Sword is mightier than the pen

Sword is mightier than the pen:

Quote headline: Sword mightier than the pen as sixth journalist is killed.

You have false perception that will end in mad perception if you think the pen is mightier than the sword or the sword is mightier than the pen because both are false.

In any case might is about power or force that is blind and harmful and meaningless and thus it is harmful and speaking about blind force to say one is mightier than the other.

Just because the sixth journalist has been killed does not prove the sword is mightier and so you are practicing false logic and perception to say that just because another journalist is killed the sword is mightier than the pen (represented by the journalist).

THE SWORD IS NOT MIGHTIER THAN THE PEN NOR IS THE PEN MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD. IF YOU PERCEIVE IT AS SUCH YOU HAVE FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION.

MIGHT IS ABOUT FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND HARMFUL AND SO IT IS MEANINGLESS AND HARMFUL TO TALK ABOUT THE PEN BEING MIGHTIER.

IT IS FAR FETCHED THAT IS FLIRTING WITH MAD PERCEPTION TO SAY THAT JUST BECAUSE ANOTHER JOURNALIST HAS BEEN KILLED AND HE IS A WRITER THAT IT PROVES THE SWORD THAT KILLED HIM IS MIGHTIER.

 

Morgan Stanley not Exxon is the world’s biggest oil company:

According to this report, it is Morgan Stanley by ‘virtue’ of the future contracts it held, not Exxon Mobil that was the world’s biggest oil company.

What the report below state confirms what I surmised that it is speculators and not fundamentals that drove oil prices to stratospheric levels. Even as oil prices rose feverishly, supply was increasing and demand waning and fundamentals are merely excuses by the vested to justify rising prices and all the investment banks that stood to gain denied responsibility for the bullish forecasts by their analysts that encouraged more and more investors to jump into the oil market.

Did Speculation Fuel Oil Price Swings?

Jan. 11, 2009

---

(CBS) About the only economic break most Americans have gotten in the last six months has been the drastic drop in the price of oil, which has fallen even more precipitously than it rose. In a year's time, a commodity that was theoretically priced according to supply and demand doubled from $69 a barrel to nearly $150, and then, in a period of just three months, crashed along with the stock market.

So what happened? It's a complicated question, and there are lots of theories. But as correspondent Steve Kroft reports, many people believe it was a speculative bubble, not unlike the one that caused the housing crisis, and that it had more to do with traders and speculators on Wall Street than with oil company executives or sheiks in Saudi Arabia.

---

To understand what happened to the price of oil, you first have to understand the way it's traded. For years it has been bought and sold on something called the commodities futures market. At the New York Mercantile Exchange, it's traded alongside cotton and coffee, copper and steel by brokers who buy and sell contracts to deliver those goods at a certain price at some date in the future.

It was created so that farmers could gauge what their unharvested crops would be worth months in advance, so that factories could lock in the best price for raw materials, and airlines could manage their fuel costs. But more than a year ago those markets started to behave erratically. And when oil doubled to more than $147 a barrel, no one was more suspicious than Dan Gilligan.

As the president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, he represents more than 8,000 retail and wholesale suppliers, everyone from home heating oil companies to gas station owners.

When 60 Minutes talked to him last summer, his members were getting blamed for gouging the public, even though their costs had also gone through the roof. He told Kroft the problem was in the commodities markets, which had been invaded by a new breed of investor.

"Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the oil contracts in the futures markets are now held by speculative entities. Not by companies that need oil, not by the airlines, not by the oil companies. But by investors that are looking to make money from their speculative positions," Gilligan explained.

Gilligan said these investors don't actually take delivery of the oil. "All they do is buy the paper, and hope that they can sell it for more than they paid for it. Before they have to take delivery."

"They're trying to make money on the market for oil?" Kroft asked.

"Absolutely," Gilligan replied. "On the volatility that exists in the market. They make it going up and down."

He says his members in the home heating oil business, like Sean Cota of Bellows Falls, Vt., were the first to notice the effects a few years ago when prices seemed to disconnect from the basic fundamentals of supply and demand. Cota says there was plenty of product at the supply terminals, but the prices kept going up and up.

"We've had three price changes during the day where we pick up products, actually don't know what we paid for it and we'll go out and we'll sell that to the retail customer guessing at what the price was," Cota remembered. "The volatility is being driven by the huge amounts of money and the huge amounts of leverage that is going in to these markets."

About the same time, hedge fund manager Michael Masters reached the same conclusion. Masters' expertise is in tracking the flow of investments into and out of financial markets and he noticed huge amounts of money leaving stocks for commodities and oil futures, most of it going into index funds, betting the price of oil was going to go up.

Asked who was buying this "paper oil," Masters told Kroft, "The California pension fund. Harvard Endowment. Lots of large institutional investors. And, by the way, other investors, hedge funds, Wall Street trading desks were following right behind them, putting money - sovereign wealth funds were putting money in the futures markets as well. So you had all these investors putting money in the futures markets. And that was driving the price up."

In a five year period, Masters said the amount of money institutional investors, hedge funds, and the big Wall Street banks had placed in the commodities markets went from $13 billion to $300 billion. Last year, 27 barrels of crude were being traded every day on the New York Mercantile Exchange for every one barrel of oil that was actually being consumed in the United States.

