TUCK RULE “any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward body.” ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
RED SOX COME BACK 0-3 “CURSE BROKEN”
ARMSTRONG “A KID AND HIS BIKE”
MESSI! “DEFEATS FRANCE”
BILES! “BEST BALANCE”
BOLT! “BEST SPRINT”
PHELPS! “BEST SWIM”
’02 KINGS V. LAKERS “SHOULD REFS GET STATS?”
AMERICAN PHAROH “TRIPLE CROWN”
ELEVEN HOURS, FIVE MINUTES “THE TENNIS MATCH”
COOKS CAUGHT IT “maintain possession throughout the process of the catch”
A Shelley, dead, because he wrote, but wasn’t bold?
Love sitting around until it’s old?
The landscape is ruined with ruins wild.
I should have kissed. But smiled.
***
AETERNITAS MORS
Since eternity is death, I’ll take this hour as my bride. This hour! When the light of the sky leaves And beauty begins to coincide with light’s deceiving, that hour when the phantom lights are lit inside.
My bride is beautiful this hour, Like the mixture of youth and maturity in time— Landing and lingering in leaves of rhyme. One perfect hour! Whose rhythms leap by the smoke-exhaling river, Quietly, like the perfumey flower.
One hour! kissing the minutes, and true— An hour I spend dreaming of an hour, lost in those hours Which want to be this hour, too. I smile, pretending there’s an island which has eternal flowers.
I did not choose this hour. But that hour when I called her name With urgency! I forget that hour. The shame. This hour chooses me. The purpose of the music. The wind spasms are free.
I was hurt by an urgency. I called you again and again. You didn’t respond. The mist lingered above the water. I traveled the leafy circuit of the pond. Thank God hours like those are few!
The hour I choose will be holy, but not without treats, The Christmas ones when I was young. The holy, trembling days when the holy songs were sung And evenings died by sunset feats.
A bride climbs a hill. Her friends are sad, as if it were a sacrifice. Do not weep, they say. The goddess will kiss you and kill Your fears. She serves you drinks with clinking ice.
Within the hour, I’m with my bride. She wakes in the outdoor lamplight Calmly, as if she were death life gently shakes. The lamps start up inside.
This will be the hour, gleaming, Defying eternity and all its length! The delicacy of this hour is its strength— A dreamy hour, before the delicate sleeper dreaming.
I decide—after hours of thought—this hour will be the one When night is blue along blue earth, but that won’t be all. We don’t need to know how the motion of the sun— Look! Has made the large and gold look sad and small.
Now the bride comes down. In the shadowy blue. One guest weeps in joy, but we Don’t believe. Who can believe anyone is true? Or that poetry is for eternity?
Someone laughs. The blessed know the hour when it comes, when the child is no longer a child. The world into the world comes. There is so much talk of the wild, She weeps. Someone laughs. Where are those eternal drums?
An Englishman discovered oil in Iran in the very beginning of the 20th century BEFORE it became the world’s resource and Iran agreed to a DEAL where Britain
I dreamed TDS sufferers
were wandering around the Bay of Pigs
looking for the Kennedy Center
could basically take oil out of Iran for decades. The 1953 “coup” story was a LIE. The Shah wanted oil independence for his country and one of his Prime Ministers, Mosaddegh, appointed by law by the Shah (two previous prime ministers of the Shah were murdered by Islam extremists
but all they found was an abandoned
day care center with a misspelled sign.
I dreamed TDS sufferers
were wandering around their home town
looking for an insurrection
connected to Khomeini and the Shah himself survived a shooting in the face in 1949) pushed internationally for Iran to take over its own Iranian oil facilities. Britain (Churchill was in charge at the time) was having NONE of this and
but all they found was a two hour,
unarmed, protest. They took photos
and this made them exhausted.
I can’t fit the history of Iran
in a tweet, so what do I say?
Britain got out its warships (running on Iranian oil) and blockaded Iran. Mosaddegh was approved by the Islamist/Communist parliament in Iran—he was NOT part of a “democratically elected government;” PM Mosaddegh was not elected by the people—only a majority of the parliament—a parliament, it should be pointed out,
I dreamed TDS sufferers
were living to tell their grandchildren
that a second childhood is wonderful.
which sympathized with terrorist Islamists. MI6 told the CIA what to do and also controlled SAVAK. Britain was taking Iran’s oil, not the U.S, who had enough of its own oil and was therefore in a position to be friendlier to Iran than Britain. The 1953 “coup” (when the Shah by law fired Mosaddegh because his PM was not getting anywhere
They were having a party
at the Watergate hotel
but Jimmy Carter spoiled everything.
