--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Wow. I made only four posts yesterday, and now > in addition to the *expected* people freaking > out and trashing me, we've got a couple more > new ones. This surely must be an example of > "Do less, accomplish more."
Nobody has "freaked out," Barry. A number of us have been laughing at you. > And what was it I said, exactly? Well, I suggested > that some TMers (the ones who like to think of > themselves and their ilk as somehow "special") > preferred to buy into the *obvious* propaganda > intent of Bob Roth's quote about "religious > minorities" and believe that the Lynch grant failed > because of a major "hit" from fundamentalist Christians. > > It seems I was right. Thus their overreaction here. > But the question still persists, "*Why* would they > prefer to believe that it took the participation > of a well-healed right-wing conservative organization > and its lawyers to stop this grant? > > Duh. Duh indeed. Note that Barry himself "preferred to believe" this less than 24 hours ago: ----- --- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My guess is that the threat of a lawsuit by the fundies had > more of an impact on killing the TM club than the vocal ex-TMers. [Barry wrote:] I think you're probably correct. They (the Lynch Foundation) was afraid of having a precedent set. _____ <snip> > From Gina's firsthand report, it seems that the > impetus that eventually caused the grant to be > withdrawn came from *two people*, both ex-TMers. > One spoke up in a meeting, the other wrote a > letter. Do less, accomplish more. The reporter > picked up on this, and it hit the News, and the > Christian legal org got involved. Voila. Actually (as I've already noted, and Barry has blithely ignored), we have no idea at what point, before or after the meeting, the Pacific Justice Institute became involved; nor do we know whether it became involved after reading about the program in the newspaper (opposition to the program had been reported before the meeting took place) or because folks who opposed the program contacted the organization and asked for its help; nor, if the latter, whether these folks were former TMers or fundie Christians themselves (or both). In other words, there is no basis whatsoever in anything that has been reported here for Barry to draw the conclusion he does. When > confronted with real opposition, the Lynch > Foundation put their tail between their legs > and ran. > > Some invincibility, eh? > > Faced with this abject defeat, those who still > *believe* in the TMO's invincibility are going to > have to do the same thing that the dumb 'Muricans > did after 9/11 -- they're going to have to find > someone *big* to blame. Does anyone here believe in the TMO's invincibility, or is this another of Barry's many fantasies? They *can't* admit that > all it took to stop this half-baked plan was two > ex-TMers speaking up. It *had* to be some big > organization, "working behind the scenes," doing > all sorts of nefarious things to stop the spread > of light. Note again that Barry himself has acknowledged that it was the Pacific Justice Institute's threat of legal action, more than the objections of the two former TMers, that most likely brought about the withdrawal of the grant. Nobody here suggested PJI was "working behind the scenes," of course, Barry's misleading quotation marks notwithstanding. To the contrary, its participation was right up front; its chief legal counsel was even quoted on the issue in the San Diego Union-Tribune's report. Nor did anybody suggest PJI was doing "all sorts of nefarious things to stop the spread of light." What it was doing was, again, quite specific and right up front: It threatened legal action. > And of course, anyone who suggests that what > *really* stopped the grant in its tracks was > nothing more than the TMO's own karma coming > back to them has to be demonized. "Damned raghead > rabblerouser. He's not only a wino, he must be > working for the Christians who are trying to > keep us from enlightening the world." Barry, no one here whose posts I've seen has been "demonizing" you because they disagree about the TMO's own karma coming back to them, or about the role played by the two former TMers. The reason you've been "demonized" and called a wino is because you have so consistently ignored the *facts*, as if you were too drunk to comprehend what has been reported here and what folks on this forum have been saying, and have instead substituted an elaborate set of fantasies on which you could base a volley of vicious putdowns of the pro-TMers. (One of the people who have "demonized" you isn't even a TMer any longer.) Plus which, you seem to be unable to recall what you yourself said about what killed the deal less than 24 hours ago. > The last part is just hyperbole. So far. But > just wait... :-) Actually, your entire rant here is not just hyperbole but a combination of denial and hallucination. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
