[FairfieldLife] 'California Dreamin?'
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - December 8, 2008 (OWSweather.com) Rare 50 year Arctic Blast Sets Sights On Southern California. Possible historical cold air mass... With a week away, and a sure sign of things to come, OWSweather.com is making preparations on the server to handle the traffic from this next event. UJEAS is in line with the majority if not all the other models in keeping a near historical arctic air mass into the Southern California region. With a warm November, Southern California is finally ready for cold storms to make their way in. Resort level snow will be likely next week, and in pretty hefty amounts if things stay on track. OWSweather.com Meteorologist Kevin Martin predicts a 50 year event. While Martin is usually conservative on these events, the pattern highly favors it. We are in a pre-1950 type pattern, said Martin. We know we are due for a winter storm sometime this year. The type we may be dealing with will be ranked up there with the known years before 1950, which set record low daytime temperatures into the forecast region. With this, may come low elevation snow. Forecaster Cameron Venable is seeing very cold temperatures in the Los Angeles areas as well. Torrance is not usually known for winter weather, thus making this an interesting event for Venable to track. Temperatures in Siberia, Russia will be -81 degrees this week, said Martin. With those type of temperatures the arctic air mass has to spill somewhere. Our answer of the exact track will become more clear this week. All residents in the mountain communities should prepare this week for very cold, winter weather, with snow. Indications are a second, colder storm could hit near the 18th-22nd time-frame. The details on that will have to be sorted out. OWSweather.com staff More information: www.OWSweather.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Hillary: mediocre senator from New York
I still think that Obama's offer to make Hillary Clinton Secretary of State is an act of compassion. As Paglia points out, she really *doesn't* have much in the way of credentials. This is her oppor- tunity to gain some. It's not as if she could fuck up that much worse than Rice did, and the bottom line is that she will have to be implementing start over policies designed by Obama and his team of thinkers. They may or may not work any better than the old policies, but she doesn't get to make them, and has to actually *demonstrate* her ability to implement them, not talk about it. I think that this is a fairly magnanimous gesture on the part of someone who suspects that Hillary could actually have something to offer to the U.S. in the future if she ever got over her primary debilitation, which is that she believes that she deserves offices that she is unqualified for. So far, *except* for her brief and unremarkable stint in the Senate, Hillary has never had to do anything BUT talk the talk. Now she has to walk the walk. Being allowed to do so is a great favor, one that she'll either live up to or poison with ego. I have enough confidence in her to suspect that she'll live up to them, and so does Obama. Statecraft is about finding ways to get people to work together. It is NOT about telling them what to do as if you have the right to. Hillary will learn this very quickly and DO THE JOB, or she'll make excuses and go back to talking the talk. I've told the story here of my friend who was the world's worst person for working with other people. She literally drove everyone so crazy with her vindictive histrionics at the computer company she worked for that everyone banded together to buy out her shares and get rid of her. But she learned from that and went back to school and became a psychologist, and put *herself* into a position of remedial edu- cation on how to become a decent human being, one who cared more about other people than she did about herself. Now, a few years later, she is such a human being; the transformation has been amazing. The position of Secretary Of State is, for Hillary Clinton, a matter of remedial education. She will either learn how to work with other people and live up to the potential that Barack Obama and others see in her, or she'll prove that she can't do anything but talk the talk. I wish her the best. With one exception, she's got the toughest job in the world, and I hope she does it well. With all deference to Camille Paglia, whose rants I sometimes enjoy, in this one she sounds, more than anything else, like Hillary Clinton. This is the kind of rap that a high school cheerleader would make about the girl who beat her out for prom queen. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paglia nails it again. Great article. As for Obama's appointment of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, what sense does that make except within parochial Democratic politics? Awarding such a prize plum to Hillary may be a sop to her aggrieved fan base, but what exactly are her credentials for that position? Aside from being a mediocre senator (who, contrary to press reports, did very little for upstate New York), Hillary has a poor track record as both a negotiator and a manager. And of course both Clintons constantly view the world through the milky lens of their own self- interest. Well, it's time for Hillary to put up or shut up. If she gets as little traction in world affairs as Condoleezza Rice has, Hillary will be flushed down the rabbit hole with her feckless husband and effectively neutralized as a future presidential contender. If that's Obama's clever plan, is it worth the gamble? The secretary of state should be a more reserved, unflappable character -- not a drama queen who, even in her acceptance speech, morphed into three different personalities in the space of five minutes. Given Obama's elaborate deference to the Clintons, beginning with his over-accommodation of them at the Democratic convention in August, a nagging question has floated around the Web: What do the Clintons have on him? No one doubts that the Clinton opposition research team was turning over every rock in its mission to propel Hillary into the White House. There's an information vacuum here that conspiracy theorists have been rushing to fill. http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/12/10/hillary_mumbai/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For extra credit, if you're so inclined: Do you think Barry really believes this? If so, what might his basis for believing it be? If I assume Turq is just fucking with you on 100 posts to you, just to get a rise, I'll be right 99. 