What can you say to a TDS sufferer
who stands on the street with a sign
and had communist sympathies) was a fake spin by MI6 to make America and the CIA look like the villains. And, of course, to make the Shah look like a villain—because the Shah, it is important to note, wanted independence from Britain, as well. The Shah modernized Iran, and despite his puppet status, the Shah was able to use friendly relations with the United States to help Iran (which had
between her nieces and aunts, protesting
on behalf of crime?
How do you speak to a TDS sufferer
mostly been controlled in the 20th century by the Soviets in the north and Britain in the south. The U.S. actually helped kick the Soviets out.) Khomeini had a strong terrorist presence in Iran in the 40s and 50s but the Shah exiled Khomeini in the early 60s over the cause of women’s rights (go Shah!) By the 70s Iran was a modern, prosperous nation, but hated by the Left and U.S. mainstream media
who is a person just like you
but doesn’t believe a person is anything like you.
I believe everything. What did I do?
which portrayed the Shah as a torturer. (The Shah was dealing with Islamist/Communist terrorism. Charges against the Shah need to be seen in this light; he was actually kind and sensitive). The monster Khomeini’s return was facilitated by Jimmy Carter, the U.S. State Dept, the U.S. media (reporters flew WITH Khomeini on the plane from Paris as he came back from exile, portrayed as a kindly, religious savior
How do you speak to progress which cannot end?
Which is insane now but promises a smile up around the bend?
—in fact, he was a killer, and ate SAVAK for breakfast when he returned and turned Iran into a prison.) 1979, the year of the Iranian “revolution,” was also the expiration date for Britain’s oil deal—the UK (we know what they have since become) preferred to hand off Iran controlling its own oil to an Islamist dictator. After 9/11, with the globalist Bushes in control (seeing eye to eye with MI6 and globalist London) Iraq (Iran’s enemy) was attacked
Your girl who you kissed in the moonlight
is no longer your daughter.
You speak of empathy and poetry
but with a smile you vindicate slaughter.
I can’t fit the recent history of Iran
In a dirge, so what do I say?
Your girl who you kissed in the moonlight
is a they.
as the Middle East becomes the controlled chaos (further facilitated by Obama and Hillary) which we see today. Wonder why the Left and the US and British mainstream media are ignoring the people rebelling against the cruel Iran regime? Iran, like Venezuela, sends its oil to China. The globalist communists who hate the United States are still
the lying motherfuckers they have been for decades and will
The NFL is definitely rigged. Those refs were calling things against the Ravens in week 18 against the Steelers which literally did not occur. The whole world is able to see it on video (whether they want to believe it, or not.)
For the sake of their sanity, most refuse to believe it.
“We lost” is the information received. And the information “NFL is rigged” hides itself in the same information-wire as “We lost.”
There is no other information wire.
One truth effectively “hides” the other. “We lost” is what society permits as information among a certain set of individuals—but “NFL is rigged” is information which only travels through that same wire, the same wire which says “We won” to a second set of individuals.
One wire and one wire only, contains “We lost,” “The NFL is rigged” and “We won.” These three all live in the same place, in the “same seeing,” in the same experience.
No other set of individuals, with any investment in the experience exist.
One cannot know “we won” except through the same experience as “we lost” and “NFL is rigged.” No separate verification has any reason to exist—except that verification by the NFL which determines “We lost,” “We won,” and “NFL is rigged.” The same group which rigs the result (“we won” or “we lost”) is responsible for “NFL is rigged” and therefore “we lost” and “we won” must exist in the same information-wire, the same experience and it physically, as well as metaphysically, cannot possibly exist somewhere else.
“NFL is rigged” travels through the identical information-wire as “we lost” and “we won” and therefore the truth “NFL is rigged” can make no true impression on anyone who experiences “We Lost” or “We won.”
It is the perfect crime.
“The crime” exists, but it never manifests as “a crime.” This is the definition of a perfect crime.
The “game” only exists in “one information wire” shared by two competing interests which cancel out everything save “We lost” and “We won,” (both allowed to exist, obviously) because otherwise there would be no interest.
