{Eidetic Vision}[15th March 1988]

[Redbook5:64-65][19880315:1045]{Eidetic Vision}[15th March 1988]

19880315:1045

*Eidetic memory** – the ability to visual{ise} as external images what are in fact inner visions – whether one realises it or not – is a talent which (I have hypothesised) belongs to the S~ degree: and may be associated (perhaps in more Outer-Circle dominated Individuals) with 'photographic' memory. Bearing in mind that [SX],* who seems to have it, was born a Scorpio – it is intriguing (but not statistical) to note that [William] Blake, who has also been described as having eidetic vision, was born on 28^th November.***

My mother's mother painted a flower with a face in, which she called Puck, and claimed to have seen on the South Downs one day while out walking; I have an idea that her birthday may also have been in November**** (or was that when she died?).

It is important to understand this matter of eidetic vision as it can explain some of the more bizarre manifestations described by modern cultists (and, for that matter, by Christians). Without this explanation, as people recount# how they have encountered satyrs in the Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh, or thereabouts – one sees the choices as accepting the material existence of these creatures, or the madness or mendacity of the narrator. Eidetic vision allows the possibility of a (very 'real') projection as external image of an inner vision which, almost inevitably, will be coloured by the cultural background, state of mind etc. of the 'seer'. This process will almost certainly (perhaps certainly) [sic] be quite unconscious, at least in today's circumstances.

This does not imply that the origin of the vision is either wholly within the mind of the seer, or wholly without it. Neither is very likely.

*ref IV.[[Redbook4:295-296][19880109:0947c]{Birth dates [continued (3)] – A Scorpio}[9th January 1988],] {295} ('A Scorpio' ff)

[& see [Redbook5:13-14][19880212:1155f]{Multiple Viewpoints and Single Minds [continued (6)]}[12^th February 1988], final para.]

**{vision, surely?}

[Yes, probably, in this context; eidetic memory appears to be another name for 'photographic' memory. <20180102>]

***But as an Artist, shouldn't he have been born about May – directly opposite [in the circle of the year]? – diametric resonance! <880327(6)>

****[W] has just found a long-lost birthday list: my mother's mother's birthday was 11^th November. <880326>

#Hawken, 'The Magic of Findhorn', Fontana Collins, 1975, p134ff (I suspect that +Mk's conversation with [the Narrrator] on the [mountain] in '[0]' may owe something, unconsciously, to this).

[PostedBlogger3101for02022018]

{Cold Start}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:63][19880314:1755]{Cold Start}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1755c

‘If “The Plan” proceeds on schedule, [the New Age Movement] may well be in the driver's seat by June 21, 1983....’ (Cumbey, ibid,*, p.68).

It's always reassuring to read this kind of book cold off the press.

*[(Cumbey, 'The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow: The New Age Movement and Our Coming Age of Barbarism', Huntington House, USA, 1983 (– NB; perhaps it took a while to complete, or to find a publisher?)]

[PostedBlogger3101for01022018]

{The Serpent[continued]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:62-63][19880314:1600c]{The Serpent[continued]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1600

[continued]

The significant exception to this* unifying concept – although still syncretistic – is the attitude of religions to the Serpent, which I suspect polarises them accurately, and may be defined (as I understand it) as follows:

FOR	AGAINST
Hinduism	Christianity**
Tao-ism etc.	Judaism
Buddhism?	Islam(ic Sufi-ism)
	(The Biblical Religions)

***

.1730

While the Serpent to an extent represents the horseshoe of the Circle excluding Crisis – [sic] its centrepoint is, I guess, A~, and in this sense the identification of the Serpent with the Devil and the Anti-christ is probably correct. It also helps towards a solution to the problem of where the major religions are represented on the Circle diagram, which might be something like this:

[Text of ms. diagram of which an extract is shown above:]

	C~
	BIBLICAL RELIGIONS
G~	☼	M~
	HINDUISM
	A~

*[See last previous entry.]

**BUT: 'Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.' Matthew X.16 (AV[/KJB]) <880808>

***→ [[Redbook5:67-76][19880316:1300]{False Christs; True Christ}[16th March 1988],] 67

[PostedBlogger31012018]

{The Serpent}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:62-63][19880314:1600b]{The Serpent}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1600

[continued]

One of the major problems which this* highlights is the fact that almost everything the Fundamentalists say against the 'New Age' cults can be reversed and used against Christianity** – and particularly against the rather 'extreme' sort of Christianity practised by Evangelical Churches in the U.S.A., to whom I suppose the fundamentalists must be at least doctrinally related. It might be better to concentrate on the substance of the cults: and if that is too vague a concept, their results and practices in concrete, everyday terms. That, too, can rebound.

