As usual, Barry can't make his point without lying:

--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote:
<snip>
> But the *rest* of the "pile-on" folks? They had
> one and only one *intent* -- "Gotta demonize
> the TM critic." Judy, as usual, contributed 
> nothing of substance.

As Barry knows but can't admit, I've contributed
*plenty* of substance regarding Vaj's dishonesty.
In fact, I did so yesterday with regard to Vaj's
claim concerning MMY's "Maharishi" title.

 She can't. She is neither
> intelligent enough nor experienced enough in
> these topics *to* contribute substance. So she
> did what she always does, and used it to play
> "Gotcha" against Vaj. The idea being sold to
> lurkers here is, "If EmptyBill 'caught' Vaj
> in one mistake or 'lie,' then you should not
> believe *anything* Vaj says."

Nope. In the first place, EmptyBill is hardly the
only person knowledgeable about the traditions
Vaj touts to have caught him in "mistakes." In
the second place, it was Randy, not EmptyBill,
who caught him this time.

In the third place, what I *actually* said was:

-----
A few of us here who have no basis of knowledge to
challenge his pronouncements on other traditions
have found him to be grossly dishonest in areas we
*do* know about, including (but by no means limited
to) misrepresenting what has been said on this
forum in the past. Naturally this has given us
good reason to suspect that his discourses on other
traditions that contrast TM with them unfavorably
may not be clean as the driven snow either.

Like Randy, I have no problem with someone being
critical of TM or MMY or the TMO. I do have a
problem with dishonest and unfair criticism of TM/
MMY/the TMO (or of anything else, for that matter).

Life is tough enough when everyone is being as
honest, sincere, and fair as they possibly can be.
There's no excuse for making it even tougher.
-----

Barry doesn't dare address my points, so not only
does he fail to quote them, he deliberately
misrepresents them.

<snip>
> Then comes (sadly) Lurk. His point may be accurate,
> that Vaj *does* bail from the endless dick-size 
> contests that EmptyBill trots out, but who wouldn't?

In fact, as Barry knows, Vaj bails from *most*
challenges to his accuracy and veracity, not just
from EmptyBill's.

<snip> 
> Yes, Vaj pisses people off. Yes, Vaj has a 'tude-
> and-a-half about TM and its followers. But do you
> think that YOUR "Gotta get him" 'tude is any 
> better or more "evolved?"

It's not just his "'tude," it's his dishonesty.

Barry, of course, can't acknowledge this because
dishonesty is also what we go after *him* about. He
has to portray dishonesty as no more significant
than a "'tude," and objections to dishonesty as
somehow no "better" than the dishonesty itself.

How evolved is *that*?


Reply via email to