"We talked to the largest physical trader of crude oil. And they told us that compared to the size of the investment inflows - and remember, this is the largest physical crude oil trader in the United States - they said that we are basically a flea on an elephant, that that's how big these flows were," Masters remembered.

Yet when Congress began holding hearings last summer and asked Wall Street banker Lawrence Eagles of J.P. Morgan what role excessive speculation played in rising oil prices, the answer was little to none. "We believe that high energy prices are fundamentally a result of supply and demand," he said in his testimony.

As it turns out, not even J.P. Morgan's chief global investment officer agreed with him. The same that day Eagles testified, an e-mail went out to clients saying "an enormous amount of speculation" ran up the price" and "140 dollars in July was ridiculous."

If anyone had any doubts, they were dispelled a few days after that hearing when the price of oil jumped $25 in a single day. That day was Sept. 22.

Michael Greenberger, a former director of trading for the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the federal agency that oversees oil futures, says there were no supply disruptions that could have justified such a big increase.

"Did China and India suddenly have gigantic needs for new oil products in a single day? No. Everybody agrees supply-demand could not drive the price up $25, which was a record increase in the price of oil. The price of oil went from somewhere in the 60s to $147 in less than a year. And we were being told, on that run-up, 'It's supply-demand, supply-demand, supply-demand,'" Greenberger said.

A recent report out of MIT, analyzing world oil production and consumption, also concluded that the basic fundamentals of supply and demand could not have been responsible for last year's run-up in oil prices. And Michael Masters says the U.S. Department of Energy's own statistics show that if the markets had been working properly, the price of oil should have been going down, not up.

"From quarter four of '07 until the second quarter of '08 the EIA, the Energy Information Administration, said that supply went up, worldwide supply went up. And worldwide demand went down. So you have supply going up and demand going down, which generally means the price is going down," Masters told Kroft.

"And this was the period of the spike," Kroft noted.

"This was the period of the spike," Masters agreed. "So you had the largest price increase in history during a time when actual demand was going down and actual supply was going up during the same period. However, the only thing that makes sense that lifted the price was investor demand."

Masters believes the investor demand for commodities, and oil futures in particular, was created on Wall Street by hedge funds and the big Wall Street investment banks like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Barclays, and J.P. Morgan, who made billions investing hundreds of billions of dollars of their clients’ money.

"The investment banks facilitated it," Masters said. "You know, they found folks to write papers espousing the benefits of investing in commodities. And then they promoted commodities as a, quote/unquote, 'asset class.' Like, you could invest in commodities just like you could in stocks or bonds or anything else, like they were suitable for long-term investment."

Dan Gilligan of the Petroleum Marketers Association agreed.

"Are you saying that companies like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley and Barclays have as much to do with the price of oil going up as Exxon? Or…Shell?" Kroft asked.

"Yes," Gilligan said. "I tease people sometimes that, you know, people say, 'Well, who's the largest oil company in America?' And they'll always say, 'Well, Exxon Mobil or Chevron, or BP.' But I'll say, 'No. Morgan Stanley.'"

Morgan Stanley isn't an oil company in the traditional sense of the word - it doesn't own or control oil wells or refineries, or gas stations. But according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Morgan Stanley is a significant player in the wholesale market through various entities controlled by the corporation.

It not only buys and sells the physical product through subsidiaries and companies that it controls, Morgan Stanley has the capacity to store and hold 20 million barrels. For example, some storage tanks in New Haven, Conn. hold Morgan Stanley heating oil bound for homes in New England, where it controls nearly 15 percent of the market.

The Wall Street bank Goldman Sachs also has huge stakes in companies that own a refinery in Coffeyville, Kan., and control 43,000 miles of pipeline and more than 150 storage terminals.

And analysts at both investment banks contributed to the oil frenzy that drove prices to record highs: Goldman's top oil analyst predicted last March that the price of a barrel was going to $200; Morgan Stanley predicted $150 a barrel.

Both companies declined 60 Minutes' requests for an interview, but maintain that their oil businesses are completely separate from their trading activities, and that neither influence the independent opinions of their analysts. There is no evidence that either company has done anything illegal.

Asked if there is price manipulation going on, Dan Gilligan told Kroft, "I can't say. And the reason I can't say it, is because nobody knows. Our federal regulators don't have access to the data. They don't know who holds what positions."

"Why don't they know?" Kroft asked.

"Because federal law doesn't give them the jurisdiction to find out," Gilligan said.

It's impossible to tell exactly who was buying and selling all those oil contracts because most of the trading is now conducted in secret, with no public scrutiny or government oversight. Over time, the big Wall Street banks were allowed to buy and sell as many oil contracts as they wanted for their clients, circumventing regulations intended to limit speculation. And in 2000, Congress effectively deregulated the futures market, granting exemptions for complicated derivative investments called oil swaps, as well as electronic trading on private exchanges.

"Who was responsible for deregulating the oil future market?" Kroft asked Michael Greenberger.

"You'd have to say Enron," he replied. "This was something they desperately wanted, and they got."

Greenberger, who wanted more regulation while he was at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, not less, says it all happened when Enron was the seventh largest corporation in the United States. "This was when Enron was riding high. And what Enron wanted, Enron got."

