free will: yep, another thread about 'that'...

[Dontaskme]

How much 'drama' we individually put into this, or not put into this, is another matter though, and as you rightly pointed out some add more 'drama' then "others" do.

How discriminatory of you to say.

Plank in your own eye, comes to mind, especially since I personally cannot keep up with what is your own drama, which seems to be off this planet extending as far out as the outer limits of the known universe can stretch.

But then humans are always wanting to blame the other for what they do themselves. They just can't handle the heat of their own self inflicted generator.

The hypocrisy is hilarious, are we having fun yet, or is this all just sooooo so serious.

.

[Age]

How much 'drama' we individually put into this, or not put into this, is another matter though, and as you rightly pointed out some add more 'drama' then "others" do.

How discriminatory of you to say.

How CAN there exist ANY thing that could be so-called "discriminatory" when there is ONLY 'nondual', Oneness?

Plank in your own eye, comes to mind, especially since I personally cannot keep up with what is your own drama, which seems to be off this planet extending as far out as the outer limits of the known universe can stretch.

So, as "henry quirk" so Rightly POINTED OUT 'some add more 'drama' then "others" do. Which, from 'your' perspective, appears now to be 'me' who is adding MORE 'drama' then 'you' or "others" do.

So, is there ANY 'issue' here AT ALL, REALLY?

If yes, then what is that 'issue', EXACTLY?

But then humans are always wanting to blame the other for what they do themselves.

Did I EVER BLAME ANY one for ANY thing that I do NOT do?

If yes, then WHERE, EXACTLY?

I just said, some add more 'drama' then "others" do. Which, if you are correct, 'I' add more 'drama' then "others" do, including 'you', correct?

They just can't handle the heat of their own self inflicted generator.

The hypocrisy is hilarious, are we having fun yet, or is this all just sooooo so serious.

.

I am absolutely NO IDEA NOR CLUE what ANY of this is referring to, EXACTLY?

And, by the way, I have absolutely NO interest in even trying to work it out.

[Dontaskme]

So, as "henry quirk" so Rightly POINTED OUT 'some add more 'drama' then "others" do. Which, from 'your' perspective, appears now to be 'me' who is adding MORE 'drama' then 'you' or "others" do.

NO, you are deceiving yourself again.

Henry quirk named names, namely DAM as being the drama whore. Henry did not ADD the ''some more than others'' comment, you said that, didn't you, silly clown.

AGE:

How much 'drama' we individually put into this, or not put into this, is another matter though, and as you rightly pointed out some add more 'drama' then "others" do.

After you had read Henry's comment ...you then chimed in by adding ''some'' are more than others, implying DAM was the ''some'', as DAM was mentioned by Henry, which then prompted you to agree with Henry that DAM is the ''some''
And now you are blaming Henry that he was the one that said ''some more than others'' when it was clearly you that said that ..fool.

Henry:

simply movin' to another thread wasn't dramatic enough

DAM must have her drama, don't you know

center ring, spotlight focused and hot

Dam is here to keep reminding Age what Age so conveniently forgets to remember, when it suits.
You made an assumption didn't you, that what you claimed as ''some'' was what Henry pointed out, even though Henry clearly pointed out a name which you then agreed with. Namely, you agreed with Henry that DAM is the drama whore, but then disguised it by saying ''some'' because you are sneaky and lower than a worms tit.

[Dontaskme]

And, by the way, I have absolutely NO interest in even trying to work it out.

Even though you claim to KNOW how the mind works...so yeah, you do not have to invest any more wasted interest on your self professed claim, especially since you are able to convince yourself that sometimes you have no interest in working it out what you already claim is worked out by yours truly, and you do this exactly when it suits you to say so.


So here, all you've done is back out of your redonkulous claim that you know how the mind works, by losing interest when it does not suit you to work it out.

I'm just here to point out your excessive ego is a messed up stupid bunk.