98. :-) When it comes to women I characterize as feminists (very much with quotes), I'm completely serious about the vast majority of them never having actually DONE anything. They just talk, talk, talk as if they deserve to be listened to simply because they're talking. It's like bloggers, thinking that they're actually influencing history or influencing public opinion when all they're really doing is typing a few words into a computer, most of which are never read by anyone at all. Probably only a couple of dozen bloggers have any effect at all. When it comes to feminists (without quotes) I am spoiled because I got to work with and alongside many of them over the years. Real feminists don't whine. Real feminists don't have to come up with silly manufactured outrage battles to fight. On the whole, they're too busy trying to actually DO something with their own lives, and help others DO something with their own. I have ZERO respect for talkers. I have great respect for those who DO something. Nothing about Judy Stein convinces me she's ever done shit -- not in the world of spirituality, not in the world of business, and not in the world of politics. I think she's basically a blogger with an overinflated view of her audience. She rants to a very, very small audience here on FFL, *most* of whom don't even bother to read what she writes. And to her this is synonymous with DOING something. To me it's a bunch of talk, talk, talk. A woman who quietly achieves her goals in life without making a big deal out of it has done more for feminist ideals than 10,000 women who rant and whine about the mistreatment of women. That one woman is providing an *example* of a woman DOING something, whereas the 10,000 are just talk, talk, talking. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: snip I don't agree that you and Raunchy (if that is who this round is aimed at) don't do squat and blame others for your not doing anything. You both seem pretty empowered to me. Thanks. I guess that's the most I can expect from you, but it's basically what I was looking for. This is specifically what I was asking you to comment on (which you did), BTW: You, as far as I can tell, followed the great god Nike and Just did it. As far as I can tell, the feminists didn't -- and don't -- do squat except blame someone else for them never having done anything. For extra credit, if you're so inclined: Do you think Barry really believes this? If so, what might his basis for believing it be?
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: -Original Message- From: David Orme-Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 12:29 PM To: David Orme-Johnson Subject: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM Dear Friends and Colleagues, The links below will take you to a new page and subsections on www.TruthAboutTM.com http://www.truthabouttm.com/ , which presents evidence that the Transcendental Meditation program in not cult. You can see some of the post below. All the best, David Individual Effects Issue: Is the Transcendental Meditation Program a Cult? http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/IsTMaCult/index.c fm Summary: The Transcendental Meditation program cannot be called a cult because it develops independent, intelligent, creating thinking and its founder, Maharishi, has in many ways encouraged personal independence, integration with society, and good citizenship. Contents: Table Comparing the Transcendental Meditation Program and Cults http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/IndividualEffects/IsTMaCult/index.c fm #tablecult Change the word programme to movement and then see what you get. The TMO is a cult by just about any definition. Here's the first dictionary you get in google: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult .a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies. Which system of religious worship with reference to rites and ceremonies do YOU practice when you sit down for 20 minutes x2? Actually I said: Change the word programme to movement and then see what you get, because I'm not convinced you can seperate the two. When I say my mantra I'm making a prayer to Lakshmi, and it the mantra came via a ceremony praising, indeed bowing down before, all manner of gods, deities, aspects of natural law whatever you want to call them it couldn't be any more obvious, once you've read the English translation. When I meditate (haven't said my mantra in years), I'm not making a prayer to anyone. Sounds to me like you're not practicing TM, but some faux-hindu version you picked up from hanging around faux hindus too long. You only think you're not. Your mantra is what it is we are told it's just a meaningless sound but it isn't. The only faux Hindus I know are the TMO and I don't share any of their beliefs. The funny thing is they would say they aren't beliefs but the truth and that TM is not a religion or cult when, to casual onlookers, it's stark staringly obvious. And the TMO considers me initiated. Initiated into what exactly? And that is before you adopt the highly strange and obviously religious belief system that the TMO will insist is the absolute truth against all the available evidence. Why do you adopt it then? Didn't, it's all too easily dismantled. Phase transition indeed! Dude, the first stage of escaping cults is realisation that you've been duped in the first place.. Never been duped. I just don't buy into all the Maharishi-isms. Hmm Hmmm. What does the TMO consider us initiated into, do you think?
