Thursday, July 28, 2011

Aces go places:
You mean to say that those who are not ‘aces’ don’t go places? If those who are not aces also go places what you say is false that has deadly consequences in terms of insanity and even eternal punishment for you.
IT IS NEVER REASON BUT ALLURE, ATTRACTION, BECAUSE ‘ACES’ RHYMES WITH ‘PLACES’ WITH THE MOTIVE OF FALSELY CHAMPIONING ‘ACES’ TO TENDER BY REHASH THIS PHRASE THAT IS COPIED FROM OTHERS BECAUSE HE IS NOT THE FIRST TO USE THIS PHRASE.
BECAUSE IT IS REHASHED THE PERSON IS A ROBOT HEADING FOR ROBOT FAILURE, BECAUSE IT IS FALSE, HE IS HEADED FOR INSANITY FOR PERCEIVING WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE. THE PURPOSE FOR SAYING SO IS TO STIR EMOTION AND WHOEVER STIRS OTHERS’ EMOTIONS IS ACCRUING DEBT TO BE REPAID AS SUFFERING.
The Buddha said all ties are suffering and therefore bad:
Nibbana Sutta: Total Unbinding (4)
One who is dependent (has ties) has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no desire. There being no desire, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
According to the Buddha, ties are evil, bad, lead to suffering and so whoever advocates ties advocates bondage or attachments, wavering and suffering and so only a deluded person says it is good to have ties. Ties bond and whatever is bonded is suffering, restriction never the goodness it is touted to be.
Wendy Deng very good right hook:
This is celebrating Murdoch’s wife attack on a would be assailant of her husband. She threw a punch not right hook and so to call it a right hook is to falsify to make more to it than there is.
What she did, attacking another even though the victim intended to attack her husband has grave consequences for her, she is going nowhere near heaven but at minimum the animal world awaits her and so to praise her or see nothing wrong is wrong view that is the way to hell or the animal womb.
WHAT SHE THREW WAS A PUNCH AND TO CALL IT A GOOD RIGHT HOOK IS TO FALSIFY AND IT IS SIN TO CELEBRATE AN ACTION THAT HAS DEADLY KARMA FOR HER. THE ATTACKER WOULD GO TO PUNISHMENT BUT SO WILL SHE.
The essence of a robot’s existence:
In order to function, a robot requires two types of programming:
  1. Firstly whatever he desires to say or do must be recorded either fabricated by self or copied from others and it is by playing back of such recordings or programming that he is able to say or do anything. In order to ‘learn’ new behaviour or speech, he must record anew or modify or reconstitute his existing recordings to come up with new behaviour. Whatever is not recorded the robot cannot say or do even when it is possible to say or do it.
  2. He must in addition have programming or instructions to tell him when to activate which recordings, instructions to look for certain cues to activate which recording from his library of possible speech and actions.

Subsequently he requires a braking system to enable him to stop half way whatever speech and actions he is in the process of rendering to meet unexpected contingencies or to switch to another recorded track.
Once a programmed speech or action is recorded, he is not in charge of the speech or action, he may modify repeatedly his recording or hone to perfection his playback until they become very consistent and stereotyped. What a robot can do, what which he is in charge or have control is varying how much force he adds to his playback just as you can vary the volume control of your Hi Fi system. Thus the robot can play around and vary how much added force, how much prolonging, how much speed and loudness changes every time he plays back but he has no control over what he says and does. Rather than the meaning of what he says and does that is important to him, it is the force added, the force changes of what he says or does that are more meaningful to him, it is for the force changes and added force of what he says or does that he exists for and enjoys.
IN TRUTH THE STYLISH EMOTIONAL PERSON HAS NO TRUE GENUINE SPECIFIC TO THE OCCASION UNDERSTANDING. WHAT HE SAYS OR DOES IS PROGRAMMED AND HE HAS PROGRAMS OR INSTRUCTIONS TELLING HIM WHAT TO SAY OR DO AND WHAT IS LEFT FOR HIM IS TO STOP PLAYBACK PREMATURELY EVERY NOW AND THEN, VARY THE AMOUNT OF FORCE AND FORCE CHANGES HE ADDS TO WHAT HE PLAYS BACK AND IT IS SAVOURING THE FORCE CHANGES THAT IS OCCURRING IN HIS SPEECH AND ACTIONS THAT IS IMPORTANT TO HIM RATHER THAN THE ACTUAL MEANING OF WHAT HE SAYS OR DOES WHICH MAY BE MEANINGLESS, SILLY OR FALSE.  
A robot subsists on force:
Because once recorded what he says or does is predetermined, a person who does not realize he is a robot is left with a life of making new recordings (eg taking up golf or playing the piano, learning the role of being a father or doctor), modifying or rearranging pre-existing recordings, practicing to perfection existing recordings and to make life ‘meaningful’ and add variety or spice, to toy around or play around varying the amount of force he adds to a current playing track, varying the amount of prolonging, changing speed and strength in his playback and it is experiencing and enjoying these permutations of force changes that attracts him and he finds pleasurable, often he does not realise that what he says or does by rehash time and time again is meaningless, just for show, does no useful work, is contradictory or makes no sense or is false or presumptuous. It is enjoyment of the successful exercise of force, the joy of flawlessly executing his recordings (eg flawlessly reciting long extracts of Shakespeare or golf shot) that stirs him and is important to him.
The joys of recital:
The joys of recitals are the pride in having so many recordings to choose from to dish out as the situation requires, to proudly dish out recordings that are deemed by self and others to be appropriate and impressive, the ability to flawlessly execute the recordings without blemishes, the ability to ‘spontaneously’, rapidly extemporarily vary the force added, force changing of what you say and do and to enjoy the slick force changes involved.
Teoh Beng Huat RCI a whitewash:
The RCI concluded that Teoh Beng Huat committed suicide because he could not stand the pressures he was subjected to.
Was there any evidence, did the officers in charge of his interrogation admit to subjecting Teoh to physical or mental abuse or duress? Did they describe how they subjected Teoh to pressure? If not how did the RCI come to the conclusion Teoh Beng Huat was under undue duress that he could not cope? Did Teoh Beng Huat admit that to the commission?
This is a case of relatively petty corruption and even if convicted, Teoh could be fined or jailed for a period, this is not the end of the world and so why would Teoh want to commit suicide unless he was subjected to unreasonable UNLAWFUL intimidation even physical torture. If this is the case, has the commission established exactly what Teoh was subjected that drove him to suicide and has any officer been named as responsible, censured, recommended for sacking and being charged and even jailed.
UNLESS THE DURESS THAT DROVE TEOH TO SUICIDE IS PERFECTLY LEGAL, THE RCI IS SHOWING A BIG BLIND SPOT IN NOT PIN POINTING WHO THE OFFICER WAS TO BE BLAMED WHO SHOULD BE CENSURED, RECOMMENDED FOR SACKING AND BE CHARGED IN COURT. IF THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE, IT INDICATES THE COMMISSION IS ALL FOR SHOW, TO PIN MINIMAL BLAME ON THOSE RESPONSIBLE WHILST THE LION SHARE OF BLAME IS ON TEOH FOR COMMITTING SUICIDE.
IF HIS ALLEGED CORRUPTION WAS PROSECUTED FAIRLY, THERE IS NO REASON WHY HE SHOULD COMMIT SUICIDE, AT MOST HE COULD BE FOUND GUILTY AND JAILED FOR A FEW YEARS. IS THAT REASON TO COMMIT SUICIDE SO HASTILY WITHOUT CONSULTING FAMILY AND SEEK LEGAL ADVICE?
ANYONE WHO BELIEVES THE RCI CONCLUSION IS PLAUSIBLE IS GULLIBLE, HAS FALSE LOGIC BECAUSE IT IS UNTENABLE. THE REFUSAL TO BRING THE OFFICERS INVOLVED TO ACCOUNT IS EVIDENCE OF PARTISANSHIP.
IT SEEMS NOTHING IS SACROSANCT ANYMORE, EVEN RCIs HAVE BECOME RUBBER STAMPS FOR THE RULING ELITE.
Why the RCI conclusion is wrong:
It is wrong incorrect, unjustified for the RCI to conclude that Teoh Beng Huat was driven to suicide because it is impossible for it to establish that.
What it should say is that based on evidence, it cannot establish whether Teoh committed suicide or it is the result of criminal action because based on evidence presented, no one can conclude Teoh committed suicide and so it is unrighteous and guilty of the RCI to say Teoh was driven to suicide.
BASED ON EVIDENCE, THE RCI CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT TEOH MAY HAVE COMMITTED SUICIDE BECAUSE OF DURESS OR HE MAY HAVE BEEN CRIMINALLY KILLED EITHER WILFULLY OR ACCIDENTALLY.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE RCI TO ESTABLISH HE COMMITTED SUICIDE SO EITHER IT IS FOOLISHLY JUMPING TO CONCLUSION OR THERE MAY BE BEHIND THE SCENE PRESSURE TO ADOPT AN UNRIGHTEOUS CONCLUSION THAT WOULD EXONERATE PEOPLE.
How can the RCI say it is suicide?
The RCI acknowledges that the three involved in the interrogation are notorious for their unscrupulous even criminal methods in interrogating witnesses and it is likely Teoh was subjected to the same abusive methods.
BEARING IN MIND THAT THOSE WHO INTERROGATED ARE LIKE THUGS, HOW CAN THE RCI CONCLUDE THAT TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE THAT EITHER BY CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE OR BRUTALITY, TEOH WAS MURDERED OR KILLED UNLAWFULLY.
WITHOUT INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOF TEOH KILLED HIMSELF, THE RCI CAN ONLY TRUTHFULLY RECORD AN OPEN VERDICT, TEOH MAY HAVE KILLED HIMSELF OR HE MAY HAVE BEEN CRIMINALLY KILLED. SO WHY IS THE RCI JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS? IS IT BECAUSE OF INCOMPETENCE OR VESTED INTERESTS TO CLOSE THE CASE?
Internet letter said Teoh was killed:
Apparently there is an unsigned credible letter circulating in the internet that said Teoh was killed, did not commit suicide and the circumstances point with even overwhelming preponderance to unlawful death than foolish hasty suicide. The RCI admitted that it is likely Teoh was subjected to the same abusive criminal interrogation so without knowing, how can the RCI rule out criminal death and conclude it was suicide?
Such a conclusion can only come from gross incompetence or a desire to conclude and close the case without actually determining the truth or the truth cannot be disclosed.
All these apparently stem from an obsession to pin corruption on the Selangor state government so that it can be toppled and be replaced by a BN government.
A SIMPLE QUESTION THE RCI SHOULD ASK ITSELF:
BEARING IN MIND THESE INTERROGATORS ARE LIKE ROGUES AS YOU ACKNOWLEDGE, CAN YOU BE CERTAIN THEIR RECKLESS BRUTAL METHODS COULD NOT HAVE KILLED TEOH? IF THIS IS A PLAUSIBLE SCENARIO, WHAT EVIDENCE HAVE YOU THAT THIS DID NOT OR CANNOT OCCUR?
WITHOUT HAVING RULED OUT CRIMINAL DEATH, HOW CAN YOU CONCLUDE TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE BECAUSE HE COULD NOT STAND THE PRESSURE?

Why should the interrogators stonewall if they are innocent?
