by S. Poulos
taking legal action, trying to overturn my recommendation as illegal."
"That is even more serious than I thought," she said, concerned. "If that happened, everything you accomplished so far would simply blow away into dust." She thought for a moment as though she wanted to be hundred per cent sure of what she was going to say, and then she added, "But you are not going to allow this to happen, are you honey?"
"What do you mean?"
"You know what I mean."
"You mean?"
"Yes!"
"I don't know what to say."
"Of course not, because you are a doer. You are not good at saying things; you never were. You are good in doing things, so let's go and do it."
"I feel so bad. I spoiled your vacation Lillian"
"Look honey, we had a wonderful time, so wonderful I will never forget it. It's shortened up a bit, but so be it. I am happy when I see you have peace of mind. The rest can wait. After all, I would not like to continue with our vacation as though nothing had happened! No, I would expect much more from you."
Mister Clarke held both her hands, and said, smiling while he looked deep in her eyes, "I am the luckiest man in the world. I have the most wonderful person in the world, and she is my wife, right here in front of me. I can touch her, I can hold her, and I can kiss her." Then he started to kiss her, saying, "I'll make it up for you dear; I'll make it up to you," and with that, they got up holding hands, feeling calm, and at peace, and went to the travel agent to organize the trip back home.
As soon as John Watson the new chairman had been elected, he started to work towards over-ruling the recommendation issued by his predecessor. He had an overwhelming majority in the committee, and his hands were free to act as he felt. After he tightened up the case, gathering all the information and documents he needed, he put in the appeal in court. To his surprise, the author of the recommendation challenged the appeal. The ex-chairman had returned from his vacation and lodged an injunction against the appeal, claiming the recommendation was valid, as it had been issued by applying all the legal letters of the law.
The court upheld the ex-chairman's appeal, and issued a hearing in five days.
The day for it arrived, and both parties were in their positions ready to defend their cases. The side of the new administration claimed that due to a quorum, the recommendation was non-valid. They had enough material, claiming that when the ex-chairman issued the recommendation, most of the members were in another room preparing it. This was in order to facilitate him, as he had insufficient time due to the fact that he insisted on presiding over the hearing without interruptions.
The ex-chairman claimed that the recommendation was made according to the letter of the law that specified that in order for a member of a committee, to be eligible to participate in the process of forming a recommendation of a hearing, the committee member in question had to participate for a justifiable time in the process of the hearing itself.
The new administration claimed that indeed the committee members participated in justifiable time in the process of the hearing. The only time they were absent was the time during the press conference, but that was irrelevant anyway, for the press conference was not part of the hearing.
The ex-chairman hit back, claiming that the press conference was valid, for it was held under the jurisdiction of the WCFET, hence, it was part of the hearing process. It was even more informative than the hearing itself. In fact the press conference provided much more informative material. As he put it, the press conference was, "The tipping point, the cornerstone, the gist", that made him and the few colleagues that participated issue the according recommendation. "Therefore," the ex-chairman ended, "the claimant has no right to appeal against the recommendation, for they have an incomplete picture, due to lack of attendance and insufficient evidence."
It did not take long for the verdict, which was in favor of the defender, with the preamble that the claimant had shown insufficient interest in the proceedings of the hearing, by not participating in the press conference. The court found that this was indeed part of the hearing proceedings.
But the same night, as the ex-chairman and his wife were celebrating their victory, the new chairman called a meeting of the committee, claiming they had only lost a battle, not the war.
He called all the big guns into action. He engaged one of the biggest and best known law firms, together with the assistance of some of the WCFET lawyers, and they made an enormous legal machine.
After the favorable court verdict for the WCFET recommendation, the Teacher was bombarded with offers inviting him to appear on television networks, in newspaper interviews, on radio and at universities. He chose mainly the universities, firstly because he liked the personal contact with the audience and secondly because these audience were young. He thought the young more appreciable to new teachings than the old.
This was also the weapon his opponents mainly used against him i.e. that he incited the young in to revolt against the established world order.
They ignored the fact that the gist of his message was to obey the natural laws that govern the universe.
This was the Third University at which the Teacher would appear. There had been scuffles and small demonstrations outside the previous ones and so the organizers took some precautions for the upcoming gathering.
As the Teacher had the luxury to choose the venue, he insisted on a number of rules, one of which was to apply the same technique he used in the television interview. That is, during the presentation, the organizers to show various passages they chose from various sources authorized by the Teacher, whether from his writings speeches or interviews. They had to select and present them for debate, as it was a good way to trigger the notion for conversation. It gave food for thought, and brought always-lively dialogues, an exchange of ideas and discussion, and that was the aim of the whole endeavor.
One of the previous universities had used a projector for this purpose; the other one used video. This university had a huge amphitheatre with a screen as big as a cinema's. The amphitheatre was packed and at the back many were standing. There were two podiums; one for the Teacher one for the organizer and two boom operators for the sound with one microphone hanging from each one for the audience to participate.
In general it looked a pretty well organized gathering.
Everything was ready for the presentation to start.
The Teacher and the organizer were ready standing on their podiums and the organizer started to address the audience. "Ladies and gentlemen, I have been organizing forums for this university for at least the last twenty years, and every time I have done it in the past I was able to categorize the subject or to be aware of the motive behind each. This time I am racking my brain to put our guest somewhere; to categorize him. I even had problems promoting this event because I did not know what label to use. He does not belong to a political party or political ideology. He is against religion, as we know it. He called the new age groups the Pharisees of modern times. He claims and accuse many professions are unethical and even outright criminal as in the case of hypnotists. After all that, if you would think that the rebellious or the revolutionary ones would side with him you are wrong, for he advocates that the citizen of a state has the duty to respect and obey the laws of the country until they are abolished by the inner pressure of the same citizens exerted on the government.
"To be honest, there is hardly anyone left to support him for if you add it all up it summaries the whole of mankind.
"With all this in my mind, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to introduce you to one of the most controversial men of our time; to the man as the whole world knows as the Teacher.
"Well Teacher is there anything that you disagree with in my introduction or is there anything you want to say in general for the opening of this forum?"
"Yes! For a start I don't accuse anyone. I merely state. I am not a peculiar old man saying every morning when I get up, 'hmm let's see which one shall I accuse today
...' and to all these people who feel that I have offended I would advise that all this energy they use against me would be better used inwardly to re-examine themselves. They might derive much more by doing that. After all, prevention is always better than cure.
"I also want to say, that I never comment on comments made for me, whether favorable or not. If I did that, I would spend the rest of my life doing just that, although the analysis you just made approaches pretty close to the facts.
"But what are facts? Let's we assume that we want to go from point A, to point B. This road from A to B is the factual road, or the road that interests us, or better, the road that is relevant to us. Now, if we for some reason, unknown to us, made a detour, then we entered the non-factual road, or the road that is not in our interest, or the road that is irrelevant to us. Hence it is immaterial, therefore non-factual, and thus pseudo-factual. This is what I wish to explore with you all.
"Man lives in a world that is pseudo-factual. If we take as a base the fact that nothing in this world is as it should be, that is because, on the way from A to B, we made a detour. Rather than following the road straight from A to B, we are on a pseudo-factual road that we assume is the real road. Therefore, whatever calculations a man makes will be irrelevant or wrong, because his calculations derive