--- In [email protected], "dhamiltony2k5" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > > wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > Though the stated aims are different, is this incessant fundraising > > at MUM really any different than that which goes on at any > > university? How do Stanford and Harvard get their billion dollar > > endowments? People wake up one day and decide, Gee I guess I'll > >make > > a substantial contribution to my alma mater...? Nope- it is the > >same > > kind of deluge of mailings, phone calls, fund raising events that > > occurs at MUM. Kind of a big yawn, dont'cha think? > > > > ************* > >--- In [email protected], bob_brigante <no_reply@> > >wrote: > > >It's clear that all schools do incessant fundraising, so I don't have > >a problem with that. It's just that I find the decision to not use > >the original pundit campus for the pundits when they finally showed > >to be irrational, and so apparently do 250 people who pledged to > >support the pundits, but are not kicking in as promised. > > Not much like Harvard or Yale actually. The integrity is way higher > & much more transparent at the real universities. Differently, at > MUM it takes so much more money when half of it disappears abroad. > No surprize that 250 people have backed out of providing their money > to Maharaishi now and the TMorg. The word is out. > > It is about integrity and this money thing kind of goes in the same > catagory with the movement not being able to easily attract the 2,000 > or 1700 people (M.E.) it was wishing for without hirlings. > > It is a sad story about the loss of integrity and a fallen guru. > Look at the money problem, their research and their pr, they are > apparently liars, cheaters and stealers in method. Qualities not > usually associated with integrity. We'll see if Maharishi can re- > write things as they have become at the end of his book in the final > chapter. > > Lots of people will write the epilogue when the time is ready and > there is a lot of material for that.
There's lots of court cases about mismanagement of donated funds by universities, up to and including a $100 million trust. The MUM situation with the pundits is hardly the worst, and in fact, if the donors had already given over their money, a judge would almost certainly throw out any lawsuit since the purpose to which the money is being put would be quite close to the original purpose for which it was given--close enough that no judge would bother ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, from what I heard on NPR recently.
