Whilst the title states that the five points are about being more creative, they also apply for many of the challenges that we face in everyday life, it might be Council tax, dealing with bailiffs, Government agencies etc.
I tend not to use template letters when I write to so called “official bodies”, I cannot see the point in doing that as I will be using someone elses work and research which I probably will not understand. Thus I write my own original documents, which I must understand since I am the one writing them. Make sense?
I think that the most important thing that John Cleese speaks about is time.
“Creativity is not a talent. It is a way of operating.”
Much has been said about how creativity works, its secrets, its origins, and what we can do to optimize ourselves for it. In this excerpt from his fantastic 1991 lecture, John Cleese offers a recipe for creativity, delivered with his signature blend of cultural insight and comedic genius. Specifically, Cleese outlines “the 5 factors that you can arrange to make your lives more creative”:
Space (“You can’t become playful, and therefore creative, if you’re under your usual pressures.”)
Time (“It’s not enough to create space; you have to create your space for a specific period of time.”)
Time (“Giving your mind as long as possible to come up with something original,” and learning to tolerate the discomfort of pondering time and indecision.)
The lecture is worth a watch in its entirety, if only to get a full grasp of Cleese’s model for creativity as the interplay of two modes of operating — open, where we take a wide-angle, abstract view of the problem and allow the mind to ponder possible solutions, and closed, where we zoom in on implementing a specific solution with narrow precision. Along the way, Cleese explores the traps and travails of the two modes and of letting their osmosis get out of balance.
I hope that you will get as much out of the words of Cleese as I did. I always research as much as possible before writing letters.
I have a good friend who took the time to write down some lines about her own feelings and I have her express consent to adapt her words as I see fit.
Here are her words and my annotations are in bold:
They want me to sin-The Catholic Church are very good with that lie
They want me to commit fraud-Councils, Courts and the Police love this tactic
They want me to follow – Whoever they choose for me, sorry, NOT happening. I do not follow.
They want me to shut up- So long as I can type, speak and move any muscle in my body then I shall tell you where to go.
They want me to not question their authority- I’ll crack the jokes, no man has authority over another, thus you can ram that one right up your dirtbox.
They want me to pay their bills- I owe nobody anything and yet they bring in false laws called statutes to say that I owe money for a bill, how does FRO sound? Their bills are their bills and not my bills.
They want my children- I would defend my kids with my life as I did this country, they know what will happen if they attempt that move.
They want me to conform-I wish them luck with that, sounds like a frontal lobotomy to me.
They want to poison me
They want to tell me lies
They want to con me
They want to lock me up
They want to make me live by rules
They want to fuck me
They want me agree to war
They want me to have religion
They want to divide and concur me
They want my make money off my name
They want my LIFE
They want your life to
Here is my reply:
A few lines are left unanswered, feel free to comment and I shall include them in the main post.
Do you ever get so angry that you scream at your pc or tv when you watch main stream media reporting regarding the Sarin gas attack in Syria? I do and I have done over the last few days.
I am fucking sick of the BBC (bullshit broadcasting cover-up) posting their shit propaganda, BBC you are certainly not impartial.
Due to the mainstream medias continual crap and ramping up of the use of military intervention in Syria we now have the Russian Pacific Fleet in the region. This is a major game changer for the USA and NATO.
Those Russians are now saying no to what the US thinks will just be another roll in and take over a Sovereign state. The USA is not the worlds policeman, they are nothing more than a shower of war mongering evil bastards who use their military to support corporations.
Quite simply put, it is someone who causes a council to spend more money to collect council tax than will ever be collected from the debtor.
Does this sound strange?
It bloody well should but for the wrong reasons, the reason being is that nobody has a clue what to do to become a toxic debtor regarding council tax.
You are lucky, I do!
Write a lot of personal letters to your council.
Ask as many questions as you can. Never allow any response from a council to go unanswered, challenge every response and every part of each councils response.
Ask questions such as:
Who are you?
Where does your authority come from?
What is your job description’
Am I liable for this tax, if so why?
Can you prove any claim that you make?
