@duchess64said I regard the rest of Ghost of a Duke's sentence as misleading (at best) or a distortion of reality.
Of course, meditation can have beneficial effects in other ways (such as perhaps
in reducing stress or high blood pressure), but that's not its chief purpose.
(Ghost of a Duke apparently confuses meditation's byproducts with its aim.)
Suzianne (who can NOT even cite a ...[text shortened]... alai Lama a 'Zen master' when
he obviously does not belong to or promote the Zen sect of Buddhism.
So to be clear, because you found the second half of my sentence misleading you chose to pretend I hadn't said it and edit it out of my quote?
Are you cool with me reciprocating such a practice and misrepresenting your own quotes by editing out the stuff I don't like?
@kevcvs57said I’ll hold the ghost to that cos I would like to move on now and get some proper news back on the telly.
The Czech pm was interviewed and confirmed that an extension would be available if a good reason was found. That’s not gonna help Boris but I hope we take the deal and get a election based on domestic manifesto’s rather than Brexit.
On that we agree sir.
Boris will win the vote (by 2) due in part to unanticipated abstentions. When this comes to pass, all will come to view the Ghost as a powerful aberration.
@duchess64said "'turning the light inward' is practiced during meditation and is not in itself about intellectual moralizing …"
--Ghost of a Duke
Ghost of a Duke may find it too painful to concede that he agreed with my point to Suzianne.
I note how you disengenously reply to a different post in order to only quote half of my sentence. (I will choose to believe you did so in error).
Here is the full sentence, the end of which renders your reply a nonsense:
'So, although 'turning the light inward' is practiced during meditation and is not in itself about intellectual moralising, the desired outcome is still the cultivating of our own fields, our own moral being and integrity.'
“They lost their veto. Though Sammy Wilson ended a statement about the new customs arrangements by saying they would be ‘costly’ and damage the economy. Which wasn’t a problem when they had the veto, apparently.”
Originally they were going to get a community veto so the unionist politicians would have a veto over the aspects of the deal that tie NI i ...[text shortened]... hink Saturday is going to be ‘squeaky bum’ time for everyone regardless of their views on the issue.
@kazetnagorrasaid So, a deal after all. It's dead on arrival in Parliament, so it will be interesting to see what Johnson will do in order to convince Labour to vote along. DUP have already said they will vote against the deal, and one would imagine the LibDems and SNP to vote against any Brexit deal. A new referendum perhaps, with this deal and remaining as options? Or will Johnson just ...[text shortened]... ith the promise of leaving under the terms of the deal in case the Tories win a sufficient majority?
Did the DUP say they would vote against it? (Possible I missed that statement). I only heard they would not support it, which could simply mean they abstain from voting.
There is a significant difference between abstaining and voting against, when it comes to the precarious count.