[FairfieldLife] My idea of a feminist
As I suggested before, I think that a feminist is what a feminist DOES, so the best way to express what I think a feminist is is to talk about what one DID. I have a friend I've known for some time. We met in the Rama cult, and both of us laughingly have no problem referring to it as one, and at the same time having zero regrets for having been involved with it for years. My friend is a very attractive woman, in great shape because she's an athlete, and funny and outgoing. When I first met her, she was in the process of walking away from one successful car- eer and starting another in the world of computing. And that's exactly what she did; within two years of starting over as a programmer, she was earn- ing $200+ an hour as a consultant. She then moved into the even more rarefied world of AI, and made enough of a name for herself in that world that one of the leading companies in that field, a company at that point staffed primarily by men, offered her a shot at being their Marketing Mgr. In a few short years she tripled the company's business. At that company, she was known far and wide as a remarkably effective people manager, inspiring rather than intimidating. And for her, it never even *occurred* to her to ask whether the person she was working with was a man or a woman; she measured them only by the same criterion she used for herself: Do they DO THE JOB they've been hired to do? One of the most fascinating things about my friend IMO is that she is gay, but I think I'm the only person in the company who knew that. It is NOT that she was in the closet. Far from it; she's been openly gay since she was 15. It's just that the issue of her sexuality NEVER CAME UP because she didn't bring it up. She was as comfortable in a group of guys making crude jokes about women as she would have been in a group of lesbians making equally crude jokes about women. Her sexual pref- erence was irrelevant to doing the job. *Everything* was irrelevant except doing the job. Back in the Rama cult, when it came time to DO THE JOB there, when our task du jour was to teach people how to meditate, it was within a strange and, to me, badly-conceived-of environment. Fred Lenz, for whatever reasons, had set up the teaching thing as kind of a competition between the men and the women students. Some of the women (and interestingly, few of the men) really got into the gender competition, and used it as a way to act out their unresolved feelings for the other sex. My friend stayed out of the misery and just taught; I think she wound up teaching more people to meditate than anyone else in the group. And she did this while earning $200+ an hour as a full-time consultant, paying for all the teaching expenses herself and teaching for free. Lately, with the success of having transformed a computer company under her belt and the Rama cult a decade behind her, she has found another outlet for her spiritual aspirations, another teacher. I honestly don't know who it is. All I know is that when that teacher offered her a chance to put some energy back into the system, my friend didn't hesitate for a moment. She took a well-deserved leave of absence from the company she works for and went to India to teach computer classes to men and women students of this teacher so that they could become self-supporting, and not have to rely on donations. And during this whole time I've known her, I have never heard her badrap either men or other women for keeping her down or hindering either her career or her expres- sion of her sexuality or her spiritual aspirations. People DID try to hinder her success; that's just life. But she never for a moment focused on the obstacles, and she never for a moment bitched or whined about those who became obstacles. She just DID THE JOB, whether it was in the world of business or the world of spirituality. That's the kind of person who I think of when I hear the word feminist. Someone who presents the EXAMPLE of a strong, successful woman to the world, not some- one who can only whine that there aren't more of them. I once was with her as a number of women I would char- acterize as feminists (very much with the quotes) were whining and bitching about being held back by the men in the small computer company they all worked for. My friend just rolled her eyes and went back to work for the guys the other women were calling male chauvinist pigs. A few months later she bought the company from them. It's not about talking the talk. It's about walking the walk.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
One thing's very obvious from hearing Orme-Johnson's comments: someone affiliated with the TMO is listening to FFL and probably the TMFree blog...it just shows the power a forum of free speech like FFL, etc. can have. They're forced to respond (with rather lame answers) because the banter here is also hitting the search engines along with their marketing spiel. And so the disinformation campaign that is OJ's website. On separate note, Raunchy asked why anyone would want to continue to expose the dangers of the TM org, so repeatedly. The answer is the danger still exists that people can be deceived, harmed or financially drained by this org which is overly secretive. This same org thrusts itself constantly into the public spotlight worldwide, but gives no transparency for their potentially dangerous org and it's former leader was involved in numerous scandals from money laundering, to political manipulation to sexual improprieties--the list goes on and on--all the while working hard to conceal his tracks and his past. The technique they're selling and the org that administers it has been the cause of suicide, murder, insanity and a long list of ills that could potentially be prevented. If the victims of other cult abuse organizations can say never again in the hope that more people aren't harmed by such institutions of abuse, so can we. On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:11 AM, yifuxero wrote: ---I don't see much truth in this section. His clever choice of words generates an imprecise reply (typical of TMO responses as a whole, apart from outright doctoring of stats): Is anyone getting enlightened? Many people are experiencing the classical milestones of enlightenment, which arise from regular practice of the Transcendental Meditation program. These include witnessing of sleep and activity, equanimity during challenging experiences, and increase creativity. Recent published research on these individuals has scientifically verified the reality of unique physiological characteristics and benefits of enlightenment. Moreover, the entire body of research on the Transcendental Meditation program demonstrates holistic development of the qualities of enlightenment
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: [...] You only think you're not. Your mantra is what it is we are told it's just a meaningless sound but it isn't. Ah, I see, my mantra has meaning, but I don't know what it is, so therefore I only THINK it has no meaning... Dude, the first stage of escaping cults is realisation that you've been duped in the first place.. Never been duped. I just don't buy into all the Maharishi-isms. Hmm Hmmm. What does the TMO consider us initiated into, do you think? Do *I* care? Why do YOU? L.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Eyes for Lies Blog: Dr. Timothy Stryker
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sihdi: http://www.eyesforlies.blogspot.com/2008/10/dr-timothy- stryker.html What's the relevance...is he a TMer (asking before I spend the time reading all of it)? I'm confused because you preceeded the link with the word Sihdi...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak extends the love to Sean Hannity...or does he?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: snip Putting that question aside for the moment, what I found interesting was the way Deepak signed off on the letter: Love, Deepak. After reading the letter, tell me if you had the same reaction as I did: that Deepak really doesn't have all that much love for Hannity and his employment of the Love, Deepak was really for cynical effect and to score debating points. Jeez, I *hope* it was for cynical effect. If it wasn't, he's got a far worse problem than having been misrepresented by Hannity. I believe that he believes that he must remind himself of universal love constantly in order to behave in a loving manner. this goes along with his inability to tell the difference between MMY's interpretation of consciousness and the New Age interpretation. L I think that that is exactly right, in a nutshell.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
Well, I guess it's settled now - we know who one of the FFL trolls are. Now all we have to do is figure out who were the Marshy's main conspirators. Let's start with Rick and Barry. There must be at least ten other informants that frequent this discussion group. I wonder why they don't confess to their crimes and start to at least pay some form of restitution to those poor students that they harmed. Vaj wrote: ...it's former leader was involved in numerous scandals from money laundering, to political manipulation to sexual improprieties--the list goes on and on--all the while working hard to conceal his tracks and his past. The technique they're selling and the org that administers it has been the cause of suicide, murder, insanity and a long list of ills that could potentially be prevented.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Deepak extends the love to Sean Hannity...or does he?