*[See last previous entry.]

**{See inserts at VII.[] 299-304}

[cf. [Redbook5:67-76][19880316:1300]{False Christs; True Christ}[16th March 1988], 67.]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger29for30012018]

{Lucifer (1)}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:61-62][19880314:1600]{Lucifer (1)}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1600

It is unfortunate that the New Agers chose Lucifer as their guiding light. However, it does reveal an inconsistency in the Fundamentalists' approach, which is unsurprisingly highly condemnatory of the emphasis on Lucifer. Fundamentalists' general case is based explicitly on Scripture: but Lucifer occurs only once in the Bible,* according to the Encylopaedia Biblica, with reference to the hubris of the King of Babylon, ** and is now generally translated (e.g.) 'Daystar' (NJB)*** or 'Bright Morning Star' (GNB)****. The attribution to Satan's fall from Heaven was apparently by St. Jerome# and the Early Church Fathers.#* Compare: 'Arise Oh Morning Star! Arise, and never set'.#**

*(Isaiah 14.12-15)

['12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. (Authorised / King James Version)']

**cp. Ezek[iel].28:11-19. <880812>

['11 Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, 12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. 13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. 14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. 15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. 16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. 18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. 19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more. (Authorised / King James Version)']

***[New Jerusalem Bible]

['12 How did you come to fall from the heavens, Daystar, son of Dawn? How did you come to be thrown to the ground, conqueror of nations? 13 You who used to think to yourself: I shall scale the heavens; higher than the stars of God I shall set my throne. I shall sit on the Mount of Assembly far away to the north. 14 I shall climb high above the clouds, I shall rival the Most High." 15 Now you have been flung down to Sheol, into the depths of the abyss!']

****[Good News Bible]

['12 King of Babylon, bright morning star, you have fallen from heaven! In the past you conquered nations, but now you have been thrown to the ground. 13 You were determined to climb up to heaven and to place your throne above the highest stars. You thought you would sit like a king on that mountain in the north where the gods assemble. 14 You said you would climb to the tops of the clouds and be like the Almighty. 15 But instead, you have been brought down to the deepest part of the world of the dead. (Good News Translation)']

#[Jerome (/dʒəˈroʊm/; Latin: Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus; Greek: Εὐσέβιος Σωφρόνιος Ἱερώνυμος; c. 27 March 347 – 30 September 420) was a priest, confessor, theologian, and historian. He was born at Stridon, a village near Emona on the border of Dalmatia and Pannonia.[2][3][4] He is best known for his translation of most of the Bible into Latin (the translation that became known as the Vulgate), and his commentaries on the Gospels. (Wikipaedia)]

#*[The Church Fathers, Early Church Fathers, Christian Fathers, or Fathers of the Church are ancient and generally influential Christian theologians, some of whom were eminent teachers and great bishops. The term is used of writers or teachers of the Church not necessarily ordained and not necessarily "saints"—Origen Adamantius and Tertullian are often considered Church Fathers, but are not saints, owing to their views later being deemed heretical. Most Church Fathers are honored as saints in the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Church of the East, Anglicanism and Lutheranism, as well as other churches and groups. The era of these scholars who set the theological and scholarly foundations of Christianity largely ended by 700 AD. (Wikipaedia)]

#**[1 Thy kingdom come, O God,

Thy reign, O Christ, begin;

Break with Thine iron rod

The tyrannies of sin.

2 Where is Thy rule of peace

And purity, and love?

When shall all hatred cease,

As in the realms above?

3 When comes the promised time

That war shall be no more,

Oppression, lust, and crime

Shall flee Thy face before?

4 We pray Thee, Lord, arise,

And come in Thy great might;

Revive our longing eyes,

Which languish for Thy sight.

5 Men scorn Thy sacred name,

And wolves devour Thy fold;

By many deeds of shame

We learn that love grows cold.

6 O'er heathen lands afar

Thick darkness broodeth yet:

Arise, O morning Star,

Arise, and never set.

