Right at the beginning?
You hear people routinely say with great verve as if there is nothing wrong, “right at the beginning” or “right at the bottom” or “right at the centre” when it is nonsense or false because there cannot be anything right or left or wrong at the beginning, bottom or centre.
“Right” is a style of speech people copy mindlessly from others and it is intended to falsely exaggerate how great something is.
Something can only be at the beginning or bottom or centre, never right at the centre and the fact that ordinary people, even those who pride themselves to have great understanding do not realize reflects that they do not understand what they say or hear.
Just as they think they understand what they say or hear here and they do not, what they call their understanding elsewhere may be myth than reality.
Even as I point out above there will be those who will argue with me because they have advanced false perception that ‘right at the centre’ is meaningful, there is nothing false or meaningless about ‘right’.
THERE IS NOTHING RIGHT OR WRONG OR LEFT AT THE CENTRE, BOTTOM OR BEGINNING OF SOMETHING AND IT IS A FALSE STYLE OF SPEECH TO EMOTIONALLY EXAGGERATE SOMETHING AND THE FACT THAT PEOPLE SEE NOTHING WRONG EVEN AFTER I NOW POINT REFLECTS THEIR ADVANCED FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION THEY DO NOT BELIEVE.
Why Razak abetted in Altanturya’s murder:
In his affidavit, Razak admitted he met with the chief inspector in Najib’s office after Altanturya’s abduction and asked him what happened.
You would not expect Razak to divulge precisely what he was interested about the disappeared Altanturya but the fact that he is aware of her disappearance, he is curious about her fate, she was abducted from his house late at night after a mysterious call requested her to return alone to the house (perhaps on promise to meet her alone), indicates that Razak in all likelihood played a key part or abetted in her murder and the decision to acquit him is a miscarriage of justice.
Looking at the car:
Quote: Looking at the car – saloon and Avant estate versions go on sale at the same time – it’s hard to notice many differences from the previous generation, but a few subtle enhancements have been made.
There is no need to say looking at the car, it is a style of speech and saying much about nothing. Just say there are few visual differences compared with the previous generation apart from a few enhancements.
What has – saloon and Avant estate versions go on sale at the same time – got to do with what is being said that it is hard to tell the differences visually between the previous and new models?
It reflects a scatter brain that he or she inserts something that flies off at a tangent from the subject at hand that people do not believe will end in insanity.
THERE IS NO NEED TO TALK OF ‘LOOKING AT THE CAR’, JUST SAY THE NEW CAR LOOKS ALMOST THE SAME AS THE OLD AND WHAT HAS - saloon and Avant estate versions go on sale at the same time – GOT TO DO WITH THE SUBJECT AT HAND THAT THE NEW CAR IS VISUALLY VERY SIMILAR TO THE OLD ONE?
YOU WILL BE FOOLISH TO TREAT THE OPINIONS OF SUCH A PERSON AS OBJECTIVE AND ACCEPTED WITHOUT QUESTION.
Does Bush bashing bother the president?
This is the headline of a Newsweek story and it is always false.
It is an flippant way of asking properly, “Is the president hurt by the Bush bashing?”
There can only be one true answer to the question and it is that he is certainly hurt by the bashing even if he denies it and puts on a brave face.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT ANY ORDINARY EMOTIONAL PERSON THAT INCLUDES BUSH IS NOT HURT BY THE BRICKBATS IN HIS DIRECTION NO MATTER HOW HE MIGHT DENY OR SAY HE DOES NOT GIVE A DAMN AND SO IT IS A FRIVOLOUS WORTHLESS QUESTION TO ASK BECAUSE THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE TRUE ANSWER.
Recognition not understanding:
What people call their understanding (of things) may be simply their recognition and recognition has nothing to do with understanding, does not need understanding because it only requires reasonable perception of two entities (eg the object and the word representing it) and memorizing the association between two entities.
Thus if their understanding is their recognition of things then they have no understanding which would be in line with their behaviour in perceiving (how and what they see and hear), thinking, speaking and doing being rehashed and they are therefore biological robots and robots and computers never understand anything they say or do, they merely say or do what they are told, they cannot say or do what they are not told or programmed to do even when it is possible to do or say so.
