They are called blind spots Ravi. Most of us have them, and by
acknowledging them, we are able to move forward. But by not
acknowledging them our life continues in an unfilled manner which is
evidenced in good measure by satisfying personal relationships or the
lack thereof.
Now if you wish to call that a by product of spiritual ecstasy and
advancement, be my guest but I'm gonna call it a big 'ol blind spot.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
>
> Really lame and retarded Steve baby - clearly because it's clear I have
> no aversion to men (haven't you been reading my posts on Robin) and
> neither is being admitted to Amma chat room a highlight, I don't give a
> fuck about my job either, hilarious Stevie.
>
> No what is special and a highlight is my ability to prey and zoom on
> retards like you.
>
> The reason I sent addressed that post on my re-admittance is so you
> would compare yourself to someone like Jim, the moderator of the free
> speech zone and realize how far off you were from the truth and
reality,
> with your assessment on my posts on Ammachi free speech zone.
>
> Nothing surprising - you lack any ability to reflect yourself, you are
> ruled by some perverse subjectivity which is likely to handicap you for
> the rest of this lifetime.
>
> Anyway I am going to address a post to you Steve baby on this so-called
> aversion to men.
>
> On 6/28/13 1:40 PM, seventhray27 wrote:
> >
> > Take away the fact you seem to have a natural aversion to men. (I'm
> > not sure how that came about, and I don't care to speculate), but I'm
> > trying to come up with some real life achievements for Judy, and I'm
> > sort of coming up empty. 18 years of discourse on the internet, and
> > I'm sort of coming up empty.
> >
> >
> > And also sorry to say that it's exacerbated by the fact that she
feels
> > she has revealed much about her life.
> >
> > Go figure.
> >
> > And I know you regularlytout your high paying job as a software
engineer.
> >
> > It is good that you do have something to crow about.
> >
> > I guess the other big hi-light of the year is that you've been
> > re-admitted to the Amma chat room.
> >
> > Hooray!!
> >
> > Baby steps, baby steps. But keep racking up those achievements and
> > you'll continue to feel good about yourself.
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula wrote:
> > >
> > > It doesn't take too long does it Steve baby - to unleash your inner
> > moron. It is there, always - waiting to be unleashed on the
unsuspecting.
> > >
> > > How hilarious is that you think Judy lives in an unreal world?
> > >
> > > Your wisdom? It's OK to support an emotionally, psychologically
> > stunted, dishonest, malicious, vindictive person like Barry as
long as
> > he works for a cutting edge company?
> > >
> > > You are the one who's living in an unreal world Steve baby. Judy
> > just sticks up for truth.
> > >
> > > On 6/28/13 11:28 AM, seventhray27 wrote:
> > > > Always a pleasure to hear from you Judy. Thanks for a mid
> > afternoon break. I may read again, but just want to make a quick
reply
> > now.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There's the real world and Judy's world.
> > > >
> > > > In Judy's world you razzle and dazzle, run circles around you
> > opponents, rush the net, make beautiful cross court back hands, hit
> > perfect lobs that hit the baseline. But in the real world it's more
> > like you keep banging into closed doors and dead ends, trip over your
> > own feet, get so bent up like a pretzel you need a chiropractor on
> > retainer.
> > > >
> > > > For God's sake Judy, don't venture out of your make believe
world.
> > Your heart may not be able to take it.
> > > >
> > > > That real world feedback can be brutal. At least for you.
> > > >
> > > > The rest of us find it kind of exciting.
> > > >
> > > > You know, like someone being selected to work on a cutting edge
> > project for one of the most cutting edge tech companies in the world.
> > > >
> > > > Like that. Like that.