(Hensley, Lewis, 1824-1905)]

{cp. Also 2 Peter [1.]19: '…until the dawn comes and the morning star arises in your minds'. (NJB)}

[So we have confirmation of the words of the prophets; and you will be right to pay attention to it as to a lamp for lighting a way through the dark, until the dawn comes and the morning star rises in your minds.]

[19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: (Authorised / King James Version)]

[cf. [Redbook4:137][19871019:0925h]{Angelic Hierarchies [continued (11): Note on Cherubim]}[19th October 1987].]

[& see [Redbook5:83-84][19880317:2250{Lucifer (2)}[17th March 1988].]

[PostedBlogger29012018]

{Circle Class Structure}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:60-61][19880314:1115l]{Circle Class Structure}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

- - - -

*Discussion of the U~ position suggests a possible Circle analysis of class structure (there have been others!** In fact it is a hemispherical analysis based on occupational class, which nowadays seems to be the determining factor of adult social class and grouping.

In this analysis, G~ hemisphere occupations (mainly artistic, and in the minority) have occupational groupings but no hierarchy between groupings (except as theorised by people like me): so far as groupings see each other, this analysis is supported by observation. Nevertheless it is possible that (for example) each Art tends to draw its influence and even its practitioners more from the parallel stratum on the M~ hemisphere.

That is the hierarchical hemisphere, I guess, and shows the hierarchical or right-wing structure of classes: roughly, from the professional 'classes' (possibly narrower than the Inland Revenue definition***) around S~ through e.g. ordinary Scientists and Technicians around M~, craftsmen and (then) tradesmen(?) around U~, to such people**** as factory managers and factory workers, who share a similar low status, around A~.

Who is at the top, at I~? Royalty (and Archbishops?) I suppose; the old 'upper classes', now largely obsolete, might have been between there and S~; then the vast Middle Classes from about there to about ?the U~ side of M~, and the Working Classes from there down to A~.

This is perhaps another reason why, in our class-conscious society, nobody much wants to be a factory manager: but cause-and-effect are not obvious.

*[[Redbook5:57][19880314:1115g]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (7)]}[14th March 1988]]

**[ref.[...]]

***[[Redbook5:34][19880304:1835d]{Trades, Professions and Vocations}[3rd March 1988]]

****[sic; in the ms the original following noun was “industrialists”, crossed out and replaced by “factory managers” as shown here – which perhaps explains the slightly, although perhaps unintentionally, disparaging tone of the reference.]

[PostedBlogger28012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (11)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:60][19880314:1115k]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (11)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

One of the hardest things in the World is to accept, as you approach the +C†I~ point on the Outer Circle, that even if you do everything correctly, you are going to be sent back* into that World from which you thought you had escaped, to do what you are told to do to the best of your limited ability. It is so nice to think that you are about to achieve all there is to achieve: but self-examination suggests otherwise.

So where is my fundamentalist friend? Who has entered his life? The answer** – I think, but do not know – is Raphael,*** the affable Angel, the Companion of pilgrims, **** Christ seen still from the Outer Circle: “Do not be afraid; peace be with you. Bless God for ever.”#

*{Somewhere in one of the 2 books he leant/gave [to] me, is an intriguing reference to a Christian clergyman apparently saying something similar: that when you have found or come to Christ you have to turn away again. (My recollection may be inaccurate.)}

**I am not now happy with this. <900916>

***(Remember that these are only names.) <880315>

****(This seems an arrogant presumption) <880321>

[Presumably, the arrogance is in the presumption that that is where the fundamentalist friend was.]

#Tobit.12.17.

[PostedBlogger27012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (10)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:59][19880314:1115j]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (10)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

In a riveting sequence of the video,* a former cult-follower described the visions of Jesus which she had had, full of light and Love: only when she referred to the Bible did she discover that these were false Christs. So I concluded (as my friend confirmed) that in their view Evil can create Good. I do not believe this.** Good may indeed arise out of Evil, to Evil's confusion; but Evil cannot create Good for an evil purpose and evil use.