The mathematical formula of the perfect crime is written out this way: X (we lost) divided by Y (we won) always equals 0.
Politics operates in the same manner: One) “I always vote Democrat,” Two) “I always vote Republican,” Three) “Two party system is rigged” is an analogous trifecta.
A religious analogy might be this: You find out three pieces of information in one experience. One) I have died Two) I am going to hell. Three) I had a chance to go to heaven.
Nowhere else but in the experience of death can, or does, the individual (in the monotheistic world view) know these three things. They come through one information-wire and one information-wire, only.
The same “three-in-one” experience happens when one receives the result of a game as a partisan fan which one experiences: We lost, We won, and Game is fixed can only be experienced in one and the same information-wire, making it a multiple but entirely singular experience. “The Game is fixed” is a fact which cannot be disputed but which remains invisible—the same way the fact of death vanishes in the same moment one is either alive in heaven or alive in hell.
It is impossible to experience “Game is rigged” at the moment it is replaced with the (rigged) result of “We Lost” or “We Won.”
Jesuits and intelligence operatives learn this stuff as children. The world of ‘spies’ and ‘double agents’ is similar—but it is important to note that real life is different from the ‘sealed result’ of a ‘game.’ The spy’s goal, however, is to make life just like the ‘sealed result’ of a ‘game.’
You cannot forgive the players—they might be in on the fix.
You cannot forgive the NFL—they might be in on the fix.
World events are happening so fast these days, Scarriet, the beloved literary site relaxing by a lazy river somewhere, hardly dares to comment on them.
But since things are happening so fast, we wish to comment on them.
Oh helpless paradox.
Add to this dilemma, the fact that, while Scarriet wishes to comment on the world, Scarriet knows almost nothing of the world.
Well, here goes:
I asked this simple question to a political activist acquaintance from India who was raising the alarm on the current actions of the White House abroad.
“But don’t you think Venezuela and Iran are already captured nations?”
Breathlessly, I continued:
“They both are run by criminals. Criminal nations, by necessity, export (and import) criminality.
The United States, under certain of its regimes, exports criminality, as well. I’m not saying the United States is perfect—far from it.
We must treat every situation as unique, or no politics can be cogent or clear.
I agree sovereignty should be respected, (does the EU respect sovereignty?) but that principle must finally be curious as to the freedom and sanctity of a nation’s citizenry.
The current administration in the United States is fighting a long history of corruption and anti-democratic (deep state) entrenchment. Sometimes it is really that simple: moral builders vs. thieves.
Any political observer captured by entities such as the BBC, the EU (and its net zero insanity) and the mainstream “politics as usual” of the United States and its legacy media, will be compromised. Any person from India who doesn’t understand that London is still a snake (as much today as it was when London’s queen ruled India) will never understand politics.
Iran’s fall in 1979 hinged on the fact that Britain’s oil license in Iran expired in 1979 and Iran’s capture was deliberately fostered by the very same elements in the United States bent on destroying the current administration.”
I want the readers of Scarriet to understand. Scarriet is free. It is not compromised—by academia, by fear, by nonsense, by anything.
Scarriet understands poetry alone is not enough, but this is not the same as denying poetry is truth. Poetry is truth.
Poetry is better viewed as what it truly is when put next to mathematics, as Poe does in his “Eureka.”
The following (a glimpse of another of my text conversations, this time to family members) may help:
“I spent this afternoon re-reading the middle part of Eureka, more impressed than ever (if that is possible) by Poe’s 1848 essay. One needs to read this work very slowly (there is nothing else like it). There are sentences in Eureka which need to be contemplated for a week, a month.
For a moment I was actually entertaining the idea that Poe was the secret second coming of Christ. The truth of Eureka is that profound. It is SCIENCE—but music (poetry), too.
EMPHASIS is important. This is the one qualifying aspect of art which identifies it—EMPHASIS. [This alone is what makes Eureka a poem.]
Poe describes the miraculous mutuality of gravity. The poet intentionally does so in such a manner that the reader comprehends the importance of the universality of gravity. Poe needs this fact in order to describe the origin of the universe. It is theonly universality for Poe. It proves, for Poe, the indivisible One which precedes the Big Bang. Attraction (universal gravitation) and Diffusion (repulsion, electricity, light, irradiation) are Poe’s two opposite principles. [Poe says matter is repulsion.]
