
The only reason any comment can affect another is if the other is not focused on what they want.
That's nice to say, but when groups of people have the bully pulpit of controlling the microphone of the airwaves and spread the same hate and lies hour after hour, you may not respond to it, I may not respond to it, but hundreds and thousands of people do. If 50,000 people were to listen to and believe people on the radio saying "hypnosis is fake and all hypnotists are liars and terrorists" that would absolutely effect me and my life!
It really isn't about challenging another, it is about focusing one's attention (thoughts, beliefs, feelings and actions) in the direction of where one wants to go and encouraging others to do the same as well. (And allowing others to challenge if they so choose. Even if challenge creates more challenge.)
That's what I meant by challenging the hate mongers and liars. If it were only you or me listening to the radio, I'd say your point is absolutely accurate. But it's also hundreds of thousands of people who listen to hate and lies hour after hour, day after day. It is their actions, as a response to what they hear, that has an effect.
Challenging what one doesn't want only brings more of what one doesn't want. We can not change the hearts and minds of people without congruency in the direction of what is wanted with extremely little attention to what is not wanted.
I would want to challenge lies, misrepresentation, and hate with truth. I would contend that truth and facts bring understanding. I think we may simply have a different concept of the meaning of "challenge," here, and we basically would do the same thing.
This is not a limited universe. There is room for the sick, the well, the hater, the lover, the stupid, the smart, the idiot, the a...hole, the excluder and the includer. Whichever we focus on or challenge we will have more in our experience.
I agree...but I would also contend that sickness, hate, stupidity, etc. are limiting. Spreading a message of truth, facts, and honesty provides a background of limitless possibilities.
There is that ole' quote from Edmund Burke, "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing"
And I agree. I also believe that people are basically good and will act for the highest good of themselves and others when given that option and shown how that option can be beneficial. For example, several years ago oil refineries spent millions fighting the rule that would require them to put "sulfur scrubbers" in their refineries to limit air pollution. They lost and finally installed them. The result was they ended up producing large amounts of sulfur which they sold for a profit that has more than paid for the cost of the scrubbers. If they had simply gone along with it they would have made even more money and helped clean the environment. But they were thinking in terms of limitations rather than possibilities.

It can be misleading because for evil to prevail in this universe of movement, all that is really required is not doing nothing (as it is virtually impossible to do nothing) but resistance of evil is all that is required for evil to prevail (it is a focus on what one doesn't want and energy flows where attention goes. It doesn't matter if the attention is on what we don't want the energy goes to whatever we focus on and enlivens it.)
I agree. But you don't resist the darkness by bringing in more darkness, you resist darkness by turning on the lights. I don't conceive of confronting hate and lies by simply saying "you're a hater and a liar." Rather, it is confronted by showing the truth and the benefits of positive relationships rather than hate.

All that is required for evil to fail is for good men and women to focus on what they want instead of what they don't want.
There is a difference between focusing on what you want and ignoring evil. We need to be aware of what is there so we can bring into our lives what we want.

Frankly, Doc, I think our major difference, here, is semantics and not content. That's why I tend to be anti-semantic.:eek:

[Docresults]

There is a difference between focusing on what you want and ignoring evil. We need to be aware of what is there so we can bring into our lives what we want.

Frankly, Doc, I think our major difference, here, is semantics and not content. That's why I tend to be anti-semantic.:eek:

Don,

It may be and yet Anti-semantically we are both using the word focus(ing) and you brought in the concept of ignoring evil, which leads me to believe there is some content difference.

What I am speaking of is a congruency that is so strong it doesn't ignore anything, it just isn't in the same vibrational range. When one is vibrationally in peace or love (congruent) evil is not in their world. It is not a matter of ignoring anything it is a matter of vibrational relativity.

What one would see and call evil, someone congruent and focused would see the same thing, include it without labeling it evil or good... taking the useful aspects focusing on those, accentuating the positive aspects of what others term 'evil'. Calibrate to where they are going and move forward. Happy with what is and eager for more.

In other words no need to challenge, justify or explain truth about other's or self's actions. Any of those things (challenging, justifying, etc.) cuts one off from their connection with Source (All There Is) and moves one further from what they want.

Instead of challenging evil and showing others your's or mine or someone else's truth why not point people inside to their Source so they can find their own truth, which doesn't have to be the same as your's or mine.

Telling a grown man or pointing out to him or others he's a hater and spreading hate only spreads more hate. (It creates more publicity and press for him and his views, which many seem to be against, which in turns draws more people to his view-again the energy is flowing where the attention is going. Not matter how much we wish it was different, it ain't.) It may be the truth but there are all kinds of truths that one can focus on which will increase the vibration of that particular truth. Focus on another truth and you decrease the vibration of the previous truth.

And using hate to point out truth (yours/mine/etc) two different vibrations, not close enough to make the jump.

We don't make lovers by stopping haters. We stop haters by BEING LOVE (Includers). Those who have ears to hear will hear and those who have eyes to see will see and those who don't won't. One teacher many are familiar with once said it like this, overcome evil with good. In other words move your focus from what you don't want (evil) to what you do want (good). He didn't say stop evil, hate, etc. by any means necessary. He gave a plan to overcome it. IF he had been an ole' Japanese monk he may have said use "emotional aikido".

Our attempt to control others behavior will not work or make us happy. History and our own experience should be enough to show us that. The only thing that can or will make someone happy, in the long run, is emotional freedom and/or control. It is internal to each individual self and available to all individuals. It will never be accomplished by attempting to control the words and actions of another. If history shows anything, that is the most consistent thing history has shown us. It is not a matter of right/wrong, fair/unfair. It is a matter of diversity so that the universe expands.

No one really makes another feel bad because the Individual really is the Meaning Maker. What meaning are we going to make. Others will model what we do so I encourage make meaning in the direction of what we want and others will follow our example. Congruency is very attractive.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Jack]

And that, Connie, is your right.:)

Jack

[Don]

When you write, "We don't make lovers by stopping haters. We stop haters by BEING LOVE" you're making a subtle assumption that I disagree with. Your post indicates that to you, the opposite of hate is love and the opposite of love is hate. I disagree.

Hate and love are not opposites, the are emotionally directed intense energy. The "opposite" of both is indifference.

