A US Military Takeover Is Just a "Judas Kiss" Away

For the average citizen watching events such as the intense pursuit of the Tsarnaev brothers on television, it would be difficult to discern between fully outfitted police SWAT teams and the military.  The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies”[See p. 16 (3) here] the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.  The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule:  Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.  Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, calls the rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” and says, “It’s quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”  ***  One of the more disturbing aspects of the new procedures that govern military command on the ground in the event of a civil disturbance relates to authority. Not only does it fail to define what circumstances would be so severe that the president’s authorization is “impossible,” it grants full presidential authority to “Federal military commanders.” According to the defense official, a commander is defined as follows: “Somebody who’s in the position of command, has the title commander. And most of the time they are centrally selected by a board, they’ve gone through additional schooling to exercise command authority.”  As it is written, this “commander” has the same power to authorize military force as the president in the event the president is somehow unable to access a telephone. (The rule doesn’t address the statutory chain of authority that already exists in the event a sitting president is unavailable.) In doing so, this commander must exercise judgment in determining what constitutes, “wanton destruction of property,” “adequate protection for Federal property,” “domestic violence,” or “conspiracy that hinders the execution of State or Federal law,” as these are the circumstances that might be considered an “emergency.”  ***  “Governments never like to give up power when they get it,” says Afran. “They still think after twelve years they can get intelligence out of people in Guantanamo. Temporary is in the eye of the beholder. That’s why in statutes we have definitions. All of these statutes have one thing in common and that is that they have no definitions. How long is temporary? There’s none here. The definitions are absurdly broad.”  The U.S. military is prohibited from intervening in domestic affairs except where provided under Article IV of the Constitution in cases of domestic violence that threaten the government of a state or the application of federal law. This provision was further clarified both by the Insurrection Act of 1807 and a post-Reconstruction law known as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (PCA). The Insurrection Act specifies the circumstances under which the president may convene the armed forces to suppress an insurrection against any state or the federal government. Furthermore, where an individual state is concerned, consent of the governor must be obtained prior to the deployment of troops. The PCA—passed in response to federal troops that enforced local laws and oversaw elections during Reconstruction—made unauthorized employment of federal troops a punishable offense, thereby giving teeth to the Insurrection Act.

Well it's the thirtieth anniversary of the release of Return of the Jedi.  Interestingly Pastor Mark, as fundamentalist as he was, let his kids see the Star Wars movies, because he bought into the theory that "The Force" was Jesus, and his kids played with light savers when they were young.  The new Star Trek is out.  They love to talk about virtually aspect of this movie except for the plot, which seems to be under wraps.  Last night on Jeopardy I learned that "The Doors of Perception" was a novel about drugs written by Huxley in 1953, which was really ahead of its time.  I had always known that the full name of the band "The Doors" was "The Doors of Perception", so the whole band is an ode to drugs.  Northern Texas is having quite a time of it with all of these killer tornadoes and hail storms with baseball sized hail.  Today is the 39th anniversary of the LAPD tear gassing the house where six members of the Symbionese Liberation Army were holed up.  All six were killed along with titular leader Donald De Freeze, when the house caught fire and burned to the ground.  I was watching this TV coverage for hours on end, by myself.  I had always regarded the SLA as some kind of a plastic phoney organization and not to be trusted. There is medical news where the chance of the success of IVF or invetro furtelization - - was doubled from about thirty percent to 63% because now they are able to take progressive snap shots of the developing blastisists every twenty minutes and to select the healthiest one, while they are still in the incubator.  The break-through should gladden the hearts of extreme anti abortionists because it means fewer embryos will be destroyed.  The Power Ball jackpot remains at an all time record, which may remain an all time record for sometime to come, even if it's won tonight.  One person who needed money was cleaning out his closet and came accross an old Lottery ticket and won himself four million.  ABC news is continuing to mis-portray these Income Tax "targeting" hearings as some organized persecution of the tea party and patriotic groups.  But of course there was no news of foreign affairs or the economy, or the stuff that Congress is supposed to be doing in the way of passing badly needed legislation.  

