No, some of Barry's former posts are probably correct, in that TM itself is a 
small matter, that contrary to what Hagelin and Lynch claim, few people are 
interested in, that it is a dying movement - it just irritates me that Lynch 
and cronies are attempting to defraud a whole new generation of marks.

 From: "" <>
Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2013 9:47 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Carol

The only thing to add, in good conscience, is that the TM bashers are drying up 
on here, so this may not be the fertile field, for practice,  that it once was. 
Better to find another obsessive - 

Maybe you and Bee could put together your own yahoo forum, attracting millions, 
no doubt. With your one pointed focus on the ills of the Maharishi and the TMO, 
and Barry's bilious outlook on life, you'll be in business in no time!! 

You could call it, "Two little pricks, and the TM balloon".

--- In, doctordumbass@...  wrote:
> Exactly. For one thing, everyone who does TM eventually dies. 100% fatality 
> rate. And there's your foot in the door - You could channel all those who 
> have passed away, and are *still pissed off*, and want to sue the TMO, from 
> the grave - Defendant by proxy, and lawyer, all in one!! Play your cards 
> right, and this could go on for *lifetimes*. 
> --- In, Michael Jackson  wrote:
> >
> > If you want to ignore the ill effects of TM that we all know about and 
> > people like you ignore, then enjoy your ignorance.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> >  From: seventhray27 
> > To: 
> > Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2013 7:08 PM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: David Lynch Is Back to Carol
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > --- In, Michael Jackson  wrote:
> > >
> > > If Oz was as responsible in his touting of TM as he is of other herbs, 
> > > drugs and procedures where he gives both the pros and cons, he would be 
> > > giving both sides.
> > > 
> > > In fairness, he may not know the crap the TMO does, and he certainly may 
> > > not know what Marshy was.
> > 
> > It's a relaxation technique.  That's it's primary purpose.  And I am 
> > certain that  you would find fault in any discussion that did not arrive 
> > at what you would consider to be the correct conclusions.
> > Let's examine the modalities you recommend, although I can't even remember 
> > what they are.  Massage maybe.  
> > Let's take massage.  What do you suppose would be the negative effects of 
> > massage, or mindfulness, or any of the other programs you recommend.  Just 
> > for fun, take a shot at those first.  I'll wait.
> >


Reply via email to