I was listening to the clip Matt Staggs posted on here the other day of Alan Watts expounding on the Buddhist concept of “No Self” so I clicked on it in YouTube to see what else came up, and there I found this little clip of Charles Manson answering the question of “Who are you?”
After listening to Watts, Manson’s answer struck me as profound. “I am nobody”, was his answer, basically. It struck me that Manson is a Zen Master.
I had seen other Manson interviews. He completely dominates all his interviewers, running circles around them. Interviewers always come at Manson in a hostile way, seeking to pass judgement and not listen at all. Manson takes these as an opportunity for dharmic battle, and he destroys. He is a master. It seemed to me that Manson was answering all of the questions in little Koans, dropping gems of wisdom completely missed by his interviewer.
I particularly like the one with Geraldo Rivera. Rivera Seemed to think he was going to shame Manson and get him to cry tears of contrition and apologize to the American people or some ridiculous thing, or at least those are the wheels I saw turning in Rivera’s well -oiffed head. He didn’t have a chance: Manson completely owned him. No amount of creative editing in the world could give a contrary impression.
I clicked on some more links and discovered an interview of Manson being interviewed by Charlie Rose, one I hadn’t seen before. Not surprisingly my impression of Charlie Rose was that of a more dignified, serious journalist, but he gets dominated as well. Its interesting that these men both seem to want to set out to shame Manson. They come at him from the perspective of representing the establishment and all that is good. In that sense it’s not a normal interview in that they’re not asking probing questions to get Manson to open up and share about themselves.
I am struck by how confidently Manson, who appears to be just over 5 feet tall, walks into the room in comparison to the three enormous correctional officers who accompany him, all ow home appear to be slightly nervous to be on TV. Apparently he had just come out of solitary confinement and apologizes for being a little out of it. If Manson was out of sorts at the start of the interview, within 30 seconds he appears to be perfectly at ease and in complete control. It is Charlie Rose who appears stiff and awkward, and once the interview is underway Manson immediately starts dropping gems!
Rose: Do you have friends you can talk to?Rose seems to establish early on a pattern of steering the conversation continually from the interesting to the banal:
Manson: I am friend to everything I see, everything I know, everything I feel
Rose: “what about other inmates?”This statement is a theme that Manson revisits later in the interview. Rose asks him about his fan mail and then Manson opens up about “the Rainbow”: His explanation of what the spiritual aspect of the sixties was about and where it originated, using an analogy of a tree growing up from a seed underneath the ground and how a similar process can occur in the mind.
Manson: “I am brother in these hallways for 40 years. With no snitching on my jacket, no asking for nobody to protect me, and walking on my own two feet.”
Rose immediately cuts him off, asking him to instead explain why he makes little origami scorpions. Rose seems to think most people would consider scorpions creepy and wants to keep the conversation focused on lurid spectacle, but Manson once again steers the conversation back again back to the spiritual dimension, talking about shamanism and the difference between what Manson calls “spiritualism” and organized religion.
Rose continues to attempt to paint a preconceived picture of Manson, who refuses to play along and answers in metaphors and analogies. Rose considers these as an attempt at obfuscation, in the process completely missing the profundity Manson is offering him. Rose asks Mansonabout his mother and father, feigning pity that Manson never knew his father. Manson asserts that he does know his own father, but that he considers his father to be every man (everyman?) and that his mother is the ice box, meaning the penitentiary. When Rose scoffs, Manson elaborates that the generation of men returning from WWII raised the generation of boys living in the penitentiary. Manson then recounts one of his earliest memories of visiting his mother in prison.
When Rose asks if he has any happy memories, Manson once again lays it for for him, Bodhisattva style:
Manson: I…I don’t have that.
Rose: You don’t have that?”
Manson: I don’t have that yin and yang that you people do.
Rose: Is that ying yang?” (rose seems to take “ying yang” as a phrase connoting nonsense)
Manson: yeah, in other words, you can’t make me unhappy
Rose: Are there sad memories, though, growing up?
Manson: I don’t have all that. (smiling)
Rose: You do have it. You are an individual; You have an experience. You are one human being with experience.
