Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Dream Delving



[1976]

I should have turned the engine off! I recall feeling it rumble through the steering wheel, though I was parked aside on the red-brown gravel road heading down into a valley. But behind me I'd spotted something at the T junction, and it needed my investigation. Before leaving, I remember looking back into the cave of the interior of my van, seeing every wall covered in books, but not in boxes, as if my vehicle were a traveling library. And my largest painting, Passing Through Too, leaned up sideways from floor to ceiling. My life's work. All that I had was in that caravan.

The sound of the gravel at my feet was reminiscent of young manhood, when I'd gone hiking in the mountains. I looked back at my vehicle and smiled at my tall two-tone Dodge, orange and cream, that I'd first bought when entering Canada. It rumbled slightly at a distance as I trudged up the fifty or so yards from it to the crossroad to inspect the thing that'd caught my attention. It was a brightly gleaming silver bench. Like a Holy Grail! It radiated with brightly silvered light. Around it was a woodsy gathering of shrubs. But next to it, right beside it on the ground, was a bright white plastic bag, containing something the size of a puppy, but the bag was flapped over as though lying there a long time and flattened by the wind. And around the bag was some human garbage, a knocked over paper coffee cup, black and brown, a green cool-drink bottle as though left on its side after playing postman's knock, and ... well, a dump of human excrement.

Ugh! That had me turning!

I looked back toward my vehicle only to see, to my great alarm, it take off. I must have left it in gear! I started to run. Even as I was running I marvelled that I could; what had happened to my wheelchair? And as I fixed my attention back on the vehicle I could see it clearly, its orange body and cream top escaping from me. Somehow I could get a point of view suddenly from ahead of it. It careened toward a great pile of leaves, big as a haystack strewn across the road, but they were scattered by the weighty momentum of the vehicle. It gathered speed and so did I. I ran after it and watched as it miraculously clung to the tight corners of the mountain road as it descend. Then I lost sight of it. I scoured the ground for slew-tracks. Had it gone off the cliff?

Down in the small town the roads became black bitumen. The four way stop sign as I entered afoot seemed forlorn. No one was around. No cars showed signs of being hit. The caravan was not in sight. I recall feeling desperately worried that it might have struck someone. I really hoped it had just gone off the cliff. I felt dreadfully responsible for the momentary lapse in judgement; that so small a thing as leaving the engine on could wreak such havoc. I remembered that in
Northern Ontario, where I was first made Canadian, that's what we do, in winter, we leave engines on. But I knew this was not winter. Was the big pile of leaves not indicative of Autumn?

And then I woke up.

We should've could've might have ought to have done something plays over and over in most of our lives. Our mistakes contribute to the chaos. Paradoxically, our most carefully planned creations do so too. The past is irretrievable, except in memory. Or is it? There are theories that we are on a continuous loop, adjusting minutely, repeating over and over the life we play. To what end? Thing is, learning is the reflection, or not, and we do what we do, most of us, without an intentional harm. Certainly, I did not want to launch my freewheeling vehicle down a mountain road at an unsuspecting populace! Then again, as the old man I ran up to beside a gas station said, "You left your caravan unattended? Did you not think what harm it could do? You've got to take more responsibility, man!" 

And then I woke up; again. 

Yet lingering with me, most pervasively, is the silver of that bench, my responsibility, and the detritus of human offal. 


Monday, April 7, 2014

Give Another Hand for Humor!



                                                       [For Donovan's U Tube see below]

Humor has its drawbacks. (The comedians at ‘Hecklers’ basement bar in Victoria would make much filth of my opening remark!) The master of ceremonies persisted in the lewd, crude and the rude. And despite ladies present, his imagery was that of the uninhibited, the exhibitioner, the perverse shocker, the assault on the senses. Yet he had more hands clapping than I could count. And I realized (ladies and gentlemen), that on this Saturday night, at 21:00 hours, with drinks, women, men, and the spotlight on the small stage given to the exposition of comedy, that I was in for an intemperate and titillating test of integration. (Repetitive, I know.)

Yet the Master of Ceremonies soon enough advanced the action. And while he was speaking it struck me that though genre specific, though differentiated, potentially divisive, dislocating and downright dirty, it is in each and every moment that we are tested for readiness to be aware, absorptive, assimilative, compassionate, and inclusive. What part of Integrative is not? What part of Whole is not? What part of Everything is not? Preference is all. And so prudishness and perversity lie together abed in the sea of allusion, illusion, and inference. We are but mankind adrift; flotsam and jetsam in The Universal Energy.