It seems the Republican tea party deliberately leaked classified E mails.  But they doctored them over first and in fact told outright lies on the subject of the exchanges within the Obama administration.  Steve Miller testified before the house today and gotr highly hostile questioning.  The thing is that some IRS categories are more privileged than others.  There was a rush of groups in 2012 after the Citizens United ruling, to get this “social service” classification, because these groups don’t have to reveal their donors but can be used to funnel and launder vast sums of money.  Of course nobody in the mainstream media will relate this story objectively.  Bill Press this morning once again stated that AG Eric Holder has outlived his usefulness.  He has failed when it counted most.  He prosecuted John Edwards and wants all of the Associated Press sources.  And yet he would never go after so much as one Wall Street crook, and he refused to prosecute Bush or Dick Chaney or other higher officials of the previous administration.  There are few times when I’ve felt like saying “Right on, Holder”.  In terms of Moe Kelly- - he says that Black people “settled on the name” of Black, because it was better than Negro or colored, or those other names like spear chucker, or for that matter a “sixties hair style”.  Moe points out that every other ethnic group has their own special commercial outlets of food or clothing or entertainment.  Why shouldn’t Black people be able to do this, too?  The other strange story of the day was Pat Robertson giving a woman the advice when asked “How can I get past the fact that my husband cheated on me” and Pat Robertson says “Just don’t think about it”.  And in Dr. Levy fashion he says “Just think about the good things in your life” and I think he threw in a remark about “You could try fixing yourself up a little”.   I’m wondering when Gene Scott married that horse lady Christine, we all thought “Well, at last our pastor is settling down” and can look on Scott and Christine as a stable couple.  But we know that marriage only lasted a very few years.  Here he goes off balling a foxy porn queen, who is young enough to be his daughter.  I wonder what Pat would say about that.

I listened to Moe Kelly at nine.  He maintains that often a proponent of any idea has to “explain himself fully” and lay it all out.  If people think you’re hiding something or omitting a key element- - they’ll be less inclined to believe you.   Joe Drisco from around here knows of a book where they talk about "the physics of the soul with respect to the body".  That's a book I'd definitely like to read.  I like the Mike Meloy designation for his listeners as "Truth Seekers".  I believe that what is really Truth can withstand the scruteny of questioners.  Some of you may have wondered the wisdom of doubting "The Crucifixion Narritive" as I put it, of Jesus Christ.   Here are just a few factoids.  It's a well known axiom that police like to elicit Testimony of witnesses as soon after the crime as possible when memories are vivid and they speak from true emotion not filtered by rationalization or posing.  Yet, with the gospels, for some strange reason the initial "story" is a whole lot sketchier than subsequent "Revisions' when details are much more thoroughly filled in and the thing is more plausable.  The first question we need to answer is "Are their independant crucifixion records found elsewhere in contemporary history?  A big Negatori on that.   We must suspend logic to believe that the one statement of Jesus to the authorities of "I am the Messiah, and from here on you will see the son of man coming in the clouds of glory" is enough to draw the death penalty.  The authorities obviously regarded Jesus as a threat.  Why?  Wouldn't rather, the man who ended up being Freed according to the narritive 'Jesus Barrabus" have been much more of a "threat" to incite revolution.  I can almost guarentee you no Pastor or Christian radio comentator will be able to answer a single question on this page, because they have a going-on forty year track record of never having been able to answer any question I ever posed to them.  We are to believe that the Jewish mob in the public square intimidated Pontious Pilate into relenting on his decision to free Jesus saying "This man has done nothing wrong" but rather was intimidated by a crowd shouting "We have no King but Ceasar and if you don't crucify this man you are no friend of Ceasar".  We are told that Pilate took a basin and filled it with water and ceremoniously washed his hands (a particular Jewish custom) saying "I have no part in the guilt of this innocent man" and the crowd responds 'His blood be upon us and upon our children".   The crowd preferred to free a man who had comitted a Murder in a recent inserection rather than the Prince of Peace.   Most schollars pick the year of 85 AD for the "release" of Matthew and Luke.  Oddly this would be smack dab in ghe middle of Emperor Domecian's reign of repression.  Do you really think a whole eruption of desciples inspired by a new book on the market would go unknoticed by this suspicious minded Emperor?  People have to ask themselves, "What if I were really there while all of this was happening?  Would it be believable?   By the way AD 85 if fifty years.  This would be like a biography of Sonny Liston, or Patsey Klein, or Medger Evera or Pope John 23rd had just come out for the first time.  And if the majority of you readers don't know who those people were, you're making my point for me.  And consider this - - Governor Pilate is sprung on this reading public without any sort of "set up" of how Provincial governments or organized or the nature of the authority structure.  These readers wouldn't know Pilate - - a distant provincial governor from fifty years earlier- - any more than they'd know who the average Joe Blow stranger they were passing on the street.  Of course I have my theory on all of this and what actually happened.  I guess you might describe me as soneone who believes in asking questions that get Answers - - and mot merely asking questions that immediately prompt even more problematic, harder to answer questions.  (Selah)

