Are your series of "Duh's" really called for? Seems a rather rude and egotistical contribution.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Haiglin said he was surprised -- the us raja, presumably > > > > in the inner of innermost circles -- had no idea Tony > > > > was "missing" for 8 years. > > > > > > Do we take this as gospel? > > > > Well, the Raja of the US for the Global Capital of Supreme > > Consciousness said it. I would hope its "gospel". If not, > > then JH has no credibility. > > Uh, duh. > > > If he blatently lied on this, what other areas areas topics > > did he lie about? And if one of the head rajas lied, then > > its not a stretch that other rajas (and prime ministers) are > > blatant liars. > > > > > Or might it have been tactical spin? > > > > Could be. But that would discredit the PR wing of the TMO. > > Double-duh! > > > And spin is a bit inaccurate in my opinion. Spin is > > presenting facts in an advantageous light. Lying to > > presenting false facts. > > Right. And...? > > > > "Well, gee, if even John Hagelin wasn't told, I don't > > > feel so bad that *we* weren't told." > > > > Not tactically successful if the upshot is the TMO world > > now sees JH as a clueless baffoon. Or if it confirms what > > they have suspected. > > They don't have many good choices, do they? > > > But, that may be indicative of the deep wisdom and sucess > > skills of the TMO: a tactical ploy that backfires and > > yields a much more damaging result that the "cover-up" > > was supposed to shelter. > > I doubt it will be more damaging among the folks > to whom it's directed. > > > > I'd speculate that *all* the top-level people knew, > > > and quite possibly a good sprinkling of lower-level > > > folks as well. > > > > Then the secrecy issues are all there. > > Duh again. > > > Is the TMO a group of clever, manipulative liars or merely > > clueless baffons. > > As you just pointed out, not so clever. But again, > what choice do they have at this point? > > > > > If Tony has 25 meals cooked for him, to only eat one, > > > > wouldn't someone notice when no one was there to eat > > > > such? > > > > > > For the record, the 25 meals deal is a rumor Vaj passed > > > on from the TM-Free blog (a hangout for very bitter TM > > > critics), supposedly something someone heard from > > > someone else who heard it "from the kitchens at Vlodrop." > > > > OK. But if we drop this "dot", the pattern is still there > > -- no one noticed for 8 years that the leader of the thing > > they have devoted their lives to was missing. Not exactly > > competence incarnate. > > If you think about it, the "no one noticed" notion > really isn't plausible. They surely knew he wasn't > at Vlodrop. Whether they all knew everything else > isn't clear, but it seems awfully likely to me. > > In any case, I just wanted to point out that this > particular dot is only a poorly sourced rumor, since > quite a few folks here seem to be taking it as > established fact and using it to build their cases. > > > > That isn't exactly the most reliable sourcing, yet it > > > too appears to have been accepted as gospel here. > > > > > I don't accept anything as gospel. But if a number of dots > > begin to form a close knit cluster, it begins to paint a > > picture. > > I don't really think we've got all that many dots. All > we know is they have a potentially embarrassing situation > that they're trying to present in the best possible light. > > A lot of dots don't do you much good if most of them are > imaginary. Imaginary dots that form a pattern we'd like > to see can be highly misleading. >
