Relevant Information.

IMID Commentary

Recent Correspondence

By sharing my need for additional time and resources I hope to be able to finish this work well.

However, I would’ve never known where to begin without your guidance. Someone pointed out the need to help my friend David and I was able to respond.

Prior to that, I was flying blind, and not sure of my way. I had a dim recollection of the incident and my sheepish avoidance, so followed through with work that shows how my life followed as a result of the communities leadership.

Without full knowledge of where I’ve gone wrong, discovery becomes an endless effort to prove what no one can accept and ongoing crime will continue to prove that it is in fact - really happening.

Accusing witnesses of delusional thinking is likely to condemn us all for failing to believe in each other. And this time, we’re not alone; Agent Smith is watching.

Do we really have to rely upon someone, or something else because they've read all the words, or must we make way because we were denied an alternative?

What's been spoken is far more ambiguous and open to interpretation. Like drafts in the light and optical recognition - its much more lucid, so the clarity and specificity we can achieve is unrivaled.

At a minimum, let's be relieved of the obstructions and objections without consent. One persons opinion is not enough to allow a physical, or financial restraint to be levied upon another.

Given clean and sober living, in a safe place (or one that we help to keep safe), we can discipline ourselves to make sound decisions with feedback we’re afforded while on the job.

An opinion written by someone on paper or papyrus, or something someone heard, or believed to be true about creation and the Creator may be suspect even if only because the medium naturally fragments. Must we surrender our judgement to the same fragmentation. No, we've turned to the mediums source and work in the light to be rid of the problem raised at Babel.

Why should we suffer what’s been written if we won’t survive it. We work with what’s been propagated to be clear once again.

And only a biological parents, teaching thier children how to adapt to this environment - no matter how flawed, or obstructed they may be - can provide the source of adaptation required of them; our own genetics.

What's really missing is compassion for the builders. Our loving God is still there, it's just very hard to communicate with Him/Her; the closer we get, the more confusing it becomes to become clear about his work and intentions. So we shine the light on what we know to be true, to be truly useful to Him, and let Him make the decisions. Please see also: Pleading

Recent Tweets (paraphrased)

The fragmentation of language is all we need to justify the odd habit of putting things away. It’s not the need to hide anything at all, though there are many who would, the truth is not long hidden.

It's the belief that we’re not in control of ourselves, or our experiences, that prevents us from having compassion and empathy for others. For example: “No you’re not powerless, you just won’t admit that someone else took control of your sexuality!”

The sense of being a failure, or being found out is based upon the belief that we’re bad, defective or worthless, as in “I’m a mistake.” To be responsible about being wrong, we admit the behavior as a mistake, not ourselves, as in “I lost my judgement when drinking and need to stop”.

So I added a set of domains hosted by a domain reputation management firm well prepared for warfare and a site intended to educate those of us who think we can take refuge elsewhere.

While some things may be improving, the problems that motivated the pilgrims to reach the new world; witch burnings and lynch mobs, are easier to accomplish behind this thin veil, and many impoverished are without defense.

For example, I told my friend that someone I know was hung by the neck in New Mexico. However, I didn’t know that person then, in that ever so compromising position. And, what I know now, I know because I paid attention to what that person (who I didn’t know then) expressed. I also realize that I ought to pay more attention to what I post, since what happened there then, may have been related to what I said on the phone, and posted before I left to respond to a concern my daughter brought up.

I was forced to admit that the person who was hung by the neck may have been someone like me, who’s power to create was replaced, and power to express denied, by somebody who articulated the body to prove that there is a limit to what can be said - even if it was to express love, but there are some who may claim that the power to create was replaced by the power to destroy, and that even my memory can't serve me adequately because it's been shown that repressed memories have prevented me from full knowledge of the circumstance and it may have been me that did the deed.

Our failure to be able to create as children may be denied by childish behavior such as envy or jealousy, but it was replaced by the power to destroy. Rather than having respect for the effort to rival powers granted to our elders by emulating those that chose to learn how and prove what takes place as a natural process during life, someone chose to deny how it is achieved out of disgust for those who are not yet able.

Without evaluating how serious an accusation, or claim was that led to the terrorism we faced in 1998 (without a judgement and a proof) those who would prevent due process from a just rule are allowed to rob witnesses of their competence.

Drugged and under duress, they’re made to confess the sin of their captors.

And a death sentence ought not be imposed upon expressions of love, or the effort to teach, heal, or confront those who can't. The naïve ought not be committed (more or less) by stations of size, and the needle struggles to be free like any other fancy to be - from our grounds, but is it really wrong to seek out those who know what to do, and how to do it in order to gain the power to do so?

Societies declare agitation to be a crime when intended, but cannot correct it without a respondents competent appeal. If rhetoric has been used by a ruling party to threaten or intimidate by withholding evidence from a forum used for mediation, the rule they achieve functions without a clear understanding of the crime, or the awareness of those who they rule.

And crime continues in order to be proven to occur. We might fabricate a facsimile to better understand what's happened, but proof is withheld, reporting is obstructed and Doctors can only reduce the harm by employing means established before we could reckon at all.

IMID