In your description you seem to be consistently looking at things on a two-person basis: me and you. That "you" may be singular or plural ("haters") but it is still focused on a one-to-one relationship. The world is filled with such relationships, but from what I've seen relationships actually have three participants: you, me, and not directly involved others.

To me, it is that third party which is vastly larger in numbers where standing up to evil, etc., is important. Countering the message may or may not effect the hater, but it will effect the third parties.

If a radio talker spreads hate, mistruths, and lies, you saying "I love you" may effect you, but it's not going to stop the effect of the hate, mistruths, and lies on others.

By standing up to hatred and saying "No, it shall not be," you are not creating a circle of love. You are stopping the spread of hate to others.

By responding to people who ask, "Why are you standing up to hate?" by telling them, "Because I love" you increase those who love.

[Connie]

Speaking of standing up to hate, can I tell a quick story? (try and stop me!) :) I was in trainings a few weeks ago and this person, an unpleasant person (two of them, in fact) said some hateful things in class during a lecture directed at my religion and my family's religion. Of course I had a choice how to respond, and in this situation I chose to make my displeasure known. Verbally, and physically. (I said a few things, then stormed out of class, never to return.) The teacher chose how he wanted to handle the situation--he ignored it entirely. Everyone else was either laughing (agreeing with the hateful remarks) or squirming uncomfortably at my anger.

The upshot, speaking of energy and vibrations, is that my response was most damaging to ME. I was upset for days. It pretty much ruined the trip for me--and who knows how much more of those bad feelings and energies are attracted to me by the incident!! I would have liked to have handled it differently.

[Docresults]

When you write, "We don't make lovers by stopping haters. We stop haters by BEING LOVE" you're making a subtle assumption that I disagree with. Your post indicates that to you, the opposite of hate is love and the opposite of love is hate. I disagree.

Hate and love are not opposites, the are emotionally directed intense energy. The "opposite" of both is indifference.

Again I did not say they were opposite I said to stop hate you use another vibration of energy. Emotions are simply energy in motion. In fact hate is not actually stopped it is simply replaces with focus on another part of the energy flow. What I said is wherever focus goes it is enliven, enlarged, empowered with more energy.

Case in point...
People who have never heard of Don Imus are now more aware of him because of a bunch of people saying and making comments about him being a hater and wrong and etc. In other words challenging (focusing on what is not wanted... i.e. hate) has given more energy to the issue and empowered what is called hate speech. Now Imus legally will be able to turn it all around and come out with more people knowing who he is and more who will be curious to listen to him. All because of the tendency to attempt to protect certain people based on words. Freedom of anything (speech, etc.) is taking on a whole new meaning now-a-days.

The long run will suffer because of where the focus of energy is going. Challenging in my book is resistance and resistance creates persistence. Or is that no longer a useful presupposition?

In your description you seem to be consistently looking at things on a two-person basis: me and you. That "you" may be singular or plural ("haters") but it is still focused on a one-to-one relationship. The world is filled with such relationships, but from what I've seen relationships actually have three participants: you, me, and not directly involved others.

To me, it is that third party which is vastly larger in numbers where standing up to evil, etc., is important. Countering the message may or may not effect the hater, but it will effect the third parties.

Again you are coming from your frame, which is fine, it's your frame. I am not looking at things on a two-person basis, I am consistently looking at things on a ONENESS (One person) basis. You are me, I am me and the third party is also me.

We also seem to differ in that you see the vast majority third party as gullible and in need of something more than your example of going for what you want. I see the vast majority third party as smart and modelers of whatever it is they see that they like. If you want to influence others show them how to go for what they want from a connected position to your source. Or teach them to challenge or resist what they don't like. Curiosity wonders which will make them happier? Counter with going in the direction you intend instead of trying to stop the direction you don't want to go.

Learning really isn't done with or by words, it is a modeling process that is transfered by energy. (The teachers that got through to kids in school was more about the energy of the teach than the words they used.)

If a radio talker spreads hate, mistruths, and lies, you saying "I love you" may effect you, but it's not going to stop the effect of the hate, mistruths, and lies on others.

By standing up to hatred and saying "No, it shall not be," you are not creating a circle of love. You are stopping the spread of hate to others.

Are you sure, are you sure enough to be unsure long enough to really look at this from an energy flow POV? And as an example the case in point I presented above. Or even the Irag war. Standing up to say NO, one mans inhuman treatment of others shall not be." (It didn't solve the problem just as standing up to hate only flows more energy to hate.)

Being love does not mean saying "I love you". It is a vibration that doesn't necessarily have words attached. Moving to another vibrate doesn't stop hate it only deactivates it.

Instead of standing up to hate simply just don't be there when it shows up. Hate, just as the poor, will always be with us. Hate is a part of this well stocked kitchen call the universe and the attempt to get it out of the kitchen only strengthens it more. Stop pushing against hate and it won't raise up to bit you. Focus on what you do want and that is what you will raise up for yourself then the vast majority third party can actually choose which model they want to model.

By responding to people who ask, "Why are you standing up to hate?" by telling them, "Because I love" you increase those who love.

Again are you sure, are you sure enough to be unsure long enough to consider positions you have felt comfortable with in the past? I find it interesting that in other threads you have been in agreement about standing up against and/or resisting something such as Mother Teresa's comment "never going to a anti-war rally because it reinforces war." To paraphrase her "never go to an anti-hater's rally because it reinforces hate." Energetically it IS THE SAME THING." Or is Mother Teresa's advice no longer useful?

Now if one has hate active in one's vibration and what someone says activates that vibration (whether they intended it or not) either move up the emotional scale from hate to anger and then disgust and then to indifference and then to hope, etc. or use a tool like self-hypnosis or a energy tool to pull the charge out of it and anchor in a more useful response for oneself.

Again, on another aspect, how do you know it was really hate and not humor or shock jock tactics? You opinion and others opinion of what it was are only that opinions, they are not the truth , other than your truth. (They only tell what is going on inside of you, not what's going on inside the other.) We don't really know Imus's heart to know whether or not it really was hate speech or humor or shock jock tactics as that is what he is paid to do. And you are assuming that the vast majority third party have the same filters that you do. Fortunately they don't and they don't have mine either which is really a useful thing.