Shemp wrote: I think that that is exactly right, in a nutshell. Don't forget the part about Deepak Chopra blaming the Bombay attack on Barak Obama. That's the point Deepak was trying to make. If the Bombay attack was caused by America because the U.S. went to war against the terrorists, then the same policy is being supported by Barak Obama - he's the real cause of the Bombay attack. If Obama had kept his promise he would have talked to the terrorists and negotiated a truce. But instead Obama selected Clinton as SoS and kept Gates as SoD. Obama said he was in favor of launching first strikes inside Pakistan. Deepak's point was that the Bombay attacks were caused by American foreign policy, a policy that is fully supported by Obama. It doesn't have anything to do with Deepak's love for anyone or not. Deepak hates George W. Bush - Obama's foreign policy seems to be almost the same as the Bush policy. It's that simple. Thus, the big question about Obama has been answered: While Democrats -- even Clinton and Biden, who both voted to authorize the war -- may play the blame game with Bush about Iraq, Obama understands that if Iraq collapses after U.S. troops are withdrawn, then it won't matter who started the war. America loses, and he loses. Read more: 'Obama and His New Crew' By Debra Saunders http://tinyurl.com/55nuvp
[FairfieldLife] What to do...
...when we're afraid to make that first move out of our comfort zone and do something new.
[FairfieldLife] The Silent Woman
Barry's new best friend: http://tinyurl.com/57ta29 http://tinyurl.com/57ta29 Just like Barry, he thinks women who have opinions should STFU. Barry TALKS about what he thinks a real feminist is that they don't TALK they DO. But what has he DONE except TALK about women with strong opinions who, if measured by the number of words they write on this forum, TALK less than he TALKS? In his opinion, women who DO the job and DON'T TALK about it, are real feminists because they just STFU. Whatever happened in Barry's young life that makes him so adverse to women who TALK that he thinks they should STFU? Since a few, including Barry have attempted to psychoanalyze women on this forum who won't STFU about sexism, it's fair to say women who won't STFU probably remind Barry of his mother constantly telling him to stop playing with himself in front of the other children. Here's Barry telling women to STFU: 201166 I have ZERO respect for talkers. I have great respect for those who DO something. Nothing about Judy Stein convinces me she's ever done shit -- not in the world of spirituality, not in the world of business, and not in the world of politics. I think she's basically a blogger with an overinflated view of her audience. She rants to a very, very small audience here on FFL, *most* of whom don't even bother to read what she writes. And to her this is synonymous with DOING something. To me it's a bunch of talk, talk, talk. 201166 A woman who quietly achieves her goals in life without making a big deal out of it has done more for feminist ideals than 10,000 women who rant and whine about the mistreatment of women. That one woman is providing an *example* of a woman DOING something, whereas the 10,000 are just talk, talk, talking. 201165 Statecraft is about finding ways to get people to work together. It is NOT about telling them what to do as if you have the right to. Hillary will learn this very quickly and DO THE JOB, or she'll make excuses and go back to talking the talk. 201165 The position of Secretary Of State is, for Hillary Clinton, a matter of remedial education. She will either learn how to work with other people and live up to the potential that Barack Obama and others see in her, or she'll prove that she can't do anything but talk the talk. [http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2023/2525132831_5b37f4cef6_b.jpg] Wikipedia: Epicoene, or the Silent Woman is a comedy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedy byRenaissance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Renaissance_theatre playwright Ben Jonson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Jonson . Plot: Morose, a wealthy old man with an obsessive hatred of noise, has made plans to disinherit his nephew Dauphine by marrying. His bride is, he thinks, an exceptionally quiet woman; he does not know that Dauphine has arranged the whole match for purposes of his own.Worst for Morose, Epicoene quickly reveals herself as a loud, nagging mate. Desperate for a divorce he can find no grounds for ending the match. Dauphine promises to reveal grounds to end the marriage (in exchange, Morose must come to financial terms with him). The agreement made, Dauphine strips the female costume from Epicoene, revealing that the wife is, in fact, a boy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Employment Op that I'm sure you won't want to miss...