"There are Old Testament verses which say that God was once a man as you or I, and that he did not know everything"
-Marcion  (and it happens to be true)

"God Used To Be A Polygamist" -Brigham Young

"God Is a Polygamist" - Gene Scott

Jehovah had a wife and her name was Ashera- - I think she was a Douglas fir or something

When Ancient Israel "Cut down the trees of the high places" the country met its doom soon after that.  So much for Cause and Effect

"This is a song about Marriage - - it's called Isis"
-Bob Dylan

"You come most Carefully upon your watch"
-name the Shakesphere play

"It's Not as Late as you Think.  Therefore it definitely Is later than you think"

"Oh! - a Riddle!" -Anne Baxter

"It's not like I want to take part in any kind of Quiz"
"It's just that I ain't got no Watch and you keep asking me what Time is is"
-Bob Dylan

"Most people wouldn't find a happy marital future for Jupiter and Isis.  Domecian may be the only person on the planet who believes these two are sexually compatable" 

John Lennon told me a tale about the nine lottery tickets, and the last one was definitely In the Money.  Dometian had a dream where he saw a young horse that was calling to him as he drank his 45 oz can of Romulan Ale.  Maybe John Lennon invented tripple Cue-ball, which is a triangulation of nine billiard balls inside the wooden triangle - - as the atom smasher moves into position to fire

Despots Like to Use "Narritives"