I also consider it almost rude (maybe not rude but certainly unconnected with one's source) to predict or know what the unknown vast third party majority will accept and/or believe. Heavens to Betsy, I don't hardly know any of them and for me to make such broad generalizations about what they will or will not do when they hear someone talk is quite a disservice, disrespect, dishonor and doesn't think very highly of them. Maybe that's why I don't know to many of them.

Standing up for the vast unknown third party majority is like the guy who came up to my Grampa Vetter and asked, "Which way did the crowd go? I'm their leader." It reminds me of people like Jesse Jackson and AL Sharpton saying they speak for the African-American community where as a many of the A-A community do not consider them their leaders or speaking for them.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Don]

Hi, Connie.

You are exactly correct. The anger and negativity was most damaging to you. Not only that, but the people who insulted your religion probably used your response to validate their own negative opinion of your religion.

I remember seeing a fundamentalist Christian minister on TV who was arguing with a self-identified Witch. He was quite large and was jumping up and down until his ill-fitting shirt was coming out of his pants. He was shouting and raving. The woman was very calm and smiling. She confronted his anger with peace. And logic. She calmly and slowly worked him until he made an error that would lead to his downfall.

Eventually, it got down to his saying that she was condemned to hell for her beliefs and that he didn't say so, the bible said so. "Oh?" she replied. "And what does it say about the Jews." He said they're damned to hell, too.

There was an audible gasp in the audience. The host, a woman named Jones, almost dropped the hand-held microphone. Jones was her professional name and she, it turns out, was Jewish.

From that point on, nobody want to hear anything from the minister. He had lost and he quickly realized it. Questions were all addressed to the Witch and people were interested in what she had to say.

Confrontation doesn't mean meeting anger with anger, rage with rage, hate with hate. It means presenting your opinion with decency and truth. If our attitude comes from a point of view of honesty and love, others will realize it. It will win out over anger, hate, and rage every time.

[Don]

Again I did not say they were opposite I said to stop hate you use another vibration of energy. Emotions are simply energy in motion. In fact hate is not actually stopped it is simply replaces with focus on another part of the energy flow. What I said is wherever focus goes it is enliven, enlarged, empowered with more energy.

I agree. But respectfully, that is not the way you initially presented it, even if you think you did.


Case in point...
People who have never heard of Don Imus are now more aware of him because of a bunch of people saying and making comments about him being a hater and wrong and etc. In other words challenging (focusing on what is not wanted... i.e. hate) has given more energy to the issue and empowered what is called hate speech. Now Imus legally will be able to turn it all around and come out with more people knowing who he is and more who will be curious to listen to him. All because of the tendency to attempt to protect certain people based on words. Freedom of anything (speech, etc.) is taking on a whole new meaning now-a-days.

The long run will suffer because of where the focus of energy is going. Challenging in my book is resistance and resistance creates persistence. Or is that no longer a useful presupposition?

I think you may be looking to micro at this and not macro. You are indeed correct that more people know about him now than before. However, he is now forever identified with "hate speech." The term "hate" has negative qualities attached to it and the people who spread hate never think of themselves as doing so.

People now know that he was spreading hate and there is attention turned to the fact that the radio is filled with hate speech. That awareness may help change the tenor of radio and decrease the hate and rage in the world. That is the reason so many hate-talk radio hosts are upset about him being fired. They know that the silencing of their hate may be next.

Again you are coming from your frame, which is fine, it's your frame. I am not looking at things on a two-person basis, I am consistently looking at things on a ONENESS (One person) basis. You are me, I am me and the third party is also me.

Again, you are thinking you are projecting your frame, with is fine, it is your frame. :D But you are actually projecting exactly what I described.

We also seem to differ in that you see the vast majority third party as gullible and in need of something more than your example of going for what you want. No. That is a mind read on your part.

[/quote]I see the vast majority third party as smart and modelers of whatever it is they see that they like. If you want to influence others show them how to go for what they want from a connected position to your source. Or teach them to challenge or resist what they don't like. Curiosity wonders which will make them happier? Counter with going in the direction you intend instead of trying to stop the direction you don't want to go.[/quote] I agree. The problem is that for the past two decades there has been a concerted effort by a small group of people exemplified by the current crop of radio hate mongers to only allow their position to be heard. For people to model something they need to have access to alternatives.

Freedom of choice means you have to have a choice, you have to be aware that you have a choice, and you must have the opportunity to make that choice. The near monopoly of talk radio hate mongers prevents that.

Learning really isn't done with or by words, it is a modeling process that is transfered by energy. (The teachers that got through to kids in school was more about the energy of the teach than the words they used.) I agree. But again, you need something to model. If all you see or hear is hate, that is all you'll have to model, no?

Are you sure, are you sure enough to be unsure long enough to really look at this from an energy flow POV?

Yes. I am. Are you? Are you sure that you're sure?

And as an example the case in point I presented above. Or even the Irag war. Standing up to say NO, one mans inhuman treatment of others shall not be." (It didn't solve the problem just as standing up to hate only flows more energy to hate.)

You're correct. Standing up and saying "no" won't solve the problem. But it will introduce the energy that, if it affects others, will result in change.

Being love does not mean saying "I love you". It is a vibration that doesn't necessarily have words attached. Moving to another vibrate doesn't stop hate it only deactivates it.

Instead of standing up to hate simply just don't be there when it shows up.

That's easy to say...if you choose to hide in your house, never watch tv, listen to the radio, read a paper, or talk with anyone.

Hate, just as the poor, will always be with us.

That, my friend, is what could be called a negative belief. I choose to believe that we can end poverty and we can remove the need for hate.

Hate is a part of this well stocked kitchen call the universe and the attempt to get it out of the kitchen only strengthens it more.

You're correct. You won't get rid of hate by trying to shovel it out of the kitchen any more than you get rid of darkness by trying to shovel it out of the kitchen. Instead, you stand up and turn on the light. You don't ignore the darkness, you bring in light. Otherwise, you're going to stub your toe!;)

Stop pushing against hate and it won't raise up to bit you. Focus on what you do want and that is what you will raise up for yourself then the vast majority third party can actually choose which model they want to model.
For some reason you seem to think that the only way to stand in opposition to evil and hate is to push against it. I consider it more in the sense of evil and hate being like ****roaches. You'll never defeat them by playing their game in their environment. Instead, you turn on the light (of truth, honesty, and love) and watch as they scamper into the shadows. Then you spread more light, like boric acid, making a growing environment that is toxic to the ****roaches.