On Dec 9, 2008, at 10:05 PM, sparaig wrote: NOt a bad deal if you want to work in the organization. Many people pay money just to live in Fairfield part-time. Who do they pay it to, and for what? And how many is many? Sal Hello. Super radiance courss, WP assemblies, et etc. Aren't people getting paid for some of those? And I would guess most of those doing them live in FF already. And I don't know the number, but I'm sure its more than 2. I'm in agreement with that. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It's Only Cardboard â ¦
On Dec 9, 2008, at 10:09 PM, sparaig wrote: Well, don't know how fratboys are THESE days, but 25 years ago, they were definitely dehumanizing towards women. The ones I met were pretty nice, and worked very well with those of us in sororities. I obviously wasn't there during their most private moments, but at least at my school, I never saw any evidence of what you or raunch claim. I know that's the stereotype, but there are obviously lots of exceptions. My brother was in a frat, and he never did any of that crap either. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: For extra credit, if you're so inclined: Do you think Barry really believes this? If so, what might his basis for believing it be? If I assume Turq is just fucking with you on 100 posts to you, just to get a rise, I'll be right 99. For the record, here's what Barry said that I was asking about: You [Ruth], as far as I can tell, followed the great god Nike and 'Just did it.' As far as I can tell, the 'feminists' didn't -- and don't -- do squat except blame someone else for them never having done anything. When it comes to women I characterize as feminists (very much with quotes), I'm completely serious about the vast majority of them never having actually DONE anything. snip A woman who quietly achieves her goals in life without making a big deal out of it has done more for feminist ideals than 10,000 women who rant and whine about the mistreatment of women. That one woman is providing an *example* of a woman DOING something, whereas the 10,000 are just talk, talk, talking. Thirty-two years ago, I decided my goal in life was to work for myself, after having worked for other people since I graduated from college. And I just did it. I started my own editing business and have supported myself that way ever since. Contrary to Barry's claim, I've never once blamed someone else for my never having done anything. I don't *have* to, obviously, because I have indeed DONE something, very successfully. And even if I hadn't, it would never occur to me to blame anybody else for my own faiilure. In other words, what Barry's saying about me is complete, utter fantasy. And he knows none of it is true (as with a very large percentage of the things he says about me). If he had a legitimate case, why would he need to lie? The fact that he *does* lie, repeatedly, demonstrates that he knows he *doesn't* have a case. What kind of crappy human being, what kind of total wimp, has to *make up* stuff about somebody he doesn't like? Curtis isn't threatened by me; he got it right: I don't agree that you and Raunchy (if that is who this round is aimed at) don't do squat and blame others for your not doing anything. You both seem pretty empowered to me. raunchy can speak for herself about how she's achieved her own goals. Barry finds us so threatening because we *are* empowered. He lies about us because he has to find some way to *dis*empower us, at least in his own twisted, frightened mind.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thirty-two years ago, I decided my goal in life was to work for myself, after having worked for other people since I graduated from college. And I just did it. I started my own editing business and have supported myself that way ever since. Cool. Now, in those 32 years, and in the years that preceded them, what have you done for anyone *else*? The friend I wrote about today is about 2/3 your age. For the first half of her life she was a public defender who worked for pennies to help people who couldn't afford to pay for a lawyer themselves. Since switching careers, she has created several hundred new jobs for other people and facilitated the promotion of dozens of women within the companies she worked for. While doing this, full-time, she managed to teach several thousand people how to meditate, free, paying for all of it herself. In the last few months, she has taught several thou- sand Indian men and women how to become self- sufficient by teaching them computer skills. I understand that, like Dick Cheney, you had other priorities in your life, and I'm pleased as punch that you achieved them. But part of my definition of a feminist is some- one who walks the walk of helping other people, and doesn't just talk about the mistreatment of those people and blame the mistreaters. No response is necessary or desired. I'm just explaining why I feel the way I do about you personally. When I was speaking of feminists (very much with quotes), I was referring NOT to just you and RD on this forum but to thous- ands of people, both men and women, whom I have encountered in life who seem to have focused on the negatives of sexual inequality and whined about them monotopically, without ever doing much to provide any positives. I appreciate you speaking up about what you have accomplished in terms of your personal goals, and I think that's admirable. It's just that from time to time, especially on *this* forum, you should remember that you are addressing a lot of people who put their personal goals aside or on hold for decades because it was more important to them to help other people than it was to help themselves.