In the early 90’s, while defending my choice to direct Romeo and Juliet, I devised the following rubric for art: The thumb is thick and versatile, a symbol of the Sexual/Sensual basis of life. The forefinger is the Action/Adventure; it points and leads and instigates. The middle finger is the Romance/Sentiment; it clutches and clings and signifies. The ring-finger is the Knowledge/Esoteric symbol. (On my own hand it is longer than my index finger, connoting more thought than action?) The pinky is Spiritual/Wisdom; it has the least leadership in hand (the last we usually think of). And in the palm are the lines of smiles and frowns; the downs and ups of our emotions. (Made you look, ha!) Great literature is like that; it combines these elements. Shakespeare’s plays find their classical appeal in their ability to reach all levels of the populace; so too the Mona Lisa; so too for any effort at ontological insight that is not anemic; so too for epistemological attempts at evolving the psyche. Integration, consciously evoked, intellectually apprehended, emotively galvanized, meta-cognitively realized, or not, seeps into the interstices between the myriad fingers fiddle-fuddling amongst the five-finger discounts practiced by the miss-directions of mankind, or not, and raises the bar. Or not. Thing is, one may also draw the rubric as a Five Point Star!

Donovan Deschner raised the bar. A star in the guest spot as the visiting comedian, Donovan brought the audience to insights of our ego-mania, insights of our being judgmental, insights of own inertia, insights of our attachment, insights of our predilections for positions of power, insights of our inability easily to transcend the paradigm. His was no set based on epistemological anemia, it was an enema designed to purge the up-tight, the morally pretentious, the ontologically challenged. And as his guest, as his former teacher, I remained fundamentally proud to know him. So what if swearing is not de-rigueur? Fornication under command of the king has been ongoing for centuries, unfortunately! Ha! (Or am I too abstruse?) Irony is, Donovan was Father Capulet!

We eschew and judge and condemn at our peril. Life is full and resplendent and funny and goes on whether we approve or not. Preference is not meant to be preclusive; it is meant to regulate the amount of times we engage in a specific activity; monitor the choice of purposefully encountering a specific proximity. And laughter, that great gift of real release, is the sound of the soul cracking out of its pent up shell, ready for NOW!




 Donovan's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82keMBxVgG0

Saturday, April 5, 2014

No Noah?



When the dove of peace was first sent out there were those that shot it down. But after enough carrier pigeons had delivered their messages the Groups of Threes answered the summons. Like a parent, offspring, and guiding ghost, the president, vice president, and military commander of each species were got together in one room, the Ark of Radical Revision, and no sooner were all three representatives of all the world's countries inside than the doors were locked! Almost 200 countries in our world made for only 600 people, policy people, and then there were also some international interpreters, approximately 150 (even though there are over 6,000 languages among our species), and they, along with Noah (The Integrative Speaker) as well as the cooks and servants and cleaners, altogether amounted to approximately 1000 and 1. But the only ones allowed one collective vote was each Big Three of a Country, the Prime Minister, the Deputy, and the War Lord. (Other titles were brandished, such as Big Chief, Next in Line, and Sabre Rattler, but you get the gist of it.) And once the doors were locked, that was it! Noah announced: "We do not leave this ark until we have achieved Unanimity: World Peace!"


Meanwhile, all around that ark the people were sworn to go about their business, awaiting the results. No one was permitted to continue to war. No one was permitted to politic (in terms of usurping their absentee leaders). And no one was allowed to claim leadership over the others. All were to lead lives of daily industry that fed, housed, and clothed their ilk, and they were to celebrate their cultural and religious and even political differences. And in the great sea of humanity (although admittedly there were waves of contention and even a few storms of ill dispute) the populace waited impatiently for the results from the ark. They needed their leaders.


