Friday, 31 May 2013

It's Reset Time

A couple of young gals in particular at the beach this late afternoon really caught my eye.  One, with longish dark hair (nicely styled), had on a bright yellow total (no hedging; the Full Monty, so to speak) bikini, that showed off her impeccable crayon-brown tan swimmingly;1 with the capital V being affixed onto (this) one's mind's eye like a stamp of approval; or an ensign, to be run up the mast and flapping freely in the breeze in proud pronouncement of Victory.  ("Okay, old like-dipping-into-a barrel-of-honey Ensign Pulver: We got the message, loud and clear.')2   The other - to my right; so that I had a bit of a secretly swiveling head, when not looking at the page directly in front of my ever-wandering eyes - who paraded, complete with small dog on a leash, down to a nearby site on the sand after I had arrived, proved, upon stripping off her covering clothes, to have on a less striking, though no less revealing, bikini; the exact color of which I don't recall at this post-beachgoing, and memory-triggering, moment.  Ahoy there, sailor! Navy blue, I think it was; whatever, it was nicely fitting to her long blonde hair, and flawless white skin, yet to be kissed much by the early-season sun.3

At least her skin looked flawless, to my somewhat distant eyes.  As she strolled down to the water's edge.  Very erection-fetching.  Even in an old codger like me...4 

Questions, questions...         

One: Should I have gone over and said to her, 'Excuse me, Miss.  I don't think dogs are allowed on this beach'??

Which could have given her the opening to reply,  'Get away from me, you dirty old man.  And stop bothering me, you creep, or I'll call the cops.'

'And you'll do what with your doggie?  Stuff him down your bikini bottom and pretend he's your, er, little gift from heaven??'  And I'd saunter away, real cool like, like…Woody Allen, blowing it yet once again in a real-life version of his fantasy/parallel life.  Failing the Cool test, by in reality tripping himself as he turned to slink away, from the ignominy, and disappointment, of it all.  Every guy's nightmare.  

Girls.  Can't live with 'em; can't live without 'em…

At my age: I should be caring???  But it brings up a point.  As to where we're at.  In the drama of humanoid life on Planet Earth.     

(Betcher thinking, 'Oh oh - what a sucker I am.  I should have seen something like this coming, from this guy's blog site…'  Well, hang in there.  There might be something of value to you in this reminiscence.)

What it - this time on the beach, and my mind - brought up for me is twofold.  One; picking up on the idea of Woody Allen 'in reality' being a dufus, but having an active imagination: What is reality; really?  There is evidence that there are such things as multiple timelines, and we are living our lives - our lower, our actor lives - in multiverses, all at the same time.  For there is no 'time' outside of a matrix that holds that particular illusion all together.  Illusions; in order to give us a crack at experiences.  'Us': Sparks, fractals, of a Great Being having vicarious experience of separation - of what has been called 'points of view' - through us.  In order to/for - what.  

In order for us to grow.  Having been given free will, and concomitant choice, to develop our consciousness, our awareness.  But perhaps also for that Great Being to grow as well.  

And why not.  Since the scientific sense is that we - 'we' - are parts of (what is in 'reality') a hologram.  The parts, therefore, affect the whole.  And vice versa.  

So, there is the 'matrix' thing about this all.  That we are just playing, and exchanging, parts; over and over, in an ongoing drama, apparently of our making.  

I don't know that latter point; I just surmise it.  The other part of the picture - the play-acting part - is patently obvious, from all the evidence in of the 'reality' of reincarnation.  

That we are not our bodies.  Or our emotions.  

But something larger.

Much larger.

Part of a larger reality, that is about to confront itself, in the second of my points:

that it's time, to draw an end to the play.  

To take off our parts, in our minds.  And confront that larger reality.  

And make the most of the experience, in an individual, and collective, Life Review (which can include 'previous' lives that have in particular bled into this current one). 

And draw this current experience, of being an actor in the drama, to a close.

For a larger act to follow.

A much larger act.

On a 'larger' - higher (vibrationally speaking) - stage.

Some call it the 5th Dimension.

I call it spinach.

Sorry; couldn't resist, in keeping some balance in all of this cosmic thinking.

My comment being in reference to a New Yorker cartoon, where the young lad in the obviously very wealthy family is saying to his parents, at the dinner table: "It's not broccoli.  I  say it's spinach, and I say to hell with it."