[FairfieldLife] Men are Better than Women
Barry's new best friend says Men are Better than Women video: http://tinyurl.com/46nkzp
[FairfieldLife] Distinction between Gurudev's TM and the Mad ORG
Your beef with Maharishi is that he refused to acknowledge that a small minority of people can experience 'Negative side-effects' from practicing TM.?? Could you give me some proof of it.?? Please draw a distinction between TM and the Org's administrative stupidity. From: Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 6:11:01 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM One thing's very obvious from hearing Orme-Johnson' s comments: someone affiliated with the TMO is listening to FFL and probably the TMFree blog...it just shows the power a forum of free speech like FFL, etc. can have. They're forced to respond (with rather lame answers) because the banter here is also hitting the search engines along with their marketing spiel. And so the disinformation campaign that is OJ's website. On separate note, Raunchy asked why anyone would want to continue to expose the dangers of the TM org, so repeatedly. The answer is the danger still exists that people can be deceived, harmed or financially drained by this org which is overly secretive. This same org thrusts itself constantly into the public spotlight worldwide, but gives no transparency for their potentially dangerous org and it's former leader was involved in numerous scandals from money laundering, to political manipulation to sexual improprieties- -the list goes on and on--all the while working hard to conceal his tracks and his past. The technique they're selling and the org that administers it has been the cause of suicide, murder, insanity and a long list of ills that could potentially be prevented. If the victims of other cult abuse organizations can say never again in the hope that more people aren't harmed by such institutions of abuse, so can we. *
[FairfieldLife] Fairfield Life As Cyber-Refrigerator
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing's very obvious from hearing Orme-Johnson's comments: someone affiliated with the TMO is listening to FFL and probably the TMFree blog...it just shows the power a forum of free speech like FFL, etc. can have. They're forced to respond (with rather lame answers) because the banter here is also hitting the search engines along with their marketing spiel. And so the disinformation campaign that is OJ's website. Vaj, I understand some of the zeal with which you approach your mission of informer here, but I have a different view of what FFL is. While I do not doubt that the movers and shakers of the TMO are as paranoid as a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs, and keep an eye on things said here and on TM-Free, I'm not sure that that's a useful thing to bear in mind when reading or posting here. It strikes me as too self-important, too much like evangelism, and with a bit too much of the preaching to the invisible imaginary audience syndrome we've seen in some posters. At any given point, a little more than 4% of FFL members ever post. I would imagine that the per- centage who even read the posts is not over 10%. 119 people, most of whom made up their minds about TM and Maharishi long ago, and are as little influenced by what is said here as they were about who to vote for in the last election. (I would guess that there is not a *single* person reading this forum whose vote was swayed one way or another by anything they read here.) So if it feels good for you to keep chipping away at the veneer of the TMO, go for it. But I tend to see the place differently. I think that Curtis may have been the most eloquent so far in expressing what FFL is to him. To para- phrase him (and please correct me Curtis if I'm getting it wrong), he approaches FFL as a kind of sounding board for ideas, a place to bounce them off of the minds of other seekers who, like him, have paid their dues in the seeking process, and learn from *both* trying to express his own ideas the best he can, and learn from what other seekers say in response to his ideas. That's sorta my view of the place, too, except that I view it more as the refrigerator in a kitchen in cyberspace. I like hanging out here because it gives me a place to put some of my ideas into words and throw them out to see if they're done yet. Sorta the way you fish a strand of spaghetti out of the pot and throw it against the refrigerator to see if it sticks. If it sticks, it's done. *Most* of the strands of mind-spaghetti I throw out most not be done, because *most* of my posts never get much of a response at all. Or maybe it's that people here aren't that much into pasta (don't like thinking about or talking about the things I like thinking about and talking about). Whatever. I'm still going to keep throwing out strands of mind- spaghetti. Trying to put my ideas into words is my idea of fun. But I really don't think that in doing so I'm changing or converting anyone here to my way of seeing things. I certainly don't think that any- thing I've ever said has changed or will ever change the TMO. I would imagine that not one thing I've said here has *ever* gotten anyone to change the way they see things. And that's just FINE with me, because I'm not really trying to change them or convert them to anything. I'm just having fun with ideas. And I don't know about you, but *my* ideas are not necessarily right. In my life, almost everything I've ever believed in has been proven over time to be wrong, and I am completely comfortable with that. I fully expect most of the things I choose to believe in for the rest of my life to be wrong, too. Or at the very least, only partially right. So it's not as if I feel much of a compulsion to sell them to anyone or convert anyone to my way of seeing. And I'm *certainly* not going to waste my time defending any of these strands of mind-spaghetti. YMMV. But I wouldn't get too deep into the mindset you seem to be espousing above. I don't think that anything you have ever posted here has ever changed anyone's mind about anything, either. To believe that it has, or might in the future, kinda puts you into the RD category of poster. Do you honestly think that even *one* person here changed their mind about Hillary Clinton as a result of her posts? Similarly, I suspect no one is ever going to change their view of TM, the TMO, and Maharishi as a result of anything you say, or as a result of what the compulsive defenders say in response to them. Then again, as I said above, I've been wrong about almost everything in my life. So never mind. Carry on. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Curtis?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Thirty-two years ago, I decided my goal in life was to work for myself, after having worked for other people since I graduated from college. And I just did it. I started my own editing business and have supported myself that way ever since. Cool. Now, in those 32 years, and in the years that preceded them, what have you done for anyone *else*? I don't have the drive or the talent for activism, but I've supported women's (and many other) causes financially using the drive and the talent I *do* have. I've made more of a contribution that way than I ever could have trying to do the kind of things your friend has done. snip I appreciate you speaking up about what you have accomplished in terms of your personal goals, and I think that's admirable. It's just that from time to time, especially on *this* forum, you should remember that you are addressing a lot of people who put their personal goals aside or on hold for decades because it was more important to them to help other people than it was to help themselves. Helping others has always been one of my goals, and I've done it in a way that was best suited to my abilities. I respect the contributions of activists. But I would expect the same respect for my contributions. Thing is, they've been private rather than public. You and the others who boast about helping others should remember from time to time that not everyone who contributes to human welfare does so in a way that you can see. (This is 50 for me.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Employment Op that I'm sure you won't want to miss...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Maharishi Peace Palaces are looking to fill an Accommodation manager/marketing position.This is a full-time position but is flexible to allow for one to participate in the Invincible America Assembly. Hours would be 1:00 - 4:30 and 8:00 - 9:00 6 days a week. Qualifications include experience in sales, marketing, financial management, good self - organizer with computer skills and customer service oriented manner. ~Remuneration would be accommodation in one bedroom of the Maharishi Peace Palace ~$500 basic plus 4% of gross accommodation income per month ~Opportunity to enjoy a further $700 per month exits as hours have been set to accommodate the Invincible America Assembly. To set up an interview please send resumes to us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Anyone want to write up a resume and send it in? :) D Sal I believe that to get the $700 a month for the IAA, you will meditate in the morning until just before 1:00pm and then start again about 4:30 and finish up just before 8:00. When do you eat? When do you get your chores done?