Asked why they wanted a deregulated market in oil futures, Greenberger said, "Because they wanted to establish their own little energy futures exchange through computerized trading. They knew that if they could get this trading engine established without the controls that had been placed on speculators, they would have the ability to drive the price of energy products in any way they wanted to take it."

"When Enron failed, we learned that Enron, and its conspirators who used their trading engine, were able to drive the price of electricity up, some say, by as much as 300 percent on the West Coast," he added.

"Is the same thing going on right now in the oil business?" Kroft asked.

"Every Enron trader, who knew how to do these manipulations, became the most valuable employee on Wall Street," Greenberger said.

But some of them may now be looking for work. The oil bubble began to deflate early last fall when Congress threatened new regulations and federal agencies announced they were beginning major investigations. It finally popped with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers and the near collapse of AIG, who were both heavily invested in the oil markets. With hedge funds and investment houses facing margin calls, the speculators headed for the exits.

"From July 15th until the end of November, roughly $70 billion came out of commodities futures from these index funds," Masters explained. "In fact, gasoline demand went down by roughly five percent over that same period of time. Yet the price of crude oil dropped more than $100 a barrel. It dropped 75 percent."

Asked how he explains that, Masters said, "By looking at investors, that's the only way you can explain it."

Like & dislike are constant and the basis of action:

Like and dislike is never part time but it is constant, no one is a master of his like and dislike except in his delusion but they are all slaves driven by their likes and dislikes that are blind force stirrings that are potentially and ultimately fatal and like and dislike are never coincidental but they and not genuine reason is the basis of action for people who like and dislike.

ANYONE WHO LIKES AND DISLIKES AND THINKS HE HAS GENUINE REASON, IT IS GENUINE REASON THAT IS THE BASIS FOR HIS ACTIONS IS KIDDING HIMSELF BECAUSE IT IS LIKE AND DISLIKE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY THROUGH LIKE AND DISLIKE FAULTY EVEN FALSE REASONING THAT IS THE BASIS OF THEIR ACTIONS.

PEOPLE WITH STYLE OR USE OF FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS ALWAYS LIKE AND DISLIKE BUT AT LOWER INTENSITIES AND BECAUSE THEY ARE USED TO IT OR DISTRACTED, THEY DO NOT REALIZE THEY ARE EXPERIENCING AND EXPRESSING LIKE AND DISLIKE.

WHEN THEY ARE SAD, THEY ALSO ALWAYS DISLIKE.

WHEN THEY ARE HURT THEY ALSO ALWAYS DISLIKE.

WHEN THEY ARE FEARFUL THEY ALSO DISLIKE.

WHEN THEY ARE NOT SAD, HURT OR FEARFUL, THEY EITHER LIKE OR DISLIKE.

WHEN THEY SPEAK OR DO SOMETHING TO ANOTHER, WHATEVER THE GENUINE OR FALSE OR NONESENSICAL MEANING OF WHAT THEY SAY OR DO, THEY EITHER WANT TO DIRECTLY STIR LIKE OR DISLIKE OR INDIRECTLY THROUGH WANTING TO STIR SADNESS, HURT AND FEAR TO GENERATE DISLIKE THROUGH SADNESS, HURT AND FEAR.

AND IN THIS MILIEU OF CONSTANT LIKE AND DISLIKE, CONSTANT WANTING TO STIR LIKE AND DISLIKE IN THEMSELVES, THEY ARE KIDDING THEMSELVES IF THEY THINK LIKE AND DISLIKE ARE MERE COINCIDENCES, A HOBBY OR PASTIME BUT LIKE AND DISLIKE, NOT GENUINE REASON FORMS THE BASIS OR ‘REASON’ OR CAUSE FOR THEIR ACTIONS. AND BECAUSE LIKE AND DISLIKE ARE MERELY THE BLIND HARMFUL ATTRACTIVE OR REPULSIVE STIRRINGS OF THE PERSON’S MENTAL FORCE IT IS A DANGEROUS AND POTENTIALLY DISASTROUS BASIS FOR ACTIONS AND SO IT IS THAT ALL STYLISH AND LIKING AND DISLIKING PEOPLE ARE ACCIDENTS AND DISASTERS WAITING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE THEIR LOGIC IS SERIOUSLY AND FATALLY FLAWED BECAUSE IT IS BASED ON FORCE, ON LIKING AND DISLIKING AND THAT IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.

People who like or dislike are kidding themselves if they think their like and dislike are part time, it is not like or dislike or blind force that is the basis of their actions or decisions because like and dislike are constant in them and they are not there for ornament or experience but they (like and dislike) are directly or indirectly (through faulty programmed rehashed logic or rules reasoning) the basis or cause of their actions.

When they are not sad or hurt or fearful, they either like or dislike whatever is happening but at lower levels they may be unaware because they are used to it and are distracted.

When they are sad or hurt or fearful, they automatically arouse dislike simultaneously.

Thus Paul Krugman liked to see the share and housing market as a bubble because it is decadent and so he saw a bubble and thinks it is based on reason but it was based on force, like and dislike.

He disliked seeing a bubble in the oil market because he disliked Americans’ profligacy in use of oil and think they should pay more for their oil. Because he liked seeing oil prices rising to penalize profligate Americans, he disliked seeing it as a bubble and therefore he argued it is fundamentals and asked where is the stock held by speculators?