[henry quirk]

ya know, there are easier ways to tell a guy to fuck off than postin' a half-ass'd soliloquy

fuck off works, as does

short, sweet (but lackin' in drama, I guess)

[Dontaskme]

ya know, there are easier ways to tell a guy to fuck off than postin' a half-ass'd soliloquy

fuck off works, as does

short, sweet (but lackin' in drama, I guess)

But that's not as much fun as philosophising, which requires words, lots of them. You know, like going round in endless circles trying to get to the actual source and location of said words, which just creates more of them...fun times for me, I love it. Are we enjoying ourselves, hey ho it's a dramatic life for me...

I'm sorry, but this is a place to act out the role of philosopher is it not? I do not reject anyone who responds that would defeat the object, would it not, huh?

And another thing, I've offered my hand of friendship to you Henry, but you rejected it because you think I am a liar.

You do not actually know that for sure, not unless you spend time with me in realtime physicality, then you would know for defo if I was a liar or not, but then you prefer to believe your own thoughts, so be it, your loss.

Take care Henry.

[henry quirk]

another half-ass'd soliloquy

[Age]

So, as "henry quirk" so Rightly POINTED OUT 'some add more 'drama' then "others" do. Which, from 'your' perspective, appears now to be 'me' who is adding MORE 'drama' then 'you' or "others" do.

NO, you are deceiving yourself again.

I am "deceiving" "myself" of 'what', EXACTLY, AGAIN?

Henry quirk named names, namely DAM as being the drama whore. Henry did not ADD the ''some more than others'' comment, you said that, didn't you, silly clown.[/quote]

OF COURSE I DID. And what can be VERY CLEARLY SEEN is that "henry quirk" spoke of 'you', the one known as "dontaskme" here, in this forum, and I NEVER did.

I, PURPOSELY, NEVER referred to ANY human being, including 'you', "dontaskme", which can be CLEARLY SEEN, in what I ACTUALLY WROTE and SAID above. I just POINTED OUT that 'some add more 'drama' then "others" do'.

Which is OBVIOUSLY True, correct?

For example, to 'you', I was adding more 'drama' then ANY other, in a previous reply of mine, correct?

AGE:

How much 'drama' we individually put into this, or not put into this, is another matter though, and as you rightly pointed out some add more 'drama' then "others" do.

After you had read Henry's comment ...you then chimed in by adding ''some'' are more than others, implying DAM was the ''some'', as DAM was mentioned by Henry, which then prompted you to agree with Henry that DAM is the ''some''

I am NOT SURE if you have EVER read where I have previously suggested that, 'it is much more beneficial to, and for, 'you', ANY one, to GAIN CLARIFICATION, BEFORE EVER MAKING AN ASSUMPTION. If you have NOT, and you just READ THIS, then you have NOW.

And now you are blaming Henry that he was the one that said ''some more than others'' when it was clearly you that said that ..fool.[/quote]

BUT, I was NEVER blaming "henry quirk" for what I WROTE and SAID, as can be CLEARLY SEEN in the ACTUAL WORDS that I have used above. And, to ASSUME that I was blaming "henry quirk", for what I ACTUALLY WROTE and ACTUALLY SAID, is what is REALLY a VERY FOOLISH thing to do here.

Henry:

simply movin' to another thread wasn't dramatic enough

DAM must have her drama, don't you know

center ring, spotlight focused and hot

Dam is here to keep reminding Age what Age so conveniently forgets to remember, when it suits.

WHY did 'you' write this here, and, WHAT is this in relation to, EXACTLY?

You made an assumption didn't you, that what you claimed as ''some'' was what Henry pointed out, even though Henry clearly pointed out a name which you then agreed with.

You have just made the CLAIM that I made an ASSUMPTION, and then used the words, 'didn't you', without a question mark.

If you REALLY want the True answer, then that answer is, 'No'. But if you ALREADY BELIEVE 'you' ALREADY KNOW the answer, then just IGNORE what I have TOLD 'you' and INFORMED 'you' of.

Now, you made the CLAIM that I made an ASSUMPTION, SO 'what', EXACTLY, is 'THAT ASSUMPTION', which you are here CLAIMING and/or ASKING I supposedly made here?