Manson raises his eye brows back in forth quizzically but with good humor, amused at Rose’s attempt to put words in his mouth, responding:
Manson: When you leave go get a big rock and set it on the table.
Rose: Yeah?
Manson: I am that big rock on the table.This was a pretty straight-forward Zen object lesson. Was it completely lost on Rose?
Manson expounds on non-attachment, explaining that he was merely “pass(ing) through” the scene at Haight and Ashbury street. Rose asks why these young hippies were drawn to him, and Manson responds that he stands on his own two feet. He says that a the time he didn’t realize how rare that was and how weak most other people are. He relates the killings to a holy war, but one that he wanted no part of.
At one point in the interview he explains love as the ground of being and the role Manson plays as establishment scapegoat:
Manson: Everything is love, there’s nothing that isn’t love, even the confusion is love in one form or another, it’s misguided. Love is a word to supplement for God. I would rather use the word intelligence. If you’re going to use the word love, use the word intelligence because love is misunderstood in so many different ways and fashions.
Rose: Do you need to be loved?
Manson: Loved… I am loved, I am love
Rose: By whom? Are you loved
Manson: I am love
Rose: Are you loved?
Manson: All the way and around the world with it, didn’t you see it? Two hundred and fifteen times taking it in the fire with it man
Rose: Meaning what
Manson: Me? Meaning I’m taking up all the slack for you assholes. I’m carrying you around. Nixon. I still got you… Reagan, hey Ronny! … I’m intertwined in your very soul man.Rose, being firmly on the side of established authority(demiurge?), isn’t going to go along with Manson’s idea of himself as a scapegoat., instead continuing to paint a picture of Manson as psychopath/criminal/schizophrenic. He couches his words in the implication that others see him that way:
Rose: … and what do you say of those people who say ‘monster’?
Manson: What you see is what you get. Man, they have to live with it. I don’t. You have to live with your judgement. I live with mine. (Smiling)
Rose: You don’t think of yourself…
Manson: That is right. I don’t think of myself.Rose continues to paint the picture of how “most people” see Manson:
Manson: I don’t think you guys have seen me.
Rose: No? What don’t we understand?
Manson: You don’t understand yourselves.
Rose: No but what don’t we understand about you? Granted we don’t understand ourselves, but what don’t we understand about you?
Manson: Just what I said…I am inside of you man. I live inside of you. I am inside every one of you.They go back and forth for a while.
Rose is so invested in making him out to be a monster; that he “ordered the murders” and that he deserves life in prison. He is so invested in this that he misses absolutely everything Manson is saying. Rose seems to get that Manson is defending his innocence but catches not much else.
When asked if he will ever get out of prison, Manson ends the interview with:
Manson: Prison? I left prison in ’67. I got out of jail.
Rose: Yeah, but you are back.
Manson: Can’t you see that I am out, man? Can’t you see that I am free?”Somewhere along the line, Manson found liberation. Rose, captive to his own judgments, a man of the establishment, remains in prison.
Original Article HERE
52 comments:
yeah, a Zen Master who ordered/influenced/orchestrated (take your pick) the slaughter of nine innocent people including a woman nine months pregnant.
You really have to wonder what kind of person puts Charlie Manson on a pedestal. It's disturbing to the Nth.
It's even more disturbing seeing millions of people putting far more sinister (but "legit") criminals up on a pedestal - while continuing to blindly praise them for all their "greatness" and "contributions" to society.
It's the very few who idolize someone like Manson compared to the vast many who go in an even more frightening direction; to the Nth.
I certainly wouldn't go so far as to call Charlie a Zen master (he's a bit lacking in compassion & ethics for that) but I agree that he runs rings around most of the people who interview him. Largely because they're usually stuck in some lo-rent National Enquirer-style paradigm and (like the guy says) don't even try to listen to him.
Manson's pretty obviously dropped a bit of acid and spent a LOT of time on his own. Both of which equipped him well to lay a reasonably entertaining and somewhat coherent cosmic rave… but back in the day, the hippy trail was just full of people that could do that. The only people that fell for it though were newbies and idiots. Anyone with any common sense (or street wisdom) knows that talk is cheap and actions speak far louder than words.