The answer to his question now is in the super tankers hired by speculators to store their surplus oil that they are reluctant to dump to realize their losses, hoping (in vain) for prices to recover later.

So you think you have genuine reason and discernment?

If you have genuine reasoning you should be able to reason that a statement such as ‘the pen is mightier than the sword’ is false and will not accept it as true or may be true.

The statement ‘the pen is mightier than the sword’ is never based on genuine reason but based on force or emotion designed to stir emotion not reason in others.

It is not the sword that has might but the person wielding the sword that endows it with might and might is about force that is blind and harmful and so anyone who adulates what is blind and harmful worships food that does not last and is headed for perdition.

It is not the pen that has might but it is the person wielding it that endows the pen with might and no matter how much might there is in a pen it is puny compared to the sword.

On the other hand the person wielding the pen can write and what is written may have genuine reason or knowledge or false knowledge or nonsense and that has nothing to do with might or force.

THUS A PEN THROUGH ITS WIELDER HAS PUNY MIGHT COMPARED TO THE SWORD AND INSTEAD A PEN THROUGH ITS WIELDER HAS KNOWLEDGE OR INFORMATION AND THE TWO, SWORD AND PEN HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON AND SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO COMPARISON AND IN ANY CASE, MIGHT IS ABOUT FORCE AND IF YOU ADULATE MIGHT YOU ADULATE FORCE.

If you are discerning then you should see what is CRUCIAL that there is constant forceful stretching of syllables, changes of speed and loudness in your and everybody’s syllables here and how they lead to stress, restlessness and distraction apart from sadness, hurt and fear.

IF YOU CAN DISCERN THE STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN YOUR SPEECH, YOU WILL SURELY BE ABLE TO PUT THEM TO A STOP AND NEVER RETURN TO THE TORMENT AND BECAUSE ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE STILL STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS THEY AT BEST ONLY PARTIALLY SEE STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS.

PEOPLE CAN HEAR THE STYLE IN THEIR SPEECH AND OTHERS’ SPEECH AND THAT IS FALSE PERCEPTION BECAUSE IT IS NOT STYLE THEY ARE HEARING BUT FORCE PROLONGING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT THEY TRULY HEAR.

THE PERSON WHO HEARS TRULY HEARS THE USE OF FORCE TO PROLONG SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS, NOT STYLE WHICH IS A FALSE PERCEPTION.

THE PERSON WHO HEARS FALSELY HEARS STYLE, HEARS HOW SOMETHING SAID AS CHARMING OR ATTRACTIVE AND DOES NOT HEAR FORCE PROLONGING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS.

Obama: Anything is possible in America:

That is a false statement and he has wrong view that is not the way to heaven.

As the Buddha said, there are things that are possible and things that are impossible. To say anything is possible is to speak falsely that misleads others. It is impossible for God or the Father or the Devil to be a female, it is impossible for the Buddha to go back on his word.

It may be beyond the powers of Obama or whoever in America to undo the carnage done to the economy, if the situation on a chess board is checkmate, it is impossible for anyone to make the situation not checkmate.

Thus Obama’s statement is not a statement guided by true reason but it is driven blindly by emotion designed to stir the emotions or liking of his audience and he is speaking carelessly that according to Jesus, will be judged.

Jesus: With you anything is possible

Jesus did not say anything is possible but he said that with you (the Father) anything is possible and it is true that in the realm of existence, God is supreme, He can bring a dead person back alive, not a sparrow will fall without his approval and create fresh bread out of nothing. God can disappear you at any moment.

JESUS DID NOT SAY ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE BUT BECAUSE THIS WORLD IS A CREATION, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE WITH GOD.

Taiwan and Japan mad:

The politicians in Japan and those in Taiwan who aped the Japanese are mad to contemplate let alone carry out issuing vouchers for people to shop.

Once the money is expended, the consumption will be depressed again and so you are just buying time hoping for recovery. If the cause of depressed consumption is structural, what is the use of buying time?

You must have a reason to buy, if you buy for the sake of buying because you are given vouchers, you are buying wastefully and encouraging others to spend for the sake of spending which is can be addictive like drugs.

IT IS MAD EVEN TO THINK OF GIVING VOUCHERS TO OTHERS TO SPEND TO RESUSCITATE THE ECONOMY AND EVEN MORE MAD AND JUST A GIMMICK TO CARRY IT OUT.

AT BEST IT IS POSTPONING THE RECKONING OR EVEN MAKING IT WORSE.

Taiwan urged to run to the tills

Critics have labelled the move a waste of money

Taiwan has been handing out shopping vouchers to all its citizens in a bid to stimulate the island's economy and shrug off the global downturn.

Some 22.7 million people, regardless of age, are eligible for vouchers worth $107 to spend on a wide range of goods.

People queued at distribution points around the country to get their vouchers on Sunday.

The initiative, set to cost the government $2.53bn, is based on a similar scheme in Japan in 1999.

Taiwan is suffering in the global downturn, hit by plunging exports and rising unemployment.

Supporters say the scheme will give the island's ailing economy a shot in the arm. Vouchers must be spent by the end of September.

But critics have labelled the move a waste of money and point out that the government is having to borrow money to finance it.