Inside the ark tensions were extremely high. Ancient grudges bred anew; especially among the heads of armies. They wanted, cowboy like, to square off against each other with guns on hips. The presidents and prime ministers and big chiefs huffed and puffed. They wanted to claim the numbers of people under them as bargaining chips for a greater portion of the vote, such that if teeny little Andorra was to have one vote, then the Giant Dragon was to have 100, as was The Bear, and The Elephant, and even the Donkey too. So too did the various species begin to feel the pecking order. The proud giraffe and the placid hippopotamus and the wolf and the skunk and the blue jay and even the mosquito all needed to have their apportionments. But Noah was adamant. For each country, in fact, for all three representative of it, there would be only one vote. That's why there were three stake-holders, "because two out of three ain't bad." What do you mean, "bad?", the critters bewailed. "Well," answered Noah, "here's the thing: Not one of us is leaving this ark until we are ascertained. No one is to wage war, nevah, evah! Ever again. It must be in each country's constitution. It must be the central tenant of each triumvirate, and it must be instilled in each culture, top down, and nurtured from birth up. Care for all. And no war!"

Now, you can imagine that the War Heads were not all pleased. In an atmosphere of confused effluvium they pouted and postured and prognosticated. They even borrowed big words! They felt they'd be done out of a job! But with much dialogue they came to realize that Defence of the Realm meant to have an army to assist against all them-thar natural offences against mankind, like hurricanes and landslides and floods. (Men and women could be made proud to serve in that capacity.) And the VP's came to understand that if we did away with all the foreign currency differentiations and border controls and inequality of labour and inequality of education and unfairness of treatment and dismissal of essential human dignity and... Well, all 'that' took a lot and lot of talking! Even the Heads began to wonder what their function might be, but were given to see that the Chosen Representative Role would be one of great honour, as an example of the very best of good will and consideration of one group to another, from ant to aardvark to even the unicorn. And so, eventually, the ark's doors were opened. And everything became different.

Now then, where does one find sufficient carrier pigeons?


Thursday, April 3, 2014

Feeling Antsy?



(Proverbs 6:6 Go to the ant thou sluggard, consider her ways and be...)

Atop a round table the ant was limited. It scuttled back and forth to various edges, repeating patterns, perhaps even sure each edge was anew, for were things not changed out there in the larger space by the time it went back east, or while it was heading south? And even on the table top things could get dangerous. Objects got placed in its way. The table itself trembled at times. It was difficult, being an ant. Or was it?

One easily anthropomorphizes ants. (One easily can give many things human attributes.) But what if the ant is an ant, fully, completely, entirely contained in its 'antness'? It does not long to be an elephant. It does not feel insecure and inadequate and 'less than'. It is 'ant', defined not by what it does, but by what it is. It seeks not its purpose in life. It does not see its taking up of a giant project, such as bridging a stream, or climbing a table, or carrying a leaf as 'ambitious'. It does these things because it can. It does not seek to fulfill needs (beyond the basic ones of food, drink, and shelter); it certainly may exercise preference. It yearns not for what it cannot have, though it may organize a highway from its hometown to some golden treasure of syrupy substance as a matter of pragmatism, rather than avarice. It lives to serve its community. It 'is'.

And being ant it is content. The other 'things' that it does merely makes life interesting. It spends a great deal of time checking around. It travels comparatively vast distances. It can get lost. It may experience anxiety about not being able to find its way back to the fold, but then again, perhaps it sees the very searching as something it is doing, independent of its essence of being an ant. It stays within its physical limitations. It does not leap off that table. It does not attack...

Well, not every ant is harmless. There are red ants that will even grab up onto your bicycle tires when you ride through them and they will somehow fly through the air and land on you, and get in your hair and in your ears and even bite you in your, well, down there. Red ants are horrid to observe. They march in giant carpets and do not go around things; they scramble over them, devouring chickens and goats and... Well, they are horridly voracious. And then there are the giant black Matabele ants. They have these big sentry specimens with pincers that can feel like alien needles being jabbed into your finger, or into the buttocks. And they certainly are most alarming. We also have flying ants that come barreling out of their nest just before it rains. They have these elongated bodies like miniature hornets and they whirl into the sky, frightening children, and bashing up against indoor screens. (Or is it screens to keep them outdoors?)

We think seldom about ants. And yet we will set traps for them, spray them, stamp on them, flick them across a table, squish them, and even step carelessly through their columns. Yet though they may scurry away, and halt up, and curl up and die, I doubt that they desire anything other than to be an ant. I doubt that they suffer the indignities of apportionment and rank. One is the Queen. Another the sentry. Most are born workers. And I doubt that there is a psychologist or a teacher or a pilot or a comedian among them, at least, not that he or she holds sway over others as such; if so, it is merely a function of its being an ant, entirely a matter of course, entirely as a matter of its innate existence. Yet surely they share in-house jokes, or swap special memes of esoteric knowledge.