NOWADAYS COMPUTERS AND ROBOTS MAY SAY OR DO VERY COMPLEX THINGS (EG DRIVE A CAR TO ARRIVE SAFELY AT A DESTINATION OR PLAY CHESS AND BEAT A HUMAN GRAND MASTER) BUT THERE IS NO UNDERSTANDING IN THEM, THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND A THING THEY ARE DOING AND THEY ARE MERELY LIFELESSLY CARRYING OUT WHAT THEIR RULES PROGRAMS TELL THEM TO DO. BECAUSE WHATEVER THE ACTIVITIES OF HUMANS THAT CAN ONLY BE THEIR PERCEPTIONS, THINKING, SPEAKING AND DOING HAVE A STEREOTYPED SUBSTANCE AND STYLE THAT CAN ONLY OCCUR BECAUSE THEY ARE REHASHED AND THEREFORE THEY ARE ROBOTS IN THEIR ENTIRETY, THEY TOO IN THEORY HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING, DO NOT REQUIRE UNDERSTANDING TO FUNCTION AND SURVIVE IN A SOPHISTICATED WAY JUST AS COMPUTERS AND ROBOTS CAN SURVIVE VERY WELL SO LONG AS YOU SUPPLY THEM POWER AND KEEP THEM IN REPAIR.
And what is this recognition that people may mistake to be their understanding?
When a person sees an apple and he recognizes it (in written and spoken form) as something called an apple, he may mistake that he understands but understanding has nothing to do with it, he is merely perceiving the object called ‘apple’ and associating or linking it (recognizing) with the written word ‘apple’ or spoken word ‘apple’. What is involved in the process is a perception of the object ‘apple’, the perception of the written and spoken word ‘apple’ and tying them together or recognizing the association and this has nothing to do with understanding or reasoning.
Just as you can recognizing the associations between physical objects like cat and dog and words that are used to label them you can learn to recognize words and the activities that are associated with them like ‘take’, ‘throw’, ‘cut’, ‘smile’ and this has nothing to do with understanding but it is merely a process of perceiving the activity that embraces ‘take’ and recognizing and linking it with the word that means and tell you to ‘take’.
SOME PEOPLE CANNOT READ OR WRITE AND SOME DON’T UNDERSTAND LANGUAGE BUT THE MASTERY OF LANGUAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH UNDERSTANDING BUT IT IS A PROCESS OF RECOGNIZING OR ASSOCIATING AN OBJECT OR ACTIVITY WITH A SPOKEN OR WRITTEN WORD AND THEN COMMITTING THAT ASSOCIATION RELIABLY TO MEMORY TO BE RETRIEVED IN THE FUTURE SO THAT ONE CAN COMMUNICATE WITH ANOTHER USING WORDS. IT IS ACTUALLY A MECHANICAL PROCESS DEVOID OF REASON OR UNDERSTAND. SO LONG AS YOU CAN RECOGNIZE THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN WORDS AND OBJECTS OR ACTIVITIES YOU CAN CARRY OUT INSTRUCTIONS AND THUS BECOME A ROBOT INSTRUCTED BY PROGRAMS OTHER PEOPLE ISSUE TO YOU (EG YOUR COMMANDING OFFICER) OR YOU ISSUE TO YOURSELF FROM YOUR MENTAL RULE BOOK.
With the ability to hear and read and ‘understand’ (in truth mechanically recognizing) words spoken it opens new vistas for communication that are infinitely greater avenues for programming or fashioning rules logic or command logic.
RATHER THAN THE AQUISITION AND MASTERY OF LANGUAGE AS A SYMBOL OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF UNDERSTANDING, UNDERSTANDING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ACQUIRING AND USING LANGUAGE, IT IS MERELY THE ACQUISITON OF THE ABILITY TO ASSOCIATE AN OBJECT OR ACTIVITY WITH A WRITTEN OR SPOKEN WORD, MECHANICAL MEMORIZATION OF THAT ASSOCIATION AND MECHANICAL SUBSEQUENT RETRIEVAL TO ENABLE ONE TO COMMUNICATE WITH ANOTHER. INSTEAD THE DEVELOPMENT OF LANGUAGE OPENS NEW VISTAS FOR MINDLESS COMMAND OR PROGRAMMED LOGIC OR THE CARRYING OUT OF ACTIONS FROM VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS STORED IN ONE’S HEAD OR ISSUED BY OTHERS.