One politician supposedly came to Ronald Reagan one day seeking advice of "What can I say or do to insure that I win and to get my message accross?"  Ronald Reagan responded that what he needed was a story, a "narritive".  That is, a scenario of events that "sets the scene" that justifies whatever whacko ideas the political leader may care to put forth.  We see this in Judy's depiction of the Wall Street Protestors as anarchists and communists and people - - mauraders, if you will, who want to cease the property of the rich.  We see this also in Robert Gates' assertion that "Revolutions almost always turn out bad".  Actually this isn't true.  The thirty years war in the seventeenth century could be boiled down to France and Italy and the Catholic Church against the rest of the world in far flung places such as Prussia and England and Russia.  After the war ended in 1648,  England almost that exact same time instituted certain "common law rights" that we adopted in our Constitution as far as the right to face your accusers and trial by jury, and the right to cross examine the opponents witnesses.   The tea party has been trying to come up with a new narritive since the old one about the economy failing because of President Obama's socialist policies- - appears more flimsy and tattered with each passing day.  Not are all private areas of the economy stronger and more robust with each passing day,  but now a new study has announced that the government deficet has dropped to six hundred billion, which is about two hundred billion below where everybody expected we'd be at this point.  Mort Zuckerman can put that and his pipe and smoke it.  They say if the number of government jobs had grown, as it usually does upon most recession as a counter-balance measure both republicans and democrats agree on (but not this time) had this growth proceded along the previous pattern- the unemployment rate would now be 6.1% - - which isn't great, but it would be tollerable.  Anyhow that won't work now.  We have no need for Mitt Romney's talking about "slow walking the real estate crisis" or how the Dodd - Frank bill has crippled new bank loans, and all the rest.  So now we have some new narritives.  Moe Kelly and ABC news both played into the hands of the doom and gloomsters today in saying that President Obama is "facing the worst crisis of his Presidency' and "All Hell is breaking loose around him" in Washington.  We have the Bengazi narritive which is kind of an updated version of the "2016" movie script from last Summer when of course we learn this President was influenced by his Mother who was an orthodox Marxist- - - and how she divorced her husband when he turned Capitalist.  We hear that President Obama - - supports oil drilling in Brazil but has blocked oil production in a major way in this country.   We hear how President Obama "Prevented the Canadian oil pipeline from being built" and if he had, gasoline prices wouldn't have risen to nearly five dollars last year.  And now we hear how this President ordered security forces in Libya to "stand down" because Obama doesn't care about US deaths if Moslems do it, because the President is a Moslem himself and so of course he's never going to "admit" that Islamists can on occasion be hostile.  But today the President torpedoed these claims by release of the E Mails that are rather private- - which reveal step by step why itr was believed that wording the talking points the way we did last September is in the national interest- - and doesn't blow CIA leads as to who did it in the interest of flashy press coverage.   The President believed that saying "We don't know yet who did it' was the proper thing to do.  Politically, this proved to be the wrong decision.  As to the Internal Revenue Service thing - - my feeling now is "bring it on" because the Republicans will only look stupid bringing the thing up any more.  About as stupid as Will Horton going to Hope and saying "I know who murdered Raphael - - Nick Fallon.  But I can't tell you because if I did I would be prosecuted for attempted murder myself.  But I know Nick was up to no good.  You can count on that".

Christians have their crucifixion narritive, of course, by which an innocent "protestor against the inherent repressive nature of Judaism was martyred for his beliefs, because he on principle refused to deny his divinity.    That's a powerful narritive, all right.  The problem with that is that evidence I uncovered today supports my thesis that the first so called "Christians' were in fact following a Living Christ- - - first in Egypt and then to Rome, where at some point the founder died a natural death that went unherolded.   Perhaps no more powerful evidence exists that the "Catholic Church" as we know it did not exist in first century Rome is that - - Dometian was an Emperor who reigned for fifteen long years, and there is not a hint that ever persecuted Christians - - except for stuff that appeared in the Fourth Century that makes fleeting reference to some sort of persecution.   Since Dometian had such a despotic nature- - we know if Christians had been around the way they claimed to be preaching their "Gospel" that Dometian would have been on them like white on rice.   In the paragraph further down - - we note some interesting things about St Paul.  One of these he wasn't given to using the term "Christian".  In fact Catholics aren't given to referring to themselves as "Christians' but rather as Catholics.  Why do you suppose that is?   Were St Paul and Marcion really the same person?  They say we don't have any of Marcion's writings.  But what if we actually do?  What about those ten "epistles" to the Churches?   Marcion didn't reject the Old Testament or its prophecies of the Messiah on factual grounds- - but rather more etherial theological grounds.  Marcion accepted the "Crucifixion narritive" just as other groups like Jehovah's Witnesses, and Baptists and Mormons or Greek Orthodox do.  In fact Marcion-Paul elevated the whole death and reserrection thing that it's pretty much the centerpiece of his theology.   Do you remember what Tassitus said of those earliest Christians?  His last sentense was "Even to this day the sect of Christianity hasn't entirely died out".    He did not say they were growing.  He did not say they were a threat.   He did say they were an almost universally hated group.   One thing Marcion sought to change in His - - "narritive" was - - not only does his Luke lack the Christmas story - - but apparently reference to Christ's second coming were deleted.  (What you might call the Neil Savedra school)   Why would Martion NOT want reference to "The Last Days" in his theological repetuire?   Because it's something those original under-ground Christians believed in.  Marcion did not embrace THEIR messiah because THEIR messiah never claimed to have died and been raised from the dead, but appealed to his audience rather on some "Last Days" advent of the Kingdom of God on earth.  Think about it.  Sects that believe in an iminent Judgement Day are inherently short lived- - because obviously when "Judgement Day" fails to arrive, the people, one by one, abandon the sect.

