--- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" > > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <rorygoff@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" > <jflanegi@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > <snip> Certainly a large percentage > > > > > > > of the experiences claimed as "enlightenment" > > > > > > > by Jim and Rory fall into the category of just > > > > > > > some overwhelming emotion. <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow-- you nailed it Turq! lol > > > > > > > > > > *lol* You crack me up. > > > > > > > > Who's 'me'? > > > > > > An unreal spewer of non-truth. > > > > Who seems to get away with it in Fairfield. > > What's up with that, huh? > > > > The best I can figure is that after decades > > of empty TM promises people are so hungry > > for some sign that enlightenment exists that > > they'll believe almost anyone who claims to > > have realized it. > > > > Tell me it isn't so, and that he has some > > phwam! in person, cuz he really doesn't > > on the Net. > > > > It's not an "attacking" thing on my part, > > as his ego likes to believe, it's just that > > I don't believe him, and he's uncomfortable > > with the fact that I don't believe him. If > > he weren't, and if there weren't a "he" > > still in there *to* be uncomfortable, > > why all these endless defenses, eh? > > > Same with Jimbo. The ladies doth protest > > too much, methinks. > > This should be really good. Could you clarify for Turq, Alex? > > *lol*
(And you'd better make sure to add a super-duper extra helping of "phwam!" so it will be nice and *special* for him...)