Thus if you think that just because you can read what I say you have understanding, you may be right or wrong, what you call your understanding is merely your mechanical recognition of the associations of the words you see and the activities or objects they represent that is all about perception, memorization and retrieval that does not involve understanding, does not need understanding which is a higher faculty of which few beings in this world possess, even in minimal quantities.
Do you think IBM’s big blue understands chess?
IBM’s big blue computer beat the world’s champion grand master in chess recently.
Do you think the machine understands what it is doing and understands the chess?
It may be true the machine understands chess and understands what it is doing or it may be true it does not understand chess or what it is doing and it is merely carrying it out as it is ordered to do by its programs.
Just as a sophisticated computer that does not understand what it is doing can beat even the world’s chess champion or hold him to a draw, even so it is possible for human robots to carry out highly sophisticated tasks in speech and actions without genuine understanding.
The difference is that in addition, human robots possess consciousness and perceptions (can feel pain and pleasure) but that consciousness is not there to understand anything but merely act as disk jockey when needed and be the voyeur vicariously experiencing what it robotically carried out.
This consciousness present is not engaged in understanding, understanding is alien to it which is why most, even those who like to think themselves as great intellect are difficult if not impossible to teach, for they do not understand what is truly good for themselves and others. Their mental programs tell them smiling, liking, disliking, joking and style are meaningful and beneficial to themselves and others and they are totally under their spells doomed to future insanity but they do not understand.
Seeing with style:
People do not see live specific for the occasion but they see with a style that is consistent in them and differs from other fellow robots and what they always see and don’t see too follow a pattern that is consistent in them and differs in others.
For instance people subconsciously seek to see or hear things they like to see or hear (eg high class objects, pretty girls, tasty food, watches, cars) and they avoid seeing things they don’t like to see (eg poverty, suffering, the ugly side of life). They may not even be aware that they are pre-selecting or biasing what they see and hear, so automated is it and they are distracted to be aware of the selective nature of what they see.
In addition there is always a style in how they see eg how they use force to prolong, change speed and strength (darting eyes, looking through the corners of their eyes).
THUS EACH STYLISH PERSON NEVER JUST SEES, HE SEES WITH A CONSISTENT STYLE THAT COMES FROM A PROGRAM IN THEIR MINDS TELLING THEM HOW TO SEE AND HE SEES THINGS HE LIKES TO SEE AND AVOID THINGS HE DOESN’T LIKE WHICH ALSO COMES FROM A PROGRAM IN HIS MIND TELLING HIM WHAT TO LOOK FOR AND WHAT TO AVOID AND THUS WHAT HE SEES OR THE SUBSTANCE HE SEES TOO IS BIASED, PREJUDICED.
You understand so how you come you did not understand?
You say even insist you are capable of understanding so how come you did not understand when you say or hear others say that ‘right at the bottom of the hill is a temple’ is false because there is nothing right or left or wrong about a temple at the bottom of a hill, there is only ‘at the bottom of the hill is a temple’?
Even your perceptions are false so how can you understand? Before you can truly understand anything you must be able to perceive truly and if your perceptions are false (you perceive like, smiling, joking are meaningful) how can you truly understand anything?
And so it is that even sophisticated ones cannot see that there is constant forceful stretching of syllables, changing speed and loudness in their speech let alone that they can understand that just this is the root to the stress, restlessness, distraction, giddiness, hurt and sadness they must all experience.
This may be the reason why Jesus spoke of those who are chosen out of this world because all beings have a nature and if your nature is without seeing and understanding, in addition you have ill will and are attached to the senses (sensuality) then you are not chosen but left to wallow in this mire you call paradise.
From the actions of those who have read what I wrote, I know that even those who are very educated do not understand what I say otherwise they will not continue behaving like they do and so it is that many are just mindless robots doomed for another eternity of building up piles of skeletons that the Buddha said is as high as a mountain and shedding their own blood from their throats being cut that is as vast as an ocean.
