Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

The Future Of Humanity


Displaying posts 271 - 300 of 318 in total
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #271
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Global warming is due to the green house effect of the amount of carbon monoxide in the atmosphere . The more people get together and marry the more population growth and therefore the more human waste. It is simple . Due to the out of control lust of human being we have ended up with this world today.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #272
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
It seems clear. It's not my thought or your thought. It's just thought because it is all of our common consciousness.

I thought this QOTD clarifies it a bit more, though it might be useful to explore what is meant by "voluntary and comprehending action" : (bold mine)

K.(..) But there is a different kind of individuality, that of uniqueness, which is the result of voluntary and comprehending action. That is, if one understands environment and acts with discerning intelligence, then there is true individuality. This uniqueness is not separative, for it is intelligence itself.

Intelligence is alone, unique. But if you merely act through the compulsion of circumstances, then, though you may think you are an individual, your actions are but reaction in which there is no true intelligence. Because the present individual is merely a reaction in which there can be no intelligence, there is chaos in the world, each individual seeking his own security and thoughtless fulfillment.

Intelligence is unique; it cannot be divided as yours and mine. It is only the absence of intelligence that can be separated into units as yours and mine, and this is the ugliness of distinction out of which is come exploitation, cruelty and sorrow.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #273
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
I thought this QOTD clarifies it a bit more, though it might be useful to explore what is meant by "voluntary and comprehending action"

Basically, K is saying, isn't he?, that the true individual is intelligent, completely free, undivided, not buffeted around by reactivity. By contrast, the normal person thinks he/she is an individual acting independently, but he/she really is the same reactive, fearful, greedy, etc. person that everyone else is.

K in Quote of the Day:
It is only the absence of intelligence that can be separated into units as yours and mine

Here K emphasizes the division and reactivity that exist when there is no intelligence. But he is not talking so much in this quote of the day about the unity of mankind in its unintelligence. By contrast, The Future of Humanity really stresses that there is one consciousness of mankind and separate consciousnesses are an illusion. In other words, "You are the world."

K seems to say, in The Future of Humanity: We are one. We are not many. The normal person seems to say: We are many. We are not one.

Now the Zen people say, "We are not one. We are not many. We are not both one and many. We are not neither one nor many." In other words, any of those statements remains in the realm of the conceptual, divorced from this! This, this, this!

The actual is not conceptual. The actual is only when thought has naturally stilled.

In my view, K is giving an antidote to the world's division by saying that mankind is one. He is providing a cure to the normal view that mankind is many, separated. But it is an interim inoculation. Ultimately the actual is the clear mind, free of dividing thought. And it is thought that divides oneness from many-ness.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #274
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
it might be useful to explore what is meant by "voluntary and comprehending action"

Voluntary means action that is not reactive. Voluntary action is free of conditioning. Comprehending means action that comes from awareness. In other words, the action of the true individual is action without idea. Action without idea flows from love. Yes?

By "voluntary" K does not mean "choice." By "comprehending" K does not mean "thought." Yes? The action of the true individual is free of choice and thought. Yes?

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #275
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Basically, K is saying, isn't he?, that the true individual is intelligent, completely free, undivided, not buffeted around by reactivity. By contrast, the normal person thinks he/she is an individual acting independently, but he/she really is the same reactive, fearful, greedy, etc. person that everyone else is.

I think that is so and I didn't mean to move away from 'The Future of Humanity' but specifically those words: "voluntary" and "comprehending" stopped me. To take the opposite, he is saying that my interface with the environment is 'involuntary' and 'non-comprehending'. What would my action be then if it was 'voluntary'? What would it mean for 'me' to comprehend my environment?...I simply don't know. Maybe there can not be comprehension as long as there is a 'me'? All I can 'do' is to see how I do interact in this involuntary way, right, to see how I don't comprehend the environment I am in...? I cannot 'summon' intelligence (or love, or compassion, or wisdom) because they are not at my command. Intelligence therefore may come with the understanding of what I am...but there is no understanding if there is judgement, condemnation, etc..

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #276
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
specifically those words: "voluntary" and "comprehending" stopped me.

Please see post #275. What do you say?