What I PURPOSELY USED the 'some' word for, EXACTLY, I am thee One who KNOWS. What 'you' envision I used 'that' word for 'you' ONLY 'think' or 'assume'.

Namely, you agreed with Henry that DAM is the drama whore,

I NEVER 'agreed' with ANY such thing, AT ALL.

Especially considering of the Fact that NO SUCH THING was even presented in what I was ACTUALLY responding to.

but then disguised it by saying ''some'' because you are sneaky and lower than a worms tit.

If this is what 'you' SAW, continue to SEE, and/or BELIEVE I am, then so be it. 'you' are ABSOLUTELY FREE to SEE and BELIEVE whatever 'it' is that 'you' WANT to SEE and WANT to BELIEVE is true.

Oh, and also noted, is that "henry quirk" just wrote;

simply movin' to another thread wasn't dramatic enough

DAM must have her drama, don't you know

center ring, spotlight focused and hot

(In reply to me asking 'you' if you NEED to be TOLD to move to another thread, especially after the Fact that it was 'you' who proposed that 'you' were GOING TO, ANYWAY.)

To which I replied to "henry quirk's" response with the ACTUAL WORDS;

Are 'we' ALL NOT here for the same reason of 'being heard', or maybe more Honestly, in other words, just 'wanting to be listened to? Which can only come from being in the 'spotlight', or in the 'center ring', as some would say, and as this 'wanting to be heard' phenomena is also known as?

(Which means I was just saying asking, for confirmation, if "henry quirk" agreed that REALLY we are ALL here, in this forum, to just be LISTENED TO, which are just other words for being 'center ring, spotlight focused and hot'. Which, in other words, COULD MEAN, WHY "pick on", or highlight, "dontaskme" for some 'thing' that ALL of us are DOING HERE, in this forum.)

I then went on to also say;

How much 'drama' we individually put into this, or not put into this, is another matter though, and as you rightly pointed out some add more 'drama' then "others" do.

Which, as can be VERY CLEARLY SEEN, is NOT directed at ANY one in particular. BUT, OBVIOUSLY, some one, or, in other words, ANY one could ASSUME some particular thing or another. But, as I continually SUGGEST, GAINING CLARITY, BEFORE MAKING ANY ASSUMPTIONS AT ALL, produces a MUCH BETTER OUTCOME, for EVERY one involved.

[Age]

And, by the way, I have absolutely NO interest in even trying to work it out.

Even though you claim to KNOW how the mind works...so yeah, you do not have to invest any more wasted interest on your self professed claim, especially since you are able to convince yourself that sometimes you have no interest in working it out what you already claim is worked out by yours truly, and you do this exactly when it suits you to say so.

You, ONCE AGAIN, have TWISTED and DISTORTED what I have ACTUALLY SAID, and MEANT, into such a 'contorted mess', which I have to spend some time UNTWISTING.

I NEVER said I have no interest in working 'it' out, in regards to what 'you' have TWISTED the 'it' word to refer to with and by your ASSUMPTION.

The 'it' word, which is USED, NEVER EVER referred to the 'mind' word.

The 'it' word I USED was in relation to 'what' 'you' wrote, which I could NOT even be bothered working out what 'you' wrote MEANT, this time.

You wrote;

They [in reference to 'you', human beings] just can't handle the heat of their own self inflicted generator.

The hypocrisy is hilarious, are we having fun yet, or is this all just sooooo so serious.

To which I responded;

I am [but meant, have] absolutely NO IDEA NOR CLUE what ANY of this is referring to, EXACTLY?

And, by the way, I have absolutely NO interest in even trying to work it out.

The 'it' word here referred to the previous sentence, of yours.

And CONTRARY to what 'you' WROTE, and may BELIEVE, the 'it' word NEVER EVER referred to the 'mind' word. So, the rest of what 'you' wrote here above is MOOT.