And to end this little homily, about the insubstantiality of what we call, and have considered, reality, for eons of time - for long enough, now - and are about to enter a new one, wherein there is no time; an observation, about the likes of lovely young females in the eyes of a man, young or old:

At least in this new stage of our development, a woman's assets, when she's young, won't go 'the way of all flesh,' and their dried-up dugs won't be hanging down to their indeterminate waists, and their breath redolent of Ex-Lax, in their old age. 

And that reminds me: I wonder whatever happened to The Girl From Ipanema???…



1 Or else she was a Mexican to start with.  Though I don't think so.  The other girls in that semi-group (she was with a male; they were a gaggle) were clearly Caucasian.  But then, multiculturalism is all the rage these days; innit.  And also, while I'm being somewhat politically incorrect,* I will note that Mexican girls of that age are almost all, er, rounder.  Just making an observation.  An astute observation.  The observation of a somewhat girl watcher.  Even at my advanced age.  
     You can take the young male out of the old man's body, but you can't take…er……how does that sort of thing go again, George Dubya?            

     * as to make a bit of fun of 'multiculturalism'.  Which is, actually, nothing to laugh at.  Those hard leftists who have their beady eyes on overthrowing the American constitutional Republic and turning it into a mere part of a region of their socialist version of a New World Order, are hard at their totalitarian work, in breaking down the unity of the Republic as it is, and has been.  Wanting a cacophony of languages in the former nation; and a welfare-class, state-dependency mentality, and so forth, and so on, in the collapsing of the Established Order, and the construction on its ruins of their vaunted New Order of the Ages, in a misunderstanding of all that sort of U.S. dollar-bill prophecy-signaling thing of the Illuminati (whereby they have mistaken their antithesis stage of human development for the Synthesis stage, waiting just beyond their machinations, in the drama taking place, and about to conclude).     
     The hard right, of course, have their own, fascist version of said totalitarianism, that they would be doing a slowly slowly act to bring about themselves if they were in power.  As they started in earnest in the Bush Junior years, and opportunity.
     The land of opportunity.  Even for nation wreckers What a tragic paradox… in the meantime, we are being set up for the 'fundamental transformation of the United States' that Obama telegraphed in his first run for the presidency.  His first ineligible run.  Before he got away with the scam, and went for it again.  And in large part due to the collusion of the Republicans; who have their own ineligible characters for the presidency that they would want to put forward, and so did a quid pro quo with the Democrat Party bigwigs in looking the other way regarding Obama's ineligibililty to run for the office.  That particular office, that the Founding Fathers singled out for special treatment in the Constitution; to make as sure as they could that no candidate who had dual loyalties or allegiances would ever ascend to such power as being the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces.
     How we in this generation of citizens of the almost late, great Republic of America have failed them.  But then, that's another story……in part.

2 For those of a more recent vintage: this is a reference to the book, and play, and film, 'Mr. Roberts'.  And later a TV series; and even later a TV film...Geez; do we old-timers have to spell everything of substance out for you lot?   Like, too, say, the value of essential liberty over state-mandated 'equality'??  Which the Second World War was fought over???  And a lot of good men, and some women, lost their lives in preserving your right to choose your life's circumstances - and you're blowing their sacrifice, in not paying attention to what's going on right in front of you????...
     Which reminds me to get back to the subject at hand.
     But shaking my head all the way, over the present generation's seeming laid-back indifference to such matters as freedom...
     It must be the water.
     And the effing Mainstream Media, in the tank for the Usurper in chief. And as I referred to above, the Republican Party, as part of 'the deal'...
     The CIA must have taken over the scene.  Recall the words of William Casey, taking over as CIA Director; saying, at a staff meeting, in 1981: "We will know our dislnformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."
     Anyway.  Back to my current scene, of the drama that we are all in; to varying degrees...and varying degrees of awareness, as to the drama and play aspect of it.  

3 And so perhaps the first girl was, indeed, Mexican: how else could she have had such an impeccable tan this early in the season??  Or, having been out of life's mainstream the way I have been for many a year (living in a spiritual community as I have for some thirty years, and being of a certain age, and all), perhaps I just don't know the abilities of tan salons these days. 
     But the contour just didn't fit…   
     …just didn't fit my stereotype; I know, I know…
     ...but how often has it proved to be true?  It's a genotype.  And I am reminded of the comment of a white man who had lived among the Native Americans for many years, and reported that in all that time, he had seen only one beautiful young Indian woman, in our cultural eyes, among them.
     So much for Hollywood's version of reality.  With Jean Peters, e.g., it was a lot easier on our eyes than a real representation of the reality of the matter.  (With Burt Lancaster in 'Apache', for you younguns.)