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing's very obvious from hearing Orme-Johnson's comments: someone affiliated with the TMO is listening to FFL and probably the TMFree blog...it just shows the power a forum of free speech like FFL, etc. can have. They're forced to respond (with rather lame answers) because the banter here is also hitting the search engines along with their marketing spiel. And so the disinformation campaign that is OJ's website. On separate note, Raunchy asked why anyone would want to continue to expose the dangers of the TM org, so repeatedly. The answer is the danger still exists that people can be deceived, harmed or financially drained by this org which is overly secretive. This same org thrusts itself constantly into the public spotlight worldwide, but gives no transparency for their potentially dangerous org and it's former leader was involved in numerous scandals from money laundering, to political manipulation to sexual improprieties-- the list goes on and on--all the while working hard to conceal his tracks and his past. The technique they're selling and the org that administers it has been the cause of suicide, murder, insanity and a long list of ills that could potentially be prevented. If the victims of other cult abuse organizations can say never again in the hope that more people aren't harmed by such institutions of abuse, so can we. oh settle down, you big baby. the only long term study on any meditation technique are the Buddhist countries of the world, and the results aren't pretty. They are all wracked with human rights abuse, corruption, and crime. Quit trying to go after TM when your own preferred method of spiritual advancement just plain sucks.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Charlie Lutes on Sex and Celibacy [reposted]
Whenever I read something from Charlie, I can't read it normally. I always hear it in Charlie's voice in that interesting cadence and inflection he had. I also see him moving and waving his arms. What a character he was. We loved Charlie! --- On Wed, 12/10/08, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Charlie Lutes on Sex and Celibacy [reposted] To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, December 10, 2008, 9:12 AM The Sacred Side of Sex Charlie Lutes - (4/28/81) http://www.maharishiphotos.com/lecture28.html Everything in nature comes in pairs; a male and a female expression of nature, such as in trees, fruits, flowers, animals, and also humans. In the human it is the feminine or negative side that is passive, but magnetic. It attracts to itself, it absorbs and stores potential energy. The male or positive side is electric or charged. When there is a union between the electric male and the magnetic female, the couple involved provide a conduit for cosmic force, which flows through them into the Earth plane with tremendous power. This power radiated by them, polarizes the surrounding atmosphere. The female at this time is surrounded by a corona of greenish-blue mystic light. There is actually a powerful cosmic force surrounding us at all times that seeks expression through polarization or sexual union. Therefore, because sex invokes a cosmic force it takes on a sacred meaning, as well as providing a vehicle for the incoming soul. Sex cannot be treated as an exercise in eroticism with an orgasmic overtone. Sex, solely due to the abuse of it, has brought to humans disease, suffering and death. Basically, there is nothing wrong with sex. It is the human misinterpretation and misuse that is wrong. That which is of God and carries a sacred connotation cannot be profaned by humanity. Yet, it is true that for millions of people on Earth, sex is the only joy in life that they know. However, because the human is a self-contained universe, sex really brings two universes together to produce - by the holy process of reproduction - a third and, so on ad infinitum. God, in the process of reproducing himself, merges one part of himself into another in order to bring forth a third; the trinity functioning in a triad world. The seeds of immortality are in and a part of the human. Again, the main thrust of sex is to bring into this world higher and higher souls and not to profane sex through lust and bring in lower and lower souls and sow the seeds of destruction in the world, such as we now see - humans wantonly killing one another. In the man it is the feminine force that is passive and in the woman it is the masculine force that is passive, and before either one can be liberated these forces must be awakened. This is done through the near perfect union of soul to soul, mind to mind and body to body, a true affinity. Thereby, a balance in the female magnetic and the male electric forces is affected. As a result of the merging of the magnetic and electric forces the two combined create an electromagnetic field of force that is all-encompassing. The all-absorbing female force field unites in perfect harmony with the dynamic and kinetic power of the male in a near perfect union. The energy generated through this male-female union is far greater than anything they can generate separately - because acting together they are able to draw to themselves a great portion of the cosmic energy that exists around them. This in turn sets every atom into a higher vibration. Also at this time, because of the polarization created around them, an impenetrable barrier to every form of evil that might approach or attack them is established. Because there is a bio-electrical exchange of energy between two partners there is an intensification of sensitivity in the body, mind and soul. The body becomes sensual, the mind becomes more telepathic and the soul intuitional. This is so because the sexual union unlocks normally unused power shared between the partners. The universe itself is one indivisible matrix of cosmic force and this force is always seeking release or expression through a union of its opposite energies. So it seeks release in a couple who become a channel of discharge for this unique force. Sex between two partners can take them to heaven or it can become hell, it can bestow greater health or it can cause disease and disability. Two right people together in love are one thing, but a wrong couple together is most certainly another thing. That which has the power to create also has the power to destroy. Partners must grow in sex the same as they grow in everything else in life. Where one partner fails in this relationship the marriage is on shaky ground. Also, where there is no harmony between two people,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Employment Op that I'm sure you won't want to miss...
