--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], satvadude108 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:42 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > > They'll say ANYTHING rather than admit what > > > > MOST of them know to be the truth, that OF > > > > COURSE all of the TM dogma is based on Hindu > > > > dogma. They'll lie, they'll deny, they'll come > > > > with up excuses, they'll obfuscate, they'll > > > > attempt to distract, they'll do ANYTHING > > > > rather than violate this First Commandment. > > > > > > My personal fave, (paraphrased): > > > "We don't have to tell the kids what the > > > underpinnings are, if people like John > > > Knapp would just keep their mouths shut." > > > > > > Now there's a raving endorsement for the > > > integrity of the teaching. > > > > > > > And personally I'm getting a little tired of it. > > > > > > Not me, I still find it endlessly entertaining. > > > > Kinda tells you where the person who frequently says > > > > "I *never* lie." > > > > sets the bar on her personal honesty. > > You might want to ask Sal about her personal > honesty. Her "paraphrase" above, for example, > is a knowing lie.
I disagree. Sal did not "knowingly lie." > > > Even do.rflex, who had his nose up her butt > > so long he developed ring around the collar, > > has acknowledged how completely dishonest this > > position is regarding the non-religiousity of > > teaching TM in schools. > > Oh, you've got the wrong word there. For > something to be "acknowledged," it has to > be a fact. What John did was state his > *opinion* about the position. Fail. Again. > > See the difference? > > > I've wondered for some time if the vehement > > argument she makes was based on delusion or > > dishonesty. It is probably both. > > I don't really think people who lack the guts > to engage someone on a topic of disagreement > are in a position to do such "wondering" in > public. Ahh. The junkyard dog strains at her tether and barks at the cyclone fence that is my Firefox browser. There is no "engage" with you. Even Curtis, displaying an extraordinarily high level of honesty, curiosity, and patience is unable to sustain dialogue with you without being assailed by insults. I don't have his chops for being nice to you as I find you quite distasteful and nasty. http://snipurl.com/f1i8q No soup for you! > > But what's particularly interesting is that > here we have yet another example of a True > Non-Believer Are you referring to me or Sal? Or perhaps you are lapsing more lazily than usual into one of your twisted distortions. accusing a TM supporter of > dishonesty because her opinion disagrees with > theirs--precisely what the True Non-Believers > are constantly accusing the TM supporters, > with great scorn, of doing to them. > > Fascinating. They're utterly oblivious to > the irony (or we could just call it hypocrisy). >