4 Here I am reminded of a scene in a film script that I wrote many years ago.  An upper middle-aged couple are on a crowded, height-of-season beach, propped up in their beach chairs, reading.  He is a brash, good-natured, deceptively-smart successful film producer-director; she is his wife, who we know is quietly going mad; suicidal, not 'mental' per se.  An attractive young woman, extremely well-endowed, almost overflowing her bikini top, walks by in front of them, almost as though she knows who he is and is strutting her stuff on purpose; and on by she goes, turning some other heads.  The wife, without looking either up or over to her husband, says to him, ostensibly reading a script behind his dark glasses: "What's the first thing you notice when you look at a woman."
     "Her tits," he blurts out before thinking; then adds, totally distracted now from his business at hand, "Actually, usually, her face first.  The word is 'photogenic'.  Then her tits.  Then ass.  Then legs.  Working down the meat counter...What's the first thing you notice about a man?"
     "His wallet," she says laconically, and goes back to reading her heavy-duty novel.  (For she is an intelligent woman.  As her response indicates.)
     But I digress.  Sort of...
     Here, now - in this scene from a movie - I had not noticed, from my short distance, if Miss Doggy Owner was well-stacked or not; but she was very pleasing to the eye nevertheless, and obviously brimming with self-confidence.
     Which was obvious even to an old codger like me.
     Feeling - what.  An urge, of some  sort...  


And a P.S.  A relevant email today (Friday/early Saturday) to my federal senators, Dianne 'Assault-Weapons Ban' Feinstein and Barbara 'Me Too' Boxer.  Both Democrats, and liberal Democrats at that.  But hope - for rational thinking - springs eternal:

'Dear Senator Feinstein/Boxer,

l urge you to vote NO on S. 744.  The president of the AFL-CIO has disagreed publicly with the idea that we don't have the American workers to fill high-tech jobs.  We do NOT need foreign workers to fill those jobs.

That is the working-out of a political agenda, not the conclusion of a legitimate position.

Please check this matter out carefully.  And help put Americans to work, and off the dole, and its intentionally-created mentality of dependency on the (high-spending, people-controlling) state.

Thank you.


'Stan' Stanfield

P.S.  And note that its "political agenda" also includes a) the desire of U.S. employers to pay lower wages than those demanded for union, or US. standard-of-living, workers; thus this is a union-busting/standard-of-living-busting move on their part; which leads to b) the desire to merge the U.S. work force with the Mexican and Canadian ones, in a 'harmonization' of employment between the three countries, as part of a strategic plan to turn them all into a single region (the mooted North American Union) of a New World Order.  Just as soon as the Cabal behind all this concentration-camp stuff can get that pesky U.S. Constitution out of the way...'

No, I didn't add that P.S. to the email to my senators.  It is for more discerning types to consider.  Or shall I say, a more honest readership...


And a further P.S., to the general subject of Reset Time:

from Rupert Sheldrake: 'The Science Delusion' - Banned TED Talk (18.20 min.)
TED decided to censor this talk and remove it from their YouTube channel.  Apparently not scientific enough for them…not good for - somebody……
posted on Michael Lindfield's FB page, on May 13.  My comment(s) (May 31/early June 1):

  • Stan Stanfield Such a good, and brave, man, Sheldrake; willing to endure such ridicule as he has had to, to call'em as he sees'em.
    7 minutes ago ·
  • 276212_100004085058600_1135459113_q.jpg
  • (I meant just to start a new paragraph for the addition below)

  • Stan Stanfield It is so stupid, and hubristic, of us that we are still living within the kind of materialistic mindset that Rupert describes. How long, O Lord, how long...Our reality is malleable, Sir Scientist; phenomenological. Deal with it as it is; not as you would wish it to be. And tempus fugit.   Thanks for posting this, Michael.
    a few seconds ago ·

1) The true mark of a scientist: Follow the information that is uncovered.  Not the attitude towards things that has occluded around them.

2) Read Colin Wilson's 'Supernatural: Your Guide Through The Unexplained, The Unearthly, And The Unknown'  e.g., for an eyeful about this sort of 'malleable' thing.

No comments: