OK,it's good that you acknowledge that. ("For the record" and all.)Do I want to get in the middle of the Judy/Barry wars? Thanks for the invite, but no, I'll pass on that. --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <geezerfreak@> wrote: > > > > But Judy, I seem to recall your very recently calling my > > own writings "idiocy"....you've renamed Sal "Stupid Sal" > > in addition to untold numbers of stones thrown in Barry > > and Curtis' direction. > > > > I hope you're not trying to imply that you haven't done > > the same thing you accuse Barry of doing....that is, being > > mean and unpleasant on occasion. > > (Says Joe, defending Barry again.) > > Where did you see me implying that I was never mean > or unpleasant? > > Now, can you think of any significant differences > between what I do and what Barry does? > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "whynotnow7" <whynotnow7@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Agreed. Turq has been an unremitting jerk to many on here > > > > for awhile; insulting and intolerant. People grow tired of > > > > it and this is the result. It would be the same if any of > > > > us acted that way. Has nothing at all to do with TM or > > > > whether or not the gunas act invisibly or whether or not > > > > Maharishi is enlightened. Turq is just being a mean jerk > > > > and this is the result. What did he expect, accolades? :-) > > > > > > The proof that it's Barry's exceedingly unpleasant behavior, > > > rather than his negative views of TM, that attracts so much > > > criticism is that there are many others here who express > > > equally negative views of TM who don't get criticized to > > > anywhere near the extent he does, if at all. They're able > > > to express their views without poisonous insults and mean > > > putdowns of those who hold different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > And what about basic courtesy or tolerance of other people's > > > > > > > opinions? Is it your objective to poison the site with plain > > > > > > > old meanness? > > > > > > > > > > > > Please give explicit examples. My bet is that you can't. > > > > > > It seems to me that the majority of "lack of tolerance" > > > > > > shown on this forum lately has been aimed primarily at > > > > > > those who don't buy the TM bullsh...uh...I mean Party Line. > > > > > > > > > > He can't really believe this, can he? He can't possibly > > > > > be unaware of his unrelieved poisonous meanness toward > > > > > those he doesn't like or doesn't agree with, can he? > > > > > > > > > > And he can't really believe, in his heart of hearts, that > > > > > others' lack of tolerance for him is for his views on TM > > > > > rather than *for him* and his arrogant, rude 'tude. Can > > > > > he? How can he possibly be so lacking in self-awareness? > > > > > > > > > > As to examples, we can start with some of the most recent, > > > > > the collection of a dozen or so posts nastily mocking > > > > > determinists. (Which are quite amusing since he doesn't > > > > > understand what he's attempting to mock and just ends up > > > > > making a complete idiot of himself.) > > > > > > > > > > Barry: It isn't your views on TM. It's you, dude. > > > > > >
