"Not only unverifiable claims, but almost hysterical ones at that."
C'mon kiddies. I have been on this list for about 5 years. During that time Vaj *(Steve F.) has slandered Maharishi continuously with not a shred of evidence, presenting everything he says as above reproach. He has also slung plenty of insults as has Bozotronic Barry. So people have put up with this immature crap for five years, calling Vaj on his obvious falsehoods. Now we have richardnelson108, who has traveled to India and spoken to many of those who figure prominently in Vaj's fantasies and found out conclusively, and to no one's surprise, that Vaj IS in fact full of shit. No Question. You and Barry, having taking a hostile view of Maharishi and the TMO all of these years now jump in, in the face of credible and contradictory evidence, bitching and moaning about the treatment Vaj is receiving. Boo f*cking Hoo. You are like little children protecting the schoolyard bully. It is almost unbelievable to see so-called adults act this way. This is NOT all about you. Grow the fuck up. --- In [email protected], Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@...> wrote: > > On May 26, 2011, at 6:19 AM, turquoiseb wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@> wrote: > >> > >> Pile on? Vaj has simply been exposed as a liar. Not sure > >> what standard you look for in evaluating statements. But > >> Vaj made a series of assertions and all of them turned > >> out to be false. > > > > Not true. What actually happened is that several > > people have *declared* them false. Those people > > have IMO exactly the same level of credibility as > > Vaj -- namely none. No one has presented verifiable > > facts yet. > > That's what it seems to me as well~~ > if there were some posts made which > in any way proved Vaj's assertions to > be false, or even dealt with them on > any kind of level other than pseudo- > hysteria, I haven't seen them. Perhaps > lurk could point them out? Especially > since he seems so sure that Vaj has > been "exposed as a liar." Where, > exactly, did this occur lurk? I must > have missed the posts. And this > Richard Nelson seems more intent > on coming across more as mentally > unbalanced than in having any kind > of rational discussion. > > > > Did you even *notice* that feste did *exactly* > > what he was accusing Vaj of? He just slung insults, > > and presented not even a single supposed fact. > > > >> When asked to back up these assertions, the best he could > >> come up with, was "he heard it from someone" > > > > Yup. The people piling on didn't even go that far. They > > just claimed things *as if they were facts*, but without > > anything that could enable anyone to determine whether > > they were really facts or not. > > > > In other words, on one level what we seem to have here > > is a pissing contest, in which both sides are saying, > > "What I've heard is better than what you've heard." I > > call it total bullshit, on all sides. > > > > As for the "piling on" thang that Sal brings up, it *would* > > have been possible for Richard Nelson or others to just post > > a few verifiable facts (y'know...stuff including dates and > > contact information and where one could go to verify their > > claims) and leave it at that. They did not. What they did > > was to do *exactly* the same thing that Vaj did -- make a > > bunch of unverifiable claims -- and then proceed to call > > him names. > > Not only unverifiable claims, but almost hysterical ones at > that. Which isn't exactly what you'd call either a > great advertisement for meditation or a ringing > endorsement for their version of the "truth." > Sal >
