OzTrAlien

Jer, do you think there are differences in how actions and responses are handled with a distinction between a terrorist organisation like IRA or Al Qaeda and a Nation's Government? For example: how the US attacked the terrorist organization Al Qaeda, in relation to how it handles situations and issues with Russia and the Russian Nations Government.

Unfortunately jacbot, you have totally missed the meaning and the intention of what i presented, I tried to help by correcting the contextual view you used of Hamas being a "terrorist organisation" the same as those you listed it with as terrorists, by explaining Hamas is a Government, elected by the people. It was hoped through expanding the view of Hamas as "terrorists" to the actuality of it being a "Government", this would enlighten you and those not aware of the distinction to gain an increased perspective as to the greater technicality and inherent complexity involved in this situation, through recognition of this distinction and classification. It is unfortunate by misunderstanding the context of what was said, has lead to completely missing the fact i had applied the exact same rule distinction and classification of your concerns towards the US, to Hamas, which i had chosen to express in a simpler form with the use of Ukraine, maybe in doing so was my mistake which lead you to not see what was meant, which you chose to portray in the light of "strawman". Possibly i should have used a greater amount of expression and presented the view through the inclusion of the Government of the US, GB, AUST, ISRAEL, CHINA, MALAYSIA, IRAN or of your own nation and every other nations elected or unelected government, no matter how illegitimate or legitimate the view applied of their claim to rule govern or decide what said nations people must adhere or comply to in any form. Given the current applied and somewhat accepted interactions of Nations between each other, is derived and conducted through each Nations Government, representatives in respect to each Nation, not by free individuals or the "people" of the Nation in person with respect to their individual desires thoughts or aspirations, in recognition of this being the current structure and for now, TURE form, of how situations are handled, your stance of "I am ancap,." is about as relevant as being a "rainbow colored unicorn, in pink fairytale unicorn dust land" no matter how you try to idealize it in respect of resolution in current FORM. I absolve no one of their choice to harm or use force against another being, i have much empathy for those who have no choice in their current situations affected by the choices of those making the decisions which cause harm to others, i do realize change needs to be made, but i do realize one needs to have a correct view of a situation to be able to comprehend and assist in dealing with it in a manner to overcome it by not being pulled about by issues or consequences which are more relevant to distractions than recognition of the root cause in a situation.

The difference is Hamas was the Legitimately elected government of Gaza, just as is the current Poroshenko government of Ukraine, no matter how illegitimate or legitimate both might be seen, Hamas is not a "terrorist organisation" as it is so often referred to as to undermine its legitimacy and its right to protect the people it was chosen by to serve. please watch : http://youtu.be/hSPAm-ZWBAQ "The Blood of Palestine is on the Hands of the Bribe-Takers"

