The showing of 'a few good men' has been edited on Spike channel

[RandomThoughts]

They edited out where Hal said, "Tell the truth"

[PuffedMica]

1. I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W5Am-a_xWw

[RandomThoughts]

2. Should explain something.

'You can't handle the truth' is wrong, nobody can be sure of the truth.

From that not being able to be sure, the truth includes a choice.

There are some that think they know the truth, and unfortunately some of them have bought into despair doctrines.

I don't think I will post the despair doctrines some believe, and the factors used to convince people of them, but basically they have the form of the supernatural in many factions that use people like armies, or pawns, for some purpose.

However if you look at the next level, teaching that doctrine has a purpose, to create despair and keep people fighting, so within not knowing, and nobody can, then you see that what some think is the truth, may be a way to get them to despair.

I could explain the doctrine, maybe a bit of it.

It is why some think that people that protest or go against wrong in a system actually belong to the other side faction in some game or contest.

So if you protest something that group thinks you are actually on the other side. That is why they think of protesters of injustice, injustice they think help them win the delusional game they think they are playing, are the same as the enemy. It is a delusion many suffer from.

Once you know you can not be 100% sure of what is 'the truth' you know you have to choose. In that, if the world was a computer game, or people were pawns or toys of supernatural, I would fight that system. why? becuase there is always a thin path that says that could be a delusion to create despair, and it is wrong.



"You can't handle the truth", is a claim to know the truth, and that is the delusion that breaks people, becuase then they let what they think is the truth define them, not a choice of what should be the truth of existence, and might be, since they can't know for sure.

If you think some despair doctrine is reality, that is your choice, but weather it is or not, I would choose to go against it if I can think and feel that such a doctrine is wrong.

And it is possible such doctrines are wrong, and are not what reality is.


And I am due beer and travel money, and many experiences.


In that movie, Jessup said people can not handle the truth, in reality he was saying, people can not handle what he thinks the truth is. The truth as he chooses to see the world. So he is really saying, people can not accept what he wants to think reality is, but can not defend as what reality really is, he can only guess and choose that as his reality. Then he defends it saying it is truth, so as to not have to think and feel on that topic.


(not posted becuase this being Easter Day, just posting since Spike TV edited a movie to remove the comment where Hal says to tell the truth)

[RandomThoughts]

3. And from that the next conclusion occurs.

If it is true there are supernatural elements with the ability to have power over people, and they are not perfectly just.

They can not interact in any way that is appreciated. Since any action would show a complete ability of control. And that control would in itself be unjust.

So the use of supernatural intervention, if not completely just and compassionate, creates the definition of supernatural interaction being wrong.

Thereby isolating and wrongly treating the supernatural without kindness, simply becuase of its power. How could you show caring and love to something that could control any outcome, removing your free will or existence, by not having a part in choices.

So when I saw the supernatural was not just, by the fact the beer and travel money issue has not been corrected, then by the natural effect of everyone deserving free will and freedom to learn and choose. Even the best of the supernatural, if not perfect, becomes in the wrong.

Fortunately I can understand that effect and do a mental override, to not hold the having of power against the supernatural, and instead try to share and learn how people can be more fairly treated with compassion.



There is a quagmire, or paradox. If the supernatural helps someone, and it is not completely just, it alienates the supernatural, since the having of that ability, makes it unfair. Also why theft of free will is a very bad thing in my view.

It is a real empathy spike when thinking on supernatural, since at some point their form makes interaction unjust if they are not perfect, but to expect perfection is not fair either. And to think they should be isolated and not interact is also not fair.

It is a huge thought puzzle.

Yet I am still due beer and travel money and that has not been sent, so at what point do you show the supernatural its flaws, including its own existence if not perfect being a flaw, and thinking that is a flaw. See how the interaction of something with more power, with something with less power creates its own failure, and the thought of angst.

Why breaking up the consolidations also makes sense, since it hurts those with consolidations as much as those they might effect with them.

It is one of those paradoxes hard to hold. How can you hold it against something, just becuase they have power, and don't use it perfectly, yet having the power, in itself is wrong when looking at what creates just situations.

[RandomThoughts]

4. And that is why Authoritarian groups.

Try to get people to follow without feeling or thinking, try to get people subservient and passive, since the claim to be free, is in opposition to those that would want to control.

You can actually think of many things in the terms of relationships. Should your partner be treated as a thinking feeling equal with dignity and respect, even if you might have more of something defining power in some situation. Or should they be obedient and subservient, or even owned. And would you be with someone that expects blind obedience, or treats with equality.


That says alot about many things, and many structures.

Do 'leaders' in any sector or group, treat a group as owned and controlled, or a part of some bigger system, where they have choices and rights as part of that system.


There is an argument, but they don't know what is good for them, you hear that alot in superior types, they think they can define how other people should live, the other side is education, where you don't say what someone has to do, but teach them why they should choose to do it.

The authoritarian does not have the patience to teach, nor the respect of people to think they need to know, instead they just want people to follow.

Again that fits into the education side, and the coercion side.