Dan McDermott wrote:
I cannot 'summon' intelligence (or love, or compassion, or wisdom) because they are not at my command. Intelligence therefore may come with the understanding of what I am...but there is no understanding if there is judgement, condemnation, etc.

Yes. It's the old question of what is the way out of this mess? What K says in The Future of Humanity is most interesting: Meditation. But true meditation is not conscious. There is no method.

This leaves us with a way, that is no way. Nevertheless, exploration of meditation is vital.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #277
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Voluntary means action that is not reactive. Voluntary action is free of conditioning. Comprehending means action that comes from awareness. In other words, the action of the true individual is action without idea. Action without idea flows from love. Yes?

By "voluntary" K does not mean "choice." By "comprehending" K does not mean "thought." Yes? The action of the true individual is free of choice and thought. Yes?

That all sounds right but can it 'become' a reality? K. says that it can but only through the action (grace?) of intelligence?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #278
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

The Future of Humanity:

JK: Let's see. You are asking a question whether the mind can be perceived by the brain.

DB: Or at least somehow be aware, an awareness, a sense.

JK: Yes. We are saying yes, through meditation.

...

JK: I think it is possible to bring about - you see Sir that is the difficulty. When you use the word meditation it is generally understood there is always a meditator meditating. Meditation is really an unconscious process, it is not a conscious process.

DB: How are able to say that meditation takes place then if it is unconscious?

JK: It is taking place when the brain is quiet.

DB: Well you mean by consciousness all the movement of thought.

JK: The movement of thought.

...

JK: Now if I consciously meditate, practise, do all this kind of what I call nonsense, then you are making the brain conform to another series of patterns.

DB: Yes, it is more becoming.

JK: More becoming, that's right.

...

JK: No, let's put it that way: conscious meditation, conscious activity to control thought, to free oneself from conditioning, is not freedom.

...

JK: Yes, that's right. That is very clear. As long as there is measurement, which is the becoming, which is the process of thought, meditation or silence cannot be.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #279
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
JK: Yes, that's right. That is very clear. As long as there is measurement, which is the becoming, which is the process of thought, meditation or silence cannot be.

When the becoming process of thought is seen for what it is: false, that is meditation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #280
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
When the becoming process of thought is seen for what it is: false, that is meditation.

Meditation is when the mind is naturally silent, innocent, open. It is an unconscious process, one that cannot be consciously reached. Yes?

What can be done - quite consciously in initiating it - is to watch the thoughts flow by like a river. Without labeling them, judging them, measuring them, they can just be looked at. The same way a leaf or a bird in nature can be looked at. Just pure observation. Clear awareness.

And in this watching, perhaps the brain naturally stills to silence. Yes?

This watching of the flow of thought, the same way one quietly looks at nature, is exactly what K describes when he teaches meditation in Chapter 5 of Think On These Things and when he taught meditation to Larry Rosenberg (see Meeting Krishnamurti under the articles tab here at kinfonet).

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #281
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
What can be done - quite consciously in initiating it - is to watch the thoughts flow by like a river. Without labeling them, judging them, measuring them, they can just be looked at. The same way a leaf or a bird in nature can be looked at. Just pure observation. Clear awareness.

And then in this watching, perhaps the brain naturally stills to silence. Yes?

Yes and this is very important, the 'thinker', the 'watcher', the 'meditator', must be included in the thoughts and the watching...'see with the eyes behind the head' I recall K. phrased it at one point. Which to me meant the inclusion of myself...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #282
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Yes and this is very important, the 'thinker', the 'watcher', the 'meditator', must be included in the thoughts and the watching

Yes. K says: "The thinker is the thought." "The watcher is the watched." And...

"When you use the word meditation it is generally understood there is always a meditator meditating. Meditation is really an unconscious process, it is not a conscious process."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #283
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
...K.Meditation is really an unconscious process, it is not a conscious process."

This is a bewildering statement, isn't it? How can I do something unconsciously?
I can't can I? Anything that I do has to be conscious doesn't it? ...So 'I' can't 'meditate'... only in the 'false' way.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #284
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
K: "Meditation is really an unconscious process, it is not a conscious process."

This is a bewildering statement, isn't it? How can I do something unconsciously?
I can't can I? Anything that I do has to be conscious doesn't it? ...So 'I' can't 'meditate'... only in the 'false' way.