One of my favourite all-time Charlie interview moments is from the late 70s/early 80s. It was for 60 minutes (I think) and was pretty standard fare until near the end when the journo asked him if there was anything he regretted. Charlie stopped, rubbed his beard theatrically, chuckled to himself a couple of times and then looked straight at the camera and said "I never realised how gullible you people are". Which says it all really. He's not an evil, cult leader with fantastic hypnotic powers and he's not an enlightened zen master. He's just a common or garden con artist with a VERY different life experience to most modern humans.
To my way of thinking, Paul Krassner summed it up best of all in the early 70s when he described Manson as a "Frankenstein's monster by-product of the American prison system". Just my opinion though...
Max, I'm assuming your talking about the mob, but I'm not really sure. Who are you talking about?
SEE: Charlie Manson BAD - so I must be GOOD !
Oh, what ever will we do when Google eventually BANS thinkers from its blogs.
5 minutes browsing through the Dhammapada to familiarize yourself with its vocabulary and basic concepts, and you too could affect such a shallow imitation of wisdom.
Manson owns and dominates interviewers because (a) they are dullards, and (b) he talks in meaningless riddles and never shuts up. It's a tiresome act.
The one overarching thing I get from several decades of Manson interviews is his desperate and unremitting need to demonstrate that he has a depth of wisdom that the herd does not share, that everyone has got him wrong, that he is simply too deep or too simple or too whatever for the world to understand. Charlie, you dumb coward, if, as your replies invariably imply, every question you ever get asked is so goddam beneath you, so muddled, so fundamentally flawed in its premise, then for gods sake do the world a favour and stop giving interviews.
Whatever the gullible might think, Manson is a coward and a windbag, a blabbermouth narcissist, a failure and a thug with a big ego and a bigger mouth. An easily-acquired veneer of imitation dhamma doesn't change that fact.
follow the original link and scroll down to the comments.
There is a most relaxing non-confrontational KALX Radio interview with Manson.
Thank you, Michael Nagle. The Dhammapada is a good example. No better way to make people think you are above their level of understanding than to memorize terms and concepts like oh... Scientology for instance - then spit them out quickly while changing subjects even quicker.
Thanks, Chris I added the KALX Radio interview to the bottom of the post.
Matt - "while changing subjects even quicker" - exactly! Nicely noticed. He constantly does this, and while there's a certain facile skill to his rambling verbal diarrhoea, only the truly uninformed could mistake it for wisdom or enlightenment.
George Carlin was the MASTER of verbal diarrhea, but he at least could make us laugh - all the time.
Boy! did Michael and Matt really suck me in. I was thinking "Right-On, that's CM to a tee" AND then I realized they were also describing most every "teacher" I had in school.
EXCEPT for the "cowardly" thing - and then I realized IF we're talking about sending young folks to do your killing, maybe we're talk'in about JFK, LBJ and Nixon.
As a Saint would say: I'm so confused, maybe it's time for a drink.
There's a difference between the Manson you see in the interviews, which are all post TLB and didn't start until Tom Snyder in the late '70s, and the Manson that everyone knew in the late '60s.
Obviously he wouldn't have had such an easy time collecting followers if he was the guy we all came to know via the interviews.
It's too easy to just dismiss the guy as a "windbag" using the same tricks over and over on a bunch of "truly uninformed" people.
A coward doesn't grab a gun and throw himself in the middle of lotsaoppa's snake pit in order to fix a problem that someone else created.
We all know he's a career criminal and a con man but that doesn't mean he was an empty shell of a man with no wisdom or skill. Remember, this guy impressed a lot of people with his abilities. Including Neil Young - who still speaks highly of his experiences with him.
He was not without power and the ability to manipulate energy, which does require a lot of intelligence. He could manipulate people through energy - he could spin theirs in many directions while keeping his intact and untouchable.
Ask Hendrickson to explain in detail his FIRST encounter with Manson. It gives a glimpse into the kind of guy people were dealing with at that time. Here he was barely 5'6" and yet he was intimidating people over 6' tall. Unless you are Bruce Lee, it takes more than fancy street talk to effectively do that.