The lesson of a camera’s autofocus:

You may marvel at the modern camera’s feat of autofocus to deliver sharp crisp images of what you ‘snapped’ but the camera does not know what it is doing nor is it necessary for it to know what focusing is about to deliver focused pictures for you.

There are a few autofocus mechanisms available and the current popular one involves using computer to monitor a band of video across what the camera is pointed at that is broken up into cells. When the camera is focused the difference in pixel rate between adjacent cells is maximal, when it is out of focused or blurred, the pixel rate between adjacent cells are less.

Hence by using a motor to move the lens up and down, the sensors can detect when the pixel rate is maximal between adjacent cells and maintain it there.

YOU THINK THE CAMERA KNOWS HOW TO FOCUS AND IS FOCUSING THE PICTURE FOR YOU BUT WHAT THE CAMERA IS DOING IS ADJUSTING THE LENS POSITION UNTIL THE PIXEL RATE DIFFERENTIAL IN ADJACENT CELLS ARE MAXIMAL AND BECAUSE IT CORRESPONDS WITH A FOCUSED IMAGE YOU THINK THE CAMERA IS SMART, KNOW HOW TO FOCUS.

SIMILARLY JUST BECAUSE A PERSON CAN SAY OR DO EVEN SOPHISTICATED THINGS DOES NOT MEAN HE UNDERSTANDS WHAT HE IS SAYING OR DOING, HE MAY HAVE NO IDEA AND MERELY FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS OR PROGRAMS IN HIS MIND.

Everything including logic is rehashed and therefore false:

For one who sees correctly, as it is actually present, they is always a simultaneous style or how someone perceives (sees, hears), thinks, speaks and acts and what he perceives, thinks, speaks and acts.

People may think there is no style or substance in what they see and hear but it is wrong, they see with a style that is stereotyped in them and differs from others and what they see also differ from others. The thief will always lookout for and see things that are potentially steal-able whilst the lustful man will home in on whatever females present in a scene that may go unnoticed to another.

Whatever has a stereotyped consistent style must be rehashed, reproduced from memory and therefore anyone who has style is a robot in whatever he perceives, thinks, speaks and does.

It is impossible for a person who is a robot in whatever he perceives, thinks, speaks and does to be not a robot or not rehash what he reasons and therefore his logic too is similarly pre-recorded and rehashed to be applied to the situation.

THUS ALL STYLISH EMOTIONAL PEOPLE HAVE PROGRAMMED REHASHED RULES OR INSTRUCTIONAL OR COMMAND LOGIC TELLING THEM WHAT TO DO OR SAY OR EXPLAINING THINGS FOR THEM.

THEY NEVER FRESHLY ESXAMINE A SITUATION TO REASON OUT WHAT IS HAPPENING BUT THEY CONSULT THEIR MENTAL DICTIONARIES TO TRY TO INTEPRET WHAT IS HAPPENING ACCORDING TO THE EXPLANATIONS PRE-RECORDED.

WHATEVER IS PROGRAMMED RULES LOGIC APPLIED TO A SITUATION IS NEVER GENUINE LOGIC AND IS DANGEROUS BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO BE TRUE BUT IS FALSE AND MAY NOT NECESSARILY HOLD AND MAY EVEN BE FATAL IN SOME SITUATIONS.

WHATEVER AND HOWEVER A STYLISH PERSON PERCEIVES, THINKS, SPEAKS AND DOES IS REHASHED AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR SUCH A PERSON TO HAVE REASONING OR LOGIC THAT IS NOT SIMILARLY REHASHED BUT IT TOO MUST BE REHASHED PROGRAMMED RULES OR PRINCIPLES LOGIC.

WHATEVER IS REHASHED TO BE APPLIED TO A SITUATION IS NEVER GENUINE LOGIC BUT FAKE ROBOTIC LOGIC.

How is Morgan Stanley a bigger oil company than Exxon?

Quote: Morgan Stanley isn't an oil company in the traditional sense of the word - it doesn't own or control oil wells or refineries, or gas stations. But according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Morgan Stanley is a significant player in the wholesale market through various entities controlled by the corporation.

It not only buys and sells the physical product through subsidiaries and companies that it controls, Morgan Stanley has the capacity to store and hold 20 million barrels. For example, some storage tanks in New Haven, Conn. hold Morgan Stanley heating oil bound for homes in New England, where it controls nearly 15 percent of the market.

 

The woes of all the investment banks like Morgan Stanley & Goldman Sachs is comeuppance or karma swiftly meted.

Positive feelings for Obama:

It is said that polls show positive feelings or trust for Obama.

You may read that and find it reasonable when it is meaningless.

Why should anyone have positive or negative feelings about Obama or anyone else because positive feelings are merely the stirring of mental force attractively at the sight or mention of someone?

Of what use is stirring your mental force attractively or positively at someone?

You may argue that your positive feeling or liking for Obama is based on reason, based on facts or knowledge that he is good and reliable not realizing that it is illogical.

Why should your mental force be stirred positively because of knowledge of what Obama can do? Of what use is it to stir your mental force positively for Obama because he is capable?

THUS TO SPEAK OF POSITIVE FEELINGS IS MEANINGLESS, TALKING ABOUT BLIND HARMFUL FORCE. EVEN IF YOUR POSITIVE FEELINGS FOR OBAMA IS BASED ON FACTS THAT HE IS GOOD, WHY SHOULD OBAMA BEING GOOD STIR POSITIVE FEELINGS AND OF WHAT GOOD IS THAT WHEN THE STIRRING OF MENTAL FORCE IS HARMFUL AND MEANINGLESS?