That's right. As K explains in the The Future of Humanity, by "unconscious" he means that the movement of thought has stilled to silence. He does not mean unconscious in the sense of a total blackout, like in certain phases of deep sleep. He specifically says that when DB asks. He means that thought has quieted to silence and the implication is that there is tremendous awareness, the vibrant activity of reality.

As you say, "I" cannot do this. I cannot will it, nor can it be induced by any trickery of the self. This silence comes naturally, spontaneously, and unprompted.

But for many of us, it just doesn't! Maybe for very brief periods. But for the most part we're left in conflict, thought, division, suffering, fear, and so on.

Nevertheless, as we said, K does teach, in Chapter 5 of Think On These Things, and in Larry Rosenberg's interview Meeting Krishnamurti under the articles tab here on kinfonet, that you can watch the flow of thoughts like you would look at a brook or leaf. And in this pure watching, seeing the significance of the flowing thoughts, how they build up and boost a separative self - in this simple, clear watching of the the thoughts flow by, there may be a natural stilling, a quieting.

Only out of this real silence does the action of love flower. Yes?

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 02 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #285
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Only out of this real silence does the action of love flower. Yes?

It may be that 'something' does...the word 'love' is much too loaded for me to use in this context. 'Total compassion' it seems could be, when the feeling of 'individuality' is seen through.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #286
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Okay. Thank you for this conversation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #287
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Okay. Thank you for this conversation.

Any time:)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 02 Jul 2019 #288
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
This silence comes naturally, spontaneously, and unprompted.

But for many of us, it just doesn't!

The 'self' can sit quietly watching listening to thought ( though it's actually thought being aware of itself, isn't it?) and then the self/thinker/ meditator can become 'included' in the watching...I tried in the other forum a while back to explain how I saw this: that the illusory 'thinker' or 'meditator' gives 'permission' to be seen..'allows' himself consciously to be included in the scene. I don't know if that conveys anything but it avoids the 'thinker'/thought having to use some sort of subterfuge to maintain the false duality?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 03 Jul 2019 #289
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 886 posts in this forum Offline

So meditation comes naturally to the silent mind. It's like leaving the window open - if you are lucky the breeze comes in. I think K might have used this analogy at some point.

Thought blocking a natural flow is certainly observable in everyday life. When speaking in a language which is not your mother tongue it is easy to think about what you are going to say in too much depth. You want to construct an accurate piece of discourse but this thinking blocks the flow of language. Some people seem to manage to speak very proficiently in a foreign language. They talk about abstract topics with ease and flexibility. Their stream of language flows along and they don't have to think about or analyse too closely what they are saying.

So thought blocking natural flow is something that may happen in a variety of settings.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Wed, 03 Jul 2019 #290
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
So meditation comes naturally to the silent mind. It's like leaving the window open - if you are lucky the breeze comes in. I think K might have used this analogy at some point.

Yes, I think that is what K pointed out. "Leaving the window open", is a nice way to put it. Certainly the self, the person, does not initiate meditation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 03 Jul 2019 #291
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti Quote of the Day Varanasi, India | 2nd Public Talk, 22nd November 1964.

You know, in the case of most of us, the mind is noisy, everlastingly chattering to itself, soliloquizing or chattering about something, or trying to talk to itself, to convince itself of something; it is always moving, noisy. And from that noise, we act. Any action born of noise produces more noise, more confusion. But if you have observed and learnt what it means to communicate, the difficulty of communication, the non-verbalization of the mind - that is, that communicates and receives communication - , then, as life is a movement, you will, in your action, move on naturally, freely, easily, without any effort, to that state of communion. And in that state of communion, if you enquire more deeply, you will find that you are not only in communion with nature, with the world, with everything about you, but also in communion with yourself.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jul 2019 #292
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
So meditation comes naturally to the silent mind. It's like leaving the window open - if you are lucky the breeze comes in.

Yes. What does "leaving the window open" mean? Have we slammed it shut?

Jack Pine wrote:
Certainly the self, the person, does not initiate meditation.

Yes. Real meditation is the natural, silent mind. It cannot be intentionally initiated. Does that mean we are doomed, stuck in conditioning and conflict forever?