Einstein’s E = MC2 is all but stated by Eureka. [Einstein read Eureka] Poe also intuits the particle/wave paradox of light by calling light “particles” and then adds “impressions, if you wish” as Poe demonstrates the “distance squared” law of irradiation.
Also, re: Gödel proving nothing can be proved or demonstrated—Poe explicitly says this very thing in Eureka!!
Poe was famous enough that a large number of people were given the opportunity to read Eureka—the Bible of the Second Coming, if you will.
Quite different from the Bible, yes.
Eureka is the scientific factual equivalent. [Subtly sprinkled with theology]
If everyone on earth were to understand Eureka, humankind would all become scientists and there would be peace on earth.
But in a kind a divine and miraculous irony no one understands Eureka.
Perhaps only I do. I know of no one who truly understands it; all the commentary I have read either dismisses it, or downplays it.
Perhaps I exaggerate, but Eureka has nowhere near the popularity of the bible—which generates an infinite amount of debate and even hatred, compared to the obscurity of Eureka—which I consider to be a divine work.
After all, the God of the Bible deemed it proper to wipe out the human race in “the famous flood,” an indication He was not a little peeved at the thickness and ignorance of humankind.
The circumstances of Eureka are symbolically parallel, proving how ignorant the human race is, since no human being is receptive to its divine insights, which are there, if one looks—in my humble opinion.
In Eureka, Poe self-consciously reflects on how he will be called mad for what he is trying to articulate. But READ it, carefully. Then you will KNOW.
If you choose NOT to know, that’s fine, too, of course.”
You may have noticed that I’m far away from Venezuela and Iran.
I will now quote myself in a textual conversation with family members, same time period (near-present).
It is a glimpse of me torturing myself over mathematics—a subject which I never understood. The specific topic happens to be the mystery of what a mathematical “mean” is, as it relates to the “Gauss counting puzzle.”
We can’t know poetry unless we know mathematics.
We will never understand Venezuela, Iran, or mathematics, without poetry.
The “lazy river” of Scarriet is alive.
Here is the final conversation:
“I should thank [Uncle] Bill for posting the [standard, textbook] info on the ‘mean.’
Let me clarify why I am prolix.
‘The mean,’ to me, is the ‘middle of the counting.’
Example. The ‘mean’ of 1 thru 3 is 2. As one counts from 1 to 3, the ‘middle of that counting’ is 2. It also works for 1 thru 5. As one travels from Kamchakta (1) to Afghanistan (5), one notices the mean, or the middle, is Ural (3). There are an equal number of territories (2) on either side of Ural (the Mean) as I destroy Ian, Aaron, Dave, or Jenny, on my journey, my march, my conquest, with the yellow pieces.
[I reference the game ‘Risk,’ since we play that game during family reunions.]
However, if I travel from 1 to 100, the ‘mean,’ I am informed by the mathematicians, is 55.
Immediately I am struck by an inconsistency. 55 is clearly not in the middle of 1 to 100. 50 is.
The fact that a mathematical process or operation which involves simple counting is not consistent shakes me to the very core. If this is not consistent, what is? How can such a simple process, visible to my eye, undergo a fundamental alteration of principle?
Shouldn’t something as simple as “one, two, three” remain in place for the journey 1 thru 100?
What if the ‘counting amount’ were a container and the ‘mean’ the amount of gas in that container? For a container of 3, the “mean” (2) is 66.6% —the container is two/thirds filled with gas. But if the ‘container and its gas’ is simply increased to 100 from 3, now the gas in our tank has shrunk to 55%.
How is this possible? The relation of gas to tank did not change. The ‘mean’ is still the ‘middle of counting,’ whether we count to 3 or 100. But we lost gas.
But what’s worse, is that “the math” lost the gas.
We didn’t lose the gas. The math did.
The mathematicians will run to their formulas and make everything all right.
The math will fix the math.
But the poet is not satisfied. The poet feels betrayed. The poet will never quite trust math, again.
Socrates, and later Poe (see Dupin), famously proclaimed that the true philosopher is both mathematician and poet.
Imagination (see Eureka) is necessary to discover the scientific secrets of the universe—even though the mathematicians are likely to hang the person who is too imaginative.
Scarriet 