Do you mean the pen or the writer?

In saying the pen is mightier than the sword, do you mean the pen or the writer? If you perceive or insist that the pen and writer are the same, interchangeable, then you may be right or have wrong perception that you do not realize will end in mad perception.

If you mean the writer then you did not say what you meant and you are mischievous, devious and did not tell the truth. You are a hypocrite.

In saying the sword, do you mean the swordsman or do you mean the sword? If you meant the swordsman then what you said is purposely or carelessly misleading (in the name of style) and you did not say what you mean.

By ‘mightier’ do you mean ‘powerful’ or ‘more effective’ or productive? If by the pen being mightier you mean it can achieve more than a sword, then you did not mean what you said when you said the pen is mightier.

If you think ‘mightier’ is the same as ‘more effective’, can achieve more, you have false perception that will end in mad perception.

The statement the pen is mightier than the sword is usually copied from others and its purpose is to antagonize, to say something outrageous and false is true that the puny pen that is not designed to destroy or transmit force is mightier than the sword that is intended to destroy.

THUS IN MORE PLACES THAN THEY CONCEDE PEOPLE THINK THEY SPEAK THE TRUTH WHEN THEY DON’T. PEOPLE THINK THEY UNDERSTOOD WHAT IS SAID OR SEEN WHEN THEY DON’T OR THEY UNDERSTAND WRONGLY WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE.

Got change for $100 trillion dollars?

To deceive and do it solemnly is bad enough but to deceive and think it is fun makes it even worse, compounds your sin and the punishment for it.

People in Zimbabwe are suffering runaway astronomical inflation and you think it is funny.

The question whether you have change for $100 trillion dollars is never genuine but deceptive because that trillion dollars is virtually worthless, not your usual trillion dollar that he likes to trick you to believe he is talking about and therefore the intention is to trick others of what seem to be is not.

Trickery and thinking it is fun, pleasurable is not the way to heaven but the animal womb, even hell.

PEOPLE IN ZIMBABWE ARE SUFFERING SEVERE INFLATION AND YOU THINK IT IS FUNNY, TO TRY TO DECEIVE OTHERS TO THINK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT REAL TRILLION DOLLARS AND THINK IT IS FUNNY. ARE YOU SICK?

Virtue, concentration and wisdom:

No one except the Buddha has enunciated that there is a relationship between virtue, concentration and wisdom and this is the axis to liberation from suffering, there is no other way out of suffering.

The Buddha:

"Such and such is virtue, concentration and wisdom. Great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of concentration when fully developed by virtuous conduct; great becomes the fruit & gain of wisdom when it is fully developed by concentration. Utterly freed from lust, becoming, and ignorance is the mind that is fully developed in wisdom."

Since you have genuine, specific to each occasion understanding, what do you understand by what the Buddha says above?

What the Buddha is saying is that genuine (as opposed to false) virtue, concentration and wisdom can be objectively defined and is not negotiable and applies to all beings.

What the Buddha is further saying is that genuine virtue (as opposed to faked or imitation) virtue is a prerequisite to concentration, without great virtue you cannot have great concentration and great concentration is a prerequisite for great wisdom.

So you think you know what is genuine virtue, concentration and wisdom but you may be deluding yourself.

What is virtue?

It is simply not killing (and harming or injuring), not stealing (if something is not given to you, you do not take), cheating, no lying, idle chatter, tale bearing divisive speech, no sex (especially illicit sex, Jesus said they have become eunuchs for the sake of heaven), performing charitable acts.

People are kidding themselves if they think they don’t kill (they smack a mosquito) or tell lies (all jokes are falsifications and they find jokes pleasurable).

Without true virtue you cannot develop great concentration, without great concentration you cannot develop great wisdom.

So you think you know what concentration is about? You may be kidding yourself.

Great concentration is the effortless ability of a person to access the four heightened states of the mind as described by the Buddha. The first meditative state is serenity of the mind and body with discursive thinking freed from worries and concerns of the world. The second higher state is the fully conscious cessation of all thinking, the third being the fading of rapture to enter into equanimity and the fourth being equanimous and mindful.

"So when I had regained strength, then -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, unskillful mental qualities, I entered in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, I entered in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture I remained in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. I entered in the third jhana, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain I entered & remained in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain.

And what is wisdom? Wisdom is the three knowledges, the knowledge of one’s innumerable past lives, the passing and arising of beings.

There is no greater wisdom than to be enlightened, to be totally and finally emancipated from all suffering and the nature of this wisdom is described by the Buddha:

 "When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, pliant & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of recollecting my past lives. I recollected my manifold past lives, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion.

"This was the first knowledge I attained in the first watch of the night. Ignorance was destroyed; knowledge arose -- as happens in one who is heedful, ardent, & resolute.

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, pliant, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw -- by means of the divine eye beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.

"This was the second knowledge I attained in the second watch of the night.