I will, AGAIN, SUGGEST that INSTEAD of JUMPING to ASSUMPTIONS and/or CONCLUSIONS you just spend that little bit of extra time to GAIN CLARITY, FIRST. That way you will NOT be SO Wrong, SO OFTEN AS YOU CLEARLY HAVE BEEN.

So here, all you've done is back out of your redonkulous claim that you know how the mind works, by losing interest when it does not suit you to work it out.

BUT, what thee 'Mind' IS, EXACTLY, and how 'It' works, EXACTLY, is ALREADY KNOWN, and WELL UNDERSTOOD. Well by me, anyway.

So, I have NEVER so-called "backed out" of this CLAIM, AT ALL.

You have just gone DOWN 'this path' because of the CLEARLY Wrong ASSUMPTION you made, in the beginning of this post of YOURS here.

I'm just here to point out your excessive ego is a messed up stupid bunk.

Okay. What 'you' have POINTED OUT here is NOTICED, and NOTED, for future referencing, if needed.

Oh, and by the way, could it have been an 'excessive ego' that has led 'that one' to even WANT to POINT OUT what has ended up being just TOTALLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect anyway?

The 'ego', after all, when it comes 'down to it' is 'the ACTUAL one' who end up LOOKING FOOLISH and STUPID, correct?

[Age]

ya know, there are easier ways to tell a guy to fuck off than postin' a half-ass'd soliloquy

fuck off works, as does

short, sweet (but lackin' in drama, I guess)

But that's not as much fun as philosophising, which requires words, lots of them. You know, like going round in endless circles trying to get to the actual source and location of said words, which just creates more of them...fun times for me, I love it. Are we enjoying ourselves, hey ho it's a dramatic life for me...

BUT, thee ACTUAL 'source' AND 'location' of words is ALREADY KNOWN.

Those words that do NOT fit IN PERFECTLY with other words to make One UNIFIED PERFECT SENSE 'with' what (REALLY) IS come from 'you', human beings, ALONE. The 'you' word just, more accurately, being the 'person', or 'people', which are just the invisible thoughts and emotions, within human bodies.

So, the 'source' of 'these words' is 'you', people, and, the 'location' is from within human bodies. What the human body experiences, causes information to 'enter' the body through the five bodily senses, which is then 'grasped' by the brain and 'stored' as 'knowledge', which is then 'put out', or expressed, as views, opinions, values, beliefs, et cetera, or which all can be grouped together and known as 'thoughts. These 'thoughts' are expressed as what are known as words, and are expressed as spoken, or written, words. Which can be CLEARLY SEEN and/or HEARD.

Now, for those words that DO fit IN PERFECTLY with other words, to form a Truly IRREFUTABLE and ACCURATE description of what (REALLY) IS come ALSO from 'you', human beings, but also because those words can be IN AGREEMENT WITH and ACCEPTED BY absolutely EVERY one, then when those words are, literally, together, form and make up thee 'I', which is thee (ONLY) One that can and does KNOW and SEE ALL.

So, the 'source' of these words is, again, 'you', BUT that is WHEN 'you' are LOOKING AT and SEEING 'things' from thee perspective of ALL, and NOT just from the perspective of the body, which 'you' are within, own experiences.

So, the ultimate 'source' AND 'location' of these Correctly worded words is from, and within, EVERY thing.

Which is EXACTLY 'God', or 'thee One', IS, and/or RESIDES.

I'm sorry, but this is a place to act out the role of philosopher is it not? I do not reject anyone who responds that would defeat the object, would it not, huh?

And another thing, I've offered my hand of friendship to you Henry, but you rejected it because you think I am a liar.

You do not actually know that for sure, not unless you spend time with me in realtime physicality, then you would know for defo if I was a liar or not, but then you prefer to believe your own thoughts, so be it, your loss.

Take care Henry.

Is there AN adult human being who does NOT lie?

If yes, then WHO is that ONE?

