Kindly, see my the msg I posted, a wee-bit ago,
reaching out to the Leaderships of Pakistan and
The "ten 'years'" should 'ring some bells' :-]
What fell to me to do is, similarly, 'Accom-
plished', and I'll be 'going away', happy to be
It's like in =Groundhog Day=:
"Phill Conners": "I don't even have to floss!" :-]
What fell to me to do was just Hard, David.
Not 'inconceivable', not 'impossible', and
certainly not 'deluded'.
The ideas are 'established'.
Others will continue the doing of what re-
mains needing to be done.
I cannot say.
In case, at this late date, it needs to be made-
clear, I've worked to =not= know what folks
do, and do not, know. ["Don't respond."]
It's in Guarding Free Will.
I still have Physics to fill my 'days'.
Would prefer "Her", but I'm 'old', so Physics
will have to get me through the rest of my
I've very-few 'regrets'.
But I miss "Her", with all my 'heart'.
K. P. Collins
"David Longley" <David at longley.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:epvY78EL$4MAFw6b at longley.demon.co.uk...
> Now you are just being egocentric and silly. Do you not think others
> have to work hard, struggle etc.?
>> My point has been that in your case you may be misreading your own
> behaviour. You may be deluding yourself in thinking that any of this is
> really related to AoK etc.
>> The advice is not that you may need "institutionalising", just that you
> need to take care of yourself a little better, and one part of that
> might be just to seek some professional medical advice if only to
> *exclude* the possibility that something may be awry, and that that
> accounts for your "angst".
>> What harm would it do? It might make things easier in fact.
>> Kind regards,
>>> In article <olHYb.9716$W74.8186 at newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>, k p
> Collins <kpaulc@[----------].invalid> writes
> >"David Longley" <David at longley.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:nz12dCCipzMAFwMf at longley.demon.co.uk...> >> [...]
> >Sometimes what needs to be done
> >is just 'Hard', and if one listens to
> >you, none of that stuff would ever
> >be accomplished.
> >You'd 'institutionalize' anyone who
> >'groaned' under the stress of a work-
> >Yours would be a pretty-shabby
> >world, no?
> >I mean, who, in it, would do what
> >needs to be done?
> >You know - if 'groaning'-under-the-
> >load is so 'demeaned' that taking-up-
> >the-load becomes 'impermissible'.
> >That's a prescription for collective-
> >incapacitation, isn't it?
> >"Peeuuuwwweee Stink!"
> David Longley