Share, can you, or anyone, point out anything I've said wr to Barry's relationship with a child, or the child?
And if so, I will apologize. Details are important. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote : Steve, I also hope that Jim will stay. And that Rick will allow turq to stay. People on both sides have said vile things. But I tend to side with turq because one of my issues is that I abhor that ganging up thing that some people do here. AND I think he should apologize first. But I think you all should too for insinuating awful things about his relationship with Maya. From: "steve.sundur@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 6:41 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's the cult thinking, stupid! (For Rick) Share, be prepared to hear the laundry list of all your issues from Barry. IMO, he lives for an interaction like this, so he can step in and detail all the ways in which you, are disturbed. He is a reaction vampire, and his participation here appears mostly to feed this obsession. I hope Jim will reconsider his decision to withdraw. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote : Ok, turq, you've done some very fancy backpedaling but imo you need to man up and admit you went over the line. Of course your attackers also went over the line, snidely insinuating vile stuff about your relationship with Maya. But you started it, so you need to apologize first. Again, imo and even if they are in ganging up mode. From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 3:07 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] It's the cult thinking, stupid! (For Rick) From: "TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife <fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2014 5:34 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] It's the cult thinking, stupid! I hope I've made my point to lurkers and those with somewhat open minds. All I had to do was use a little colorful language to describe Maharishi, and the four extreme cultists on this forum went fucking crazy attacking me. I suggest that what Richard Williams, Jim Flanegin, Ann, and Steve have done in response to that is some of the purest CULT BEHAVIOR I've ever seen. It follows a pattern I've been trying to document on this forum since I arrived on it, a tendency to react to anyone who criticizes, makes fun of, or (worst) shows zero respect for the person they're guru-whipped by with anger, hatred, and a dedicated attempt to "get" them. Richard has demonstrated a willingness to lie to do this, signing my name to things I didn't write. Jim has demonstrated a willingness to stalk me on the Internet to find photos that he can then crop and caption to make them look more sinister, and Ann and Steve have demonstrated that they'll pounce on any subject (in this most recent case, polyamory) that allows them to "get Barry." Did I provoke these people by intentionally pushing their buttons? You betcha. I wanted to put their reactivity -- and the nature of it -- on display. I think I succeeded. These four people, more than anything else, demonstrate why I consider TM a cult, and FFL a cult forum. These people were all TRAINED to act like this. You may not like my tactics -- or me -- very much, but please watch these four in the future. They will probably continue to attack me, but watch how they treat *others* who dare to criticize Maharishi or TMers. They'll use the same tactics. If I've helped even a few people to see this, then I've succeeded. This one is for Rick, if he has been compelled to look into this latest tempest in a pisspot... As I pointed out above, and earlier, this is about CULT TACTICS, not inappropriate language. If you'll read through some of the posts pretending to be outraged by what I said (which I have, because I've been gathering them for a researcher who requested them), you'll notice that all of the people claiming to be outraged by the theoretical metaphor I posted have been carefully snipping out the part that *really* offended them and got their panties in a twist -- that it was theoretically ABOUT MAHARISHI MAHESH YOGI. Did I go "over the top" in my analogy by suggesting that TM True Believers were so brainwashed that they'd react to seeing MAHARISHI having sex with a child right in front of their eyes by continuing to believe that he was a "life celibate?" YOU BETCHA. I went over the top *on purpose*, to demonstrate what happens when a bunch of the same True Believer cultists I was referring to get their "Oh My God He Insulted Our Guru" buttons pushed. Please note that I never claimed Maharishi *DID* have sex with small children. I think we all know that isn't true -- he preferred women in their 20s or 30s, from what we hear, preferably married to someone else. The True Believers I'm referring to have had No Problem ignoring reports of this, and continuing to claim that Maharishi was a "life celibate." My analogy was only a bit more "over the top," suggesting that they're such cult fanatics that they'd say exactly the same thing if confronted by an even more extreme situation. But please note that it was a *theoretical* situation. I did not suggest that Maharishi *was* a child molestor. The ONLY people on this forum who have, in fact, suggested that about a living person -- ME -- are Jim Flanegin and Nablusoss1008, both of whom have actually suggested that people contact Dutch police or the family I live with to investigate me for being a child molestor or a child pornographer or both. THAT is not just real-world slander, that's criminal action. Jim and Nabby are SO lost in their cultist world that they don't realize they've just opened themselves up to a lawsuit or prosecution for trying to incite people to become moral vigilantes and commit illegal acts. (Making such a claim about a person in the Netherlands falsely is punishable by several years in prison.) Meanwhile the other people I was referring to as True Believers and Cultists in my original metaphor are going crazy trying to get you to throw ME off the forum. Well, you can if you want. It's your forum and I'll leave any time you want me to. My choice of language WAS over the top, and intentionally so. I wanted to push a few people's buttons so that they'd act exactly like the deranged cultists I think they are. AND THEY DID. Just to clarify, I said what I said SO THAT they'd freak out and demonstrate for other people what cultists they are. I think I succeeded at that. Jim, Nabby, Ann, Richard, Steve, and JohnR have ALL piled on to the "Get Barry" bus, pretending to be outraged over my choice of metaphor when dissing the common behavior of TM True Believers. In reality, I think you (Rick) and most people here know what they're really outraged about -- I dissed Maharishi, and TM True Believers, and they're determined to try to make me PAY for that. In response to my theoretical metaphor, they've been going crazy trying to paint ME as a child molestor or worse, which is a tactic straight out of the Cult Playbook. Some of them have actually encouraged others to act as vigilantes and take the law into their own hands and "Get Barry" by calling the cops on him. And all because he posted a completely ACCURATE metaphor about how TM True Believers can find a way to ignore almost *any* evidence of Maharishi's wrongdoings in their attempts to keep him up on the pedestal they've placed him on. This furor isn't about me using "inappropriate language" on a "family forum." It's about a bunch of cultists who got their True Believer buttons pushed so badly that now they want to lash out at the person who pushed them and do *anything* they can think of to "get him." In other words, it's "business as usual" here at Fairfield Life. Nothing you need to be concerned about IMO.