[Dontaskme]

Age>

Just own it. Stop beating around the bush about the fact that when you read Henry's post stating that Dam is a drama whore, that idea prompted you to respond by saying yes, ''some'' are more than others.
Your response does not need explaining to most intelligent, it's self explanatory. You were agreeing with Henry that DAM was the ''some more than others'' ..even though you yourself did not actualy state my name, that's what you meant, and now you are hopelessly trying to worm your way out of a cleverly disguised situation by yours truly.

Your attempt to pull the wool over my eyes fails every time, because I got you sussed out more than you'll ever realise.

Just own it, that's what I do, yes, I'm a dramarama kid, so what, we're all who we are.

And just to remind you of what you have forgotten again, I'm not responding to any of your posts on this thread, because Henry doesn't like it, and I respect that. I'm not like you who struggles to discern what human gestures are meaning to say when they are presented in the form of words.

Byee, see you on your own thread, where you love to relish and bask in all the drama, where you have all the time in the world to answer peoples questions and inform them of all their answers..

.

[Age]

Age>

Just own it. Stop beating around the bush about the fact that when you read Henry's post stating that Dam is a drama whore,

BUT, there was ABSOLUTELY NO thing in "henry quirk'" post that stated absolutely ANY thing that "dontasme" is a "drama whore".

WHY do you keep ADDING the 'whore' word into this?

that idea prompted you to respond by saying yes, ''some'' are more than others.

OF COURSE what "henry quirk" wrote, in the post I was responding to, PROMPTED me to respond by saying what I ACTUALLY DID. That is how DISCUSSIONS WORK, and TAKE PLACE. By the way, I did NOT included the word 'yes', AT ALL, in what I ACTUALLY DID WRITE, which ACTUALLY was;

some add more 'drama' then "others" do.

Which, as can be CLEARLY seen is NOTHING REALLY like YOUR VERSION of what I wrote, which was;

''some'' are more than others.

And, maybe it is because you BELIEVE I wrote; " ''some'' are more than others. " that that is the REASON WHY you can NOT, YET, see that I NEVER wrote NOR spoke about 'you' being MORE of a "drama whore" than "others" are. We will just have to WAIT and SEE.

Also, can you REALLY NOT YET SEE that I wrote and was speaking about how some (people) add more 'drama' then "others" do, just like 'you' did in that post that was being referred to, AND, just like I have done is some other posts.

Your response does not need explaining to most intelligent, it's self explanatory.

YES IT IS. BUT ONLY when what I ACTUALLY WROTE, is PROVIDED, is LOOKED AT, and is DISCUSSED.

OTHERWISE, just like you have SHOWN here, some WILL get the Wrong IDEA, and gain a Wrong PERCEPTION.

You were agreeing with Henry that DAM was the ''some more than others'' ..

BUT, even "henry quirk" did NOT write that "dontaskme", itself, was "some more than others are".

"henry quirk" just said that "dontaskme" MUST have "her" drama, and then went on to ask me, if I knew this, (without a question mark).

AGAIN, as can be CLEARLY SEEN and as EVIDENCED and PROVED True above.

even though you yourself did not actualy state my name, that's what you meant, and now you are hopelessly trying to worm your way out of a cleverly disguised situation by yours truly.

BUT I NEVER MEANT that 'you' are some more of a 'drama' "queeen", 'drama' "whore", NOR ANY other 'drama' ANY thing.

What I CLEARLY WROTE was that 'some add more 'drama' than "others" do. Which is was you were doing, in some posts, (which was being referred to). Which is just like what I do, in some posts, and which is what "henry quirk" does, in some posts.

Some, however, may do this MORE than "others" do. And who 'they' ARE is up for discussion. That is; IF ANY one REALLY cares.

If you want to CLAIM that you were NOT adding 'drama', or NOT adding MORE 'drama', than "others" do, in some of those above posts, then so be it. But, some "others" SEE and would SAY differently.

But, AGAIN, 'who' would REALLY care, and 'who', EXACTLY, would even continue on with this 'drama' here?

Your attempt to pull the wool over my eyes fails every time, because I got you sussed out more than you'll ever realise.

OKAY.

Just own it, that's what I do, yes, I'm a dramarama kid, so what, we're all who we are.