Provide me proof that I have to adhere to statutes.
Those are just a few to be starting with, you can add your own he he.
Use Freedom Of Information Requests en masse.
Ask your council some of the following:
Where does the money collected from council tax go?
Who decides where Council tax monies go?
Can you tell me how much from council tax is paid into public sector pension schemes for your council?
How many homes have you exempted from paying council tax.
You can add as many questions as you wish, your shout.
The SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST, this is made under the Data Protection Act 1998, it means that in law, a council must provide all data that it holds on you, this means all emails, hard copy letters to and from, audio files, video files and anything else.
This is where you collate the information from step 1 and 2 and spot the differences. I love this part.
After doing all of this you will certainly have cost the council more than they will ever collect from you.
Council tax has nothing to do with paying for services.
Have fun always, Councils hate it.
COST THEM MORE IN PAPER AND TIME THAN THEY WILL EVER COLLECT FROM YOU.
Well I think that we all knew that somewhere along the way that this time would come. Thanks to some “wonderful” Psychiatrists suggesting that paedophiles be given the exact same rights as homosexuals, they even go so far as to rename paedophiles as “minor attracted persons”, you could not make this shit up!
Please note that nothing in this article is an attack on homosexual people.
Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, paedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.
Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists with B4U-Act recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.
B4U-Act calls pedophiles “minor-attracted people.” The organization’s website states its purpose is to, “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma and fear.”
In 1998 The APA issued a report claiming “that the ‘negative potential’ of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that ‘the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from childhood sexual abuse experiences.”
Pedophilia has already been granted protected status by the Federal Government. The Matthew Shephard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act lists “sexual orientation” as a protected class; however, it does not define the term.
Republicans attempted to add an amendment specifying that “pedophilia is not covered as an orientation;” however, the amendment was defeated by Democrats. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) stated that all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law. “This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these ‘philias’ and fetishes and ‘isms’ that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule.”
The White House praised the bill saying, “At root, this isn’t just about our laws; this is about who we are as a people. This is about whether we value one another – whether we embrace our differences rather than allowing them to become a source of animus.”
Earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia is a sexual orientation just like homosexuality or heterosexuality.
Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, told members of Parliament, “Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.”
He went on to say, “True pedophiles have an exclusive preference for children, which is the same as having a sexual orientation. You cannot change this person’s sexual orientation. He may, however, remain abstinent.”
When asked if he should be comparing pedophiles to homosexuals, Van Gijseghem replied, “If, for instance, you were living in a society where heterosexuality is proscribed or prohibited and you were told that you had to get therapy to change your sexual orientation, you would probably say that that is slightly crazy. In other words, you would not accept that at all. I use this analogy to say that, yes indeed, pedophiles do not change their sexual orientation.”
Dr. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem. Quinsey said pedophiles’ sexual interests prefer children and, “There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment or through anything else.”
In July, 2010 Harvard health Publications said, “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and unlikely to change. Treatment aims to enable someone to resist acting on his sexual urges.”
Linda Harvey, of Mission America, said the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT groups continue to assert themselves. “It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages; to convince them that normal friendship is actually a sexual attraction.”
Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, “Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.”
Diamond is a distinguished lecturer for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. The IASHS openly advocated for the repeal of the Revolutionary war ban on homosexuals serving in the military.
The IASHS lists, on its website, a list of “basic sexual rights” that includes “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.” Another right is to, “be free of persecution, condemnation, discrimination, or societal intervention in private sexual behavior” and “the freedom of any sexual thought, fantasy or desire.” The organization also says that no one should be “disadvantaged because of age.”
Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states including California, Georgia and Iowa. Sex offenders claim the laws prohibiting them from living near schools or parks are unfair because it penalizes them for life.
Main article courtesy of Ex Army. Thanks to Harbinger over at Captain Ranty’s place for the link.
I am absolutely fucking disgusted at yet another travesty of so called British Justice.
Here we have a man, who was placed into a position of trust to teach children. Yet in his own dark and secretive time he was downloading and sharing paedophile related and obscene images of children. A 63 YEARS OLD TEACHER!