Again are you sure, are you sure enough to be unsure long enough to consider positions you have felt comfortable with in the past?

Absolutely! Are you sure that you are sure enough of your own positions that you don't need to try NLPish word games to intimidate people and instead just talk with them? :eek:

I find it interesting that in other threads you have been in agreement about standing up against and/or resisting something such as Mother Teresa's comment "never going to a anti-war rally because it reinforces war." To paraphrase her "never go to an anti-hater's rally because it reinforces hate." Energetically it IS THE SAME THING." Or is Mother Teresa's advice no longer useful?

I have never commented about Mother Teresa here. Considering that she used to hob-nob with some of the most horrible tyrants and mass murders in the world in order to beg small amounts of money from them, is it possible that she had an ulterior motive for this position? Do you really think the war in Vietnam would have ended as soon as it did if millions had not marched in the streets?

Now if one has hate active in one's vibration and what someone says activates that vibration (whether they intended it or not) either move up the emotional scale from hate to anger and then disgust and then to indifference and then to hope, etc. or use a tool like self-hypnosis or a energy tool to pull the charge out of it and anchor in a more useful response for oneself.

Do you think you are sure enough of yourself to step out of you paradigm for a second and see how you are discussing what works for one person only? How are you going to get this across to others when leaders who hate constantly bombard them with that emotion/energy?

Again, on another aspect, how do you know it was really hate and not humor or shock jock tactics? You opinion and others opinion of what it was are only that opinions, they are not the truth , other than your truth. (They only tell what is going on inside of you, not what's going on inside the other.) We don't really know Imus's heart to know whether or not it really was hate speech or humor or shock jock tactics as that is what he is paid to do. And you are assuming that the vast majority third party have the same filters that you do. Fortunately they don't and they don't have mine either which is really a useful thing.

When I was a child, I used to do the choosing song, "Eenie Meenie, Miney, Mo," using the line, "catch a tiger by his toe." The first time I heard a person use a racist slur instead of "tiger," I was shocked. I pointed out that it was mean (I didn't know the meaning of "racism"). My friend who had used it didn't even realize that it was mean or racist.

Just because someone says, "I'm just doing it for shock" or "I'm just doing it as a joke" doesn't mean it isn't rooted in hatred. As a hypnotherapist, I'm sure you know that your choice of words has meaning, even if they're presented as a joke or to shock people.

Of the hundreds of thousands of people who heard Imus racially slur some talented women, how many thought or felt, "Yeah. That's right!" How many are going to share that with friends? How many are going to teach it to their children? How far will that hatred go?

I also consider it almost rude (maybe not rude but certainly unconnected with one's source) to predict or know what the unknown vast third party majority will accept and/or believe. Heavens to Betsy, I don't hardly know any of them and for me to make such broad generalizations about what they will or will not do when they hear someone talk is quite a disservice, disrespect, dishonor and doesn't think very highly of them. Maybe that's why I don't know to many of them.

Tell that to advertisers!

Standing up for the vast unknown third party majority is like the guy who came up to my Grampa Vetter and asked, "Which way did the crowd go? I'm their leader." It reminds me of people like Jesse Jackson and AL Sharpton saying they speak for the African-American community where as a many of the A-A community do not consider them their leaders or speaking for them.

To Your Best,
Doc

No, I'm not standing up "for" the third party majority. I'm standing up "so" the third party majority can have an option to model, an option based on love, truth, honesty, and letting people realize they can accomplish anything without needing to hate others.

[Docresults]

I agree. But respectfully, that is not the way you initially presented it, even if you think you did.

Don, I know what I wrote and I know how you took it. I did not write love is the opposite of hate even though you read that into what I wrote. I presented two different energies yes often they are considered opposites but I did not present them as such. You mind-read that is what I was doing and it would have been clearer if I had used happiness instead of love but I was not presenting them as opposites.

In my model they are the same thing (just different perspectives). It is the same coin. One side includes the other excludes and yet they are the same thing. It depends upon where one is viewing them from.




I think you may be looking to micro at this and not macro. You are indeed correct that more people know about him now than before. However, he is now forever identified with "hate speech." The term "hate" has negative qualities attached to it and the people who spread hate never think of themselves as doing so.

People now know that he was spreading hate and there is attention turned to the fact that the radio is filled with hate speech. That awareness may help change the tenor of radio and decrease the hate and rage in the world. That is the reason so many hate-talk radio hosts are upset about him being fired. They know that the silencing of their hate may be next.

First, I am looking at this macro and long term. Second only those who have a vibrational trigger around "hate speech" will identify Imus with "hate speech" I suspect the majority will identify him as a shock jock just as they do Howard Stern.

This concept that people now know the radio is filled with hate speech seems very odd. I listen to both conservatives and liberals (the few that can even make it on the radio and out of all of them I would classify one conservative and three liberals as putting out "hate speech" and that is a small number compared to the number of those on radio.

I would be interested to know which individuals you consider hate speakers.

The problem is that for the past two decades there has been a concerted effort by a small group of people exemplified by the current crop of radio hate mongers to only allow their position to be heard. For people to model something they need to have access to alternatives.

Freedom of choice means you have to have a choice, you have to be aware that you have a choice, and you must have the opportunity to make that choice. The near monopoly of talk radio hate mongers prevents that.

I agree. But again, you need something to model. If all you see or hear is hate, that is all you'll have to model, no?

I still don't know specifically who or what you are talking about and I presume this must all be taking place without any other forms of communication such as TV, cable, Internet being available so there is not any other models to choose from and there is only this theoretical talk radio hate mongers monopoly.

You're correct. Standing up and saying "no" won't solve the problem. But it will introduce the energy that, if it affects others, will result in change.

That's easy to say...if you choose to hide in your house, never watch tv, listen to the radio, read a paper, or talk with anyone.