A world of force not reason:
This is a world of force and false reason never true reason and heaven is a world of true reason and understanding and no force. Because force is blind and seizes the being, beings in this world are blind and cannot see what is heavenly whilst beings in heaven can always see this world because they see and understand and therefore they see this world and the heavenly world.
This is a world where beings always like and dislike to an extent far greater than their somnolent, distracted or scattered awareness tells them. And like and dislike is merely the attractive and repulsive stirring of their mental forces that is line with this being a world of force devoted to and worshipping force that is blind.
AS A RESULT OF LIKING AND DISLIKING THAT IS CONSTANT AND JUST THE STIRRING OF THEIR MENTAL FORCES ATTRACTIVELY OR REPULSIVELY, THEIR MINDS ARE SEIZED BY FORCE, ARE SLAVES TO FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND BLINDS AND SO THEY CANNOT SEE AND CANNOT UNDERSTAND.
Are you upset?
Are you upset by what I previously said?
There will be many who will be upset by what I said that they do not like because they emotional feel it deprecates them.
Understanding, do you understand your upset is nothing more than your anger perhaps hurt at what I said that does not flatter you?
Understanding, do you understand that this anger and hurt is all about the stirring of mental force that is not only meaningless but inflicts mental suffering on yourself and also conditions yourself to become increasingly easy to be upset that will end in insanity?
What I say can either be true or false. If you see and know what I say is wrong or false, then you just say it is false or wrong, what is there to stir yourself to suffer and condition yourself to suffering by being upset (angry or hurt)?
AREN’T YOU A FOOL AND MASOCHIST TO BE UPSET OR ANGRY BY WHAT I OR ANYBODY SAYS? WHAT USE IS IT TO BE UPSET? WHAT MEANING IS THERE IN BEING UPSET, IN STIRRING YOUR MENTAL FORCE REPULSIVELY?
Vatican reintroduces clocking in
By Duncan Kennedy |
The Vatican has reintroduced a system of clocking in, nearly 50 years after it was last phased out.
Senior clerics will have to swipe plastic cards when entering and leaving, all in a drive to improve time-keeping and efficiency.
Comment: Efficiency that is dependent on clocking in is not genuine efficiency but enforced rule bound efficiency in which the clocking person is a robot doing as he is told, namely clocking in as he is told.
And if you will come to work on time just because you fear being found out, just to appease the clock then you are a hypocrite.
CLOCKING IN IS A RITUAL AND FAITH AND PRACTICE IN RITUALS AND RULES IS ACCORDING TO THE BUDDHA ONE OF THREE LOWER FETTERS TO FUTURE WOE.
DO NOT COERCE OTHERS TO BE EFFICIENT, LET THEM BE EFFICIENT ON THEIR OWN VIOLITION.
Clocking in is a rule:
Clocking in is a rule and the act of following it is a ritual.
Once formulated, the rule ‘clocking in’ becomes the rigid fixed master in which its obedient followers are slaves following it with force not reason.
‘Clocking in’ efficiency is enforced efficiency not true understanding knowing why efficiency.
NO ONE NEEDS ANY REASON OR UNDERSTANDING TO FOLLOW RULES BUT THEY NEED FORCE. SO LONG AS A BEING IS ABLE TO PERCEIVE THE SPOKEN OR WRITTEN WORDS OF A RULE AND RECOGNIZE (NOT UNDERSTAND) THEIR ASSOCIATIONS WITH ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN THEN THEY ONLY NEED FORCE TO CARRY OUT THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE RULES AND THEY ARE ROBOTS FOLLOWING A RULE.
A person who understands does not need rules to tell or order if to be punctual but he understands he is under employment and should come at the stated time or there are counterparties he has obligations to by coming on time.
Why bother to save when you can spend it?
The fact that the person said that implies that what is said is logical or understandable when it is false, reckless and controlled madness that will end in madness and the person has no understanding and what understanding he perceives is his misunderstanding.
You don’t spend just for the sake of spending which becomes a mindless addiction but you spend only if there is reason to spend and there is no reason to spend, you save for who knows one day you might need some spare cash.
So what the person is doing is not appealing to the reader’s genuine but his emotion or force because spending is driven by desire or blind force and becomes addictive.