Mutations are ignored on the basis they are variations which are not naturally occurring, ie: blue eyes are a mutation, they are not a natural derivative of the genetic pattern but a mutation in the gene , as Stefan puts it, they are "tall asians" a variation not what is considered normal. Much like how all cheeters(the cats) are genetic duplications or replications, any organ or living tissue from one cheeter can be used or donored to another without any rejection from their body, they may have variations in their spots but it is much like how genetic twins have small variations these are not considered mutations, however even twins can suffer compatibility issues which cause rejection of body organs . It is not the first sperm to reach the egg fertilizes it, many sperm reach the egg at approximately the same time, the whole surface of the egg will become covered in sperm, all the sperm begin to spin and rotate the egg in unison somewhat like a "mating dance" while in this process a single sperm is chosen and then allowed to enter the egg's outer wall, it is not yet understood as to how or why only this single sperm is chosen or why the opening is created by the egg to allow only this single sperm to enter the egg, but it is known the sperm can not force their way through the outer layer of the egg wall. There is no jockeying for position or obstacle created through insemination by others, for example, a female cat will have multiple male inseminations while on heat and while the ratio of each males sperm group which reach the eggs and on each egg may vary, the whole of the multiple male sperm mix take place in the "mating dance", hence all the sperm groups are involved and beneficial in the reproduction process, in essence it is helpful to all, much like how geese flying in formation is helpful to the whole group, the grouped sperm help to carry along the seminal fluid which is beneficial to survival of the sperm groups. In the charge from bagdads, on route to the golden egg there is no "system of sperm competition." The "head" of the penis is designed to facilitate entry into the vagina, not to scoop out other sperm deposits, our reproductive organs are inherently still based on our quadapedial ancestry, where "doggy style"(descriptive term) intercourse for reproduction was the "natural by design" position, when in this position the erect penis slides up between the labia minora and the smaller less ramped part of the penis gland will lodge in the fold of skin on the vagina created where the labia majora and labia minora meet, it is held there directly at the opening of the vagina, the foreskin is to retain moisture in this area to facilitate entry, as entry takes place the foreskin will be pushed back over the gland and held back there by the corona to prevent it moving forward and interfering with the path of ejectulation, the gland or more so the corona is not a scoop to pull other semen out of the vagina, normal modus operandi of intercourse for reproduction is insert once till ejectulation then remove, not put in, pull out like scooping dirt out of a bucket. Due to the design of the vigina based on our quadapedial evolutionary path you will notice this places the cervix at the bottom of the viginal cavity when in a "doggy style" mating position as the woman lowers her front body position gravity will pull her internals forward this helps to open up the viginal area inside to allow the ejeculate to have a free path to the well created by the cervix to catch sperm and aid their journey into the uterus area to meet the egg, a larger penis is not going to enter the cervix to shorten the distance any sperm must take beyond the cervix to reach the egg, it will make the path of the ejeculate shorter but it wont make any path by the sperm shorter compared to any size penis ejeculating onto the cervix well. There are animals in nature which use their penises to cause abortions of offspring from older alpha males, when they become the Alpha Male of the group, ie: like Zebras, but this is hardly what could be considered "for" or "aids" reproduction. While i could add further information on matters like where you mention arousal or discuss the changes in the fluid excreations from the cervix during the normal cycles of reproductive organ maintenance and readiness i don't want what i have said to lead away from the OP's topic It is also known that sperm from any male can be placed in any egg, once the nuclei of the egg has been removed and this will allow for reproduction of a different species within a host "mother", ie: from a male human, using either the female or male sperm, could then be placed into a pig or cow egg that has had its nucleus removed and once placed back into the host "mother" will allow for the gestation of the new human being, though artificial sperm can be created through the use of female or stem cells, this sperm must be used in a natural human egg containing the human nuclei and placed into the native female of the egg for it to produce a human being.

I came across a study many years ago which showed how people of higher than average IQ had a higher susceptibility and degree of difficulty in dealing with or overcoming issues suffered in childhood, the study showed those with a 130+ and particularly those with 140+ IQ's required far more effort on behalf of the person and the specialists during treatment and assistance in helping to resolve or overcome many of the adverse conditions which arose from childhood experiences. It did not show these people were afflicted to any greater degree than those of normal IQ levels in terms of severity of conditions, however it did show how those of higher IQ had views which were highly defined and included broader scopes of involvement used in assessment and application as to how they related to situations and outcomes, also presenting how within this higher level of intellectualization were created the degree in difficulty and extra effort required by the person and need for extended treatment/s used to alleviate the conditions. The result did show those of IQ's in the 130+ and particularly those in 140+ region were more likely to be adversely affected through issues in childhood, the effects of which would persist longer and required more effort to overcome, there seems little reconciliation from the study which concluded, they required environments which are more caring nurturing and stable in early developmental years as a preventative measure for the situation. .... which i'm sure everyone on FDR just gave a big *rolls eyes*, as to the obviousness of the recommendation. Just reading the posts in this section its clear how well the 2nd paragraph i put aligns with how intellectual people will see so many things they consider to be part of, or help to define a situation, with the number of people saying.. I think question X is to... or.. there should be questions related to X included... to quantify or give more value to the questionnaire. And while none of my post might help or be relative in trying to bring more to FDR or defining a target audience, i can say for myself it was about hoping to meet people who were thinking about and willing to discuss issues which i have found not too many people in the general public cared for or were able to hold communications at a level of inquiry or understanding which was beyond what most get off TV or without digressing into meaningless argument. There are not many places like FDR where someone can come and communicate with others in an environment of respect towards others, at a level way beyond what most even bother to give consideration on a range of diverse subject, i know FDR certainly helps me feel "i'm not alone" in the issues raised and the views presented here in a thoughtful and logical way, by those of FDR.