Quote: The report said the characteristics of this “blue wall of silence came amply into play by the untruths spouted by the MACC officers to cover up the nefarious activities that took place on the 15th and 16th of July 2009”.
Why would you lie if you have nothing to do with Teoh’s death? Events will exonerate you.
The very fact that they are lying and you the RCI acknowledge that should alert you that they may be involved with Teoh’s death and so without having ruled out that they could not have somehow killed Teoh, how can you conclude Teoh killed himself?
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE SHOULD BE EVASIVE OR TELL LIES IF THEY ARE INNOCENT AND THE FACT THAT THEY ARE EVASIVE OR HAVE LIED INDICATES GUILT AND IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES HOW CAN YOU RULE OUT CRIMINAL DEATH?
‘Criminal death likely’ is the correct conclusion:
You do not need to be a law expert or top judge but a person with genuine understanding will say that based on the known circumstances of this case, it is unlikely (if not impossible) Teoh killed himself but it is likely if not certainly that criminality was involved in his death, especially bearing in mind the notoriety of Teoh’s interrogators and their attitude of denial or non-cooperation. Now that there is another case with parallels again involving MACC in Sarbaini, it is even more so the case.
NO NEED FOR RCI, A PERSON WITH TRUE UNDERSTANDING CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT IT IS UNLIKELY IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE, IT IS LIKELY IF NOT CERTAIN CRIMINALITY IS INVOLVED.
NYT: Hitler Aide’s Grave Is Removed To Stop Neo-Nazi Pilgrimages
It is not an accident that Hess is referred oddly or wrongly as Hitler’s aide when he was Hitler’s deputy. Do you call your deputy an aide?
It is because people’s understanding and perceptions of events are rehashed and currently ‘aide’ is the fashionable copied and rehashed description that the person sees nothing wrong to call Hess Hitler’s aide.
In the past ‘aide’ was not such a fashionable term and so they would not call Hess an aide.
A DEPUTY IS NOT AN AIDE, HE CAN DEPUTIZE AND TAKE OVER FROM YOU. AIDE IS A CURRENTLY FASHIONABLE COPIED REHASHED TERM AND IT IS EVIDENCE PEOPLE ARE REHASHERS THAT THEY NONCHALANTLY REFER TO HESS AS HITLER’S AIDE WHEN HE IS A DEPUTY.
Complicity not incompetence:
Logically the RCI has no right to conclude Teoh committed suicide and so the reason it is doing so may be either due to ineptitude or it is wilful complicity and for one who understands it has to be the latter never the former.
Surely members of the RCI are aware there is a possibility that Teoh was murdered and based on the evidence they have before them they cannot rule out foul play.
THE REASON THE RCI WAS CALLED WAS TO ESTABLISH THE CAUSE OF TEOH’S DEATH DUE TO SUSPICIONS OF FOUL PLAY AND SURELY THE RCI IS AWARE THE POSSIBILITY OF FOUL PLAY IS PRESENT ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE NOTORIETY OF THE INTERROGATORS THAT THEY THEMSELVES ADMIT TO AND SURELY THEY WOULD REALIZE THAT BASED ON EVIDENCE THEY CANNOT RULE OUT FOUL PLAY SO WHY ARE THEY SO KEEN TO SAY TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE WHEN THEY COULD SAY IT COULD BE SUICIDE OR MURDER, THEY CANNOT SAY FOR SURE, WHICH THEY CANNOT? AND SO IT MUST BE COMPLICITY NOT INCOMPETENCY THAT IS THE CAUSE OF THIS ILLOGICAL CONCLUSION.
Amen with half for you and one for me:
The authorities want to draw a line and close this case and so it is a case of half for you (interrogators were nasty) and one for me (Teoh committed suicide, not my fault).
As the minister said, the public should accept the RCI’s findings and go home, amen, ‘fair and square’.
“Property 2013. Buyers versus sellers: Who will blink first?
This is a false fabricated statement and the subject is not about substance or meaning but about force that is meaningless.
Blinking has nothing to do with the situation but it is fabricated to impress others and stir emotion portraying buyers and sellers like two opposing gunslingers to the draw seeing who will turn and run away cowardly; in other words, buyers and sellers confronting each other in a stand-off seeing who will give way or run first.
WHAT HAS BLINKING GOT TO DO WITH A STAND OFF BETWEEN BUYERS AND SELLERS EXCEPT IN THE FALSE PERCEPTION THAT THIS IS THE CASE?
THE SUBJECT MATTER IS NOT SOMETHING RATIONAL BUT ABOUT THE BATTLE BETWEEN SELLERS GREEDILY ASKING FOR AS MUCH AS THEY CAN GET AND BUYERS BLINDED BY COVETOUSNESS TO BUY DISREGARDING THE RISKS OF OVERPAYMENT. BECAUSE THE SUBJECT MATTER IS NOT ABOUT MEANING BUT A CRAZY BATTLE OF WILLS BETWEEN BUYERS AND SELLERS, WHOEVER IS INTERESTED IN BEING INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER IS INTERESTED IN A MATTER DEVOID OF TRUE MEANING BUT A BATTLE OF FORCE, A BATTLE OF GREED BETWEEN OPPOSING BUYERS AND SELLERS. WHETHER WHO WILL BLINK FIRST IS NOT A QUESTION OF RATIONALITY OR SOMETHING TO BE STUDIED AND MADE SENSE OF BUT IRRATIONALITY, EMOTION, FEAR OR PANIC.
The Buddha may be right, earthquakes due to air disturbances:
A study by the University of Illinois captured the airglow signature of the tsunami that struck the Japanese coast on March 11 using an observatory on the island of Hawaii.
It was found at a height of 250km above the earth's surface and preceded the giant wave striking the coast by around an hour.
The Buddha described the causes of earthquake as a disturbance of the air and this seems in accordance to what scientists only now appear to concur.
The Buddha: "This great earth, Ananda, is established upon liquid (the core of the earth is molten or liquid upon which the crust floats), the liquid upon the atmosphere, and the atmosphere upon space. And when, Ananda, mighty atmospheric disturbances take place, the liquid is agitated. And with the agitation of the liquid, tremors of the earth arise. This is the first reason.
What the Buddha is saying is that disturbances in the atmosphere disturbs the core that then causes the crust to shake.
The Buddha: Eight Causes of Earthquakes
12. And Ananda approached the Blessed One, and spoke to the Blessed One, saying: "Marvellous it is indeed! The earth shakes mightily! What could be the reason that so mighty an earthquake should arise?"
13. Then the Blessed One said: "There are eight reasons, Ananda.
14. "This great earth, Ananda, is established upon liquid, the liquid upon the atmosphere, and the atmosphere upon space. And when, Ananda, mighty atmospheric disturbances take place, the liquid is agitated. And with the agitation of the liquid, tremors of the earth arise. This is the first reason.
15. "Again, Ananda, when an ascetic of great power, one who has gained mastery of his mind, or a deity who is mighty, develops intense concentration, he, too, causes the earth to tremble. This is the second reason.
16-21. "Again, Ananda, when the Bodhisatta (beings having their penultimate births eg the Buddha and his deputies) departs from the Tusita realm into his mother's womb, mindfully and clearly comprehending; and when the Bodhisatta comes out from his mother's womb, mindfully and clearly comprehending; and when the Tathagata becomes fully enlightened; when the Tathagata sets rolling the excellent Wheel of the Dhamma; when the Tathagata renounces his will to live on; when the Tathagata comes to pass away into the state of Nibbana -- then, too, Ananda, this great earth trembles.
They don’t like and don’t understand:
Based with the announcement that Teoh Beng Huat was driven to suicide because he could not cope with his interrogators, emotional people are stirred to dislike (or like) the announcement and they may proffer reasons that are false why they think it is a cover-up or right.
The person who truly understands is not stirred emotionally and he gives the true reasons why the conclusion is false and it is a cover-up.
What is the reason why this is the correct?
The RCI has not proffered any evidence or proof that Teoh Beng Huat committed suicide instead of being a victim of a crime and it is highly improbable if not impossible they could be in secret possession of information that would prove Teoh Beng Huat committed suicide. If they had such information the authorities would ensure it is publicized so that they are exonerated of any blame for his death.
Thus without such proof he committed suicide they are unfairly jumping to conclusion that he committed suicide without conceding that he may also have been unlawfully killed. The RCI’s ruling would favour the ruling elite and it is highly unlikely if not impossible that such a erroneous conclusion could be the result of ineptitude.
BECAUSE EMOTIONAL PEOPLE DO NOT TENDER SUCH AN EXPLANATION WHY THE RCI CONCLUSION IS WRONG, THEY DO NOT TRULY UNDERSTAND.  
If Teoh’s suicide can be proven it would have been publicized:
If there is proof Teoh committed suicide vested interests would have publicized it in no uncertain terms so that it is exonerated of all blame for the death.
The fact that no proof has been tendered indicates it cannot be proven Teoh committed suicide and thus in the face of substantial evidence that Teoh could have been a victim of a crime, why is the RCI coming to an unwarranted conclusion Teoh committed suicide without acknowledging that he could also have been killed?
IF IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW POSTHUMOUSLY TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE NOR HAS ANY CLINCHING EVIDENCE BEEN TENDERED, WHY IS THE RCI SO SURE HE COMMITTED SUICIDE?
The composition of the panel of RCI:
In order to understand the findings of the RCI it may be pertinent to find out who are on the panel. The track record of Malaysian judges is far from impeccable and there is no evidence leopards change their spots when they retire and there is ample evidence their medical counterparts are amenable to persuasion. If the panel included the likes of Karpal Singh or Lim Kit Siang then it would be more credible.
Quote: Justice James Foong Cheng Yuen (head). The other four members of the commission were retired Federal Court judge Abdul Kadir Sulaiman; former Court of Appeals judge T Selventhiranathan; Penang Hospital senior consultant forensic pathologist Bhupinder Singh; and Mohamed Hatta Shaharom, dean of the Cyberjaya Medical Science College University and a consultant forensic psychiatrist.
Why Karpal not on the panel?
IN THE NAME OF BEING SEEN TO BE FAIR AND IF THE MACC IS INNOCENT AS CHARGED, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT FEAR BUT SHOULD WELCOME INVITING THE LIKES OF KARPAL OR LIM KIT SIANG TO SIT ON THE RCI PANEL SO THAT ITS CONCLUSIONS CANNOT BE ACCUSED OF BEING BIASED. WHAT MORE CAN YOU ASK THAN FOR YOUR ADVERSARIES TO EXONERATE YOU WHEN IF THE MACC IS INNOCENT NO ONE CAN PIN IRREFUTABLE BLAME ON IT?
Much to excite:
Quote: Already, though, there is much to excite those interested in the Solar System's minor planetary bodies.
This is a scientist whose discipline is supposed to be ‘cold hard’ logic speaking and he does not realize what he is talking about is stirred force (much to excite) with reference to obtaining new information about an asteroid.
What is there to be excited and of what use is the stirring of mental force about obtaining new information that is not only blind but disturbs the mind so that it has greater difficulty focussing on the new data. As an objective scientist you should be calm clearly thinking in your approach to your job, not getting excited to go overboard.