Self knowledge can be initiated. That is part of meditation. That is a start. And the first step is the last step. The self can be observed in the mirror of relationship.

You can watch thought flow by, innocently, without trying to label it or change it. It can be watched like a bird or a stream is watched.

While the natural silence of real meditation cannot be initiated, real change can happen. Real moment to moment transformation. But it won't unless there is seeing of the violence, conflict, and harm in the world. And therefore in myself.

Unless the urgency of of conflict and violence is truly felt, why would a first step be taken? The window remains slammed shut, nailed closed. And the breeze doesn't stand a chance.

I can do nothing. But I must do something. The present crisis demands it.

At the very least I can watch myself. When I see my cruelty, my annoyance with someone, it can transform. There can be freedom from it. To see this is not to create an ideal. When change is, moment to moment, it is actual, not an ideal. Yes?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jul 2019 #293
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Meditation is the understanding of life. We don't understand our relationship with people and things therefore meditation becomes a goal , an ideal situation so we can get more energy to do more mischief.
It takes a lot of work to understand your relationship with people and we are not willing to do the work.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jul 2019 #294
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Relationship is a mirror

The Book of Life, March 15, HarperSanFrancisco, 1995

Surely, only in relationship the process of what I am unfolds, does it not? Relationship is a mirror in which I see myself as I am; but as most of us do not like what we are, we begin to discipline, either positively or negatively, what we perceive in the mirror of relationship. That is, I discover something in relationship, in the action of relationship, and I do not like it. So, I begin to modify what I do not like, what I perceive as being unpleasant. I want to change it—which means I already have a pattern of what I should be. The moment there is a pattern of what I should be, there is no comprehension of what I am. The moment I have a picture of what I want to be, or what I should be, or what I ought not to be—a standard according to which I want to change myself—then, surely, there is no comprehension of what I am at the moment of relationship.

I think it is really important to understand this, for I think this is where most of us go astray. We do not want to know what we actually are at a given moment in relationship. If we are concerned merely with self-improvement, there is no comprehension of ourselves, of ‘what is’.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 #295
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

One Self quoted Krishnamurti:
The moment there is a pattern of what I should be, there is no comprehension of what I am.

That's an interesting and appropriate quote, One Self.

I definitely question what K is saying here.

Let's take an example: Whenever I go into a particular store, I steal something. I'm very good at stealing and I get away with it.

Now I become aware of my stealing. Also I see its impact: how the store owner, who seems pretty poor and struggling, loses out when I steal. And I see how the stealing boosts my self, because obviously I want something and I get it for nothing. So I am boosting a division, a separate feeling from others where I get something and they lose.

Now you might think that if I am aware of all this, of all the harm I am doing, that I would stop. But no. That would be having an ideal. That would be having a picture of what I want to be: someone who doesn't steal.

So I go on stealing, but with awareness!

Now is that really K teaching? Because if it is, I want no part of it.

But that is what many people here seem to say: Don't change, because doing so means you have an ideal.

Whereas I say, and I surely think that K does, too, that real attention is transformation. That seeing the harm of my stealing with real attention is freedom from stealing and the ending of it. It is not having an ideal.

One Self wrote:
I think it is really important to understand this, for I think this is where most of us go astray.

I think this is really important, too. And I think we can go astray here, too. But for the opposite reason. You are saying that we create an ideal that prevents us from seeing what is, yes? I am saying that we don't really, really see what is, because if we did, there would be change.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 05 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 #296
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

Once again, idiot, based in your above post you have completely misunderstood what it means to have an ideal. Or to make an ideal out of a belief. Instead of understanding it appears that you are more intent on justifying your misunderstanding of what others have said and what you think K is saying.

I'll give you an example. Recently you seemed upset because K had to carry a passport which you considered a denial of his pointing out that nationalism is part of the cause of conflict in the world. Nationalism, along with organized religion, racism and other idealistic beliefs. You idealized what K said about nationalism and then compared it with a simple compliance with the law that K had to do if he wished to travel from country to country. Namely, declaring residency of a country so he could obtain a passport. Your accusation was a childish, simplistic understanding of both what K said about nationalism and what your understanding of international travel

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 #297
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Now let's take the example of Jack Pine. Obviously, he attacks certain people here on kinfonet. He doesn't just question their views. He attacks them, insults them, and tries to get them to leave kinfonet. Do you think he is unaware of what he is doing? I don't. He knows exactly what he is doing. He is aware of it as he is doing it. He will not change. To do so would be to have an ideal, to have some disingenuous concept of love or something, which is not honest. So he is aware of what he does and he rejects having some ideal of how he might be different.