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, pliant & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the ending of the mental fermentations. I discerned, as it was actually present, that 'This is stress...This is the origination...This is the cessation...This is the way leading to the cessation...These are fermentations...This is the origination...This is the cessation...This is the way leading to the cessation.' My heart, thus knowing, was released from the fermentation of sensuality, becoming, ignorance. With release, there was the knowledge, 'Released.' I discerned that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'

The three knowledge man:

In Buddhism there is the three knowledge man and the three knowledges are these:

1)   The knowledge of the recollected your manifold past lives, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion.

2)   The knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw -- by means of the divine eye beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.

3)   The knowledge to the ending of the mental fermentations. I discerned, as it was actually present, that 'This is stress...This is the origination...This is the cessation...This is the way leading to the cessation...These are fermentations...This is the origination...This is the cessation...This is the way leading to the cessation.' My heart, thus knowing, was released from the fermentation of sensuality, becoming, ignorance. With release, there was the knowledge, 'Released.' I discerned that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'

How come no one is wrong like me?

I have presented to you my interpretations of what the Buddha and Jesus said and you may discern that no one else has interpreted what the Buddha and Jesus said (eg Let your yes be yes only, anything more comes from evil) the way I have done.

What I say may be wrong but how come no one is wrong like me?

There are so many wrong views and they all have their advocates but how come no one falsifies like I falsify or is what I said, what I interpret what the Buddha and Jesus said the truth that this world cannot receive for it neither knows nor sees it?

The Buddha said the man who preaches from the teaching and discipline declared by him is rare. Because my preaching differs from others, if what I preach is true then all the rest are false and I am indeed rare, even unique.

Whether you like it or not:

Whether you like it or not,

Whether you are Christian (and proud of it), Muslim, atheist or Taoist or Buddhist,

The man of genuine virtue (does not kill, harm, tell lies, speak divisively, steal or cheat) does not suffer whilst the man of no virtue who kills, harms, tell lies, speak divisively, steal and cheat suffers.

The man who has great concentration, who can swiftly access serenity of mind and body with discursive thinking, then without thinking, then with the fading of pleasure and pain to dwell in pure equanimity and mindfulness does not suffer whilst the man who has no concentration must suffer.

The man of great concentration has great wisdom and does not suffer whilst the man with poor concentration has no wisdom and as a fool, he suffers accordingly.

THUS THERE IS ONLY ONE EMANCIPATION FROM SUFFERING AND IT IS THE PATH DESCRIBED BY THE BUDDHA AND HEAVEN IS THE WAY STATION TO FINAL TOTAL EMANCIPATION.

YOU CAN SEARCH FOR WHATEVER ELIXIRS TO YOUR SUFFERING HERE IN DRUGS, FOODS, YOGA OR TAICHI BUT IT IS ALL DELUSION, DEAD ENDS THAT WILL END IN TORMENT.

The power of words:

Quote BBC headline: The power of words, How language and literature shaped Barack Obama.

Comment: Words have no power, they can only have meaning that may be true, false or nonsense, makes no sense, a form of falsity.

If you perceive words as powerful then you may be cultivating false perception that will end in mad perception.

Winds, the waves and sunlight has power or force or energy but words have no energy or power. It is your false perception that endows words with power.

YOU MAY CORRECTLY SPEAK OF THE VALUE OR BENEFITS OF WORDS BUT TO SPEAK OF THE POWER OF WORDS IS TO WORSHIP FORCE AND FALSELY PERCEIVE FORCE IN WORDS.

Staying calm 'prevents dementia'

Scientific study indicates that staying calm has a 50% chance of avoiding dementia.

THE CORRELATION IS ACTUALLY 100% NOT 50%

IF A PERSON IS TRULY CALM, DOES NOT USE FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS, HE DOES NOT SUBJECT HIS MIND TO FORCE AND CANNOT BECOME DEMENTED.

IF A PERSON CONSTANTLY USES FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS IT IS TO BE EXPECTED HE WILL BECOME DEMENTED TO GREATER OR LESS EXTENT.

BECAUSE EVEN THOSE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CALM ARE NOT TRULY CALM, THEY TOO USE FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS, IT EXPLAINS WHY SOME OF THOSE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CALM ALSO DEVELOP DEMENTIA.

ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE ONLY RELATIVELY CALM AND SO RELATIVELY CALM PEOPLE HAVE RELATIVELY LESS VULNERABILITY TO DEMENTIA NOT ABSOLUTELY NO VULNERABILITY.

IT IS PERVERSE, REFLECTS SCIENTISTS ARE DELUDED, TO THINK THAT ONE SHOULD THEREFORE BE ACTIVE SOCIALLY BECAUSE IT IS STRESSFUL TO BE ACTIVE SOCIALLY.

Staying calm 'prevents dementia'

Being relaxed and calm can reduce their chances of dementia

People who are more laid back are less likely to develop dementia in old age, a study has suggested.

Research published in the journal Neurology asked 500 healthy elderly people to fill out questionnaires about their personalities.

Those who were calm and relaxed had a 50% lower risk of developing dementia during the six years of the study.

UK experts said it offered "compelling evidence" of the need to be "socially active throughout life" (This is bizarre logic. Socially active is stressful rather than calming. Socially active is inimical to calm rather than calming).  

There are 700,000 people with dementia in the UK. That number is expected to rise to over one million by 2025 and 1.7 million by 2051.