Do you need excitement in order to function as a scientist? Rather than enhancing your performance as a scientist as emotional people delude themselves, excitement is inimical, detracts from and degrades the rational performance of a mind.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE A PERSON WITH TRUE UNDERSTANDING WILL TALK EXCITEDLY ABOUT MUCH TO BE EXCITED WITH NEW DATA BECAUSE HE WILL REALIZE WHAT HE IS SAYING IS NONSENSE, SILLY AND SO IT IS THAT MANY ARE LIKE EMPERORS WITHOUT CLOTHES, THEY THINK THEY ARE FULL OF UNDERSTANDING BUT WHAT THEY HAVE IS DELUSION AND REHASHED FALSE UNDERSTANDING.
When can one say Teoh committed suicide?
If you or credible witnesses saw Teoh Beng Huat commit suicide eg jumping then you can say he committed suicide even if others disbelieve you.
If you have evidence eg a video recording of him jumping or he spoke with his family saying he was going to commit suicide then it is reasonable to say he probably committed suicide.
Without tendering such evidence he committed suicide you have no right to say he committed suicide and if you say so, it must be because of incompetence or vested interests.
There is evidence those who interrogated Teoh are like goons and it is reasonable to say they might gone a step further to either ‘accidentally’ or deliberately kill him.
When such a possibility exists and you are aware it exists as you admitted, how can you not concede this possibility may have occurred and instead rule that Teoh committed suicide?
THUS THE RCI’S CONCLUSION MAKES NO SENSE, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO MAKE THE CONCLUSION THEY MADE.
If they have credible evidence they would have tendered it:
If there was credible evidence Teoh Beng Huat committed suicide it would have been tendered to the public long ago to absolve them of liability and the fact that no credible evidence of suicide has been tendered means there is no credible evidence and in this light, it is false to conclude Teoh Beng Huat committed suicide.
The possibility Teoh was criminally killed has not been ruled out by evidence, so why is the possibility not conceded in the conclusion?
Officers’ stonewalling clear sign of guilt:
Normally when someone is guilty of a crime, he will fake being helpful or informative to give the semblance he is innocent because refusal to cooperate is a sign of complicity.
Especially when the system is backing you, the MACC officers should have no fears they would be framed and if they have done nothing wrong it is straightforward to narrate the course of events as it truly occurred and so the acknowledgement by the RCI that the three officers were uncooperative in a coordinated fashion is a clear sign of arrogance, defiance and indication they are in some way involved in Teoh Beng Huat’s death.
THE RCI HAD TO MENTION THE OFFICERS’ OBSTINATE UNCOOPERATIVENESS TO ACKNOWLEDGE REALITY AND GIVE A SEMBLANCE OF IMPARTIALITY AND CRITICISM OF THE OFFICERS BUT WHAT IT CONVENIENTLY FAILED TO CONCLUDE IS THAT IT IS AN INDICATION OF COMPLICITY.
A PERSON’S SILENCE OR REFUSAL TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IS NEVER A SIGN THAT HE IS INNOCENT AND DOES NOT WANT TO IMPLICATE HIMSELF BUT IT IS ALWAYS A SIGN HE IS GUILTY AND DOES NOT WANT TO IMPLICATE HIMSELF.
ESPECIALLY WHEN THE SYSTEM WILL BACK YOU, THERE IS NO WAY IT WILL FRAME YOU IF TEOH BENG HUAT COMMITTED SUICIDE HIMSELF, THESE OFFICERS HAVE NO REASON NOT TO COOPERATE EXCEPT THAT THEY ARE GUILTY.
The correct verdict: Officers guilty of criminality and probably caused Teoh’s death
Based on the evidence established, a (impartial) person with true understanding must conclude that the MACC officers are guilty of serious criminal actions and they probably caused Teoh’s death.
In what ways are they guilty of criminal actions?
Corruption is for the authorities to prove by collecting information and evidence, never extracted through mentally or physically abusive interrogation and incarceration. There is no cause to arrest and interrogate the person into the late hours of the night and to apply physical or psychological intimidation.
IT IS LIKELY IF NOT CERTAINLY THAT THE OFFICERS’ ACTIONS AND METHODS CONTRAVENE THE LAW SERIOUSLY AND SO THEY ARE GUILTY OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR AND SHOULD BE PUNISHED. WITHOUT WITNESSES COMING FORWARD OR FURTHER FORENSIC EVIDENCE, THEY ARE LIKELY TO BE LINKED TO TEOH’S DEATH.
People suspect but they do not understand:
Teoh’s family rejected the RCI conclusion and senior DAP leaders too rejected the findings. They allude to a whitewash but they cannot explain exactly why it is a whitewash.
A PERSON WITH TRUE UNDERSTANDING CAN TELL YOU WHY IT IS A WHITEWASH AND THERE IS NO NEED TO BE AGITATED OR DOUBT YOU MAY BE UNFAIR TO THE RCI OR RULING ELITE.
THE REASON IT IS A WHITEWASH IS THIS:
MEMBERS OF THE RCI DID NOT SEE TEOH BENG HUAT COMMIT SUICIDE NOR ARE THERE WITNESSES WHO SAW, NOR IS THERE EVIDENCE THEY TENDERED TO THIS EFFECT (EG VIDEO OF TEOH JUMPING OR APPROACHING THE ROOM ALONE). IF THERE IS PROOF TEOH BENG HUAT COMMITTED SUICIDE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TENDERED TO THE PUBLIC LONG AGO. AND SO WITHOUT OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CONCLUSION, THE RCI IS INCORRECT (FOR WHATEVER REASON) TO JUMP TO THIS CONCLUSION ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THE OFFICERS IMPLICATED ARE LIKE GOONS AND THEY HAVE BEEN STONEWALLING IN A CONCERTED MANNER THAT SUGGESTS THEY ARE GUILTY AND TRYING TO COVER UP FOR EACH OTHER.
IT IS SIMPLE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ACTIONS AND METHODS OF THE OFFICERS ARE UNLAWFUL AND SO THEY ARE GUILTY OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND IF THEIR ACTIONS CAN DRIVE TEOH TO SUICIDE THESE ACTIONS MIGHT ALSO KILL TEOH.
NO NEED TO FEAR THE RCI MAY BE RIGHT, IT IS DEFINITELY WRONG FOR REASONS BEST KNOWN TO THEM, THE CORRECT CONCLUSION IS THAT THE OFFICERS BEHAVED CRIMINALLY IN A SERIOUS MANNER AND LIKELY CAUSED TEOH’S DEATH.
THE RCI ADDED UP 1+1 AND CAME UP WITH 3, I ADDED UP 1+1 AND CAME UP WITH 2.
Cover up again points to guilt:
If a cover up is unsuccessful or it can be proven to have occurred then it again points to a crime, because cover ups are designed to cover up crimes not truth.
Thus because the RCI has IN TRUTH no right to say Teoh committed suicide and it has EVERY DUTY IN TRUTH to state that the officers are guilty of serious violations of the law and based on their coordinated uncooperativeness and their capacity for thuggish actions, it is likely they may have caused Teoh’s death and it failed to say so, it is a cover up and this again points to a crime.
Proof people don’t understand:
Faced with the announcement of the RCI’s findings people either welcomed (liked) or are upset or expressed dissent (don’t like) and they voiced their approval or disapproval. This upset or approval is their understanding of the RCI’s findings and it is essentially a blind meaningless stirring of their mental force.
THE CORRECT OR TRUE UNDERSTANDING OF THE RCI’S REPORT IS TO ASK THE RCI HOW IT CAME TO THE CONCLUSION TEOH KILLED HIMSELF, ON WHAT BASIS OR EVIDENCE DID THEY COME TO THIS CONCLUSION? IF THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE ACCEPTED AS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE, THE RCI HAS NO RIGHT TO SAY TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE AND SO WHY IS IT SAYING SO?
I DO NOT ACCEPT OR REJECT THE REPORT AS THE MASSES HAVE DONE, I UNDERSTAND AND SAY IT IS WRONG BECAUSE THE RCI HAS NO RIGHT TO SAY TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WITNESS IT NOR HAVE THEY TENDERED EVIDENCE TO THE EFFECT.
Read up, stand up, speak up
WE need to equip ourselves with the necessary information and knowledge to keep our politicians accountable.
“Read up, stand up and speak up” is an indiscriminate, non specific advice or command that only those who are robots will issue and only those who are robots will find appealing. Keeping our politicians accountable is not a true but false or mad reason to read up or equip yourself.
SUCH ADVICE IS NOT ONLY WORTHLESS, IT HAS DEADLY KARMA TO BE EXPERIENCED AS FUTURE SUFFERING FOR THE FOOL WHO THINKS HE IS SPEAKING FULL OF MEANING.

LET OTHERS DECIDE IF THEY WANT TO READ UP, STAND UP OR SPEAK UP WHEN THERE IS A NEED TO DO SO RATHER THAN BECAUSE YOU TOLD THEM TO DO SO.
I may have cured my car’s creaks:
In recent years I had to put up with my aging car’s creaks and scraping noises as it went over bumps or turned sharp corners then I decided to spray its suspension joints with WD 40 to see if it will cure those unpleasant squeaks. So when the wheels came off to change new tyres, I borrowed a can of WD 40 and sprayed all the many hinge joints I could find.
It seems to have worked because those squeaks have so far disappeared.
Not only is this a simple and cheap solution, asking the mechanic may be a recipe not only for wasted money but damage to the car.
I experienced squeaks with my other car and the mechanic recommended an expensive change of shock absorbers which not only did not work but he may have done expensive damage to the alloy suspension arms causing a loud thump occasionally as the arm slipped slightly because of damage. After changing the absorbers the problem persisted and it was cured when WD 40 was sprayed on the hinges of the upper wishbone arms. Now the problem recurs occasionally but always responds to a spray of WD 40.
NOT ONLY WILL A SPRAY OF WD 40 TO THE HINGE JOINTS CURE YOUR SUSPENSION SQUEAKS, IT CAN SAVE YOU MONEY AND MORE DAMAGE TO YOUR CAR BY GETTING THE MECHANIC WHO MISDIAGNOSES TO WORK ON IT.
Why the world has reached economic doom:
You do not need supernatural powers to see that the world has reached a disastrous society destroying economic Armageddon because the facts are there to be seen but this world from top to bottom has no true understanding of what they see and there is a wilful refusal to accept reality.
One of the key reasons the world has reached economic doom is that the wealth is now in the hands of the few who are now reluctant to lend to the system (governments like the US, UK, Italy, Greece, Spain, et al) because of increasing fear of default thus depriving the party or world the fuel or alcohol needed for the party or artificial debt driven boom to continue.
Who are the few who now hold a destabilizing portion of wealth whilst the masses (governments who have run up massive debts on behalf of their people, people who have spent on credit cards, bought houses they could not afford, people whose savings in banks and retirement funds have been recklessly lent by bankers and fund managers and lost are now saddled with debts up to their necks and no savings or savings in name but not reality)?
These ‘wealthy few’ include individuals from the very rich like Bill Gates to many budding millionaires (eg your Mike Tysons, footballing stars, entertainers), many multinationals or big companies (Microsoft, Apple, Toyota, Exxon) which by piling up profits year after year, have now garnered a sizeable proportion of the world’s wealth.
When you pay exorbitant toll to toll collectors like PLUS, the profits go into private hands and most of it is not recycled into the system but stashed away even overseas to be forever lost. If PLUS is owned by the government, no matter how exorbitant the toll, the money collected remains in the system to be re-used by the government for the use of the people.