That is certainly ONE way to do it another is "IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT ANYONE ELSE SAYS, THINKS OR BELIEVES. IT ONLY MATTERS WHAT YOU THE INDIVIDUAL THINKS. If your vibration is high enough you don't go to those lower vibrations.


That, my friend, is what could be called a negative belief. I choose to believe that we can end poverty and we can remove the need for hate.

Good for you. As soon as you figure out how to vibrate (think, feel and believe) for others, let me know and I'll join you in that belief. I choose to believe that people can choose (consciously or unconsciously) to be do or have anything including poverty and hate and it doesn't have to effect me or anyone else if they so choose..

When Jesus said, "The poor you will have with you always." I suspect like me it wasn't a limiting belief. It was an awareness of the operational structure of how the individual is the creator and Meaning Maker of their entire life and that not everyone has the same outcome (their definition of success isn't all the same.) i.e. the wants and desires of many in the third world is not the same as the desires of the individuals in the West. Neither is more valuable or important only different.

For some reason you seem to think that the only way to stand in opposition to evil and hate is to push against it. I consider it more in the sense of evil and hate being like ****roaches. You'll never defeat them by playing their game in their environment. Instead, you turn on the light (of truth, honesty, and love) and watch as they scamper into the shadows. Then you spread more light, like boric acid, making a growing environment that is toxic to the ****roaches.

Again, here is the difference between me...

Who's definition of truth, honesty and love is everyone going to line up with?

Everything is true if you believe it and everything is false if you believe it. The Individual is the Meaning Maker for their life experience. Truth, honesty and love are always changing as the realm we live in is about movement.

One mans truth, honesty and love is another man's false, lying, hate. One man's light is another man's darkness...(i.e. American public and the Radical Fundamentalist Muslims.)

It seems that you don't comprehend that the Individual is the Meaning Maker of their own experience and therefore responsible for what they believe. And you want them to understand things they way that you or others understand things and that will make things better.



Absolutely! Are you sure that you are sure enough of your own positions that you don't need to try NLPish word games to intimidate people and instead just talk with them? :eek:

That was a very NLPish and intimidating thing to write! Do you do that often? That's pretty NLpish and intimidating for someone who hasn't really studied or taken NLP training. YOu must be a natural at this stuff.



I have never commented about Mother Teresa here. Considering that she used to hob-nob with some of the most horrible tyrants and mass murders in the world in order to beg small amounts of money from them, is it possible that she had an ulterior motive for this position? Do you really think the war in Vietnam would have ended as soon as it did if millions had not marched in the streets?

Based on what you wrote above it seems your frame says that MT did what she did from ulterior motives? Could it just as easily have been she was so full of compassion-light-God and saw goodness/Godness in everyone she was dealing with? What if her vibration did not reach down to the level of judgment and yet she was still able to calibrate to create what she was after?

The Vietnam war would have ended sooner and in another way if the military had been allowed to be the military and politics weren't the flavor of the day.

The Vietnam war as all the other wars and the recent terrorist attacks happened long before any of the physical actions took place. They were created vibrationally through the collective vibrations of those that came before. And it seems as long as we resist what we don't want, instead of focusing on what we do want we will continue to experience the same.

The most useful thing the individual can do to influence the whole of society is to instead of ignoring what you don't want, focus on what you do want and move toward that (not away from what you don't want.)



Do you think you are sure enough of yourself to step out of you paradigm for a second and see how you are discussing what works for one person only? How are you going to get this across to others when leaders who hate constantly bombard them with that emotion/energy?

When are you going to realize that if something works for one person only (structurally), it works for everyone. One gets it across the same way the early church got it across. CONGRUENCY Example first-behavior first, words second. Modern believers today are words first and their example is the same as everyone else. (You can't tell the difference between a Christian and a non-Christian today from behavior.) That is one of the main reasons Christianity has so little power today. It's all talk and not congruent action.

The powerful people, the ones with true core power, not created hype, political, or group power do it with CONGRUENCY Example-behavior first, words second. Congruency is where the real strength of energy is. Alignment from internal to external then beyond the self to one's circle of influence and then duplication of that. (You know they say there is only six degrees of separation.)



Just because someone says, "I'm just doing it for shock" or "I'm just doing it as a joke" doesn't mean it isn't rooted in hatred.
It doesn't mean it is either.

No, I'm not standing up "for" the third party majority. I'm standing up "so" the third party majority can have an option to model, an option based on love, truth, honesty, and letting people realize they can accomplish anything without needing to hate others.

So you truly believe your definition of love, truth and honesty is what the third party majority have no clue of? And I guess you don't recognize any of the myriad of options to model that are available to the third party majority that are out there.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Poodle]

and ... women call you "oh God!" :p Pood

[Don]

Don, I know what I wrote and I know how you took it. I did not write love is the opposite of hate even though you read that into what I wrote. [quote]
I never claimed you did write that. However an objective reading of your post clearly shows you imply that.
[quote]I presented two different energies yes often they are considered opposites but I did not present them as such. You mind-read that is what I was doing and it would have been clearer if I had used happiness instead of love but I was not presenting them as opposites.
It seemed very clear that you were presenting them as opposites. If you are not stating that you don't believe them to be opposites then we agree.
In my model they are the same thing (just different perspectives). It is the same coin. One side includes the other excludes and yet they are the same thing. It depends upon where one is viewing them from.
Which matches my position. It is a shame you didn't simply write that in the first place!
First, I am looking at this macro and long term. Second only those who have a vibrational trigger around "hate speech" will identify Imus with "hate speech" I suspect the majority will identify him as a shock jock just as they do Howard Stern.
As you pointed out, most people haven't heard of Imus. Now, most people will identify him with his racial slur.
This concept that people now know the radio is filled with hate speech seems very odd. I listen to both conservatives and liberals (the few that can even make it on the radio and out of all of them I would classify one conservative and three liberals as putting out "hate speech" and that is a small number compared to the number of those on radio.

I would be interested to know which individuals you consider hate speakers.
There is no need for me to give names. When people spread lies, racism, division, hate, etc. they are giving hate speech. I live in a major city and there a multiple stations spreading hate 24/7.

Sometimes, however, they take a brief break to peddle overpriced vitamins or questionable financial advice.

