--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > wrote:
> > > "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > why you refuse to do such a simple
> > > > thing as supply some URLs that you claim
> > > > already to have found.
> > > 
> > > And this is important, or even interesting, because ?
> > 
> > Oh, if blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy are of
> > no concern to you, I guess it wouldn't be.
> Thats a pretty big disconnect. If blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy
> were manfiestly core issues here, it might be of interest. Though
> labeling people, just for the sake of labeling, can get to be quite
> boring and IMO non-productive. 
> In my view I don't see "blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy" -- but
> oddly, I do see some petty obsessions. I remember when Vaj first 
> made the statement. It was not exactly earth shattering. A quick
> observation of some momentary interest. Not the kind of thing that
> would affect ones world view.
> Then I remember your correction: it wasn't a bunch of quick rich
> schemes after all, it was Fred G.s book. Curious, I did a search
> myself. The first page was filled with what looked like get rich 
> quick schemes based on do less accomplish more (or do nothing 
> accomplish everything). Upon closer examination, I saw they all 
> related to Fred's book. So my take away was, you were both correct 
> in reporting your perceptions. You, Judy, were technically correct. 
> Vaj, it was clear to me, made a perceptual or cognitive error, as I 
> initially did, and reported what he thought he saw. Not a big deal.

Mm-hm.  And yet, had it been just a mistake, after
I made my post reporting on Gratzon's book, you'd
think Vaj would have double-checked and then retracted
his claim.  *Then* it would not have been a big deal;
anybody can make a careless mistake like that.

But he didn't.  Instead he came up with all kinds of
crap, such as citing get-rich-quick schemes in the
Fairfield community, as if that supported his original
claim; announcing that he wasn't going to do *my*
homework for me, as if he had not been the one to make
the claim in the first place; claiming that even if
he did provide the URLs of the Web sites he had in mind,
I wouldn't believe them; and finally telling *me* to
do a search for the sites in question, as though they
actually existed.

So I'm afraid the most likely conclusion is that he
intended to deceive from the start, hoping that most
folks wouldn't bother to check up on him, and that 
anybody who did do a search wouldn't click through
the hits and discover that the sites all had to do
with Gratzon's book.  (The point of the exercise,
of course, having been to suggest that TMers are
greedily preoccupied with making money and thus
vulnerable to get-rich-quick schemes, especially if
they're advertised using TM slogans.)

What we know *for sure* is that having been informed
of his error, Vaj first threw down a red herring of
Fairfield get-rich-quick schemes, then when that
didn't work, attempted to stonewall and pretend that
there indeed were such sites but that somehow I was
too incompetent to find them.

Now, I don't know what your standards are for blatant
dishonesty, but the above more than meets mine, even
if Vaj's original claim was just a dumb mistake.

The *hypocrisy* part is, of course, that Vaj
frequently scornfully accuses MMY and the TMO of
being dishonest in various ways (as with his most
recent comment about the TM studies that inspired
me to bring up the purported Web sites claim again).

> I don't see "blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy". And its not a matter
> of much important to begin with. I mean its not like Vaj was
> testifying before the nation about intelligence on WMD.

It's not like anybody here is testifying on such
important matters.  But Vaj *does* "testify" about
matters that are important to many here, quite a 
few of whom seem to consider him to be a font of
authoritative information.

So it appears to me to be important to know that he
is willing to lie in the service of his agenda, and
accordingly take other pronouncements that he makes
about MMY and TM and the TMO--and quite possibly
other things as well--with a good-sized salt shaker

> So to go on and on and on about this, over a three month period,
> appears a bit curious to me. IMO, to me, it reveals quite a bit more
> about you than about Vaj.

I'm happy to have it "revealed" that I am intolerant
of deliberate falsehood.  I suspect most people here
have long since figured that out, however.

As for Vaj, perhaps you don't consider it much of a
revelation that, at the very least, he will lie to
cover up his errors.  I disagree; I think that's a
pretty important character trait to know about.

Oh, and by the way, I have not been going "on and
on about this over a three-month period."  I posted
about it right after Vaj made his claim, but I don't
believe I brought it up again here until just now.
I may have mentioned it one other time in passing;
I actually can't remember now.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to