Hierarchies and Evolution and the Bell Curve, and Psychogeometrics and Spiral Dynamics and Maslow and Bloom and Kohlberg and Gregoric and even Anagram Theory is not the ilk of the ant; it simply is. And the world unfolds as it will. As such, when we go the ant and consider her ways in terms of the collective contribution to the health of the whole (which really comes down to its serving its very own group,) harvesting and gathering and foraging in a timely manner, it is its 'happiness' in being what it is while doing what it does that might best be emulated; what it does is what it does while it is. Yes? Now then, mightn't we be as such too? Or are we not ants?


The Afrikaans joke?
Ek sal julle vertel (I shall you tell) maar dit bly (but it stays) tussen hierde vier (between these four) miere (ants).
Yet ‘walls’ in Afrikaans is pronounced exactly like ‘miere’ (ants), but is spelt ‘mure’ (walls). Insert another ant into the picture and the joke makes no sense, ha! A pithy play on words and sound.


Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Ring Any Bells?





Equality and peace are unachievable - our differences are powerful survival mechanisms. Tolerance and compassion are learned skills to allow the bell curve its true shape.
Top of Form
Like ·  · Share
·         Paul Smulders and 6 others like this.
·        
·        
Paul Smulders One csn only srtive to achieve an abstract concept. One cannot actually achieve it?
·        
Harold Thompson You statement brings to mind the theory put forward by Bryan Sykes in his book Adam’s Curse: A Future without Men. Equality and peace are unachievable, not because of ‘group’ and / or social differences but because of the male need to get the female to accept his sperm. Briefly, the theory goes like this – irreparable degeneration is being done to the Y- chromosome as it advances through evolution. This degradation gives rise to increasing male infertility. Women, he states, are winning the battle of the sexes because the x-chromosone, which has a ‘twin’ can repair itself to minimise bad mutations. Men must impregnate women to keep their y-chromosone ‘alive’. The more the impregnation the greater the chance of their y-chromosone surviving. Wars and invasions and the resulting capture and rape of women and the slaughter of rival y-chromosones are perpertrated to achieve this. It also helps that women are attracted to powerful men. He then gives examples of this, his primary example being Genghis Khan who fathered thousands of boys. (Girls don’t count)
Ultimately male survival is in the hands of women though, because they can choose to abort all male progeny.
In conclusion then, it is the genetic drive of men to ensure the survival of their y-chromosone that gives rise to inequality, not social or other differences.
A fascinating and entertaining book, well worth a read.
·        
Nicky Stockwell Interesting stuff.
·        
Tony Stockwell The differences of which I speak are the random mutations and geospecific coping mechanisms that some have and others want. It is this which drives competition. I think there is no chance that our species will revert to snail-like options for procreation.
·        
Harold Thompson Geospecific coping mechanisms do not influence the direction of mutation. Has environmental determinism made a comeback?
·        
Harold Thompson Sorry, forgot your second point. Future procreation will be egg to egg fertilisation, men will not be required.
·        
Tony Stockwell Ahh let us dispense entirely with group dynamics and the mutual delight that coitus provides!
·        
Harold Thompson Oh ye y- chromosone your fate is written in the genes.
·        
Harold Thompson Sykes theorises 5 000 generations. Embrace group dynamics and enjoy while you can Tony 
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury Thing is, more and more integration, since it is a process and not a product, is about accepting that which "is" while nurturing the awareness of all at the edges of potential; a bell curve that is always present however far progressed along the continuum of evolution.
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury Thanks for care you put into your commentary re Sykes book, Harold Thompson, much appreciate your Miltonic mind!
·        
Harold Thompson  Thanks Richard. Thanks should really go to Tony for his droplets of wisdom which he teases us with all too seldom.
·        
Guido Guidetti Bill Sykes wrote an entertaining "theory" primarily designed to make him $$ and more attractive to women. The male of almost every species, particularly mammals all have similar behavior patterns around competition and resources. So Sykes is postulating the elimination of all male mammals as they blindly propagate their y chromosome, hmmm
·        
Guido Guidetti Once the resource and environment issues are resolved then compassion and tolerance can emerge
·        