The guy has admitted on several occasions what he is in terms of good vs bad. We know what he got himself into and what that makes him. But to bash him to the degree that some people do is pointless and makes him into a one dimensional character - which he wasn't. It also makes it harder to get to the truth of TLB. It does, however, pile on loads of credibility to Bug and the theory that he used for prosecuting Manson.
@Cielodrive
I was referring to the mafia but probably not the same one you are thinking of.
I'm talking about the real mafia that dress in suits with little American flags on their lapels.
The kind that get real pay checks (payed for by us) and hold real job titles (often through elections), and who's criminal mis-deeds effect millions and millions of lives on a daily basis.
The other mafia is just for show and distraction - and is actually very low level in comparison.
Can't say I agree with your views on our government, but I'm glad we live in a country that allows you to express your views.
Not any more Cielo. People are getting locked up all the time for "expressing their views."
Just look at the case of Brandon Raub.
Max, the announcement of the elimination of your 4th Amendment right under the National Defense Act was televised the same time as the final episode of the Sopranos, so most people missed the big switch to Fascism, you know how it is, can't be bothered with those pesky civil rights when mind numbing dribble is on the boob tube.
Exactly 1nonbeliever.
The kind of people who criticize my remarks are those who have never even heard of the NDAA.
yeah, I am going to get crucified for saying this but I can't believe Liz's site is now dominated by a pro-Manson guy (RH) and his contempt for us programed robots who don't share his perspective...and the other wing nut with his endlessly tiresome anti-govt tirades.
And Col Scott was dead on with his assessment of the Leslie article and this latest one that anoints Manson as a Zen Master is just flat out beyond the pale.
I gotta bite the bullet and stop coming here like others have but I do still enjoy seeing what Patty, brownrice, Chris B. and others have to say.
But this place just ain't fun anymore.
Leary I can't say I agree with everyone either, but if you want playtime there's always NickJR.com. Every time someone disagrees with you you take your football and go home. It's getting tiresome.
There you go again Leary, twisting the facts to suit you and your "wingnut" routine.
"Endlessly tiresome anti-gov tirades" ???
Really Leary? Do you see a tirade anywhere up there?
It's called a "discussion." Something you should learn how to engage in rather than your constant childish name calling.
Leary ol' mate, ya shouldn't get so distressed by it all. I don't agree with all the opinions expressed here either (and I'm sure lots of people don't agree with mine). The beauty of this place though (IMO) is that there ARE unusual opinions expressed here without the moderators banning people left, right & centre or biting the head off anyone that doesn't hate Charlie with the same level of passion that they feel.
Admittedly, Max gets a bit over-heated with people that don't agree with his take on things (i.e. you)… just as you get a bit over-heated with him. Probably you could both turn it down a notch and just agree to disagree… that's how communities work best (once again IMO).
Personally, I find myself agreeing with a fair bit of what he has to say about government… just as I agree with a lot of your observations and comments. Surely, there's room at the table for everyone?
As for RH, it should probably be noted that of all the people that post regularly on these blogs, he's the only one that actually had any first person experience with Charlie and company back in the day. For this reason alone, he's worth listening to…. one doesn't have to necessarily agree with him to find value in his thoughts.
And look at the quality of the new posters turning up recently… not bad, huh? Stick around, dude… you'll regret it if ya don't… and I'm sure I'm not the only one that'd be sad to see you go.
Peace
Very well said Brownrice.
Except...
First of all I don't get heated. I've never gotten heated here. I wouldn't do this at all if it wasn't fun. If people interpret it as heated then they are misinterpreting. It's like a text message - very easy to read too much into words without a voice behind them.
My responses to Leary are NEVER compelled by the fact that he disagrees with me. I respond the way I do because he is incapable of directing something at me without name calling.
And still, like I said, it's not at all a heated thing. More like role playing.
Fun. Entertainment.
There's no doubt in my mind that if I were in person with the people who have engaged in these "arguments" with me, it would be a totally different story, and we'd get along fine.