Moe Kelly is upset at the Oxygen network again.  This time it isn’t baby mamas of rappers but rather it’s scandals of Church Leaders of Los Angeles,  Moe rattled off a lot of names of presumably famous pastors I’d never heard of, and have the feeling I wouldn’t want to, by how they have lived their lives.  I had Rush Limbaugh on for a while and he said Chris Matthews said “President Obama is bored his job and hates the routine duties of being an executive but would rather campaign all the time”.  But as it turns out I checked out that program and Chris Matthews was saying exactly the opposite.  That President Obama stepped up to the plate and grabbed the bull by the horns tackeling this Internal Revenue Service full on.  He fired Steve Miller last night, and another guy just under him resigned today.  But neither man was at the lead post when this abuse was alleged to have been going on.  Rather that was a Bush appointee.   We just had cold cut sandwiches for lunch, and French fries with catsup.  The tomato soup was so hot it took an extended time to let it cool down.  We had cantaloupe for desert.  I listened to Randy Rhodes at noon and at two, and I watched the soap opera.  The key remark of the entire day was Gabriel.  She remembered something that had also lodged in my mind.  It was that phone call that E J Di Mira received saying “OK- - so it’s done?  Good!” and he had a smile on his face.  Gabriel interoperated this as satisfaction for a malicious deed well done.  And I am inclined to agree.   Lucas is the last to find out about his mother having an affair, as he puts it, with the husband of his ex wife.  Awkward.

This is after dinner.  We had chicken Alfredo tonight.  I had three helpings of it all together and all of them were rather small.  I had my initial serving, with the squash, and that Prune guy gave me most of his, including some squash, and then seconds came around and I had that, too.  We had strawberry ice cream for dessert.  Before dinner I was reading up again on some old favorites like Marcion and Marcionism, looking for any new slant.  They say that Marcion believed in a lot of things he couldn’t if he endorsed Paul’s writings.  I was reading from Romans and Galations from my bible earlier.  It’s interesting that it would be unnecessary for Paul to write a letter to the Galation church condemning Judaizers, because if he was away- - and then visited the Church and learned first hand of the hericy, then he would be THERE.  So why write a letter saying you’re dismayed about it later?  It’s funny how for Rome- - Paul says ‘I have spiritual gifts I want to impart to you” and also “I would desire fruit from you”.  At times Paul sounds awfully narcissistic, saying another place he wants to teach them his Gospel, but also acknowledges that “Your faith affects the whole world” or something.    They say that Marcion was a preacher of the “Unknown God” named Monia or something - - this Gnostic prime source is given a personal name, which I’d never heard before.   It is said of him that “earth was a stranger to him”, not that earth didn’t know of Him, but that He as God never had “visited this planet before”.   I have trouble with this.  But elsewhere they admit that Marcion does not dispute the factual material of the Old Testament, or that OT scriptures spoke of the Messiah.    There was some group of Palinists in the early middle ages from 660 to about 850 or something - - which the “Emperor” (?) tried to snuff out.  I also reread Clement of Rome.   Much as I feared you can learn nothing of what things were actually like in Rome, Christian wise, at the end of the first century since Clement’s life biography was generally written centuries later.  But things are said like Paul referred to Clement, and that Peter personally anointed Clement as Pope.  But the Coptic Church has a rather different portrait making him more secular.