Harold Thompson There is great variance in male patterns of behaviour around competition (other alpha males) and resources( females). An alpha male behaves differently to a theta male and very differently to an omega male. What Sykes postulates is that it is the alpha males who are driven, albeit fruitlessly, to propagate their y-chromosome. Interestingly he sees homosexuals as already having been eliminated because they do not propagate their y-chromosomes.
·        
Harold Thompson Tony Stockwell , Richard Michelle-Pentelbury and Guido Guidetti you assume altruistic behavior in humans. What happens if your assumption is wrong?
·        
Tony Stockwell Guids - our will to co-operate has to balance our will to be successful. Because sharing time and space is a given, and each person on the curve comprises the whole, our need is mutual if poorly understood.
·        
Guido Guidetti That's why the concept of "free enterprise" as a form of competition is the best and most natural way to compete. No need to understand our mutual requirements, no need to worry about equality the hidden hand will reward success and success will generate wealth which under good governance (a big question in of itself) will be shared with all within the bell curve------Idealistic I know!
·        
Tony Stockwell Harold - living alone is the worst waste of time and energy. Altruism is not an absolute, it fluctuates within us as tolerance and compassion seeps into our behaviour.
·        
Harold Thompson So you assume altruism yet deny commensalism?
·        
Tony Stockwell The only ism that works is pragmatism and for that you need a complete understanding of what we are - the other isms are then subsets.
·        
Harold Thompson Pragmatism is altruism with reward, hence my assertion that altruism is a fallacy.
·        
Harold Thompson Living alone does not reflect non altruistic behavior, it reflects a lack of pragmatism.
·        
Guido Guidetti I can buy that Harold, does a seeming act of selfishness prove altruism? or does the act in of itself bring a form of gratification IE psychological egoism thus denying the act is altruistic a debate worthy of FB friends lol
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury No assumption, Harold. It is at the very edges of Meme behaviour that a given person spills over into a new paradigm, or retrenches into old meme behaviours despite glimpses of "a larger way to be". Individual by individual, evolution is phenomenally slow. As such we have an observable mass Meme behaviour of Self-centricity, Familial-centricity, Ego- centricity, Rligio-centricity, Polotico-centricity, Global-centricity, and if we get lucky and have enough time we may reach a state of full integration (a Singularity of Spirit that is independent of a singularity of technology). Thing is, if there are for the sake of a metaphor twelve grades of evolution in our collective consciousness, there will ALWAYS be souls progressing through the grades. The concept is that the more people in a higher grade the further the progress of the bell curve. For instance, "we" retrenched to the fourth meme, Religiosity, post 9-11, when we were en-route to more and more and more of the fifth. Since then we've slowly gathered steam to be more politico-centric once more, and even are more aware of a grand-scale Egalitarianism in the offing. But with decisions to be made vis a vis North and South Korea as well as Ukraine and Putin, we may well have to retrench to the sixth level. (Recalling here, that one speaks of a societal mass meme as opposed to an individual.) The evolutionary potential that invigorates my positive thinking is that endemic to being a person is 'possibility', however unleavened, and that the individual possibility needs nurturing, one by one, in order for the group to see itself predominantly coming from a more inclusive, more integrative Meme. ( WE are no longer level one Survivalists as in the origins of mankind, but what if WE were entirely reduced to that meme by a nuclear holocaust?) As such, we currently may well be spreading less Y chromosomes (a physical manifestation) in preparation for a more 'spiritual' sense of integration; a singularity of compassion and accord. Ha! Reality would have it that we simply are too many in the big school, especially in lower grades, with too few teachers, and the budget of time and resources is running out!
·        
Harold Thompson That's my point succinctly put Guido. Gratification is intrinsic to an altruistic act and thereby negates it.
·        
Tony Stockwell No Harold - contributing to the whole and deriving benefit is confirmation of belonging. That is simply pragmatic.
·        
Harold Thompson Richard, a reply to your post requires a good nights thinking and rest. I hope to respond in the morning.
·        
Harold Thompson So contributing is pragmatic, not altruistic. That's exactly my point.
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury For what it's worth (semantics being what they are): evolution is fundamentally pragmatic. It's innate to each, paradoxically, for the sake of the Whole.