> > > >
> > > > P.S. No idea where my planets are.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Two for Steve...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27"
> > steve.sundur@ wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27"
> > steve.sundur@
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > (snip)
> > > > > > > > On the witness stand:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Mr. Carlsen, did you state in an unequivocal manner
that you
> > > > > > > > never, and would never, strike someone in the course of
> > > > > > > > conducting your "confrontations"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Why, no, that is not what I stated. You haven't been
> > > > > > > paying attention, as usual."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *plonk*
> > > > >
> > > > > [Having been forced to ask for dismissal of his case because
> > > > > of his own humiliating confusion concerning what Mr. Carlsen
> > > > > had actually said, we see the prosecutor late that night
> > > > > wandering around in circles in the courthouse parking lot,
> > > > > muttering to himself. As we get close enough to hear him, we
> > > > > realize he is repeating, over and over, what he had expected
> > > > > to be the judge's charge to the jury following a successful
> > > > > prosecution, now only a wistful fantasy:]
> > > > >
> > > > > > "Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, you have heard the
> > evidence. It is
> > > > > > now time for you to make your decision. The guidelines I have
> > given you
> > > > > > are simple in this case. Did Mr. Carlsen lie when he
> > repeatedly stated
> > > > > > that he did not strike anyone, in the course of his
> > confrontations. You
> > > > > > may request copies of his testimony where he attempts to
put this
> > > > > > striking in a certain context, but the issue we are dealing
> > with here is
> > > > > > the simple, Did Mr. Carlsen lie when he made his
statements about
> > > > > > striking.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The bailiff will stationed outside the door, and when you
> > reach your
> > > > > > decision the jury spokesman should notify the bailiff and you
> > can come
> > > > > > back into the courtroom to have the verdict read. Please be
> > advise that
> > > > > > defense council or prosecutor may wish to poll each juror as
> > to why they
> > > > > > reached the verdict.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One note: Any "plonking" once the verdict is read will not be
> > tolerated"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> >
=========================================================================
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27"
> > steve.sundur@ wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As has been pointed out, it's not about hitting, it's about
> > > > > > lying.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmmm, Barry claims it *is* about hitting (see below),
> > > > > as well as the alleged lying.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Refresh your memory by going over the posts where Robin
vehemently
> > > > > > denied to Vaj that he ever struck anyone during his
> > confrontations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Right. You find me one of those, tootsie, and then we
> > > > > can discuss it. Paraphrases aren't good enough.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Then look at the open letter where the equivocation begins,
> > > > > > just before he is about to be outed as indeed striking people
> > > > > > in the course of his confrontations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Like the prosecutor, Steve, you are confused.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's really not fair to hold you accountable for your
> > > > > errors in this, I realize. You're obviously handicapped
> > > > > by your lack of reading comprehension, which keeps you
> > > > > from ever getting a handle on anything the least bit
> > > > > complicated and allows you to be easily misled by those
> > > > > with an intention to deceive.
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess you didn't see the question I asked you below,
> > > > > BTW. Just too many of those doggoned words to get
> > > > > through, huh?
> > > > >
> > > > > (Just out of curiosity, do you have lots of planets in
> > > > > Gemini? That could explain a lot.)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Did I mention that he almost broke someones jaw?
> > > > > > As Ann has pointed out, let's not dispute the facts. Let's
> > move on, if
> > > > > > you care to.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > (snip)
> > > > > > > > It was ALWAYS "about the hitting." It's only the
> > > > > > > > die-hard cultists trying to protect their past or
> > > > > > > > present investment in fantasies about Robin who are
> > > > > > > > trying to make it appear to be something else.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Robin physically struck his students, and can find
> > > > > > > > ways to justify that. His "defenders" KNOW that he
> > > > > > > > repeatedly physically struck his students,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We "KNOW" this *because Robin admitted it*.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and continue to find ways to justify that.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't recall anybody trying to justify it. Robin
> > > > > > > himself has condemned it in no uncertain terms (as
> > > > > > > Barry knows).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Oh, wait, I *do* remember somebody here attempting
> > > > > > > to justify it:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "There is plenty of compassion here for weird shit we
> > > > > > > all did in our past and this doesn't sound like such a
> > > > > > > big deal. There were a whole bunch of weird psychological
> > > > > > > 'breakthrough' cults that seem to be far worse than what
> > > > > > > you were running back then. If you weren't banging your
> > > > > > > disciples ten deep in Elvis' Graceland white panty
> > > > > > > parties, you come off as better than most people in your
> > > > > > > position of power over the entranced."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This person also said:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "What Ann may not be aware of about the dynamics of the
> > > > > > > place is that the Robin hitting people issue wasn't
> > > > > > > really about Robin hitting people."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hmm. Guess the person who wrote the above must be a
> > > > > > > cultist too, huh?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This post was made the morning after Robin posted his
> > > > > > > Open Letter, not a year and a half later. Boy, those
> > > > > > > cultish Robin-defenders got busy quick, didn't they?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > By this time, Barry will have figured out who wrote
> > > > > > > the post. And that will be the end of his fulminating
> > > > > > > about "justifying" and "cultists."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anybody else want to take a guess as to who it was?
> > > > > > > Steve, how about you? Xeno?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > THAT is why this
> > > > > > > > topic continues to come up. THAT is the very stuff
> > > > > > > > of the cult mindset.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No, Barry keeps bringing it up because of his own
> > > > > > > personal animus against his critics, especially
> > > > > > > Robin and his defenders. Full stop.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In this instance, he brought it up because he was
> > > > > > > *infuriated* by his inability to bait Ann and me,
> > > > > > > just as Ann said. When he made a bunch of patently
> > > > > > > false claims about Robin's behavior on FFL, I
> > > > > > > easily documented the lies and laughed at him. Then
> > > > > > > he suggested Robin was a psychopath, and Ann and I
> > > > > > > both laughed at him. Then he lost control completely,
> > > > > > > hauled out the whole striking-students business
> > > > > > > again, and crowned it with one *huge whopper* of an
> > > > > > > exceptionally malicious lie.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That lie was exposed and debunked as well. Now he's
> > > > > > > busy trying to save a little face by telling a whole
> > > > > > > bunch *more* lies, and failing miserably. But he
> > > > > > > can't stop himself. It's a compulsion.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