Jack Pine feels justified in what he does. I bet he actually feels it is a duty, to keep what K pointed to from being mucked up by fools, misinterpreters, etc. Years ago he was a rifleman in a war and he has long since repudiated that. But you know what? He is still a soldier! He is a warrior right here on kinfonet, fighting for the right, against those who he sees as somehow wronging or misrepresenting Krishnamurti. It is a holy war and he is honor bound to fight it. To do otherwise is to dishonor Krishnamurti.

So he is aware of his attacks, even as he does them. He will not change because that would be an ideal, a false image rather than what is.

Can he really see the violence of attacking people and be free of it? There can be transformation only when attention fully sees what is, all the implications, how attack involves division of self and other, how justification boosts self. Such change really involves psychological death, the ending of self. And the self is very cunning. It will do whatever it can to survive. Whatever self-deception and mental trickery it can come up with, it will do. Anything. To avoid surrender. To avoid surrender to what is.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 #298
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Can he really see the violence of attacking people and be free of it? There can be transformation only when attention fully sees what is, all the implications, how attack involves division of self and other, how justification boosts self. Such change really involves psychological death, the ending of self. And the self is very cunning. It will do whatever it can to survive. Whatever self-deception and mental trickery it can come up with, it will do. Anything. To avoid surrender. To avoid surrender to what is.

Seeing all this a bit differently...Taking your words (and mine) as speaking from the "cunning" self. Jack's point I think is that our conditioning is 'total'. Your explanation, criticism comes from this conditioned self (as does his) always trying to spare and maintain itself. It's a very 'delicate' point as I see it. We 'learn' something and it becomes part of us...whether it's the word of God, or the word of Trump...I think that was the point of his post to me regarding taking 'insight' and adding it to the 'mix' of the conditioning. The truth can't be accumulated, we have been taught that it can and should be, but no matter how 'illuminating' it was at the time it was glimpsed, it is no longer the truth once it is remembered. Interesting to consider.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 05 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 #299
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
So he is aware of his attacks, even as he does them. He will not change because that would be an ideal, a false image rather than what is.

Now why don't you post something in response to what I actually wrote in the above post? Something about how you, we, all, idealized what we believe in. Then when something contradicts that ideal, or at least appears to, we pull it out and compare it to the new facts we are faced with. Who doesn't do that? Starting with the second post on this forum you have done that repeatedly on this thread and on others. Here is your second post:

idiot?: Second post on this thread:
"Now the first word out K's mouth is...
"I"
The second word is...
"thought"
You may not see any irony in that, but I do.
"I thought we were going to talk about the future of man."

What you obviously appear to be referring to is that since K used a pronoun, I, and used the word "thought" that he was betraying himself by referring to a center, a self, that he points out doesn't exist. Then K uses the word thought and thought being in the past and conditioned is not the future.

You hold ideals about both of these concepts and then, taking K literally, you compare what you believe (that's what an ideal is, a belief") with what he is saying and you think K is being inconsistent. Isn't that what you were implying. If not what were you trying to imply?

This above example is exactly what I'm talking about. And this thread, as well as others, are rife with this kind of thinking.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 06 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jul 2019 #300
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Can he really see the violence of attacking people and be free of it?

What about you and your alter-ego "One Self". What about the attacks you two post? What about the attacks on me in your above post #298. I'm not attacking you I'm disagreeing with you. And I am giving concrete examples with my disagreement. You don't know anything about me so your attacks on my married life, my combat life, etc are completely speculation and aimed below the belt. I'm telling you exactly what I disagree with along with giving examples of facts. Instead of trying to insult me, which is a waste of time and something you can't do anyway, why not respond with some facts of your own?

And why not be honest and admit that you are behind one or two other identities on this forum? You just mentioned something in your post #298 about me that I just wrote to Huguette in a private message less than three hours ago.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 06 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 271 - 300 of 318 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)