I admit it. I had to pull up Nickjr.com to see what it's about. In my day, pre-schoolers couldn't read.
Zen Master?, hardly. But very interesting comments. As I had also seen this video sometime ago, I am rather in agreement with you. I choose not to have a TV anymore, but used to watch Rose's show. With all guests, even heads of state, he is pompous, overbearing and worst of all, talks over their comments and answers his own questions.
As a former student of Tibetan Buddhism, I thoroughly enjoyed the 1st clip and his rather relaxed, confident, run-around of Rose.
Now, as someone whom has hung around with street guys (thugs, dopers, etc.), in my younger life, I am hearing a lot of tailor made con artist bullshit.
I suppose, though, when I was less cynical and a disenfranchised youth, I could have fallen for the B.S. (plus the girls and drugs), but i wouldn't have died for him, much less killed for him. Thanks for posting this.
Leary - Max does get under you skin doesn't he? He kind of makes me feel like I did the time I had Scabies in my younger years.
Max Frost said...
Not any more Cielo. People are getting locked up all the time for "expressing their views."
Just look at the case of Brandon Raub.
---------------------------------
Good point Max. Kind of a Woodrow Wisonesque move on the government's part.
I'm a vet and the trampling of constitutional rights pisses me off.....
The radio interview is well worth a listen.
About 30 minutes in he gives an entertaining explanation why some cats are responsible for the cutting down of the giant redwood trees.
Let's see: Now Leary is baiting me AGAIN -- this time by saying "I am pro-Manson"
Actually, I am pro-Hendrickson, but I understand "teachers just want to have fun."
Unfortunately or otherwise, this website revolves around a subject matter (MURDER) that is NOT considered FUN by intelligent people, especially those who are still serious about developing their mental abilities.
Most of us attended some kind of schooling, for some time, in our lifetimes. And most of us attended school in a FORMAL public education setting, BUT Charles Manson attended school in PRISON (including both State and Federal penitentaries.) We were "taught" to be good little American citizens and Manson was taught to be an "outlaw." Thank God HE became the "bad guy" so we could be the good guys. AND also provide others like cops, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, guards, etc. with a valid reason for existing in our society.
The media still makes a fuss every time Manson farts, BECAUSE there is NO one else worth mentioning - HE is the DEVIL ! IF anyone had ever seen GOD in the flesh, HE would get the attention. AND eventually, God and the Devil would be fighting over who gets the most attention.
Of course, there would be agents, promoters, road managers, etc. and even Miss "O" would get involved.
BUT as long as God stays out of Charlie's PR program, Mr. Manson is the God of Evil. And when YOU call him a no-good motherfucker it's just like ironing his suit, shinning his shoes and adjusting his tie for him. YOU become his personnel butler. IF you still don't get it, maybe it's time to enroll in some night classes.
Manson....Zen Master?
He does have a way with words.
The way any number of street/country/other side of the tracks folk I've met/know speak.
Manson....Zen Master?
He does have a way with words.
The way any number of street/country/other side of the tracks folk I've met/know speak.
Exactly what I was thinking. I love the open discourse and intelligence on this blog - the different life experiences and viewpoints make it interesting. While it's human nature to get butthurt every once in a while, the "my way or the highway" obstinance is really aggravating. We all supposedly are in search of answers and truth. It's in coming together and expressing ALL viewpoints that we have a shot at getting to the truth. Variety is the spice of life. Nothing exists without polarity and contrast. Otherwise-nice people who try to stifle or belittle differing viewpoints aggravate and puzzle me. QUESTION EVERYTHING! Debate is exhilarating, & nothing real (even when it's subjective reality) can really ever be "threatened", anyway, so defensiveness only wears you down with negativity.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Mr. H.: Your posts are genius. So glad you take the time to post here. In a world filled with inane fluff, you challenge people to THINK. And that's scary to some. To me, it's an exhilarating chance to exercise one of our few remaining freedoms.
Miss Crabtree, is your surname "Dreiser", also?
I reckon Miss Crabtree is aka La-de-la.
that's an asinine statement Matt. My objections are not about "disagreement", I love disagreement. Or I should say I love intelligent disagreement. But when every thread seems to be highjacked by the 'Big Brother is killing us all' mindset it just takes the enjoyment out of discussing TLB. I consider it a buzzkill, or conversation killer.