As Mangus shows here it is part of the natural biological process of species reproduction, would an egg laid by a chicken be considered a parasite? Consider its meaning, compare the gestation period of a person to a true parasite like a tapeworm, the worm lays its egg this is transported to the host, once inside the host they gestate in the egg, hatch and then lives within the host for the entirety of their life cycle deriving its nutrients from the host and needing to be hosted for survival after gestation, whether symbiotic or not. The person gestates and leaves the bearer it does not remain "hosted", it becomes and lives as its own separate entity. Your example of the "lung dweller" would most likely come under part of normal biological construction, just as the myriad of bacterial and biological organisms that exist within our bodies are part of what makes it work, most of them are needed and beneficial, it is only when they are detrimental they become redefined as "parasites", like worms, mites and others, these cause stress on the system which lead to many of the imbalances of symmetry within human bodies due to their nutrient consumption and toxin release at the hosts expense. Hopefully you can see the difference between a fetal stage as part of that species biological reproduction and a parasite. I can align with Stefan's use of "parasite" in the context of Government creating dept at the expense of those yet to be born, it is parasitical, i can not see how someone, unless in a purely derogatory sense or malaligned mental projection of lifes process of reproduction could align a fetus with a parasite.

Phew!!! I'm glad i was on track with what you had presented. My thanks to you for finding some value in what i have said, inherently i guess we feel much the same about the issue, hence why you raised it and why i tried to provide input. You are correct with the analogy of the oscilloscope to verify a color, it would be a simple way to nullify variations, if only things could be so simple in many other areas my use of schrodinger's cat was really in a "how" context of discussing things, one generally has to relay in terms of the "cat being both alive and dead at the same time" to define or prove something, more in relation to what you had said about falsifying to prove true(kind of jest on my behalf), not the literal reason for the creation of the "scenario" or use was meant to expose or destroy. I could have said something like "we play cat in the box" but i figured most might not get what was meant, oh well, hope this clarifies it. I was not out to pick at data or possibilities from their use, hence no comment on like you pointed to "perpetual motion", i think the issue what you raised is above and beyond that, i was out to express concerns i felt relevant to the how's and possible why's in the way relevance and acceptance is applicable in the use and collection of information, especially when purely statistical data can be so easily manipulated to validate outcomes(not something i'm a fan of). I didn't want to turn this into a discussion of physics, math's or a subject related to those things as i mentioned above i felt you raise and expressed a concern that is above those in a content, yet is easily exposed through those areas. I really liked what you said and put here, i believe there is SO MUCH MORE TO LIFE than what has already been uncovered and this has me in pursuit of understanding and knowledge from wherever i feel Truth may be revealed...even if it has only me more convinced i'm on the right path.

RR i think you have done well in what you have presented to what i would view as "the acceptance or adherence value, in the use of knowledge or application of principles", as you have pointed out much of what is used empirically are based on theories which inherently are not absolutes, likewise with many words, they present a context the meaning of which often has variation at each use and interpretation by another. An example of this is in the way each sees colors, while many see a color differently the waveform may be derived of that color and presented to all and this will show they are all seeing the same description, while with words it is not as easily resolved in their use, as they can have many different applications within their use, ie: their definition and use from a legal, scientific or dictionary can vary their meaning and application. As you pointed out much of the empirically used or should it be said "agreed to" and used information carries validity within a confined or narrowed field or view with application of the principal, E=mc2 and the laws of thermodynamics both suggest as Tesla put it "energy is ever present", while many rely on the theories of relativity or special relativity and many other theories used as support of conclusions, they seemly overlook or disregard the outcomes within application, like dimensions and other applications like "string theory" outcomes derived from the use of these agreed to formulas and the fact they are only theories. It is known many of these theories come to points where they cease to work or expose their flaws(for lack of better description) at certain levels of application, like of an atom's structure and seeming defiance of the "rule", or when expanded to "black holes", and this is where i feel you are trying to expose and explore from what you have presented in regard to the value of or collection of information, with respect to adherence of direction where knowledge may be obtained for use or in regard to weight of credibility given in application. You mention duality and while it seems for everything there is "created" an equal opposite, like, matter / anti-matter, hot / cold and good / evil, this somewhat creates a "scale" for things to be given a relative objective or subjective use or weight of significance, like hot or cold really becomes situational, just as good and evil are considered opposite ends of the scale, with words it seems they are placed on a scale as to their meaning, they become somewhere between good and evil, this individual "scale" placement can make some reject or accept a word and a definition considered good or bad. It would become very hard to make a non dual approach as we often have to play with "schrodinger's cat" when discussing things, people can often "switch off" or reject things at one word due to the connotations it invokes in them, yet in trying to relay a "foundation" or "principle" it can often be hard to describe what might cause someone to do something or pursue their direction, even if it is in the face of all odds, is it intuition, belief or faith that someone steps from where they are, it would be like trying to write a description of "fair play", it would become a huge impracticality. Most of the discoveries of science and many other fields are formulated or stumbled upon by accident or by those not of the "regulated" opinions held by many of these areas or held within the current structure of these fields of endeavor, take for example the recent discovery of the Chestahedron, what can we say it was that caused this person to go completely against all of what was known and thought to be complete in forms known and discoverable and agreed to by the whole of science and physics, surely it wasn't ignorance, he had to somehow suspect there was something yet to be revealed and he proved it. To go through and try remove or change the use of words for political correctness would surely lead to many problems, i mean history would really need to be rewritten if we want to be politically correct, would the discovery of America be considered politically correct if we look at the word discovery in relation to how it is historically presented, it would seemingly suggest no-one was there or knew about the land before Columbus happened upon it or laid claim to it. For me personally I do not think using the discussion between you and Stefan is an attack on Stefan, its use allows for ease of definition in what you are presenting and saves creation of a purely hypothetical scenario to present the issue from, everyone can see/hear all what is involved and in essence it makes things easier to help comprehend the situation. It does seem unbalanced to allow validity of investigation of meaning from a dream by someone, which it is know to be from a release of DMT while asleep, but to give no credibility or to reject other intuitive pursuits like tarot readings or astrology, can a conscious use of DMT and any inspiration gained from the experience be considered plausible or given the same value as a sleep state DMT experience. RR I hope i have been able to grasp what you are referring to in what you have presented and if not i hope you will be able to help me understand and correct my context.