How, EXACTLY, could I "own" what 'you' do?

Is this one of those times when 'you' talk to "your" 'self', as 'you' some times say that this is what 'you' are doing here, in this forum?

And just to remind you of what you have forgotten again, I'm not responding to any of your posts on this thread, because Henry doesn't like it, and I respect that.

If I recall correctly, "henry quirk" NEVER mentioned ANY thing about this, UNTIL AFTER 'you' brought this up.

Also, if you HAVE TO REMIND me, AGAIN, that you are NOT responding to ANY of my posts, in this thread, then let us NOT FORGET that; if you ARE 'reminding me AGAIN, then you have also responded, ONCE AGAIN. Which is what can be CLEARLY SEEN, and PROVED True.

I'm not like you who struggles to discern what human gestures are meaning to say when they are presented in the form of words.

I NEVER even KNEW that 'gestures' could be presented in the form or words. I thought that 'gestures' were, literally, movements of the body and a form of nonverbal (or non word) communication.

So, besides 'struggling' with what you say here I am, which you say you do NOT, I did NOT even KNOW that it was a POSSIBLE thing.

Byee, see you on your own thread,

Okay.

where you love to relish and bask in all the drama, where you have all the time in the world to answer peoples questions and inform them of all their answers..

.

Is that what 'you' ASSUME I do, or BELIEVE I do?

I wonder if I will take the two below, unanswered, questions to the other thread, or just leave them here, to be LOOKED AT, and PONDERED OVER?

Was there AN adult human being, (in the days when this was being written), who did NOT lie?

If yes, then WHO would have that ONE been?

[Dontaskme]

I'm sorry Age, but you are still trying to worm your way out this. You know you'd do yourself and everyone else concerned a big favour by just owning it.

Age wrote:

BUT it was 'you', "dontaskme", who said something about moving ALL of discussions to another thread. I am just STILL WAITING for 'you' to do so.

Do 'you' REALLY NEED to be TOLD to do some thing which you said you were going to do ANYWAY?

To which Henry replied to Age's comment:

Henry wrote:
simply movin' to another thread wasn't dramatic enough

DAM must have her drama, don't you know

center ring, spotlight focused and hot

Henry said to Age...don't you know.

To which Age responded to Henry's comment, that said DONT YOU KNOW...by agreeing Dam likes drama, but then instead of saying yes Dam likes drama, Age twisted it by saying yes, I agree with Henry's response by saying ''some'' more than others, implying Dam.

Anyways, I will continue to remind you Age of this event that you keep denying has happened. It will only stop when you accept that you really did agree with Henry that Dam likes drama. So keep on with the pretence of denial all you want, because everytime you respond denying what you meant, I'll just keep reminding you of your denial in your refusal to accept that you did indeed agree with Henry that Dam likes creating drama.

You did not have to respond to Henry's reply to your comment, you could have remained silent, but you wanted to stir the wasps nest...didn't you Age, yes you did.


I said I was going to move my posts to your own thread Age, isn't that enough for you to understand, and sorry if I didn't move my posts to your thread, in the time frame that you would have preferred, is that why you felt the urge to bring up the issue again by informing me that you are still waiting for me to move them....I'M SORRY, I didn't move them fast enough for you...and why the hell did you have to say this to me >

Do 'you' REALLY NEED to be TOLD to do some thing which you said you were going to do ANYWAY?

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

[Dontaskme]

I NEVER even KNEW that 'gestures' could be presented in the form or words. I thought that 'gestures' were, literally, movements of the body and a form of nonverbal (or non word) communication.

Stop trying to use this as an excuse to worm your way out again.

Deaf people understand words by the use of non-verbal body movements like sign language. Well guess what Age, there's another surprise ...Hearing people can understand verbal gestures as well, in the form of words, which are also known as signs Age....can you read 'sign posts' Age?

Hello, are you reading me, is there anyone in there?

[henry quirk]

I'm not responding to any of your posts on this thread, because Henry doesn't like it, and I respect that.

I formally cede the thread to you two: don't stop on my account