Spending is the opposite of saving and because spending is gratifying (more thrilling to spend) and saving is boring and demands discipline or denial, just because you can spend, you should not bother to save and give in to the impulse or force to spend and that is false or mad logic.
It is a form of reason but false:
“Why bother to save when you can spend” is a form of logic or reasoning that the person obviously subscribes to and that he wants to share with others or recruit others but it is false, can be examined and proven to be crazy, not based on genuine reason but based on emotions (eg like for spending that is a proxy for force) not reason.
THUS THIS PERSON MAY THINK HE TOO CAN REASON, HAS REASON BUT IS FALSE REASON THAT MISTAKES FORCE AS THE BASIS OF HIS ACTION IN SPENDING TO BE UNDERSTANDING OR KNOWING WHY AS THE BASIS OF HIS ACTION TO SPEND INSTEAD OF SAVE.
The importance, good and bad news about understanding:
The importance about understanding is that without understanding, the being will create for himself suffering now, greater intensified entrenched suffering later and because there is life after death, without understanding he is headed for even an eternity of weeping and gnashing of his teeth after being thrown into the furnace.
Unless you enjoy suffering stress, restlessness, distraction, giddiness, hurt & sadness that becomes more intense and chaotic in old age and you enjoy eternal punishment, then you should strive to acquire understanding.
The good news about not understanding is that it is not a natural state of a being’s mind but it has a cause that can be remedied. The bad news is that this cause is tenacious, almost implacable, will not let its victim go easily and unless the person has substantially attenuated this cause he will not experience a measure of understanding and just as this cause can be attenuated even eliminated, it can flare up again to engulf the foolish person and plunge him in darkness so that nothing shines through again.
What is the cause of a being not understanding?
The cause of a being not understanding is the mental force resident in his mind. All beings trapped in the lower realms that include the human state possess significant even violent mental force that is hard often impossible to placate and it is this mental force that is their masters and they are merely robots dancing to their mental force’s dictates or tunes.
By merely paying attention to identify the working of mental force and applying persistence to attenuate or efface its workings, the person will experience increasing understanding that if not arrested leads to final full effortless force free understanding.
Just as you can painstakingly whittle down the ferocity of your mental force, like a fire that can flare up anew from the ambers, mental force can re-grow in strength so that it increasingly seizes the mind until it is without understanding at all.
Not understanding is an enforced not natural state of a mind and it is only force, mental force that has force to enforce and maintain that not understanding and because it is force that enforces and maintains the not understanding, with the elimination of force acting on that mind, not understanding effortlessly lifts and the person then understands.
It is mental force through the potent cocktail of stress, restlessness and distraction that it generates that causes the person to be unable to understand.
It is mental force acting as like and dislike or the attractive or repulsive stirring of his mental force that are the receptionists to whatever happens to him rather than reason or understanding acting as the receptionist that makes him unable to understand whatever is happening.
It is mental force that is the puppeteer behind all his delusions either implanted by others or fabricated by himself that make him unable to understand. Delusions are plans or beliefs that are false but the deluded person perceive not just believe are true and it is the force behind these delusions that maintains these delusions even to unshakable extent. As a result of possessing delusions, perceiving and understanding what is false is true, the deluded person cannot understand what is true is true.
It is the five hindrances or obstructions of the mind that the Buddha described that makes a being not understand and when examined, all the five hindrances (covetous and worries about affairs of the world), ill will, restlessness, doubt and uncertainty, sloth and torpor) are all proxies of mental force. In other words it is mental force that is behind the five hindrances that detain beings in not understanding and therefore suffering.
When a person becomes very angry or agitated, he becomes totally divorced from reason, inebriated, he does not comprehend what people tell him and may throw all caution to the wind and engage himself in a fight that may result in his death and it is not just here than mental force renders him unable to understand or reason but always mental force is the puppeteer either in the background or the foreground preventing true understanding from arising.
A robot never has understanding; it only does what it is instructed to do and all ordinary stylish people are robots in whatever they perceive, think, speak and do because there is a consistent stereotyped style and substance that cannot be produced live but must be rehashed and they are therefore biological robots. It is again mental force that is the drive for whatever is the substance and style of their perceptions, thoughts, speech and actions and so by permitting themselves to behave as robots or to record and rehash from record whatever they want to say or do, it is mental force that is blind and without understanding that is the basis of their recorded rehashed actions.
