IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

On the Value of Truth [was Re: A Theory of Neuropeptides?]

k p Collins kpaulc at [----------]earthlink.net
Wed Jan 14 07:44:10 EST 2004


Case in-point:

'secrecy'

You know - like what happened 'yesterday'
with respect to the contents of Mr. O'Neil's
newly-published Book that questions the
'decision' process through which the War
in Iraq was precipitated.

Authorities are Threatening Mr. O'Neil
with prosecution with respect to his handling
of 'secret' documents.

First, there was no Secret. Anyone who only
stayed on top of the News could see, all along,
what was happening.

But I want to discuss the 'moving toward' 'secrecy'
that's been rampant within Governmental machina-
tions, and =not= only here in the U. S.

Can't anyone see that the very fact that there are
'strong reactions' with respect to so-called "disclosures"
of, supposedly, "secret" stuff, that that flat-out SHOUTS
Awareness that this or that, in the 'secret', 'moves away
from' Truth with respect to all-of-Humanity?

I mean, reactions to the 'disclosing' of 'secrets' literally
declare that there's stuff in-there that folks in this Gov-
ernment =Know= is 'combustible'?

I mean, 'secrecy' Declares Treachery, doesn't it?

Yup.

And it Declares that Truth is, in fact, being actively -
volitionally - 'moved away from'.

So what all this 'hype' about, supposed, "secrecy"
does is tip-folks-off to the fact that absence-of-Truth
is the 'guiding-principle'.

It's not-Truth that does such, but absence-of-Truth.

So, it's 'hilarious' - =everything= that's 'supposed-to-
be' with respect to 'secrecy' actually does the stuff
that 'secrecy', supposedly, 'prevents'.

If 'secrecy' is not =the ultimate self-defeating stuff,
it's right-up-there with the worst such stuff.

Why do such?

In the name of 'defending' The Constitution?

All 'secrecy' is is revved-up 'moving away from' Truth.

You know?

What's 'wrong' with doing good-stuff, right in the light
of 'day'?

What's 'wrong' with Leading =that= way?

Nothing.

It's easy to do.

And it's Fun to boot.

Be-cause it enlists folks' own 'desires' to do good-stuff
in their own Living.

'secrecy' turns such on it's head, and, thereby,
forsakes folks' collective Strength.

And folks 'wonder' why everything's so 'hard'?

Come on!

Wake up!

k. p. collins

"k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:WNJMb.5312$q4.208 at newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "k p Collins" <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:wGsMb.4017$q4.714 at newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > [...]
>
> > To 'live' without Truth is 'Death', itself.
> > [...]
>
> One 'hour', =Lived= in-Truth is worth more than
> =any= amount of 'living' in absence-of-Truth.
>
> Think about it, in absence-of-Truth, Living is
> Impossible.
>
> In absence-of-Truth, all that's Possible is
> 'blindly'-automated 'mechanics' - Biological
> 'robotics'.
>
> And 'robotics' cannot 'see-beyond' what's
> in its rote-enforced 'mechanics' - so it keeps-
> on 'playing the same old song' - over and
> over again, 'unable' to see that it's Destroying
> everything, including itself.
>
> It's 'blind'. It cannot see WDB2T, and, there-
> fore, cannot break-out of it's 'program'.
>
> These are the Costs that absence-of-Truth
> extracts.
>
> And what's Sorrowfully-'hilarious' is that the
> ability to 'move toward' Truth has been right-
> there, in the Biology, all along, but the 'supposed-
> to-be's, handed-down intergenerationally via
> 'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization
> "dynamic subordinate coupling" [AoK, Ap5]
> "templating", have routinely 'displaced' its
> functionality.
>
> The ability to see Truth, 'tossed-aside' in
> favor of 'blind'-automation.
>
> And "Woe! to any who do anything about it".
>
> The 'blind'-automation calls them "enemy",
> and then does what's 'supposed-to-be' done
> to 'enemies'.
>
> My Life is an Experiment with respect to
> the Hypothesis that Humans can, in fact,
> Be what's right-there, in-them, to Be.
>
> It's why I 'move toward' Truth, period.
>
> ken [k. p. collins]
>
>





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net