THUS ALL THESE LARGE CORPORATIONS LIKE GM, APPLE, PANASONIC, EXXON ARE LIKE PARASITES RAKING IN PROFITS YEAR AFTER YEAR FROM THE MASSES, LEACHING THEIR WEALTH AWAY PERMANENTLY (WHAT IS RETURNED AS INVESTMENT IS MINIMAL) SO THAT NOW THEY CONTROL A SIZEABLE WEALTH THAT THEY CAN LEND TO GOVERNMENTS TO INCREASE THE PUBLIC DEBT SO THAT THE BOOMS BUILT ON DEBT CAN CONTINUE, NOW THAT THEY ARE HESITANT, GOVERNMENTS ARE IN DANGER OF RUNNING OUT OF BORROWERS AND THUS DEFAULT.
It was Ronald Reagan who started the deadly US debt spiral, before him the US sovereign debt was miniscule and thereafter it kept rocketing up exponentially and yet Bush saw it fit to enact tax cuts that benefited the rich more than the masses.
Now Republicans act like (but are not) saints, they want the US government to cut its deficits drastically but they are adamantly opposed to raised taxes (because it means the rich will have to pay more). The rich want sacrifices, so long as it is not them who are sacrificing.
AND SO IT IS THAT THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, THROUGH OUT RECENT YEARS, THE FEW RICH (INDIVIDUALS, CORPORATIONS) HAVE STEADILY QUIETLY PILED UP WEALTH IN THEIR HANDS (BY HOOK OR CROOK) AND IN THE PAST THEY ARE HAPPY TO RECYCLE THIS WEALTH BACK INTO THE SYSTEM BY LENDING TO COMPROMISED GOVERNMENTS WHO BORROW ON BEHALF OF THE MASSES TO BE FRITTERED AWAY ON USELESS WASTEFUL FOR SHOW CONSUMPTION BUT NOW THE DEBT PILES OF COUNTRIES LOOK OMINOUSLY TOO LARGE, THEY ARE BALKING AT FURTHER LENDING DEPRIVING GOVERNMENTS OF FURTHER DEBT THEY NEED TO FUEL THE MAD CONSUMPTION BOOMS.
THE WORLD IS RUNNING ON EMPTY TANK, THOSE COUNTRIES WITH SURPLUSES EG GERMANY, JAPAN, CHINA ARE ONLY IN NAME BECAUSE THEIR SURPLUSES ARE NOT SITTING PRETTY IN BANKS BUT HAVE BEEN LENT OUT GREEDILY RECKLESSLY IN SEARCH OF MORE UNRIGHTEOUS GAINS AND NOW BORROWERS CANNOT RETURN THESE ‘SAVINGS’ AND SO THESE CREDITOR NATIONS ARE LIVING IN FANTASY THEY ARE WEALTHY JUST AS SAVERS ARE IN FANTASY THEIR MONEY IN BANKS ARE STILL THERE.
The wealthy will sabotage the system:
There are many ways the wealthy will criminally use their wealth to sabotage the system.
One key way is to ‘invest’ or speculate in the commodity markets artificially driving up prices of vital commodities like oil, grain, minerals to levels they would not achieve without the artificial increased speculator demands.
Speculators are active in currency markets not because they have a need to buy yen or yuan but to profit WITHOUT WORK from currency changes and as a result of their presence, they cause even extreme harmful movements of currency that bring them profits.
Again derivatives are like the devil’s instruments, written to allow lenders to lend with impunity hiving off the risks to unsuspecting others so that when the loans inevitably collapse, others end up with the shit, not them.
SPECULATORS EVEN BORROW MONEY TO LEVERAGE THEIR BETS AND THEY DON’T CARE IF THEY KILL THE SYSTEM THAT LAYS THE GOLDEN EGG, SO LONG AS THEY MAKE PROFITS FROM RISING OIL PRICES THEY ARE DRAWN IN IRRESISTIBLY TO.
Even if multinationals pay taxes, the taxes merely act as dampers in the inexorable transfer of wealth from the system to the few but in recent years tax evasion has become a sophisticated industry with companies hiding in overseas tax havens so that they milk as much from the system and return as little as possible to the system.
And now, ‘lo and behold’ all these dastardly patriotic corporations like Apple have set up shop in China to manufacture cheaply to sell expensively in the US depriving US citizens of jobs they need.
CAPITALISM IS A CANCER THAT IS NEVER SELF SUSTAINING AND HOLDS WITHIN IT THE SEEDS OF ITS CERTAIN FUTURE DEMISE.
It is capitalism not communism that is a dead end:
Communism is a dirty word and you can get jailed for advocating communism.
Look at the ants and termites, it is a huge society working efficiently together finding food, producing, defending, maintaining and nurturing the young. If you think there is capitalism in ant societies you are deluded.
Again the Buddha said there is a realm in heaven where the angels delight in creation and these do not work for money, they do not create and improve for money gains.
HENCE COMMUNISM IS A SYSTEM THAT WORKS FOR THE COMMON GOOD NOT MONEY TO BE PASSED TO THE FEW, WHERE MONEY REMAINS IN THE SYSTEM, IS COLLECTED BY A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT TO BE RECHANNELED FOR COMMON RE-USE THAT IS THE SELF SUSTAINING SYSTEM.
IT IS NOT COMMUNISM THAT IS EVIL BUT ITS FECKLESS PRACTITIONERS LIKE LENIN, STALIN AND MAO THAT HAS GIVEN IT A BAD NAME (AND WILL BE PUNISHED).
Hotel Housekeeper Tells Magazine of Her Encounter With Strauss-Kahn
By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN
The housekeeper at the Sofitel hotel who accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexual assault has given a long and tearful interview, with her full name and picture attached, that provides her detailed account of the May encounter — including that Mr. Strauss-Kahn told her “You’re beautiful” as he attacked her.
In the interview, with Newsweek magazine, the housekeeper, a 32-year-old immigrant from Guinea named Nafissatou Diallo, said she had apologized and turned to leave when she realized that Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s room was not empty.
“Oh, my God,” Ms. Diallo recounted saying as she caught sight of a naked man — Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who was then the managing director of the International Monetary Fund — in the 28th-floor suite she had entered intending to clean. “I’m so sorry.”
Mr. Strauss-Kahn responded, “You don’t have to be sorry,” and reached for her breasts, she told Newsweek.
“You’re beautiful,” Mr. Strauss-Kahn said as he compelled her toward the bedroom, Ms. Diallo recounted to Newsweek, which also refers to her as “Nafi.” She said she told him to stop, saying: “Sir, stop this. I don’t want to lose my job.”
Much of the woman’s account tracks news reports about what she told the authorities about the encounter. Her allegations led to an indictment against Mr. Strauss-Kahn on charges including attempted rape. But some details are new, like her account of their dialogue and her account of her movements around the hotel immediately afterward. But they can be contradictory: She told counselors at the hospital right after the attack, for example, that Mr. Strauss-Kahn had not spoken at all.
Her interview marks the first time either person who was present in the room has publicly provided a narrative of what occurred there. Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers have suggested that any sexual encounter was consensual. Her interview with Newsweek and a second one with ABC News, scheduled to be broadcast on Monday and Tuesday, appear intended to put pressure on the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., to prosecute the case.
“I want him to go to jail,” Ms. Diallo told Newsweek. “I want him to know there are some places you cannot use your power, you cannot use your money.”
In response to the Newsweek article, Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers said Ms. Diallo was “the first accuser in history to conduct a media campaign to persuade a prosecutor to pursue charges against a person from whom she wants money.”
Both Newsweek and ABC published pictures of her, and the Newsweek story describes her physically — “her dark hair is hennaed, straightened, and worn flat to her head,” for example.
Newsweek characterized Ms. Diallo’s account of the encounter as “vivid and compelling,” but said that at other points during the interview, which lasted more than three hours, she was less forthright. Questions about her past in Africa “were met with vague responses.” At times, her tears struck the interviewers as “forced,” according to Newsweek. The article also said that she is illiterate, unable to read or write any language. She spoke proudly of her job at the New York Sofitel, where according to the magazine she made $25 an hour plus tips.
Although Mr. Strauss-Kahn remains under indictment, prosecutors have expressed concerns about the accuser’s credibility as a witness, saying that she had admitted lying in her application for asylum from Guinea. They also say she entered false information on tax returns and misrepresented her income to qualify for her housing.
Ms. Diallo described Mr. Strauss-Kahn as physically forceful, saying he behaved like “a crazy man to me.” Once in his bedroom, “he pulls me hard to the bed,” she told Newsweek. He tried to force her to engage in oral sex, she said.
The woman, who is taller than Mr. Strauss-Kahn, said she kept pushing him off, but she added that she did not “want to hurt him” for fear of losing her job. Mr. Strauss-Kahn shoved her to the bathroom, she said, forced her to her knees and made her engage in oral sex, holding her head “so hard” between his hands. At the end of the encounter, she said, she ran out and sought refuge in the hallway.
“I was standing there spitting,” she told Newsweek. “I was so alone.” She exchanged looks but not words with Mr. Strauss-Kahn as he left his suite and headed to the elevator, she said.
She also sought to explain her movements after the encounter, which prosecutors have questioned. She recounted how she went to a nearby room to retrieve her cleaning supplies and then re-entered Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s suite to begin cleaning it. “I went to the room I have to clean,” she said. She reported the encounter to a supervisor.
The whole encounter may have lasted just nine minutes. Citing an anonymous source, Newsweek reported that nine minutes after Ms. Diallo first entered Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s suite, he placed a call to his daughter, whom he then met for lunch.
Concentration not force is the key to great power:
According to the Buddha it is the development of a mind’s concentration (not development of mental strength or force) that is the key to great mental power that can stop a strong man splitting a log with an axe or cause the earth to shake.
Ordinary deluded people are barking up the wrong tree because they worship force, they train themselves to generate great physical and mental force and when faced with mental (eg stress, sadness, fear or hurt) or physical (eg key cannot open lock) obstacles their answer is to summon more and even more force to surmount the physical (twist the key harder and harder instead of seeing if it is the wrong key) or mental obstacle.
THE ANSWER OF FOOLISH EMOTIONAL PEOPLE TO MENTAL OR PHYSICAL TROUBLE, CRISIS OR OBSTACLES IS TO SUMMON MORE FORCE TO ATTACK AND OVERCOME THE OBSTACLE. THEY WORSHIP FORCE AND THEIR STANDARD ANSWER TO PROBLEMS IS TO SUMMON AND USE FORCE. YET THE KEY TO GREAT POWER OF THE MIND IS NOT FORCE BUT GREAT CONCENTRATION. THE GREATER THE CONCENTRATION YOU CAN DEVELOP, THE MORE POWERFUL YOU ARE, EVEN TO THE EXTENT OF MOVING A MOUNTAIN, STOPPING A STRONG MAN SPLITTING A LOG, FLYING THROUGH THE AIR, WALKING ON WATER AND DIVING THROUGH THE EARTH, EVEN CAUSING THE GREAT EARTH TO SHAKE.