*[See [Redbook5:52][19880314:1115b]{Fundamental Points of View [continued]}[14th March 1988]]

**{Good men may, however, be used unwittingly for evil ends; the good remains good, and the evil (probably) evil. And Individuals out of the Separation *** may sub-create images and symbols of the Unity.}

[i.e. Individuals may sub-create out of (i.e. from) the Separation images, etc., presumably]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger25for26012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (9)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:59][19880314:1115i]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (9)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

Is 'my' Christ the Anti-Christ?* Logically, you would have to work outside the framework of the Circles to say so, since the Anti-Christ must presumably be opposite diametrically to Christ, if I understand the concept aright: in relation to +C†I~, the Anti-Christ must be at A~ ([Azrael,] interestingly, the only one of the Circle Archangels who does not seem to come from the Judao-Christian canon,** but from Islam). Satan is (I believe) at A~, and Lucifer's fall*** is from S~ (note the anagrammatical near-correspondence)**** to A~: # this connection of S~ and A~ corresponds to that of R~ and A~.

But I imagine such men as my fundamentalist friend would say that the whole Circles idea is demonic, and must be abandoned. After all, they do not accept the basic validity of scientific knowledge. What this amounts to in the end is exclusion on a vast scale: the problem, as earlier adherents have discovered,#* is that the World has a habit of not being excluded. One way or another, you do have to grapple with it.

*{It would certainly be a devilish trick to present a logically 'closed' system with a Christ-substitute, excluding Christ.}

[ref. [Redbook5:55-56][19880314:1115e]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (5)]}[14th March 1988]]

[& cf. [Redbook5:67-76][19880316:1300]{False Christs; True Christ}[16th March 1988], 67-68]

**'I am Raphael, one of the seven angels who stand ever ready to enter the presence of the glory of the Lord.' (i.e. excluding Azrael, in Circle terms) (Tobit 12.15)

***[See [Redbook5:61-62][19880314:1600]{Lucifer (1)}[14th March 1988]]

****[i.e. of Sariel and Azreal.]

#ref IV [?] ….

#*e.g. Mediaeval Munster? [–] the Anabaptists?

[continues]

[PostedBlogger25012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (8)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:58][19880314:1115h]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (8)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

- - - -

There was an electricians shop* in the King's Road, Chelsea: the only non-clothes shop, so far as I recall, in the stretch from the Town Hall to Sloane Square,** which was there when I arrived [as a child] in the early 1950s, and was still there when I left in 1986. In all that time I don't think it changed in any material respect: for as long as I can remember, the same people ran it. They steadfastly and deliberately (for I once discussed it with them, with mutual unease) resisted all attempts to cash in on the King's Road's fashionable aspect. (Their prices became devilishly high, but so I guess were their [local business tax] rates.) They just never changed: they were as if in a time-warp.

They got on perfectly with my parents, who paid them large amounts of money, but after my misunderstandings with the shop became the rule rather than the exception, I had to stop going there. It was like talking to people on another planet, or at least on another wave-length. Within a few years of*** my departure from Chelsea, I learnt from my mother that they were either Exclusive or Plymouth Brethren – I forget which. In a way, I hope that they are there still: a fixed point in a madly whirling World.****

*G.(?) Ashby <900916>

**[ by 1986-- after the sad departure of Beetons the bakers with its delicious sausage rolls and warm mini-loaves straight from the oven; Mr. Jones the Grocer whose bicycles delivered all over Chelsea and who used to give the writer a custard cream biscuit whenever as a small boy he visited Mr. Jones’ shop; and the original Thomas Crapper, plumber; among many others. <20171219>]

***{(before, that is)}

****Apparently not. <891006>

[continues]

[PostedBlogger22for24012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (7)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:57][19880314:1115g]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (7)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

I would sum up this particular man,* personally, as typical of a particular kind of man who has a considerable ability to acquire new academic knowledge – perhaps through not having used up his memory capacity in previous academic work, but this is speculation – but not a highly developed ability to manipulate that knowledge.** From things he has said, I would say that he is just past forty; considers himself to be of working class origins, and was once proud of it; was probably a builder,*** most likely of craftsman status; and was made redundant relatively recently. All these things, and his relatively 'specialised' and single-minded approach to the matter, suggest a man whose natural or starting position was perhaps around U~. (However, something was said suggesting a birthday relatively recently.) Knowledge is the gift [sic] of the Spirit at U~.****

The three examples he referred to of temptations, in the context of those who had been born again (who would be highly unlikely to give way [to them,] as well as [in the context] of those who had not [been born again] (and who would not),# involved, respectively:#* lechery; avarice; and pride. These are at U~, M~ and S~: in other words, in reverse order, the three most likely to carry a Man from Attraction, round the Outer Circle. In this context, I should have thought that taking a Degree of a theological kind would involve dangers of precisely this nature: especially Pride (at Ordination, although he does not intend to be actually ordained); and especially for a man with a closed mind.