THUS ‘NOT UNDERSTANDING’ IS NOT A NATURAL STATE OF ANY MIND BUT IT IS AN UNNATURAL ENFORCED OR FORCE DRIVEN OR MAINTAINED MENTAL STATE.
BECAUSE NOT UNDERSTANDING IS MAINTAINED BY FORCE, IT CAN BE CURED AND THE SIMPLE AND ONLY CURE IS TO ELIMINATE MENTAL FORCE AND YOU CAN ONLY DO SO IF YOU PAY ATTENTION TO PERSISTENTLY ELIMINATE USING FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS.
BECAUSE FORCE IS CONDITIONING AND WHAT IS PAINSTAKINGLY DECONDITIONED CAN BE RECONDITIONED, IF THE FOOLISH BEING IS LACKDAISICAL, HE MAY RELAPSED TO BECOME RE-SEIZED BY MENTAL FORCE TO BECOME SEVERELY WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING AGAIN.
Pabhassara Suttas: Luminous
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why -- for him -- there is no development of the mind."
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed noble disciple discerns that as it actually is present, which is why for him there is development of the mind."
What I say is in accord with what the Buddha says above that the natural state of a mind is luminous or understanding but incoming defilements that are proxies of force (namely covetousness and anxieties about the world, ill will, doubt and uncertainty, restlessness and sloth and torpor) prevent understanding just as clouds obscure the moon.
Batman stunt death was an accident:
The death was never an accident but the result of the reckless way the car was driven perhaps in the name of capturing the most dramatic but ill advised shots for the movie, it may be the result of the recklessness or mindlessness of the driver or the person killed himself and so to rule that it was an accident, nobody is to be blamed or it cannot be foreseen or prevented is false.
MOST IF NOT ALL ROAD ACCIDENTS ARE NEVER ACCIDENTS BUT THE RESULT OF THE RECKLESS, MINDLESS INATTENTIVE WAYS PEOPLE DRIVE DRIVEN BY EMOTION RATHER THAN GUIDED BY REASON AND TO CALL THEM ACCIDENTS IS TO SPEAK FALSELY FOR THEY ARE NO ACCIDENTS BUT ENTIRELY TO BE EXPECTED FROM THE WAY THE PERSON DROVE.
JUST AS HERE THEY THINK THEY UNDERSTAND AND SPEAK OR HEAR THE TRUTH, THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND AND HEAR AND SPEAK WHAT IS FALSE, IN THE SAME WAY THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND ELESEWHERE AND IT IS A DELUSION THEY DO.
A crash not accident:
It is a crash not accident.
To call a crash an accident is to speak falsely if the crash was caused by reckless, inattentive or absent minded or otherwise blameworthy driving.
IT IS CORRECT TO CALL ROAD ACCIDENTS CRASHES AND FALSE TO CALL ROAD CRASHES ACCIDENTS.
An excuse does not exonerate anyone:
Jesus said you will be judged for every careless word you say and so to claim carelessness is to proffer an excuse that does not to exonerate you from accountability.
To say something is an accident is to give an excuse or false reason for something happening and because it (excuse) is a false reason it does not exonerate the person and those who perceive that their excuses exonerate them have advanced false perception that what is false can exonerate them or absolve them from blame.
RATHER THAN EXONERATE SOMEONE AN EXCUSE COMPOUNDS HIS BLAME BECAUSE HE INCURS KARMA FOR THE ORIGINAL ACCIDENT AND HE INCURS FURTHER KARMA FOR PROFFERING AN EXCUSE OR FALSE REASON FOR WHAT HAPPENED AND AS A RESULT OF PERCEIVING WHAT IS FALSE IS VALID HE IS CULTIVATING FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION.
TO CLAIM CARELESSNESS IS TO PROFFER AN EXCUSE AND IF YOU THINK THAT EXONERATES YOU, YOU HAVE FALSE PERCEPTION BECAUSE AN EXCUSE IS A FALSE REASON FOR SOMETHING AND THEREFORE DOES NOT EXONERATE YOU.
No comments:
Post a Comment