THE PERSON WHO HAS ATTAINED THE FIRST HIGHER STATE OF MIND (SERENITY OF MIND WITH DISCURSIVE THINKING) HAS HIGHER CONCENTRATION AND THENCE POWER THAN THE PERSON WITH AN EMOTIONAL MIND. THE PERSON WHO HAS ATTAINED TO CESSATION OF THINKING WITH A ONE POINTED MIND HAS HIGHER CONCENTRATION THAN THE PERSON WITH THE FIRST HIGHER STATE OF MIND, THE PERSON WHOSE MIND IS NEITHER STIRRED ATTRACTIVELY (TO LIKE) NOR REPULSIVELY (TO DISLIKE) HAS HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF THE MIND COMPARED TO THE PERSON WITH CESSATION OF THINKING. THE PERSON WHOSE MIND HAS SHORN OFF ALL RECEPTION OF FORCE TO EXPERIENCE NEITHER PAIN NOR PLEASURE HAS A HIGHER CONCENTRATION AND THUS POWER THAN THE PERSON WHO NEITHER LIKES NOR DISLIKES.
HENCE IF A PERSON DESIRES TO DEVELOP GREAT POWER OF HIS MIND, HE MUST DEVELOP GREAT CONCENTRATION, POWER OF A MIND IS A FUNCTION OF ITS CONCENTRATION AND NOTHING ELSE.
IT IS GREAT VIRTUE THAT GIVES RISE TO GREAT CONCENTRATION THAT THEN LEADS TO GREAT WISDOM.
POWER IS NOT A FUNCTION OF A MIND’S WISDOM NOR VIRTUES BUT GREAT VIRTUE IS THE INDISPENSABLE PRECURSOR TO GREAT CONCENTRATION AND WITH GREAT CONCENTRATION, GREAT WISDOM ENSUES.
THE CONCENTRATION OF MY MIND TODAY IS SIGNFICANTLY HIGHER THAN IN THE PAST AND IT IS GETTING GREATER AND GREATER.
WHEN EMOTIONAL PEOPLE TRY TO DEVELOP GREAT CONCENTRATION EG WHEN PUTTING A GOLF BALL, THEY DO SO BY SUMMONING GREAT FORCE TO DRIVE OUT DISTRACTIONS AND FOCUS ON THE PUTTING BUT THAT IS A DELUDED FORCE BASED GREEDY CONCENTRATION WITHOUT EVERLASTING BENEFITS.
Forced and noble concentration:
Emotional people’s concentration is entirely force based, thus when they are sitting for an exam or lining up for a putt or concentrating before launching into a tennis serve, they are summoning more force to momentarily, stressfully focus on the action they are greedily desirous of executing (passing an exam, putting or serving a ball).
EMOTIONAL PEOPLE HAVE A PLAN OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO EG ANSWER EXAM QUESTIONS SUMMONING THEIR MEMORY OF RECORDED ANSWERS WHILST DRIVING OUT DISTRACTIONS, HOW TO PUTT THE BALL AND THEY USE GREAT GENERATED FORCE BASED CONCENTRATION TO EXECUTE IT ‘FLAWLESSLY’.
Noble concentration is entirely different; it is effortless, has nothing to do with force but is just a skilful elevation of a mind’s state to shed first thinking, thence liking and disliking and finally neither pain nor pleasure.
Just as a mind that has attained great noble concentration can stop you from splitting a log with an axe, it can permit you to make another walk on water as when Jesus allowed Peter to walk on water. It is noble concentration that allows a being to exercise influences as far as heavenly world.
"Again, Ananda, when an ascetic of great power, one who has gained mastery of his mind, or a deity who is mighty, develops intense concentration, he, too, causes the earth to tremble. This is the second reason.
BY SAYING HE CAUSES THE EARTH TO TREMBLE, THE BUDDHA SAYS IT IS THE DEITY’ GREAT CONCENTRATION THAT CAUSES THE EARTH TO TREMBLE.
FURTHER NOBLE CONCENTRATION IS NEVER SUFFERING BUT GREAT HAPPINESS AND ORDINARY PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE MISSING AND THE PERSON WHO HAS TASTED GREAT CONCENTRATION DOES NOT ENVY ORDINARY PEOPLE. MY CONCENTRATION IS FAR GREATER TODAY THEN IN THE PAST AND I HAVE NO WISH TO RETURN TO THE SUFFERINGS OF THE PAST.
Objective not opinion Teoh was killed:
It is objective, not a matter of opinion or debatable that based on facts available in the public domain Teoh Beng Huat was killed did not commit suicide. Why is that so?
If someone can be proven to have lied then the opposite to what is lied must be true.
Thus if the RCI has been proven to be wrong to rule Teoh committed suicide the ruling must have been directed from behind the scenes. It is impossible that the RCI should not know they do not have the facts to say it was suicide and so the reason they said it must be because of instructions and the opposite is true, Teoh was killed.
It is a reflection of ordinary people’s lack of true understanding and their serious, deadly doubt and uncertainty that they are still in uncertainty, think that no one can know except the three officers and their superiors what actually happened.
UNTIL THEY GO MAD, PEOPLE TELL LIES FOR MOTIVES EG TO SHIRK RESPONSIBILITY OR HIDE THEIR TRUE EVIL NATURES AND IF WHAT THEY SAY CAN BE PROVEN TO BE FALSE OR WITHOUT BASIS THEN THE OPPOSITE MUST BE TRUE OR HAS BASIS. IF TEOH DID NOT COMMIT SUICIDE AS LIED, THE OPPOSITE, HE WAS KILLED MUST BE TRUE.
RCI not a waste, it proved Teoh was killed:
People think they are very clever, they can tell lies and nobody can know for sure. The problem with telling lies is that once you are ‘outed’ found out, the game is up, the truth is exposed.
Before the RCI or if the RCI had concluded that it could not determine whether it was suicide or unlawful death, then the truth remains undetermined for the public. By jumping to the unsubstantiated conclusion that Teoh committed suicide, the RCI has perversely exposed that Teoh was killed, did not commit suicide.
THE RCI WAS NOT A WASTE OF PUBLIC MONEY, IT SERVED AN IMPORTANT PURPOSE BECAUSE IT CONFIRMED TO THOSE WHO ARE DISCERNING THAT THERE IS A COVERUP AND THEREFORE TEOH WAS KILLED NOT COMMITTED SUICIDE. BEFORE THE PUBLIC COULD SUSPECT MURDER BASED ON OVERWHELMING CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE BUT BY STATING TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE WITHOUT OBJECTIVE BASIS, THE RCI HAS ESTABLISHED THERE WAS A WHITEWASH.
Based on suspicion the RCI concluded suicide:
The RCI actually gave its ‘reason’ why they concluded Teoh committed suicide and it is Teoh’s inability to cope with the duress or pressure or whatever. They have no way of knowing this, it is merely speculation on their part and it is criminal to tender their speculation as the reason to say he committed suicide. Even if it is true Teoh was driven to suicide because he cannot cope, you cannot tender it as the cause and conclude therefore it is suicide unless you have evidence this is the case.
BY SAYING TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE BECAUSE HE COULD NOT STAND THE PRESSURE, THE RCI IS ADMITTING IT HAS NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY ITS CONCLUSION EXCEPT THEIR SPECULATION HE COULD NOT COPE AND KILLED HIMSELF. AS A RESPONSIBLE PERSON YOU CANNOT COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT YOU WANT THE NATION TO ACCEPT BASED ON SUSPICIONS. WHAT PROOF HAS THEY THAT HE COULD NOT COPE? ONLY IF YOU KNOW AS FACT HE COULD NOT COPE, NOT SPECULATION BY YOU THAT HE COULD NOT COPE CAN YOU CONCLUDE HE COMMITTED SUICIDE BECAUSE HE COULD NOT COPE. IF THERE IS BETTER EVIDENCE TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE WHY DID THE RCI CITE THIS FLIMSY REASON?

No matter how much conflicting data the RCI has to contend with in coming to its conclusion or ruling, it is never the data they forgot to include that led it to its conclusion Teoh committed suicide but it is the data that it considered that led it to say he committed suicide.
BASED ON EVIDENCE IT CONSIDERED IN COMING TO THE CONCLUSION TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE, THE RCI SHOULD REALIZE THE EVIDENCE IS NOT CONCLUSIVE, IT DOES NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT EVEN ANY EVIDENCE THAT TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE EXCEPT CONJECTURE HE COULD NOT STAND THE PRESSURE.
WHAT THE RCI IS SAYING IS THAT BASED ON THEIR SUSPICION TEOH COULD NOT COPE, THEY CONCLUDED HE COMMITTED SUICIDE, HOW SILLY. WHY NOT SAY TRUTHFULLY YOU DO NOT KNOW.
Even if Teoh was abused it does not mean he could not cope:
Have the officers admitted and described how they abused Teoh? If they are uncooperative, how did the RCI know what they actually did that was severe enough to drive Teoh to suicide?
FIRST OF ALL THE OFFICERS MUST ADMIT TO AND DESCRIBE WHAT ABUSE THEY SUBJECT TEOH TO OR THERE IS RELIABLE EVIDENCE WHAT SUBSTANTIAL ABUSE THEY METED TO TEOH. WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THIS, IT IS FANTASY, AND JUMPING TO CONCLUSION TO SAY TEOH WAS ABUSED LET ALONE HE COULD NOT COPE WITH THE SEVERE ABUSE.
Based on speculation Teoh is likely to be killed:
If you are going to conclude based on speculation then the evidence is preponderantly that he was killed not committed suicide because you admitted the officers subjected Teoh to unlawful intimidation and they are uncooperative, formed a wall of silence.
IF ARE GOING TO CONCLUDE BY SPECULATION THEN THE ODDS ARE OVERWHELMINGLY IN FAVOR OF AN UNLAWFUL DEATH THAN SUICIDE.
Bamboozled, they all never truly understand:
Faced with the RCI’s findings, emotional people are in uproar and they give all sorts of reasons why they think it is fraud that are all false because they never cite the true reasons why it is a whitewash as I cite.
THE TRUE REASON WHY THE RCI FINDING IS FALSE IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT CITED NOR ARE THEY IN POSSESSION OF EVIDENCE THAT INDICATES OR PROVED TEOH COMMITTED SUICIDE AND THE REASON THEY GAVE, THAT TEOH COULD NOT COPE, IS NOT A VALID REASON BUT MERE SPECULATION ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY HAVE NOT ADDUCED ANY EVIDENCE THE OFFICERS ABUSED TEOH.
JUST AS IT IS UNRIGHTEOUS OF A JUDGE TO CONVICT SOMEONE OF MURDER JUST ON SUSPICION, IT IS UNRIGHTEOUS OF THE RCI TO CONVICT TEOH OF SUICIDE JUST ON SPECULATION HE COULD NOT COPE.
IF THE RCI TRULY UNDERSTOOD, IT WOULD UNDERSTAND IT HAS NO RIGHT TO CONCLUDE THUS, IF THE PUBLIC UNDERSTOOD IT WOULD HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THE RCI IS CONCLUDING BASED ON SPECULATION NOT FACTS.
BECAUSE ORDINARY PEOPLE NEVER CITE THE REASONS I GIVE WHY THE RCI CONCLUSION IS FALSE, THEY HAVE FALSE UNDERSTANDING EVEN IF THEY CAME TO THE RIGHT CONCLUSION IT WAS A WHITEWASH.
Wrong on three counts:
If you say Teoh committed suicide you are saying this is what happened and so you must back up your conclusion with reasonable or acceptable evidence.