 

House Republicans Pass "Empoyee Flexability Bill

These republicans in the US House of Representatives are at it again.  Last week they passed a craftily worded bill to screw American Workers and to undo worker related rights that have been in existance for multiple decades.  House members in Tenessee originated this bill, that narrowly passed the US house with mostly, but not entirely - Republican house members voting for it's passage.  Here's more.  The Working Families Flexibility Act would instead supposedly allow employees to choose compensatory time instead of overtime pay when they worked more than 40 hours a week.  This means, of course, that it would apply only to workers who get paid by the hour — those at the bottom of the wage scale. They’re the least likely to have paid leave benefits. So the bill might seem a boon to them.  But it isn’t — mainly because these workers wouldn’t really have the choice the bill seems to give them.  Hypothetically, they could choose to continue getting overtime pay instead of opting for comp. time. We have to assume that many would, since $10.00 an hour — the average wage for workers without paid sick leave — is barely enough to lift a family of three above the federal poverty line.  But, as Working America argues, employers would have the upper hand. They could give workers incentives to choose comp. time, e.g., a better shift. They could pressure them.   True, the bill specifically prohibits employers from intimidating, threatening or coercing employees to accept comp. time instead of overtime pay.   But, as the National Women’s Law Center notes, we have more than enough evidence that many employers pay no mind to provisions in our labor laws that are supposed to protect low-wage workers.  Even workers who willingly chose comp. time couldn’t necessarily use it when they needed it.  An employer could legally deny a request by saying it “unduly disrupts … operations” or grant it “within a reasonable period,” rather than for the particular day(s) or hour(s) requested.
So much for taking a day off when your kid is sick — or her school declares a snow day and there’s no one else to care for her.  So much for knowing you can get a few hours off when you need to get legal protection from an abuser.  The Working Families Flexibility Act has another implication for low-wage workers. It really is, as Working America says, a “job killer” because it enables employers to get all needed work done on the cheap.   At this point, as the Fair Labor Standards Act intended, employers have a financial incentive to hire more workers — or offer some part-timers full-time jobs — when they need to get more work done because overtime is half again as costly as straight wage.  Comp. time obviously does away with the incentive.   So here you are, working mothers. You can’t be sure you’ll generally work only eight hours a day and thus have a little time to get to the grocery store, help your kids with their homework, etc.
You can’t be sure you’ll have time off when you need it — or enough time off for a major life event like childbirth because your employer can, at any time, convert all but 80 hours of your comp. time to pay.
You can’t work overtime to make ends meet. And if, like 7.6 million workers, you’ve got a part-time job, though you’d like full-time work, you’re probably stuck with the hours you’ve got.
If House Republicans hadn’t already made “flexibility” a suspect word, this bill would do it.

OJ Simpson was in that Las Vegas court again and explained for the first time the circumstances of that armed robbery.  He was told by friends insistently that “People are selling all your mother’s stuff.  What are you going to do about it?  You better come and see if you can salvage anything that’s left”. OJ said he would be going to Los Angeles and couldn’t make it to New York where his stuff was.  But they he was called back and informed that ALL of his stuff was in Las Vegas.  OJ said ‘I’ll be there”.  But of course he took five of his buddies along with him and they all had guns.  OJ now claims he had no idea.  But there is a tape of OJ making threatening remarks at the spot like “Nobody leave this room”.  OJ claims his attorney on the last outing strongly advised him not to testify because “Their evidence is so weak it will never stand up in court”.  Now OJ wants a new trial partially because “Those attorneys took an awful lot of money right out of my pension- with little to show for it”.  This event occurred six years ago and he’s already served several years of his 33 year term, or whatever.  Of course everyone is saying how “tired” and beaten down OJ Simpson looks now.  Some expert in psychology and such advised that even if OJ should get a new trial and win he’ll need extensive counseling because he doesn’t know how to live his life and to “process information”.  The guy accused OJ of being a narcicist.  It’s the “Mrs Grenville” adage of “The courts may acquit you but society never will”.

 
According to Mike Meloy - House member Michelle Bachman wants to move to Oregon because they have an anti gay marriage provision in their state Constitution.  There is a running gag that husband Marcus Bachman is gay, and that she'll leave him behind in Minisota.  Of course I hope Michelle knows that in Oregon they have legal physician assisted suicide.  That's almost a worse provision than gay marriage.  We'll just have to wait and see.


