--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > But you see, Lawson, TM supporters must *always* > > be put down and portrayed as ignorant, etc., > > whenever they say anything and whatever they say. > > If there's nothing in context to put them down > > about, a non sequitur phrased to sound as though > > it's somehow related to what they said is entirely > > acceptable. > > I think that Judy is mistaking her own posting > strategy for Vaj's. After all, she has recently > become the leading contender in the "Display > Your Creative Intelligence" sweepstakes > spending 21 of her last 22 posts to Fairfield > Life doing *nothing* but slamming either Vaj > or Barry.
Gosh, wonder if any of the posts I was replying to were dumping on TMers or MMY or the TMO. Did you check that out, Barry? Is this, in fact, my posting strategy, or my strategy for responding to *your* posting strategy? And were all the posts actually *slamming* you and/or Vaj? Or were some of them simply pointing out problems with your facts or logic? Did you check *that* out, Barry? Or is it that, in your mind, anyone who dares to note such problems is "slamming" you? > It's easy to check -- use the 'Advanced' search > feature. In *all but one her last 22 posts*, > Judy chose to reply to posters who had not spoken > either to her or about her, to add *no* new infor- > mation or content to the topic being discussed One might make a case that pointing out why a given assertion doesn't make sense *does* add new information or content to the topic being discussed. Like my response to this from Vaj, for example, the context being an implicit criticism of MMY and TM: > > Whether Buddhist, Hindu or Bon, the classical path of meditation is a > > snare and a delusion when attachment to it becomes obsessive and it > > becomes an end in itself. > Must be why MMY always says, "Meditate, then forget > you meditated and plunge into action," huh? Is this what you'd call "slamming" Vaj without, adding any new content to the discussion, Barry? Or how about when I pointed out to you and Vaj that Vastu was not "artificial," as you had claimed, but was attuned to the natural rhythms of the system rather than to local features on the ground? Why do I get the feeling that Barry's tirade here is a function of his frustration at his and Vaj's inability to slam MMY/TM/TMers without having their errors of fact and logic noted? > Either that or she's an angry old bitch who *can't* > think of anything interesting to say herself, and > thus is limited to replying to others with putdowns. > That's all she's capable of in the way of "creative > intelligence." Mmm-hmm. I'm sure all the people who read my posts would agree with you that I never have anything interesting to say myself and post nothing but putdowns. > Oh...pardon me...not all. Her 22nd post was a link > to a 25-year-old song by John Lennon. *That* must > have strained her intellect. :-) Actually, that was the angry old bitch's holiday greeting to everyone here.