The conclusion is wrong on three counts:
  1. The RCI has not shown reasonable evidence Teoh committed suicide eg witnesses seeing him jump, video showing him entering the room alone and not exiting, video showing him acting in a distressed manner in the run-up or communications by him to others that he was distraught.
  2. The RCI has not ruled out foul play. If you have not backed up your claim it is suicide with facts, then especially when foul play is a more if not highly likely alternative, you must rule out foul play first and there is no effort by the RCI to first rule out foul play.
  3. That he committed suicide because he could not cope is not a valid reason to say he committed suicide, it is speculation on the part of the RCI without evidence eg his communication to others he was under terrible duress or documentation by the officers how they terrorised him so much that he wanted to kill himself.

Lying or speaking without knowing leads to insanity:
Whenever a person lies he must speak according to a plan that is false that he formulates either immediately or prepared beforehand and so he is training himself to be a slave of plans that are false that ends in certain insanity for him he foolishly does not realize.
THUS ANYONE WHO TELLS LIES IS ACTUALLY STARING AT A BARREL OF A GUN HE DOES NOT REALIZE WILL DISCHARGE IN HIS FACE LATER.
AGAIN IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE BUT YOU NEVERTHELESS SAY IT, THEN WHAT YOU SAY MUST BE AS INSTRUCTED BY SOMEONE ELSE OR COPIED FROM SOMEONE ELSE, EG DOCTOR SAYS RESEARCH SHOWS BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, HE IS SPEAKING WITHOUT KNOWING AND DOES NOT REALIZE HE IS FACING THE MUZZLE OF A GUN THAT WILL DISCHARGE.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT A BUDDHA OR JESUS WILL SPEAK FROM A PREPARED PIECE OF PAPER BECAUSE THAT WILL MEAN THE PIECE OF PAPER IS THE BOSS AND THEY ARE MERELY TRANSMITTERS OF WHAT THE PAPER DICTATES TO THEM.
What Anwar is doing is abominable:
This is Anwar carrying on, engaged in ‘friendly’ banter with someone who has now turned into an implacable enemy, Datuk Eskay.
WHAT THEY ARE BOTH DOING IS PUTTING ON A SHOW AS IF THEY ARE VERY HAPPY BUT IT IS ALL ABOUT EXCITEMENT AND FAKED FRIENDLINESS THAT STIRS THE MIND AND THE WAY TO TORMENT NOT SAFETY. I AM NOT PARTISAN AND WHAT ANWAR IS DOING IS CENSURABLE, NOT HARMLESS OR GOOD BUT EVIL, FALSE, HARMFUL TO SELF AND OTHERS. I WOULD KEEP MY DISTANCE FROM A SMILING ASSASIN LIKE ESKAY. THIS SMILING AFFABILITY IS ACTED FALSE MOTIVATED FRIENDLINESS NEVER GENUINE FRIENDLINESS.
Conclusion based on a theory:
Even the RCI themselves may admit that their conclusion Teoh Beng Huat killed himself because he could not cope is based on theory not fact.
You cannot establish a conclusion, Teoh committed suicide based on a theory which may be correct or wrong but you should only establish a conclusion based on facts or evidence.
IF YOUR TREATMENT OF SOMEONE CAUSED HIM TO COMMIT SUICIDE YOU ARE GUILTY FOR HIS DEATH BECAUSE IF YOU DID NOT MISTREAT HIM HE WOULD NOT HAVE COMMITTED SUICIDE. AS JESUS SAID, EVEN THE MAN WHO SCOLDS HIS BROTHER ‘YOU FOOL’ IS IN DANGER OF THE FIRE OF HELL, WHAT MORE SOMEONE WHOSE ACTIONS DRIVE ANOTHER TO SUICIDE AND SO IT IS HUMAN DELUSION THAT THE OFFICERS ARE NOT TO BLAME OR THEIR BLAME MITIGATED BY TEOH’S SUICIDE.
What does this mean?
He is staring with even intensely stirred force and there is a whiff of deceitful or denying smile.
Something has happened eg he may be seeing a nude girl that excites him or he is confronted by his own dishonesty or he is uncertain that causes his mental force to stir even violently.
No matter what, to stir your mental force intensely is the totally wrong response to any event because force that is blind is not the correct instrument to receive incoming data. Further it is insane because the stirred force not only wastes energy, it is doing no useful work and so it is controlled madness stirring even intense force to do nothing.
Such a person must have intense restlessness and ill will, wish to attack and be aggressive.
ANYONE WHO STARES LIKE THIS IS PRACTICING CONTROLLED MADNESS BECAUSE HE IS STIRRING BLIND FORCE IN RESPONSE TO AN EVENT AND THIS STIRRED BLIND FORCE IS NOT DOING ANY MEANINGFUL WORK AND HE MUST HAVE ILL WILL AND STRONG RESTLESSNESS AND BE RACKED BY CONFLICT. HE IS NO SAINT OR WISE MAN.
Saddled with debt much more than the wealth of the system:
Not only is a destabilising amount of wealth now in the hands of a privileged few whilst the savings of the many emptied by reckless lending by their guardians (bankers, fund managers) whilst many have foolishly taken upon themselves debt (credit card, mortgages) that will drown them, but the system is saddled with debts that are many times the true wealth of the system.
Because everyone parks their money in banks, a million deposited can be lent, redeposited and again lent out even many times to create many millions of debts and the illusion of many millions of wealth that will only be realized when borrowers repay their debts many years down the line.
IF MANY MILLIONS IN DEBTS ARE SPAWNED BY 1 MILLION DEPOSITED IN A BANK THEN THE ILLUSION IS THAT THE SYSTEM IS NOW MANY MILLIONS WEALTHY BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE MILLION IN THE SYSTEM AND UNTIL AND ONLY IF ALL THE BORROWERS SUCCESSFULLY REPAY THEIR LOANS, THIS WEALTH IS A MIRAGE, VIRTUAL, IN NAME ONLY NOT SUBSTANCE. IF SUCH LOANS ARE NON PRODUCTIVE MADE FOR LAVISH ENJOYMENT (BUY HOUSES, CARS, APPLIANCES) THEN THEY WON’T REGENERATE WEALTH TO REPAY THE LOANS AND IF THESE BORROWERS ARE RECKLESS THEN IT IS A CERTAINTY MANY WILL DEFAULT SO THAT THE SYSTEM IS SADDLED WITH MANY MILLIONS OF DEBTS WHEN THERE IS ONLY ONE MILLION OF ACTUAL WEALTH IN THE SYSTEM.
THUS THE SYSTEM IS HIT WITH MULTIPLE ‘WHAMMIES’, THE WEALTH IS NOW DISPROPORTIONATELY IN THE HANDS OF THE FEW, SAVERS’ MONEY HAS BEEN EMPTIED BY RECKLESS LENDING AND MANY MULTIPLES IN DEBT VS ACTUAL SYSTEM WEALTH HAS BEEN CREATED BY REPEATED RECYLCING OF MONEY DEPOSITED IN BANKS.
GOVERNMENTS CAN PRINT MORE MONEY BUT THIS DOES NOT TRULY CREATE WEALTH IN THE SYSTEM, ONLY IF AND WHEN ALL THESE BORROWERS EARN AND REPAY THEIR LOANS HAS THE WEALTH OF THE SYSTEM REALIZED THE WEALTH ALL THESE LOANS CREATED THE IMPRESSION.
ONLY WHEN THE BORROWERS REPAY THEIR LOANS MANY YEARS LATER WOULD THE SYSTEM TRULY FULFILL THE WEALTH THAT IT APPEARS TO POSSESS BY PEOPLE BUYING SO MANY HOUSES ON LOAN. IF THEY CANNOT REPAY, THEN THIS WEALTH IS A MIRAGE, A PIE IN THE SKY.
Money should be tagged ‘not for relending’:
If you are going to make lending a major player in your economy, it is reckless, irresponsible not to tag money.
Thus money that has been lent out should have a tag on it that say, ‘not for relending’ and whenever the borrower repays an instalment, the tag is removed from money equivalent to the amount repaid and be made available again for lending.
BECAUSE MONEY IS NOT TAGGED, MONEY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN LENT CAN BE LENT AGAIN MANY TIMES PRODUCING A HIGHLY RISKY SITUATION OF OVER-LEVERAGING. THE ECONOMY BOOMS BUT IT IS ON VOLATILE NITROGLYCERINE THAT CAN EXPLODE. IF MONEY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN LENT IS TAGGED ‘NOT FOR RELENDING’ THEN THE RISK OF MULTIPLE LENDING OF THE SAME MONEY IS REDUCED AND THERE IS UNLIKELY TO BE A CATACLYSMIC SYSTEM THREATENING COLLAPSE.
TO BE RESPONSIBLE, MONEY LENT SHOULD BE TAGGED ‘NOT FOR LENDING’ AND THAT TAG REMOVED INCREMENTALLY WITH EACH REPAYMENT BY BORROWERS.
BECAUSE MONEY IS NOT TAGGED, THE RISK IS AND THE REALITY IS THAT MANY MULTIPLES OF LENDING OF THE SAME MONEY HAS OCCURRED. THUS YOU SEE ALL THE SHINING EXPENSIVE HOUSES IN MALAYSIAN SUBURBS AND YOU ARE IMPRESSED HOW BOLEH MALAYSIA IS BUT THIS WEALTH IS AN ILLUSION. UNTIL BUYERS HAVE FULLY REPAID THEIR LOANS, THIS VIEW OF PROSPERITY IS A MIRAGE THAT MAY TURN TO NIGHTMARE SHOULD BORROWERS FIND THEMSELVES INSOLVENT AS IS THE CASE IN UK, US AND NOW INCREASINGLY IN BUST PROOF WE ARE DIFFERENT AUSTRALIA.
Prosperity built on debt:
In the past, young couples fresh from universities would rent even a room somewhere and take the bus or drive a ‘bone-shaker’ until they are relatively well established but nowadays the government is offering no down payment for graduates to buy houses and they immediately desire to own a ‘decent’ new car rather than take a bus or drive a bone shaker.
PEOPLE ARE BORROWING FROM THE FUTURE TO PAMPER THEMSELVES TODAY SO THAT WHEN TOMORROW COMES, THEY HAVE NOTHING AND WILL HAVE TO LIVE ON NOTHING.
BORROWING TO START A BUSINESS THAT WILL EARN MONEY TO REPAY IS DIFFERENT FROM BORROWING FOR CONSUMPTION OR LUXURIOUS LIVING THAT WILL NOT EARN MONEY TO HELP REPAY THAT BORROWING.
Strauss-Kahn accuser's media blitz carries risks
NEW YORK (Reuters) - After more than two months in seclusion and anonymity, the hotel maid who accused Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexually assaulting her is telling her story and hoping for success in the court of public opinion.
This is a fool talking and it probably has hidden motive eg he is rooting for DSK.
You mean if it has risks, you refrain from media blitz? It is an example of being calculating that the Buddha said is the path to woe.
It is not because the media blitz (who says it is a media blitz? Just because the media dwells on it does not mean the maid blitzed the media) carries risks that you don’t do it or it carries no risks or big gains that you do it. The reason you publicize your case is to inform the public about your plight or story.