A statement like there are "far more sinister (legit) criminals" than Manson out there but then not naming any is just empty rhetoric. If you honestly think there are people in American society more despicable than Charlie Manson then name them. Don't just throw horseshit at the wall and hope that it sticks.
I truthfully love it when people disagree with me. But I stand by my assertion that RH and the other guy always do it in an extremely snide and insulting manner.
I come from Boston culture where if someone insults you then you smack him. Obviously you can't do that on a blog, so the best option is to just walk away - as Saint and many others have done - and save yourself the aggravation.
Honestly, I guess my real problem is with anyone who even remotely considers Manson anything but the lowest scumbag alive today. yeah, he can be charming and entertaining in the great con man fashion. But reality is he beat women, manipulated the vulnerable and initiated the gruesome deaths of many. And he has never had one moment of remorse for doing so.
This has nothing to do with a football. That is a facile analogy. It simple has to do with choosing to not associate with people who have a completely opposite opinion of Charlie Manson than I do. Yeah, technically that can be seen as a "disagreement". But I consider it more of a mindset incompatibility.
As I said, I've come here because I truly enjoy Patty and brownrice (muchos gracias) and others who post here. But the vibe has changed here. I am convinced that the ones I have trouble with not only see Manson as a heroic figure, but most likely feel the same way about someone like Timothy McVeigh.
Go ahead, I dare ya, ask em that straight out. That's not a disagreement or different views, that is straight out war.
Zzzzz
Leary you have an obsession with Manson that I haven't seen since the Bill Nelson days.
The kind of obsession that is rooted in jealousy but has to be covered up with the appearance of immeasurable disgust.
Bugliosi had the same thing. He secretly wished he could be living on a ranch with a bunch of naked women and orgies. He couldn't have it though, so he had to make up for it by destroying the guy who did. And then he topped the whole thing off raping his mistress.
Leary if you think RH is snide and insulting then there's no helping you. Yes the vibe has changed in that no one here can stand you any longer.
Mr Hendrickson, it's always interesting to read what you write. But on the other hand, I hope you don't mind my saying how fundamentally I take issue with you on some (but not all) of what you say.
Most of us attended some kind of schooling, for some time, in our lifetimes. And most of us attended school in a FORMAL public education setting, BUT Charles Manson attended school in PRISON (including both State and Federal penitentaries.)
Yep, but that was Charlie's fault, or his momma's maybe. It wasn't Abi Folger's or Leno LaBianca's and it isn't mine.
We were "taught" to be good little American citizens
You say that like it's a bad thing. Many of those good little American citizens are some of the most fundamentally decent people on earth. Many of them, indeed, don't deserve to be called 'little'.
and Manson was taught to be an "outlaw." Thank God HE became the "bad guy" so we could be the good guys.
Why do you keep returning to this logical fallacy? We're not on opposite ends of some cosmic see-saw, defining ourselves in opposition to little Charlie Manson. Not at all. It's very simple: human societies have decided that it's wrong to break into people's homes and stab them to death. Fairly universal and long-standing convention. Check it out! Human society didn't sit down and hypocritically decide that the best way to feel good about itself was to arbitrarily come out against mass stabbings in order to scapegoat the Charlies of the world. I'm not 'the good guy' because I don't stab people to death; I'm a normal person who tries to treat others with decency and respect, and love. Charlie had people stabbed to death. There's no connection. I don't NEED Charlie to exist, or to be defined as evil, in order to prove anything about myself or about human society. My moral failings and successes have nothing to do with Charlie Manson, thank you. Yours may, mine don't.
AND also provide others like cops, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, guards, etc. with a valid reason for existing in our society.
Yeah, "society" manufactures cultish murderers and invents arbitrary rules in order to create make-work jobs for otherwise unemployable losers like Bugliosi. Sure. Mr Hendrickson.
In my experience, people who have half-baked philosophical objections to the western legal system are usually those who have had the very good fortune to live under its protection their entire complacent lives.