Hey, it did not happen once and nor was it an error from downloading a file from torrents. This was fucking deliberate to the count of four and a half thousand obscene images of kids! This is child abuse, make no mistake about this shit. To view and share images of the abuse of children is in itself child abuse.
“More than 300 of the images were in the two most serious categories, some involving children as young as two.”
You shitting me here Judge? Three hundred, yes fucking 300 hundred category 4 and 5 images, the worst possible images a depraved mind could muster into its demonic existence! Seriously, Judge Mowat, you must be shitting both myself and the general public to pass this sentence and make the comments that you made. Are you an imbicile in fancy dress?
And at court this scab on the skin of society, Judge Mary Jayne Mowat, stated “that she did not criticise him for being attracted to children.” OH FUCKING REALLY! What planet are you on Judge? Obviously not the same one that I live on.
Judge Mowat, your ruling disgusts me and you should be removed from the bench.
Here is the full story courtesy of The Telegraph newspaper.
David Armstrong, a supply teacher, escaped jail with a suspended sentence after admitting possessing 4,500 indecent images of children.
As she allowed the 63-year-old to walk free from court, Judge Mary Jane Mowat told him:
“I don’t criticise you for being a teacher who’s attracted to children.
“Many teachers are but they keep their urges under control both when it comes to children and when it comes to images of children.”
Child abuse campaigners yesterday described the comments as “outrageous” and an insult to victims.
Teachers also attacked the remarks, saying they cast a shadow over their profession and sent the wrong message to child sex offenders.
Peter Bradley, deputy director of the children’s charity Kidscape, said: “Children who have been sexually abused would be horrified to read this judges remarks.
“Schools are not places where those attracted to children can work – schools are there to provide learning in a safe environment where children know the people who look after them can be trusted and relied upon.
“This teacher should not have been in the profession and it is outrageous for the judge to say many teachers are sexually attracted to children.
“The message needs to be clear – if you are sexually attracted to children then you don’t work with them.”
Christine Blower, General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: “Teachers are professionals whose interest is ensuring children and young people achieve their educational potential.
“To suggest their interest in pupils could understandably be anything else is totally unacceptable.”
Jayne Phillips, Senior Legal Advocate at the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, added: “It is a very worrying message to send out.
“The judge’s comments do not reflect our knowledge of the UK’s teaching staff – they would be appalled by the suggestion that they are in anyway attracted to children.”
Married Armstrong was caught after a colleague at the Little Heath School in Tilehurst, near Reading, Berks, reported him to police.
Reading Crown Court was told that the teaching assistant became alarmed after noticing files on Armstrong’s laptop with names including “rape wife”, “nude model” and “gay alligator”,
Police arrested Armstrong and found 4,500 indecent images and videos on two laptops and an external hard drive. More than 300 of the images were in the two most serious categories, some involving children as young as two.
He admitted five charges of making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children between 2007 and 2010. The court heard that some of the images were not of real children but Japanese cartoons depicting youngsters in sexual scenes.
Judge Mowat handed Armstrong a 12-month prison sentence, suspended for two years.
She added: “This was by any standards a substantial collection, with some 300 of the worst kind.”
Armstrong, of Devizes, Wilts, was placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register for ten years and served with a sexual prevention order banning him from owning a computer or device capable of connecting to the internet.
He was also ordered to undergo treatment for his attraction to children and is automatically banned from working with youngsters.
Robin Shellard, defending, said his client had worked at many schools and colleges during his career and had an impeccable record.
The case is not the first time Judge Mowat has stirred controversy over sentences handed to sexual offenders.
In 2008, she allowed former headmaster Phillip Carmichael to walk free from court after accepting that medication for Parkinson’s disease had turned him into a paedophile.
Sentencing a bus driver to ten-months in jail in 2006 for abusing a 12-year-old girl, the judge acknowledged that she felt “obliged” to lock him up because of “current views about sentences”.
“I have a record of trying to suspend sentences in cases like this and them ending up in the Court of Appeal,” she told Robert Prout, following a public outcry over the brevity of prison sentences for sex offenders.