THIS IS A CALCULATING DELUDED PERSON TALKING AND HIS ADVICE OR VIEWS IS NOT WORTH CONSIDERING. RISK IS NOT A CONSIDERATION IN GOING PUBLIC, WHICH DOES NOT ITSELF CONSTITUTE A BLITZ THAT REQUIRES COORDINATION AND FINANCIAL MUSCLE. IF YOU WANT TO INFORM THE PUBLIC WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU, YOU SPEAK PUBLICLY EVEN IF IT NEGATIVELY AFFECTS YOUR CASE. RISK ASSESSMENT IS A MAD CONSIDERATION IN WHETHER TO GO PUBLIC OR NOT AND SO THE PERSON IS A FOOL.
No relending? What do you think?
Supposed you have $1 million in a bank. Do you think the money is sitting pretty there or the bank would have lent it out either in a lump sum or in multiple portions?
This money that belonged to you that the bank lent out would be used to buy various things and handed to vendors who would then re-deposit the money into their bank accounts even in many different banks.
And what would these other banks receiving portions of the money that used to belong to you do with the money? Lend it out of course.
And so the ‘merry go round’ of an initial one million deposited in one bank being lent, received and re-deposited by new owners to be relent again and again even many times fuelling consumption even many times that million in a volatile mixture like nitroglycerine waiting to explode and it definitely will one day.
MACC should investigate this:
Two Australian currency firms have admitted to paying millions in bribes to secure printing for the plastic RM$5 note and Badawi was finance minister and it is alleged that kickbacks reached all the way to him. It would be sensational to see a former PM jumping off a building because he could not cope with MACC officers.
TWO Reserve Bank currency firms are expected to become the first Australian companies to plead guilty to paying multimillion-dollar bribes to high-ranking foreign officials.
The planned guilty pleas come amid fresh revelations showing that some of the RBA polymer banknote firms' previous directors ignored legal advice and approved huge payments to tax haven accounts linked to overseas lobbyists and agents.
The Age can reveal that the full list of tax haven accounts used by Securency or Note Printing Australia between 1999 and 2009 is greater than previously reported and raises serious questions about the level of scrutiny applied by RBA-appointed board members.
Advertisement: Story continues below
The RBA companies wired more than $30 million to accounts - including several now alleged by police to have been used by middlemen to pay bribes - in Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Belgium, the Seychelles, Isle of Man, Guernsey, Jersey, the Bahamas, United Arab Emirates and Hong Kong.
The Age can also reveal that the RBA companies recently held discussions with lawyers and are planning to plead guilty to paying kickbacks to senior central bank officials in Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia between 1999 and 2005.
NPA and Securency, which are respectively fully and half-owned and supervised by the Reserve Bank, are understood to be still finalising the details of their legal position.
The RBA yesterday said it was unable to answer several questions because of upcoming court action and a continuing Australian Federal Police investigation.
In a statement, the RBA said: ''The judicial process is now under way and there are appropriate times in that for formal pleas. The boards of both Securency and NPA are taking legal advice in order to participate in that process.''
The RBA has overhauled its companies' operations, appointed new board members, banned the use of agents and worked with federal police since The Age exposed alleged misconduct at Securency in May 2009.
Federal police on July 1 charged the companies and seven former executives with bribery offences. It is the first time the nation's foreign bribery laws, passed in 1999, have been used in a prosecution.
In response, the RBA expressed deep regret that the governance arrangements in place at the companies had been unable to detect or prevent alleged wrongdoing. The AFP has said it has no evidence that former board members were involved in any alleged bribery.
Despite attempts by the RBA to distance its former appointees to the firms' boards from the scandal - governor Glenn Stevens has defended the directors before Federal Parliament - new information raises questions about the adequacy of their supervision of Securency and NPA.
Directors who fail to exercise proper oversight can be held liable under Australian criminal or corporate law.
During the period for which the firms are expected to admit to bribery, they were chaired by former RBA deputy governor Graeme Thompson, who was also chief of corporate watchdog the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. Alongside him on both of the company boards was former RBA assistant governor Les Austin, who resigned from Securency last month, just
weeks before the criminal charges were laid.
Former federal Liberal Party treasurer Mark Bethwaite and former RBA board member Dick Warburton sat on the NPA board during the alleged offending period. None of the four men responded to inquiries by The Age yesterday.
In the case of Securency, tax haven payments were made after its board endorsed external legal advice in June 2006 not to make payments to agents engaging in ''any tax evasion schemes''.
After the Securency board endorsed this advice, Mr Thompson and his fellow directors authorised the payment of more than $18 million to accounts held by Securency middlemen in tax haven locations. The payments were made between late 2006 and September 2009.
The firms will appear before the Melbourne Magistrates Court today for a preliminary hearing.

Read more:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/bribes-firms-to-plead-guilty-20110726-1hyna.html#ixzz1TGzt6FeU

Cultivate good habits:
The person speaking may think he is speaking good sensible advice when it is the opposite, it is meaningless and has deadly consequences for him.
IT IS NOT GOOD HABITS THAT YOU MUST CULTIVATE AND BAD HABITS YOU MUST DROP BECAUSE THEN YOU ARE MERELY A MINDLESS ROBOT OF YOUR HABITS HEADING FOR THE CLIFF OF DOOM BECAUSE ALL ROBOTS ARE HEADED FOR DESTRUCTION AND THEIR EXISTENCE IS A MEANINGLESS REHASH OF THOSE HABITS THAT DICTATE WHAT THEY SAY OR DO.
IT IS NOT GOOD HABITS THAT YOU SHOULD CULTIVATE BUT YOU SHOULD SEE THE GOOD OR HARM OF WHAT YOU DO AND THUS SEEING YOU WILL AVOID DOING THINGS THAT ARE HARMFUL AND DO THINGS THAT ARE GOOD, AS THE OCCASION REQUIRES, WHAT HAS HABITS GOT TO DO WITH THIS?
A PERSON HAS HABITS ONLY BECAUSE HE IS A ROBOT WHO HAS PLANS OF WHAT TO DO THAT HE KEEPS REHASHING WHICH IS WHY THEY ARE HABITS. A PERSON OF TRUTH WHO IS NOT A ROBOT HAS NO HABITS, HE DOES THINGS AS AND WHEN REQUIRED AS THE SITUATION REQUIRES WITHOUT RESORTING TO HABITS.
ANYONE WHO ASKS OTHERS TO ADOPT HABITS IS A FOOL HEAPING KARMA TO BE EXPERIENCED AS FUTURE SUFFERING.
There are no good habits, all habits are evil:
What is the point of having a good habit if it is not something that you remember or automatically rehash many times in the future, often irresistibly so, you cannot avoid activating those habits?
BECAUSE HABITS REQUIRE A ROBOTIC REHASHING EXISTENCE IT IS ALWAYS SUFFERING, ENSLAVING AND THERE ARE NO GOOD HABITS, THEY ARE ALL EVIL, MAKE A PERSON A MINDLESS AUTOMATON.
THUS TO PERCEIVE SOME HABITS AS GOOD IS DELUSION, THE PERSON HAS FALSE PERCEPTION AND UNDERSTANDING.
Recorded rehashed understandings:
People will admit they have opinions or views about various subjects not realizing that these opinions or views are de facto recorded (not true or genuine specific) understandings of things happening to them.
Just as everything they say or do, what and how they think and perceive is rehashed, emotional people’s understanding too is never genuine or true but recorded and replayed again and again to meet demands of the occasions.
Thus when a subject is broached for which they have recorded understandings or views or opinions, they will defend their opinions and views that they are attached to and perceive as true or correct.
IF YOU HAVE A VIEW ON A MATTER THAT DIFFER FROM ANOTHER, EITHER YOU OR BOTH ARE WRONG, YOU CANNOT BOTH BE CORRECT AND IN THE USUAL CASE, BOTH ARE WRONG, BOTH ARE DELUDED. AND THESE VIEWS THAT YOU EXPRESS, DEFEND AND ARE ATTACHED TO ARE VIEWS THAT ARE RECORDED, FIXED AND ARE YOUR FALSE REHASHABLE UNDERSTANDINGS OF THINGS THAT YOU FALL BACK ON TO EXPLAIN THINGS AND GUIDE YOUR ACTIONS.
THUS IF YOU AGREE YOU HAVE VIEWS THAT CAN BE DEFINED APPROXIMATELY OR EVEN PRECISELY AS SUCH AND SUCH THEN YOU ARE ADMITTING TO REHASHED UNDERSTANDING.
A PERSON WITH TRUE UNDERSTANDING DOES NOT HAVE RECORDED UNDERSTANDINGS THAT HE RECALLS TO APPLY TO A PRESENT SITUATION. HE SEES AND UNDERSTANDS THE STRANDS OF EACH PRESENT OCCASION AND THUS TRULY SPECIFICALLY UNDERSTANDING HE COMPOSES A VIEW OF WHAT HE UNDERSTANDS AND ACTS ACCORDINGLY JUST FOR THIS OCCASION.
Concentration is the source of supernatural powers:
There are many supernatural powers (eg flying through the air, walking on water and diving through the earth, appearing and disappearing, stopping someone from splitting a log with an axe, making another person invisible, creating bread out of nothing) and there is no magic or mystery or alternative sources of supernatural powers.
The only source of supernatural powers according to the Buddha is the attainment of a certain level of concentration. It is the concentration of a mind developed to a high level that gives that mind supernatural powers.
Thus the mind who is able to stop thinking at will has a higher concentration than the mind that cannot stop thinking, the mind that can stop stirring to be attracted or repulsed by things is higher in concentration than the mind that can stop thinking and the mind that has shed all experiences of pain and pleasure is higher in concentration that the mind that neither likes nor dislikes.
THIS IS THE ONLY INDISPUTABLE HIERARCHY OF CONCENTRATION RANGING FROM SERENITY OF MIND WITHOUT STYLE PROGRESSING TO NO THINKING THENCE NEITHER LIKING NOR DISLIKING AND FINALLY NEITHER PAIN NOR PLEASURE. WHOEVER HAS ATTAINED A HIGHER CONCENTRATION HAS A HIGHER ESCAPE FROM SUFFERING, HAS A MORE PLEASANT EXISTENCE AND HE EXERCISES GREATER SUPERNATURAL POWERS.
Thus when Saripputta sitting in meditation having attained a high state of concentration was given a massive blow on the head by a yakka, he experienced only a mild headache where an elephant would have been knocked over many feet.
THERE ARE SUPERNATURAL POWERS AND THEIR SOURCES ARE NOT MYSTERIOUS OR RANDOM BUT THE SOURCE OF SUPERNATURAL POWER IS CONCENTRATION OF THE MIND. SO LONG AS A PERSON HAS ATTAINED CESSATION OF THINKING, NEITHER LIKING NOR DISLIKING AND NEITHER PAIN NOR PLEASURE HE HAS ATTAINED HIGH CONCENTRATION AND WIELDS SUPERNATURAL POWERS.

Many times the Buddha said concentration is the key:
Reflecting people’s lack of true understanding they do not realize that always the Buddha spoke of concentration (not virtue or wisdom or anything else) as the key to supernatural powers.
"Once, Kevatta, a certain monk thought: 'Where do these four great elements -- the earth, liquid, fire, and the wind property -- cease without remainder?' Then he attained to such a state of concentration (not wisdom or virtue) that the way leading to the gods appeared in his centered mind (concentrated). So he approached the gods of the retinue of the Four Great Kings and, asked them the question.