I still don't know specifically who or what you are talking about and I presume this must all be taking place without any other forms of communication such as TV, cable, Internet being available so there is not any other models to choose from and there is only this theoretical talk radio hate mongers monopoly.
Then it's a shame you are so unaware of your environment to not notice the hate mongers. And believe it or not, there are some people who don't take advantage of other media. They like to have their hate reinforced with daily doses of bile.
That is certainly ONE way to do it another is "IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT ANYONE ELSE SAYS, THINKS OR BELIEVES. IT ONLY MATTERS WHAT YOU THE INDIVIDUAL THINKS. If your vibration is high enough you don't go to those lower vibrations.
Once again you turn this from the macro to the micro. As I have repeated stated, I have no problem and just turn them off. But to spread that energy of love/happiness, or whatever you'd like to call it, you have to get the same distribution as the hate mongers. The only way to get heard is to stand up with truth and love. To do otherwise allows them to continue to spread their hate.

Good for you. As soon as you figure out how to vibrate (think, feel and believe) for others, let me know and I'll join you in that belief. I choose to believe that people can choose (consciously or unconsciously) to be do or have anything including poverty and hate and it doesn't have to effect me or anyone else if they so choose..

There is no need to be condescending, but if you think you're going to attract people to your opinion by treating people that way, well, that's up to you.

Try studying the laws of resonance. That may answer your question.

When Jesus said, "The poor you will have with you always." I suspect like me it wasn't a limiting belief. It was an awareness of the operational structure of how the individual is the creator and Meaning Maker of their entire life and that not everyone has the same outcome (their definition of success isn't all the same.) i.e. the wants and desires of many in the third world is not the same as the desires of the individuals in the West. Neither is more valuable or important only different.

You may suspect all you like, but since Jesus isn't here to defend his position, and since you're taking it out of the context of the times and the environment, the accuracy of any interpretation is dubious at best.

Who's definition of truth, honesty and love is everyone going to line up with?

Hmmm. If you don't know the meaning of truth and honesty, then it is difficult to go further. Everyone has their own idea of love.

Everything is true if you believe it and everything is false if you believe it. The Individual is the Meaning Maker for their life experience. Truth, honesty and love are always changing as the realm we live in is about movement.

Again you bring it down to the micro rather than dealing with the macro. You may as well drive through red lights because you can believe them to be green. If you get a ticket and try that defense, good luck! And if you get into an accident and become maimed or are killed, I will regret it.

One mans truth, honesty and love is another man's false, lying, hate. One man's light is another man's darkness...(i.e. American public and the Radical Fundamentalist Muslims.)

You are again blurring concepts. Ask 1,000 people what is love and you'll get 1,000 answers. Ask them how much is 2+2 (base 10) and they'll give you the same answer.

If someone has facts that are accurate, and they say something contrary to what they know is true, they are lying. They are dishonest. If they tell lies or misrepresent the facts in order to get you to dislike something, someone, or some group, they are spreading hate.

It seems that you don't comprehend that the Individual is the Meaning Maker of their own experience and therefore responsible for what they believe. And you want them to understand things they way that you or others understand things and that will make things better.
It seems to me that you don't comprehend that there is a macro word where people think differently than you. You don't seem to understand that a person with the bully pulpit of the airwaves can turn those other people against you in a moment and you won't have the option of telling those people that they are Meaning Makers and they should think for themselves rather than have others think for them.

Based on what you wrote above it seems your frame says that MT did what she did from ulterior motives? Could it just as easily have been she was so full of compassion-light-God and saw goodness/Godness in everyone she was dealing with? What if her vibration did not reach down to the level of judgment and yet she was still able to calibrate to create what she was after?
Doesn't everyone have motives for what they do? You posit a lot of "what ifs" with nothing to support them. You also do a mind read of a dead person about which the truth--i.e., the facts--is impossible to determine.

The Vietnam war would have ended sooner and in another way if the military had been allowed to be the military and politics weren't the flavor of the day.[quote]
Thank you for your fascinating re-write of history which is contradicted by people who are military experts.

[quote]The Vietnam war as all the other wars and the recent terrorist attacks happened long before any of the physical actions took place. They were created vibrationally through the collective vibrations of those that came before. And it seems as long as we resist what we don't want, instead of focusing on what we do want we will continue to experience the same.[quote]

It would seem that you want to deny people free choice by limiting their knowledge and access to information and facts. You have talked about freedom but you seem to be saying people shouldn't have it. Instead, without knowing what is going on, they should simply focus on what they want. One way to do that is to stand up to the hate mongers with truth.

[quote]The most useful thing the individual can do to influence the whole of society is to instead of ignoring what you don't want, focus on what you do want and move toward that (not away from what you don't want.)

But moving toward what you do want does not imply not knowing what is going on, and that seems to be what you want.

When are you going to realize that if something works for one person only (structurally), it works for everyone. One gets it across the same way the early church got it across. CONGRUENCY Example first-behavior first, words second. Modern believers today are words first and their example is the same as everyone else. (You can't tell the difference between a Christian and a non-Christian today from behavior.) That is one of the main reasons Christianity has so little power today. It's all talk and not congruent action.
And when are you going to realize that unless other people KNOW that what works for one person can work for them, and unless they KNOW what it is that worked for another person, they will have nothing to model?

One of my favorite words is "praxis," putting theory into action. Your theory is fine but you have not included any idea that will allow others to learn your ideas and put them into action. As one minister used to say, what you're talking about is just pie in the sky.

The powerful people, the ones with true core power, not created hype, political, or group power do it with CONGRUENCY Example-behavior first, words second. Congruency is where the real strength of energy is. Alignment from internal to external then beyond the self to one's circle of influence and then duplication of that. (You know they say there is only six degrees of separation.)[quote]

It doesn't matter how much congruency you have if nobody sees it or knows about it. Living a congruent life alone on a deserted island sounds like your ideal. I choose to interact with others.

[quote]So you truly believe your definition of love, truth and honesty is what the third party majority have no clue of? And I guess you don't recognize any of the myriad of options to model that are available to the third party majority that are out there.

Again, you're doing a mind read. My definition of certain things are mine alone. Other, objective things have the same concepts as other people.