It's a chicken and egg scenario - do these personality traits increase risk of dementia in older people or are they an early sign of the disease? Dr Susanne Sorensen, Alzheimer's Society

The personality questionnaires measured neuroticism - a term meaning easily distressed, and extraversion - or openness to talking to people.

Those who were not easily distressed were calm and self-satisfied, whereas people who were easily distressed were emotionally unstable, negative and nervous.

The study of people aged 78 and over found that people who were socially inactive but calm and relaxed had a 50% lower risk of developing dementia compared with people who were socially isolated and prone to distress.

The dementia risk was also 50% lower for people who were outgoing and calm compared to those who were outgoing and prone to distress.

The lifestyle questionnaire determined how often each person regularly participated in leisure activities and the richness of their social network.

During that period they were studied, 144 people developed dementia.

Good news

Dr Hui-Xin Wang of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, who led the research, said: "In the past, studies have shown that chronic distress can affect parts of the brain, such as the hippocampus, possibly leading to dementia.

"But our findings suggest that having a calm and outgoing personality in combination with a socially active lifestyle may decrease the risk of developing dementia even further.

"The good news is, lifestyle factors can be modified as opposed to genetic factors which cannot be controlled.

"But these are early results, so how exactly mental attitude influences risk for dementia is not clear."

One theory is that stress and anxiety trigger the release of chemicals which can damage the tissues of the brain.

Dr Susanne Sorensen, head of research at the Alzheimer's Society, said: "Doctors have always believed that personality traits are linked to risk of dementia.

"This compelling new evidence suggests people who are easily stressed or not very outgoing should make every effort to be socially active."

But she said: "It's a chicken and egg scenario - do these personality traits increase risk of dementia in older people or are they an early sign of the disease?

"One in three people over 65 will die with dementia. It is vital to keep mentally and physically active throughout your life to reduce risk of this devastating condition."

For the developer or your benefit?

SP Setia together with a few banks have announced a new scheme to help people buy house in hard times that they say has the buyer’s interest at heart but may be self serving.

Rather than 10/90 (10% down payment, 90% loan), it is 5/95 (5% down payment, 95% loan).

This is a win scheme for developers because they (hopefully) get to sell off property they hold and collect money from banks. It is risky for banks and borrowers because if there is default later, it is the bank and buyer who will lose.

THIS IS THE SAME PREDATORY LENDING PRACTICE THAT GOT AMERICA AND THE WORLD IN TROUBLE, KEEP MAKING IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO BORROW TO BUY PROPERTY THAT ARE OVERINFLATED IN VALUE, WHO CARES IF THEY DEFAULT AND THE SYSTEM COLLAPSES.

THE DEVELOPER WHO SAYS HE IS MAKING IT EASIER FOR YOU WITH YOUR INTEREST AT HEART IS SELF SERVING, HE IS THE ONE WHO WILL DEFINITELY BENEFIT.

Barking up the wrong tree:

If A is the cause of unpleasant B then if you want to get rid of B there is only one answer, you must eliminate A. If you think something else, C or D or E is the answer, you may be right or you have false logic and perception that will end in madness.

People take health foods and supplements because they want to preserve their health and lives here and the reason why they want to preserve their health and lives is because they are aware (vaguely) that their vitality is waning as a result of the incessant assault of stress in their lives.

It is not the absence of health foods or supplements or herbs that is the cause of people’s sapping vitality and aging but it is the relentless bombardment of stress that has causes and only the elimination of stress through elimination of its causes is the true and ONLY answer. No amount of health food or supplements will redress the waning of their health because it is not the cause.

People resort to regular exercise, play games, jog, do yoga or tai chi or listen to music or even smoke and drink and take drugs because they are stressed and they are trying to control or manage their stress by these various ploys that may become addictions or obsessions in which they are robots carrying out their robotic tai chi or yoga or golf plans.

It is not the absence of regular exercise, playing games, jogging, yoga or tai chi or listening to music or lack of smoking and drinking and taking drugs that caused them to become stress and so in pursuing these activities they are barking up the wrong tree doing things that are useless, do not work and because they perceive these activities to work, otherwise they won’t do it, they are cultivating false perception that will end in mad perception.

AND WHAT IS THE TRUE CAUSE OF THEIR STRESS THAT DEBILITATES THEIR HEALTH AND WILL ULTIMATELY KILL THEM?

THE TRUE CAUSE OF THEIR INSOLUBLE CONSTANTLY RENEWING STRESS IS THEIR CONSTANT USE OF FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT HAVE EQUIVALENTS IN MOTION, THOUGHT AND EVEN PERCEPTION IN THE NAME OF FASHIONING STYLE THAT IS TO BE SEEN OR HEARD TO IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE OTHERS.

BECAUSE THE ONLY TRUE CAUSE OF STRESS IS THIS CONSTANT USE OF FORCE TO FASHION STYLE, THE ONLY TRUE CURE FOR STRESS IS TO PAY ATTENTION TO PAINSTAKINGLY STOP USING FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS. IF YOU NEVERTHELESS INSIST THAT HEALTH FOODS, DRUGS, MUSIC, YOGA, TAI CHI, SPORTS, JOGGING IS THE ANSWER, YOU MAY RIGHT OR YOU MAY BE A FOOL BARKING UP THE WRONG TREE THAT WILL END IN YOUR INSANITY DOING SOMETHING THAT WASTES ENERGY AND IS USELESS.