"When a monk enters & emerges from that attainment, his mind is pliant & malleable. Limitless concentration is well developed. With his limitless concentration, then whichever of the six higher knowledges he turns his mind to know & realize, he can witness them for himself whenever there is an opening.
"If he wants, he wields manifold supranormal powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, and mountains. He dives in and out of the earth. He walks on water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting crosslegged he flies through the air. With his hand he touches and strokes even the sun and moon. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds. He can witness this for himself whenever there is an opening.
"If he wants, he hears -- by means of the divine ear-element -- both kinds of sounds: divine and human, whether near or far. He can witness this for himself whenever there is an opening.
"If he wants, he knows the awareness of other beings, having encompassed it with his own awareness. He discerns a mind with passion as a mind with passion. He discerns a mind with delusion as a mind with delusion. He can witness this for himself whenever there is an opening.
"If he wants, he recollects his manifold past lives (lit: previous homes), i.e., one birth, two births, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. Thus he remembers his manifold past lives in their modes and details. He can witness this for himself whenever there is an opening.
"If he wants, he sees -- by means of the divine eye, -- beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings -- who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, and mind, held wrong views and undertook actions under their influence -- after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation. He can witness this for himself whenever there is an opening.
Juñha Sutta:Moonlit
Ven. Sariputta and Ven. Maha Moggallana were staying in Pigeon Cave. Then, on a moonlit night, Ven. Sariputta -- his head newly shaven -- was sitting in the open air, having attained a certain level of concentration (not wisdom or comfort or whatever).
Two yakkhas who were companions were flying from north to south on some business. They saw Ven. Sariputta -- his head newly shaven -- sitting in the open air. The first yakkha said, "I'm inspired to give this contemplative a blow on the head."
The second yakkha said, "Enough of that. Don't lay a hand on the contemplative. He's outstanding, of great power and might."
A second time, the first yakkha said, "I'm inspired to give a blow on the head."
A second time, the second yakkha admonished.
A third time, the first yakkha said.
A third time, the second yakkha admonished."
Then the first yakkha gave Ven. Sariputta a blow on the head. And with that blow he might have knocked over an elephant seven or eight cubits tall, or split a rocky crag. But right there the yakkha -- yelling, "I'm burning!" -- fell into the Great Hell.
Now, Ven. Moggallana -- with his divine eye -- saw the yakkha give Ven. Sariputta a blow on the head. He went to Ven. Sariputta and said, "I hope you are well, friend Sariputta. I hope you are feeling no pain."
"I am well, friend Moggallana. But I do have a slight headache."
"How amazing, friend Sariputta! How great your power and might! Just now a yakkha gave you a blow on the head. So great was that blow. But all you say is this: 'I am well. But I do have a slight headache'!"
"How amazing, friend Moggallana! How great your power and might! Where you saw a yakkha just now, I didn't even see a dust devil!"
The Blessed One -- with his divine ear -- heard those two great beings speak in praise of one another. He on that occasion exclaimed:
Whose mind is like rock, steady, unmoved (concentrated),
dispassionate for things that spark passion,
unangered by things that spark anger:
When one's mind is developed like this,
from where can there come suffering & stress?
Existing is about surviving, being happy and avoiding suffering:
Existing is about surviving, living as long as possible before dying and so if it is possible not only to exist for 60,000 Ages or eternities without dying but existing in HEAVENLY BLISS DEVOID OF ANY SUFFERING that far surpasses human bliss, then the wise person will abandon all pursuits here to obtain the state.
The Buddha taught that it is the concentration of a mind that is the key to that being’s bliss and longevity and so it is concentration that is the aim of any being who wishes to longevity in heavenly bliss.
Guarding the way to this heavenly longevity is virtue. Before you can attain great concentration you must develop great virtue (no killing, harming, telling lies, mischief, stealing, divisive speech). As the Buddha said, great is the gain in concentration when it is perfected by virtue.
WITHOUT DEVELOPING GREAT VIRTUE (GOOD CONDUCT AND SPEECH) YOU CANNOT HAVE GREAT CONCENTRATION. WITHOUT GREAT CONCENTRATION YOU CANNOT HAVE GREAT WISDOM.
Counsel to the Bhikkhus
"Such and such is virtue (virtue can be objectively defined and cannot be disputed by anyone); such and such is concentration; and such and such is 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."
Limited & Limitless concentration:
The Buddha: With his limitless concentration (the Buddha repeatedly specified concentration not virtue or wisdom or anything else), then whichever of the six higher knowledges he turns his mind to know & realize, he can witness them for himself whenever there is an opening.

What the Buddha is saying is that there is limited or restricted concentration and there is limitless or unrestricted concentration.
How might this be possible?
Suppose it is the force acting on a consciousness that restricts or limits its concentration and it is possible through correct practice to purge that consciousness utterly off the defiling intrusion of force, then such a mind freed of the defilement of force becomes limitlessly concentrated and with limitless concentration it wields great supra normal powers.
And it is force and nothing else acting on a consciousness that is responsible for its limitations which are far more severe than ordinary people realize.
NOT ONLY IS THE CONCENTRATION OF EMOTIONAL PEOPLE RESTRICTED IT IS FAR MORE RESTRICTED THAN THEY REALIZE.
Thus in order to obtain limitless concentration you must successfully purge or cleanse your consciousness off the presence of force.
THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO TRULY PURGE YOUR MIND OF THE DEFILEMENT OF FORCE TO ACHIEVE LIMITLESS CONCENTRATION THAT GIVES SUPERNATURAL POWERS, INCREASING HAPPINESS AND LONGEVITY THAT EXTENDS EVEN TO 60,000 ETERNITIES AND IT IS THIS:
  1. ELIMINATE YOUR STYLE OR CONSTANT MAD USELESS USE OF FORCE TO STRETCH EG SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE (LOUDNESS) THAT LEADS TO STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND INABILITY TO CONCENTRATE APART FROM MANDATING A ROBOTIC REHASHING EXISTENCE AND BEING THE GENERATOR OF TORMENTING EMOTIONS.
  2. ACHIEVE THE CESSATION OF THINKING THAT EVEN SHORN OF STYLE, REQUIRES THE USE OF FORCE THAT ENDS WITH THE CESSATION OF THINKING SO THAT THE MIND BECAUSE ONE POINTED OR UNIFIED AND THEREFORE MORE CONCENTRATED.
  3. ACHIEVE NEITHER LIKING NOR DISLIKING, NEITHER STIRRING YOUR MENTAL FORCE ATTRACTIVELY OR REPULSIVELY AT THINGS HAPPENING THAT GIVES AN EVEN GREATER DIVORCE FROM FORCE.
  4. FINALLY THE PURGATION OF THE RECEPTION OF FORCE BY THE MIND TO EXPERIENCE NEITHER PAIN NOR PLEASURE. FORCE IS THE SOURCE OF PAIN AND PLEASURE AND BY CUTTING OFF ALL RECEPTION OF FORCE YOU EXPERIENCE A TOTAL ABSENCE OF FORCE AND THEREFORE EVEN HIGHER CONCENTRATION.

SHORN OFF ALL FORCE ENDOGENOUS OR EXTRANEOUS, THE MIND BECOMES LIMITLESSLY CONCENTRATED AND THIS STATE THAT ORDINARY PEOPLE HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT LET ALONE EXPERIENCED, IS INFINITELY SUPERIOR IN TERMS OF ABSENCE OF SUFFERING AND HAPPINESS COMPARED TO THE RESTRICTED STATE AND IT IS THE KEY TO POSSESSING SUPERNATURAL POWERS AND LONGEVITY THAT EXTENDS EVEN TO 60,000 ETERNITIES.
Did you understand the Buddha?
Even if you disagree with the Buddha, you object to what he is saying, you must understand that he is telling you that there is something called limitless concentration that a being can develop and with this limitless concentration, he wields great supra normal powers, achieves great happiness and absence of suffering and longevity that extends to even 60,000 eons or Ages or eternities.
If you did not understand this, how can you be justified to object to what he taught? If you are not justified and you object then you are headed for suffering not safety.
Jesus said, let your yes be yes, anything more comes from evil (not good). Before you object to what Jesus said or reject him as teacher you must first understand what he tells you. A person with true understanding will understand that what is said is absolutely true and if you did not understand it, it means you do not have understanding not just here but always and you are objecting based on force, stirred repulsion of your mental force or ill will.
Programmed rules understanding can be fatal:
Ordinary people are do not realize their understanding is actually generalized, nonspecific, recorded and merely rehashed to fit a current situation and that this can turn out disastrous even fatal.
Years ago a helicopter crashed killing the occupants when it tried to hoist a metal cap on top of a telecommunication tower in Sri Damansara and it may be an example of succumbing to false programmed logic masquerading as true understanding.
The rules logic is that a helicopter can be employed to hoist a cap assembled conveniently on the ground instead of up there and then use a helicopter to lift and place it on its target, helicopters have been used to lift heavy loads in many applications. This is a programmed recorded rules logic that has exceptions that you do not realize to your own danger even death.
It is one thing using a helicopter to transport heavy loads from one place to another but it is another thing lifting and accurately placing a metal cap that will sway uncontrollably because of the turbulence of the helicopter’s blades. Further the metal cap can get caught with the tower and thus stuck, it can tug back at the helicopter which can then be destabilized so that it will crash like a stone. If the helicopter was tugged by the trapped cap to tilt sideways, it may lose lift and crash like a stone.
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE WHERE PEOPLE THINK THEY HAVE UNDERSTANDING, HAVE TRUE UNDERSTANDING BUT IT IS PROGRAMMED UNDERSTANDING BEING REHASHED AND APPLIED NOT REALIZING THE PRESENT SITUATION DEMANDS SPECIAL UNDERSTANDING OF DANGERS PRESENT THAT RENDERS WHAT SEEMS INGENIUS, ASSEMBLING ON GROUND AND HOISTING UP A SUICIDAL PROPOSITION.
Only force can limit or restrict consciousness:
If a person’s consciousness can be limited or restricted, then only something with force or force can limit and restrict and so it is that force is terrible, tormenting restrictor starting at the bottom with style or the constant mad use of force to stretch, change speed and strength whose surmounting leads to next force barricade in thinking that requires using force, whose successful surmounting leads to the next barricade, the attractive and repulsive of stirring of mental force to like and dislike and so on.
What happens when people have an idea?
Faced with a problem, people think and ideas occur to them that they may select from to apply to the problem and they may think they have understanding and understanding is involved when it is absent.
What happens is that they picture what the problem is that they have that may be even seriously flawed or defective or deficient. This is perception or a mental image that has nothing to do with understanding. Then they consult their mental jukeboxes and it may come up with several possibilities that they may then use their rules logic to select which one is best suited to apply or which one they like best or is attracted to.
PICTURING A PROBLEM HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH UNDERSTANDING OR SEEING IT AS IT ACTUALLY IS, IT IS MERELY VISUALIZING OR PERCEIVING IT THAT MAY BE SERIOUSLY DEFECTIVE OR DEFICIENT. HAVING AN IDEA OR MANY RIVAL IDEAS ABOUT HOW TO SOLVE IT IS ABOUT SEARCHING AND FINDING RECORDED IDEAS OF HOW TO SOLVE THAT REQUIRES NO UNDERSTANDING. ONCE SELECTED IT MERELY REQUIRES EXECUTION OF THE IDEA.