The problem is that masses of people are influenced by a media controlled by a tiny number of persons. I repeat, if a person has no alternative to model, if they hear, see, and read nothing but half-truths, misrepresentations, and outright lies, they actions are going to be based on those models and misinformation.

People do the best they can with their knowledge and skills. If the knowledge is faulty, their actions will follow in that way. If their knowledge is from a screed of hate that is shouted daily, is it any wonder that so many people will hate?

And respectfully, hiding in your room in an energy of love isn't going to stop an armed mob that hates you.

[Poodle]

It may have started then, but it was not used on the general public until 2002 by 'YOU KNOW WHO". Pood

[Docresults]

Don,

Your misunderstanding that an objective read must go through your subjective filters thus making it subjectively objective along with your refusal to look at or ignore the examples, micro to macro, I presented (i.e. specifically the Congruency of the 1st century believers where actions spoke louder than words and words backed up actions vs. action being no where near the words coming out of peoples mouths and their congruency winds up changing and effecting the whole world -source "Revolution, The Story of the Early Church, the first 14 years" by Gene Edwards) and you allowing your mind-read of Mother Teresa and dis-allowing mine and my refusal to allow others (hate mongers) vibration to resonate with me and your taking exception to that. Your disregard of all media EXCEPT talk radio as the only access to information this vast third party majority uses. Your misunderstanding that according to Jesus he IS here to be able to defend himself, it is often referred to as the mind of Christ. Your mind read of what most will do (believe) in regards to Imus. Your seeming limiting of "people who spread lies, racism, division, hate, etc. they are giving hate speech" to radio talk show folks when the biggest offender are the politicians, both parties (more one than the other) and the mainstream media. Your, what seems to be, deliberate turning of my words to that of ignoring something and not paying attention to my environment even though I also live in a big metropolitan city and gave you a very good concrete way to effect the macro from the micro even without a bully pulpit, it is called networking. (Me not meaning to get caught mirroring your condescension but I should have known, you use it so skillfully I would get called on it in a condescending way. Good job.)The fact that you say 'study the law of resonance and don't understand the ramifications (how it works -attraction) of resonance (vibration) or that actions have bigger vibration (resonance) than do words, as that is what the unconscious pays attention to. Your refusal even after me giving you examples of living congruently with others, you jump to... living congruently on some island or hiding in your room (just the opposite of what I was writing, you throw out nominalizations as if they are concrete and they mean the same to every one (truth, honesty, etc. I even gave examples that you ignored) when they do not in few ways that are useful, and where is the armed mob that hates you? and I could go on and on and on...

All indicate to me not necessarily the inability to try on another's model on your part as I believe you are skilled enough but your refusal to try it on as you keep characterizing my position as ignoring, micro, not macro, not noticing my environment etc. and I have used your model for 15 years already. It does not work very well. That is why I suggested another model which includes your model and goes beyond. A structural model that works on the micro and expands and works on the macro as well. (Or internally and then externally.)

In my opinion you are defending a position that has not worked and will not work because of the way resonance works (law of attraction). And yet you are so vested in your position you take other suggestions through your filters and perceive scenario's (ignoring, hiding in your room, living on an island) that aren't even there, but they must be for your position to make sense and be defense-able.

Since you don't seem to be willing to explore the possibilities and must stay within your perceived parameters (that aren't there in my model) I don't see very much use of continuing this much further unless you just want to take pot shoots at each other. We can battle meta-patterns all day long if you want.

Let me know.

To Your Best,
Doc

[Don]

Hi, Doc. I love your last comment! Let me translate what you posted into non-NLPish: "Don, you're wrong, you're incapable, what you do doesn't work, and you won't explore objective 'truth' (i.e., whatever Doc believes). Now, don't respond because Doc is right, Doc knows all, and anything you (Don) might reply is just taking a "pot shot" at the always-correct Doc."

That's so sad.

Doc, according to communication theory, for good communications to exist it is the responsibility of a communicator to accurately get his or her message to the person or persons to whom they are communicating. Respectfully, because you didn't present your message well, you are accusing me of not understanding. That is like being upset that someone in London didn't understand you wanted them to open the door even though you were talking to them in Urdu. Communication failure is the responsibility of the person doing the communication, not the one receiving it.

You also seem to confuse the discussion of objective actions with mind-reading the motives of those actions. I did not do so. You claim Jesus is here, yet if that is true, you do not say why so many people give contradictory claims about the meaning of what he said.

I am not "dis-allowing" anything. All you see are pixels on a monitor so I can't do anything other than spread ideas and concepts. It seems, however, that you object to anyone who disagrees with you or points out that there are alternatives to what you believe. Sorry about that, but it is common for people to be upset when their personal beliefs are challenged.

You mind read that I don't understand the law of resonance, when, in fact, I do--and one thing I know about it is that putting beliefs into action creates a much stronger resonant response in the world than does sitting in a room and not making your energy known.

You claim you used my model for 15 years and weren't successful. Since you have consistently incorrectly restated my "model," I don't know that this is true. Further, since many others have followed my "model" just as I have successfully followed the model of others, is it not possible that your misunderstanding of the model was the problem? And if that is possible, is not your current belief system in this area based on that mistake?

You are certainly entitled to your opinions. It is a shame, however, that you are so caught up in your own model and your own lack of success in attempting to follow the models used so successfully by others. It is also a shame that you assume that due to your own lack of success others must, of necessity, be unsuccessful, too.

I guess you would have told Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to avoid advocating for civil rights as it would require him to dare to stand up to hater mongers and be willing to denounce segregation and Jim Crow laws. And I suppose you would have told Gandhi not to resist the British, passively or otherwise. That's fine. You can do that. However, I would rather model King and Gandhi and their successes.

[Docresults]

Reading Don's last post I went through a range of emotions and yet the biggest was pity for humanity (me and Don and all of us who only want to push our points).