my relationship with my parents was and is nonexistent.

Welcome, you are fortunate to have come to such a realisation and take a stance to make changes and an outcome you desire, while still relatively young.

Hi Patrick, with your parents did you find they didn't want to listen or accept your position or outlook when trying to preset it to them, or did you decide it was better if you just walked away and let them be as they are, for your own peace and strength to continue to develop? am right with you about it being great to find a place where one can mingle with other of like mindedness. Be Well

Hello, Firstly i would like the thank Stefan and anyone involved with FDR, and Everyone here. Why am i here?, because i believed there is a better way than how things are currently being done atm, i felt all too often those around me were far more interested in the color of Brad Pitts underwear for today or meaningless sports team news, i've always felt if people paid as much interest in political "teams" as they did with sports then society would be in a far better position. I don't agree to the use violence in any form, i have always felt communication can overcome any obstacle and truth above all else can make things far better for all involved. Am i an angel -- not at all, do i make mistakes -- i sure do, am i willing to change -- i know its needed and i work to understand and better myself for everyone involved, am i willing to stand up for what i believe is right -- that's why i'm here I hoped to meet others who wanted to make change happen and let those around us know there is a better way if we all can pause for a look or are willing to have a really "good think" and discussion about things, i hope for a future that will look back and see i/we did not agree how things are today and i/we stood up to be counted as those willing to be and do what was needed for change to happen in the best possible way i/we had available, to think, share and express what we feel will make things how i/we believe they should be. Well i need to set the coordinates for the next "star jump" , will be looking forward to communicating and learning for as many here as i get to read, meet and hear from... Be Well, OzTrAlien

Starting from a UAP where gestation within the female/mother is the Natural method of reproduction, anything other becomes unnatural in the reproductive path. Putting aside the "tall asian" for now of pregnancy through rape, lack of understanding and divine conception*wink wink* we can say sexual intercorse is part of the Natural reproduction process, whereby engagement in sexual intercorse will lead to procreation/reproduction. Now we have the UPB where those who partake in consentual sexual intercorse are fully aware of the consequences, "tall asians" aside for now, the UPB in this would be, if not wanting to produce offspring don't engage in intercorse, this leaves those engaging in sexual intercorse where pregnancy is unwanted in a position of playing "russian roulette", putting aside all claims or methods of "prevention used" it still can not be equated to UPB, i hear the "what abouts" creeping in right now, like for an "expression of love" the "mutual pleasure" or just straight out "pleasure" of it all, *click* guess you got lucky this time, in reality to construct around that framework is the same as a drug users saying its just for the "high", indeed it is, it needs to be seen in a Natural light where sexual intercorse is for procreation. At this point we can bring the "tall asian" into the room, the UAP/UPB construct present what can only be deemed natural or real in outcomes and choices any variations are now up for individual assessment on what can be deemed as "Acceptable", the difference being that what takes the situation away from Universal application, and now needs to be totally viewed from an individual evaluation to find if it can be seen as Acceptable practice or an Acceptable outcome under UAP/UPB. Is a fetus a parasite? "parasite" by definition has an accepted symbiotic relationship, a "two way street", it inhabits the host it doesn't leave, a fetus on the other hand is gestated non "symbiotic" it gives nothing back to the bearer a "one way street", it leaves the body of the bearer...and becomes the next great step for Humanity and a whole bundle of "fun" for the parents. Be Well.