The media still makes a fuss every time Manson farts, BECAUSE there is NO one else worth mentioning - HE is the DEVIL ! IF anyone had ever seen GOD in the flesh, HE would get the attention. AND eventually, God and the Devil would be fighting over who gets the most attention.
Er.... yeah. Very grand. And wrong. Manson gets his little slice of attention, as do many, many others. Most people I know happen to think of him not as THE DEVIL but as an asshole career criminal with a big mouth.
And when YOU call him a no-good motherfucker it's just like ironing his suit, shinning his shoes and adjusting his tie for him. YOU become his personnel butler.
No I don't. That's pretentious hyperbole. He's nothing special. He was a little creep who had some people murdered in their homes. Now he's a boring rent-a-quote hypocrite with an ego the size of Death Valley. And when was the last time he wore a tie?!
IF you still don't get it, maybe it's time to enroll in some night classes.
Only if you're teaching them, Mr Hendrickson; then I can be really sure that I 'get it'.
If YOU still don't get it, I guess that's because you're cleverer than I am, have lived under the protection of the legal system all your life, and have never lost your loved ones to acts of brutal, random violence.
No offence, Mr Hendrickson, it's a genuine pleasure to engage with you.
Leary thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts!
The housing tank must be destroyed.
TO Michael Nagle:
Dear Sir: Do you realize you specifically responded to MY comment/posting-directly addressed to "LEARY"? So are YOU really also Mr. Leary? Cause doubling down on an old man is so cop-like!
I do appreciate the attention though.
Mr H, it's a public forum, forgive me for intruding. I thought you were big enough to deal with the likes of me.
Despite your capitals, I am NOT Leary, and never have been. I may try it one day, but for now I'm very much myself.
Apologies again for the cop-like attention. I'll put my nightstick away and get back to my donuts.
M
TO MICHAEL:
I F you actually lost loved one(s) to killer(s) like are discussed here, I am sorry. BUT here you have an opportunity to reveal YOUR story and even use your real identity. It doesn't get much better than that. Folks here actually care and want to hear about your plight.
YES, I was "protected" by brave policemen AND they were paid handsomely for their heroic valor. BUT I lost friends at the minds of men like JFK and LBJ. THUS, I know what its like to awake in the morning and remember them as a brother I never had. Of course, if you read my book and or visited my website, you would know all this. When it gets really bad, I think of the black men who were forced to fight and die, in a far off Vietnam, for "rights" they couldn't enjoy here in America.
In order to cope with the loss of their brothers, they developed a saying: "It don't mean a thing."
When a close friend would be killed: they would stand over his bloodied body and repeat over and over "It don't mean a thing," until they were able to emotionaly continue on to the next fire-fight.
YOUR heros are YOUR heros and I can even understand why, I'm somewhat of a historian. But to try and distort my understanding of history to suit your needs -- "Well, It don't mean a thing
Max does enjoy being confrontational. Patty believes Leary does too. They take turns annoying Patty, then winning her back. She is not sick of anyone, just for the record.
Now Patty is going back to sleep. But not because of tryptophan. People think its an additive but actually its one of 20 essential amino acids coded for in our DNA. We are already full of tryptophan: it doesnt put you to sleep. The big ass meal you just ate causes that. Interesting, no?
I don't consider any of this to be confrontational, Patty. It's more like bouncing a ball back and forth on a playground. It's supposed to be fun.
If we are to take a 1,000 year view all of our opinions combined they amount to nothing.
At this moment in time we are all alive in the here and now.
Each of us brings a different perspective and life experience to these continuing and varied discussions.
You all made my correlation brain machine fry its motor. Read about JFK and his women. He even pimped out his "youngest" right in the White House (and watched her give blow-jobs to his special staff members). Then consider that while JFK vigorously excercised his little head, HE was prepping the great Yellow and White race War. AND while CM was working his little tool, HE was supposedly prepping the Black and White race War. YES, it's ALL documented in book(s) documentaries, news programs, etc. BUT I always thought that Charles Manson was somewhat unique. Apparently, "a BIG House" does it for some guys.
Post a Comment