·        
Harold Thompson I found your post very interesting and thought provokingRichard Michelle-Pentelbury. I hope my response does it some justice.
At the very edge of meme the electrochemical interaction of a hundred billion neurons in our brain shuts down and we die. This electrochemical interaction of a hundred billion neurons forms the basis of what we are going to be and the connection of these interactions with the ‘outside’ world gives rise to consciousness and sensation and by this we are. These connections to the outside world are dynamic, our sense of self is not cast in stone, and Paul Smulders may yet pay his e-toll account  Andreas Jablonski may also, one day, pay me the R9000 he owes.
At the edge of meme (death) we are remembered (spilt over into a new paradigm) by those with whom we connected. This enormous mass of electrochemical neuron interaction which gave rise to self is handed over to those with whom we connected to do with as they please. Some are remembered (their consciousness is carried over and may affect coming paradigms......Einstein, Darwin, Jesus, Mandela, Mozart. Others are soon forgotten but what is true to all is that we are handed over to the prevailing paradigm. That there are so many prevailing paradigms, usually the interactions and connections of alpha males, precludes any group consciousness moving in unision from grade to grade or a sense of spiritual integration.
Evolution is physical. What are the chances of a hundred billion interactions connecting in the same way. Absolutely none! And thank goodness for that.
Jeez, I hope this makes sense! 
·        
Tony Stockwell Like the post H - residual conciousness, our own in conjunction with past knowns, impacts on the current paradigm as powerfully as the physical legacy don't you think?
·        
Harold Thompson Thanks Tony. Residual consciousness does impact the current paradigm but can never do so as powerfully as the physical legacy because it is open to interpretation and manipulation. Mandela was a terrorist / is a hero and perhaps eventually who? Physical entities such as the law of gravity or genes are powerful because they are not open to interpretation. Manipulation certainly 
·        
Tony Stockwell Denial constructs alternate realities for many - sometimes in defiance of those laws!
·        
Harold Thompson And thank goodness for denialists Tony, for it is they who fight nonsensical dogmas and beliefs and create real realities . . . . . Galileo, Darwin, Einstein, Dawkins, Paracelsus, Copernicus, Scaliger. . . .
·        
Tony Stockwell Hail empiricism?!
·        
Harold Thompson Or, as Inspector Grim would say, 'the hell with wishy washy, namby pamby, bleeding heart, bucket full of tears constructs.
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury Wonderful rejoinders, friends. A phrase I like is "which part of Everything is not?" It captures for me the essence of integrating Universality(s), ha! Goes along with the phrase "at the edge of the known universe".
·        
Harold Thompson I must say I enjoy the debates which follow Tony's provocative little postings.
·        
Andreas Jablonski Maybe so Harold, but in the end, equilibrium is everything. My separate reality has cancelled out that debt I owed you in your separate reality - I thought that was axiomatic.
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury Harold, I really like your exposition. Seems to me that our ego holds onto our general inability to accept the concept that I am utterly to be dispersed when I die; we much rather expect to be a ghost, an angel, a habitant of cloud nine, reunited with our loved ones, or even reincarnated as a single Another entity, retaining all me psychically, if not physically, but to let ME go? I,me, mine drives us, naturally. Existentially to let go and to realize the 'responsibility' (while one is conscious) is to contribute to the health of the whole within the limits of one's natural being seems so difficult to do. So we indeed construct all them thar small memes of behaviour and concept and adhere to them with a fervour inculcated in us by tradition and culture and influence. Individuation is a most difficult thing just to be. There be much of thou, and thee, but always it's really all about me. Ha!
23 hours ago · Like · 2
·        
Guido Guidetti lol @ Andreas
·        
Richard Michelle-Pentelbury Tony, Harold, Guido, Andreas, ok for me to make public our piece on this topic as follows?http://mrpswords.blogspot.ca/2014/04/ring-any-bells.html
mrpswords.blogspot.com
·        
Harold Thompson Fine by me Richard.
13 hours ago · Like · 1
·        
Guido Guidetti fine by me Richard
12 hours ago · Unlike · 1
·        
Tony Stockwell Happy to be part of it!
12 hours ago · Unlike · 1
·        
Andreas Jablonski Yes from me.
10 hrs · Unlike · 1
·         Richard Michelle-Pentelbury
Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form