Various ethical problems are necessarily ignored with the Soap opera plot.  For instance, I've noted that one person to Not Yet ever have a meeting with "Father Eric" is Will Horton.  Since Salem is such a religious city shouldn't Will be a logical candidate as a good Catholic to talk to a Priest about his gayness.  Eric might also say that God admires people of their word, too.  People are trying to parse President's words when it comes to Bengazi saying that "terrorism" does not necessarily to Al Qaeda terrorism.  For those who would plead the blood of the cross for their salvation - - if they take Jesus' words literally - - then if you are forgiven a large debt owed- - but think youre free as a now Clensed Agent- - to nit pick on the debts of others to you, you're in for a nasty surprise because Jesus concludes that in such a case "The lord of the house will cut that servant to pieces" or some such thing.  And if we take Jesus at his Word, as I presume we are supposed to, then there are any number of people who Jesus didn't seem the least bit interested in forgiving.  I like to nail down my facts before I go wagging accusatory fingers at anybody- - no matter the crime.  Often there are other "reasonable explanations" for the same Events viewed in a different perspective.  First of all Kate comes in and explodes at Stephano for murdering Raphael out of sheer possessive vengeance because he wants her all to himself.  And then you have Elvis.  He has two motives- like killing two birds with one stone.  First he gets rid of Nick like his beloved wife to be asked him to do.  Stephano Di Mira put Samantha in her place yesterday.  But the other reason is that Elvis sees Raphael as a continuing threat to his own relation with Samantha and is in morbid fear he’ll go back to her.  He had the new “FBI” shirt on him that Johnny wanted, because he had out-grown the other one Raphael gave him.  And Johnny indicated he preferred living with Samantha and Raphael than here at the Mansion.  But looking from Nick’s side of the thing - - Will Horton has broken his Word to him – twice.  First he broke his Word saying he was the father of the baby.  He didn’t have to do that.  In fact if he’d kept silent - - all he would have done would be to make Chad look like a hysterical ranter, because he knew nothing.  But - - how dense can Will be to not figure out that Nick wants Will and his mother off his case all the time.  “Just let me and Gabriel form our own family without outside interference”.    You really have to be pretty dense - - not to know that continuing to lobby threats of a verbal nature- - or for Samantha to threaten Nick with a gun - - this does not constitute “leaving us alone”.  Now there is no reason why Nick shouldn’t just go to Roman and say “I hesitated to tell what I knew but my conscience was gnawing at me- - and I know that as a good citizen I owe it to society to report crimes.  I had made a deal with Will but since he never kept up his end of the bargain, there is no reason on God’s green earth to keep up mine, especially when it’s wrong.”

Fire is a treacherous thing as we know all to well in California.  Fire can spring up rapidly or suddenly change its mind, like a woman.  And yet in all Fire does, it does it without a Will.  It can be argued that in a sentense define what separates the Dead from the Living - - it could well be that the Living have a Will.  They are sensient beings.  Some people would extinguish the one thing in Man (or a major thing) that separates him from inaminate non living things.  The difference between a Man and most other animals, is that other Animals arrive at "decisions as to what they are going to do in any given situation" a whole lot quicker than does a human being.  Awareness for the most part is a linear thing.  They say the human brain "technically" can only process one bit of information at any given Instant.  It may be good as multi-tasking but still it has to take that split second to shift gears and move to the other topic.  If one person were simotaniously aware of all possible time lines of the Universe at once- - it's questionable whether any notable Events - - would even stand out in the mind at all.  So how is the Universe organized.  Is one side of the mass continuoum labled Living - - and the other labeled Inimate Material?  It would be really funny if the chemicals in a test tube being combined would "feel themselves coming into existance".  Some will argue that God is Alive - AND also argue that God is none other than the Collective Consciousness of us all.  That's an interesting theory.
About these ads