Neither Don nor I meet the criteria that Dons speaks of for good communication according to his stating of communications theory. And yet it seems Don still wants to argue his case without meeting the criteria and misrepresent the other side using inflammatory, condescending, emotive and inaccurate terminology. (example... I know of no place Don has stated 'objective truth' that he keeps referring to and insinuating. objective=12 jurors would agree and remember both you and I get to be one of the 12)

Even though I admitted in my last post it seemed pretty clear Don wasn't willing to explore other possibilities and that I had already explored his model and wasn't willing to use it again. Even if he believes I misunderstand his model. (MLK and Gandhi both operated from the congruency I spoke of... "behavior first words second". Micro to the Macro. From my understanding of Don's model it is words first [Macro to the Micro] and behavior a real distant second. In other words Political Correctness. Attempting to duplicate MLK and Gandhi externally without duplicating the internal first really doesn't work.) It isn't a matter of Doc being right, it's a matter of structure and process.

It seems obvious from third position that both Don and I are not willing to explore the others model and according to each, the other does not represent accurately the others model. We accuse each other of mind-reading, poor communication and we seem to use accusatory and inflammatory words and language at each other. We seem to make assertions that demeans the other, we seem to be taking things out of context the other set. We ignore useful explanations. We have different definitions of success. And numerous other obvious third position issues.

Now whether I use NLP deliberately or Don uses it deliberately while putting it down at the same time and doing slight of mouth in the process isn't the issue. Don, as I, is fairly set on a preferred model. I perceive one model encompasses the other, Don does not and perceives them as totally separate. It seems neither are willing to accept the others view concerning the models.

Because of these process level issues again I repeat I don't see much use in continuing this. If it does continue it will continue down-hill as it has been going so far, with accusations of upset that beliefs are challenged, calling the other wrong, incapable, etc., etc.

I can do it with the best of them and if that is the direction we want to take this I'll play for a while. (Maybe one of the moderators will step in sooner or later and tell us children to go to our rooms and not to come out until we can stop hitting your brother.)

To Your Best,
Doc Houston

[skip]

Don, Houston,

" (Maybe one of the moderators will step in sooner or later and tell us children to go to our rooms and not to come out until we can stop hitting your brother.)"

Snog ...hrruuuuumph ...ack! And other sounds of a moderator waking up.

"If it does continue it will continue down-hill as it has been going so far, with accusations of upset that beliefs are challenged, calling the other wrong, incapable, etc., etc."

Is this to say that is the only choice, two smart professional communicators like yourselves have?

If that be the case, why on earth would anyone wish to adopt either of your models?

snork ......hummmmmm ....ahhhhhhh the sound of a moderator going back to sleep

[Jack]

(Maybe one of the moderators will step in sooner or later and tell us children to go to our rooms and not to come out until we can stop hitting your brother.)

Your discussion partner is a moderator, Doc, so no joy there.:eek:

Oxford English Dictionary:

Moderate: avoiding extremes, temperate in conduct or expression.

Moderate: render less violent, intense, rigorous, become less vehement..

So that explains everything.:D

Jack

[parsa]

Don and Doc,

I really liked your discussions:).

[Charlie]

(Maybe one of the moderators will step in sooner or later and tell us children to go to our rooms and not to come out until we can stop hitting your brother.)

Your discussion partner is a moderator, Doc, so no joy there.

Oxford English Dictionary:

Moderate: avoiding extremes, temperate in conduct or expression.

Moderate: render less violent, intense, rigorous, become less vehement..

So that explains everything. :D

Jack



I wonder what Don will be like when he reaches the same age as Terry.....

:eek: ;) :)

[Poodle]

Just because Don is a Moderator here does not mean in the least that he is not entitled to his opinions. Don and I both decided something must have been going on with the air recently.

I know Don personally. He is very intelligent, very kind and lots of fun too. Sometimes Don will take one side of an argument just because. I know what the posts read like but I even have a hard time visualizing Don even taking prescription drugs let alone anything else. He much prefers to heal his body through hypnosis than any other means.

Just factor in "for the sake of a good argument". BTW, where have you been? Missed ya! Pood :)

[Charlie]

Just because Don is a Moderator here does not mean in the least that he is not entitled to his opinions.

You're right.

Don and I both decided something must have been going on with the air recently.

I'm not sure what that means.

Is 'going on with the air' some american expression I don't know?

Or perhaps I missed something, in this thread, or another.

Never mind.

I know Don personally. He is very intelligent, very kind and lots of fun too. Sometimes Don will take one side of an argument just because. :)

This I believe.

I know what the posts read like but I even have a hard time visualizing Don even taking prescription drugs let alone anything else.

This...... I am trying to believe. ;) :)

He much prefers to heal his body through hypnosis than any other means.

Very cool.

Just factor in "for the sake of a good argument".

O.K.

BTW, where have you been? Missed ya! Pood :)

The metaphorical rollercoaster of my life has been somewhat bumpy of late, you might say.

My knuckles are a shade lighter than they used to be.

Will I fall or will I climb?

Is the rollercoaster doing this to me, or is it really all my response-ability?

I dunno, but the knuckles are definitely still lighter than they used to be.

Affirm:
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
Whatever happens I must hold on & maintain an inner balance.
etc, Ad Infinitum..........

[Poodle]

You too I know although have not studied with you personally yet and I know you will not FALL. Winners always WIN. You may wish to call Cooper's daddy as good friends are just hard to find.

That reminds me. Carmine has now added video to his web site. I had him "pictured" as extremely, extremely thin and balding a little. WRONG! I wonder what he is learning about now and if he will ever return to NLP. Want to do a time warp, just look. Hugs, Anne :)

[skip]

Don, Doc, et al,

As a moderator, if I had the ability I would close this thread, so that no other posts could be added.

I would do this because it has become about people not about ideas.

I asked you guys to look to that creative side of yourselves and find more choice than personal invective.

Now I am going to ask you guys to go talk about other things for a while. Revisit this, if and when you have regained that perspective that comes from not having such an emotional investment in it.

I wont pretend that I am above this sort of thing myself, but one thing that helps me to refrain, is some advice Cooper once offered:

"Dont wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it."

cheers,

skip

[Poodle]

It was programmed into your unconscious. I read about it yesterday and "pissing contests" get no one no where. Definitely made me stop and reevaluate! Don't exactly remember the topic but it was "glaring at me" when I read it. My mind went: Ohhhh KEWL!! I can put this in my model of the world and so it was done. Pood :)

[Jack]

"Dont wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it."

skip

Depends how fond you are of the pig.:)

Jack