--- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > O.K. then. Show us one post where Judy has ever pointed > > out an unintended irony, a lie or a wiggle from owning > > up to an error because and only because the person she > > confronted is a TM critic. Bet you a buck you can't and > > I'll bet you another buck Judy would be the first to dig > > up such a post if it existed. > > Raunchy, I think that what zarzari and others > have perceived (and rightly, IMO) is that the > *particular* nitpicks that Judy comes up with > to criticize someone very often have nothing > whatsoever to do with her real reasons *for* > criticizing them. > > One of the troika will post something less > than worshipful about Maharishi or TM or TMers > and within a few hours Judy will be all over > that person *for some unrelated, made-up reason*. > > It's like a teacher who only criticizes the > black students in the class. The individual > criticisms may actually be valid. But if a > case can be made that the *vast majority* of > the criticisms are of black students, and in > fact the *vast majority* of things that teacher > says *period* are negative comments about the > black students, that teacher is going to get > fired for being a racist. > > Judy has been trying to "get" the same three > people on this forum for well over a decade > now, one for over 17 years. I think it's > justified to question whether the reasons > she comes up with *for* consistently trying > to "get" them are her real reasons, or > whether that's just the "cover story" she > trots out to hide the fact that she considers > them the TM TB counterpart of niggers. > > It's the TRENDS, Raunchy, not the particulars. >
Sorry, there nothing in the FFLife budget for reparations.
