The Prime Minister has not rescinded his Anti-Saint Dome meditation policy yet.

>
> 
> >
> > A "Host Program" has been inspired by the current situation with the IAA 
> > Settle Grant. We hope to facilitate connecting current IAA participants 
> > with a Host during this transitional time and to inspire a new generation 
> > of IAA participants to be able to attend for either short (month long) or 
> > longer terms. 
> > 
> > A "match up" description for any Sidha who has a room in their home that 
> > would be available for at least one month will be created.
> > 
> 
> Could it be illegal and a sin against TM Dome meditation policy guidelines to 
> host TM'ers known to have visited Saints?  Aiding or abetting these 
> meditators by giving them shelter?  
>  
> > >
> > > Susan you would think so, this would be reasonable for the people who 
> > > have already been taught the sidhis technique.  But no.  A stunning 
> > > moment in the meeting was their announcement there would be re-fresher 
> > > meetings about practicing the technique but in the same breath you'd need 
> > > a Dome badge first to go to the meetings.  Catch-22. 
> > > See:
> > >  
> > > http://applicantqv.blogspot.com/2012/03/yogic-flying-tm-banned-from-domes.html
> > >  
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Here's an idea, an experiment:  Have a 4 week period where anyone who 
> > > > ever got the siddhis can come and fly in the Domes. The TMO could give 
> > > > out special colored badges in advance.  No background checks or 
> > > > eliminating a person because they saw another saint etc.  Just anyone 
> > > > can come, everyone very welcome, fly in to town for this, if need be.  
> > > > A really welcoming, genuine atmosphere.
> > > > 
> > > >  Then, see how it goes for those 4 weeks - Maybe things would improve 
> > > > in some way:  more people would attend, the energy in the Domes would 
> > > > be more powerful.  Even maybe it would inspire those attending to come 
> > > > regularly again.  And Maybe the TMO would see it was all so wonderful 
> > > > and created such goodwill that they would drop the restrictions in the 
> > > > future.  It would be an experiment.  And it is a way to see, really, if 
> > > > there are "enough" people around still wanting to do program in the 
> > > > Domes in Fairfield, Iowa.  Heck, even Rick would be admitted.  At the 
> > > > least, it would be a fun social time, and at best a real motivator for 
> > > > people to do program in the Domes.  I like to think that MMY himself 
> > > > would go for this. 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Son, you were not here so don't just assume things but yes your 
> > > > > advice below is good and true about the fourth estate below.  That is 
> > > > > also how things get done around here.  Obviously they read this page 
> > > > > and others about themselves and can move in ways accordingly.  The 
> > > > > meeting was a TM movement style public meeting where they control the 
> > > > > stage seats and microphones in their way of decorum. Very top-down 
> > > > > with the authority up front in the stuffed chairs with the mics.  
> > > > > We're an extremely verbal group, but.  When the mics were opened up a 
> > > > > bunch of people lined up for the floor mics and the line got worked 
> > > > > through.  Mostly sincere people and some aggravated people too get up 
> > > > > thinking to solve the problem in little ways.  A couple good new 
> > > > > ideas come but nothing of fundamental change offered.  Not many 
> > > > > people from in the town.  Mostly concerned earnest faith-based kind 
> > > > > of movement people who are not really going to jeopardize their 
> > > > > access to everything by speaking out much truth to power.  Though as 
> > > > > soon as the meeting is over folks are talking to one another about 
> > > > > real things.  The enforced steady decorum of the moderated mic was 
> > > > > not really about discussion.  Just quick consideration of one point 
> > > > > per and the point would be referred to further consideration in some 
> > > > > groups.  Mayor Malloy as a meditator did do an excellent job of 
> > > > > moderating the usual community crazies too who get up to any open 
> > > > > mics in any public meeting.  After a while they announced the last 
> > > > > comment as the mic went to a guy that it was getting late and the 
> > > > > meeting was to end.  So it went.  Nothing really substantial related 
> > > > > to our community deficit in the Dome numbers and who was responsible.
> > > > > -Buck
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> 
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Actually there was only one person tonite at the landmark 
> > > > > > > > meeting who brushed up against this talking about how 
> > > > > > > > experiences have been compromised in people because of 
> > > > > > > > an underlying problem. She spoke in code of course with 
> > > > > > > > the big guy up there in front of the room. Otherwise the 
> > > > > > > > suggestions were trivial, as if people did not know the 
> > > > > > > > antipathy old meditators have with the movement with the 
> > > > > > > > elephant sitting in the room. Two elephants actually.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Buck, I'm going to have to call you on this one. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > If YOU were there, why didn't YOU speak up?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The problems with the "dome program" are NOT because
> > > > > > > of the people administrating them. They're caused by
> > > > > > > the roomful of pussies to timid or too intimidated
> > > > > > > to say something about the policies. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Don't you DARE keep ranting about Bevan and his gang
> > > > > > > if YOU didn't have the balls to say something when
> > > > > > > offered the opportunity to do so.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm mentioning this partly because of the chorus of
> > > > > > laudations for the late LB Shriver. I never knew him,
> > > > > > and his contributions to FFL were before my time. But
> > > > > > I've noticed a tendency in some people checking in 
> > > > > > here to admire him for standing up to the "powers that 
> > > > > > be" and actually making some of his comments and 
> > > > > > criticisms in public.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Which is admirable, except that the people applauding
> > > > > > him for doing this don't seem to do this themselves. 
> > > > > > They bend over and take in the ass from the TMO 
> > > > > > policies, then grumble safely from behind pseudonyms 
> > > > > > about the perps not having used any K-Y, if they
> > > > > > grumble at all. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > NOTHING will change about the TM movement until this
> > > > > > codependent enabling stops. I've said it before and 
> > > > > > I'll probably say it again -- if you want a change to 
> > > > > > these discriminatory and probably illegal policies, 
> > > > > > TAKE IT TO THE PRESS. Go public, and go large. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Nothing terrifies tyrants more than the things they're
> > > > > > doing behind closed doors being made public. Nothing
> > > > > > encourages them more to *continue* doing these things 
> > > > > > than a bunch of terrified sheep too timid to complain 
> > > > > > that the shepherds are buggering them.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to