*[See last 6 previous entries, [Redbook5:51-61][19880314:1115]{Fundamental Points of View}[14th March 1988] ff.]

**{He has recently deferred his first year course – due to difficulties with the academic approach to comparative religion, I gather.)

***{Painter and Decorator, in fact.}

****[See e.g. [Redbook4:45][19870712:1840d]{The Gifts of the Spirit (2)}[12^th July 1987].]

#[be highly unlikely to give way, presumably – all this in brackets ( ) of course is the perceived opinion of the man in question, not of the writer.]

#*[Unclear respectively to what; perhaps intended to be respectively to U~, M~ and S~ in the next sentence (which placing is as in [Redbook4:13-14][19870707:1000]{Virtues and Vices (2)}[7^th July 1987] (“This hierarchy of vices comes from E[ncylopaedia] B[ritannica] XVII.382 (instead of Dante)”).]

[continues]

[PostBlogger22for23012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (6)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:56][19880314:1115f]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (6)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

(This* is one unexpected difference I find with him, and, perhaps, other Christians: I am, as near as I am capable of being, certain that the Spirit of God is within each man (and woman, of course), even if veiled (as the Soul may be stained); I accept that the turning-point to its unveiling (and the unstaining of the Soul) is by Christ. There is some support for the Spirit of God in Man (whom I distinguish, in aspect only, from God the Spirit, in or as God) in Ecclesiates XII:6-7.** But to this man, and to others, there is no Spirit of God in Man at all until Jesus Christ enters his life.)***

*[See last previous entry, final para.]

**[Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern.

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

(Ecclesiastes 12:6-7 (King James Version))]

***{This can be explained as a difference of emphasis – by me, but not by him.}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger22012018]

{Fundamental Points of View [continued (5)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:55-56][19880314:1115e]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (5)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

All this,* of course, is rank heresy to such a man – in which if I should persist, I should no doubt be identified as a follower of the Anti-Christ. Is the Christ I perceive, discovered as +C†I~, the Anti-Christ?** If not, and if he differs from the Born-again's Jesus Christ, why not?

First, I think he does differ. I should expect a man who had adopted an Archetype to the extent of consciously living with and modelling himself on him, to show the characteristics of that Archetype. My impression of the historical Jesus Christ is that he showed qualities (among others) of compassion, perception, responsiveness and intelligence. This particular man shows a degree of compassion, but not (in my opinion) a great deal of perception, responsiveness or intelligence.*** He is obviously greatly drawn to the figure of Jesus Christ.****

I think I can place him – my fundamentalist friend, I mean – at a particular point on the Circles which I had not really considered before. In terms of his religious outlook, I believe he is the man who passes round the Outer Circle (through Outer Action, 'forcing' through drugs etc.), through A~ (wizardry, etc.), through a Revolution and Simplification (he has recently# lost his job – probably after being 'born again', however, which was about 15 years ago), to the point of Attraction on the Outer Circle: where, poised perhaps between the competing Outer and Inner influences, he stops.#* Attraction, to Christ, but not Unity: the belief that there is only one valid perception is more specialist than generalist#** {and is} hardly unifying (although there is another way of looking at this).

A genuinely small concern with worldly possessions other than on a relatively modest scale suggests the +C†I~ point not rolling over at once towards Ordination; but (I suspect) a similarly small concern with Individuals who are neither born-again [n]or likely candidates suggests similarly not returning through Love.

*[See last previous entry.]

**[& see [Redbook5:59][19880314:1115i]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (9)]}[14th March 1988]]

***[Note that of these four, arguably compassion is the easiest deliberately to adopt, and intelligence the most difficult. <21012018>]

****{(however he perceives that figure)}

#{not that recently?}

#*Is this possible? <891006>

{If not, then probably U~ (See [[Redbook5:57][19880314:1115g]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (7)]}[14th March 1988],] 57 [next entry but one].}

I should now place him with Evangelicism generally as passing round the O[uter] C[ircle] – yes, probably now at c.U~. <900916>

#**(As to which, see below [next entry but one, [Redbook5:57][19880314:1115g]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (7)]}[14th March 1988]].)

[continues]

[PostedBlogger21012018]