I believe that to get the $700 a month for the IAA, you will meditate in the morning until just before 1:00pm and then start again about 4:30 and finish up just before 8:00. When do you eat? When do you get your chores done? Those with earthly needs need not apply. BTW, the dropping of deuces(#2) in the peace palace bathrooms is strictly prohibited. Please arrange for a celestial dove to come down and take it away. the no time for eating policy will make this easier. Men will wear 800,000 volt stun rings on their unholy linghams 24/7. Any uncoiling of the dhoti demon will trigger a three second blast to subdue the one-eyed yogi. Repeated infractions will result in being fitted with the Jaws of Yama device on the twins of impurity. This is a wonderful opportunity for someone with no personal needs to live in an environment that recognizes none. A strict eyes closed, mouth shut policy will be enforced. Please remain seated for the term of your employment. Sounds like heaven on earth to me! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: The Maharishi Peace Palaces are looking to fill an Accommodation manager/marketing position.This is a full-time position but is flexible to allow for one to participate in the Invincible America Assembly. Hours would be 1:00 - 4:30 and 8:00 - 9:00 6 days a week. Qualifications include experience in sales, marketing, financial management, good self - organizer with computer skills and customer service oriented manner. ~Remuneration would be accommodation in one bedroom of the Maharishi Peace Palace ~$500 basic plus 4% of gross accommodation income per month ~Opportunity to enjoy a further $700 per month exits as hours have been set to accommodate the Invincible America Assembly. To set up an interview please send resumes to us at tmcenter@ mailto:tmcenter@ . Anyone want to write up a resume and send it in? :) D Sal I believe that to get the $700 a month for the IAA, you will meditate in the morning until just before 1:00pm and then start again about 4:30 and finish up just before 8:00. When do you eat? When do you get your chores done?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Curtis, if you're going to paraphrase me, please try to be accurate. I didn't invite someone to believe anything. I suggested they leave their minds open a crack to the possibility there were some insights they hadn't grasped. I did try but I am open to correction to understand what you meant. I'm not sure I understand the distinction you are making here. We don't share the same perspective on how deep Maharishi's insights were. That may be why. Maharishi wasn't exactly presenting Hegelian philosophy. He was extremely repetitive on very view, easily grasped points. I suggest you leave your mind open a crack as well on this point. On me not understanding what Maharishi taught? Sorry but given my history with his teaching that is not an option. To paraphrase a great quote from Guitar Slim, I studied his teaching so much it would make your ass hurt. I'm very confident that I understood his POV to my own satisfaction. Or did I make a specific statement concerning MMY? That's what I guess I don't understand, why are you making a special case for him? Is he the only such special case? I don't know, most likely not. But his case is the only one I'm talking about here. This is the interesting question for me: How have you determined his uniqueness? I don't see any reason for someone who has spent some time with his 3 books and especially after meditating for a while to doubt their conclusions about his teaching based on how well they have understood it. Do you think someone who has spent some time with three books about the Delta blues and has played and/or listened to the music for a while can be certain they understand it completely? Keith Richards said To play this music you need three chords, two fingers and one asshole. Understanding something completely may be as unrealistic as understanding it perfectly. But I spent less than an hour with two groups of kids today and they understood the most important parts of the music to me when I was done. It is actualizing it in performance that is the life long journey which might be a match for how you feel about meditation as a practice. But the intellectual part is not so hard in either case. Do you equate leaving one's mind open a crack with lack of confidence? How about just lack of *certainty*? I guess we all put in the time we feel we need for any thinker and then come to a conclusion. I'm not sure certainty is the best goal for knowledge. No, neither am I. I don't think in some cases that we can even be certain we've put in all the time we need to come to a valid conclusion. I guess we each choose out battles here. Valid enough for ourselves is probably the only thing possible. But that is good enough to support a great life for me, and I suspect for you. snip Maharishi was not the biggest intellectual even by his own admission in his own field of interest compared to the professional pundits around Guru Dev. I think that depends on how one defines intellectual. snip To put it in more general terms, you can't *rule out* other interpretations of a teaching if you aren't even aware there *are* other interpretations. I'm not sure what you are referring to here. I had in mind some of the conclusions that Ruth has drawn, such as that no suffering means no empathy. That is her take on the teaching, not the teaching itself. I don't doubt that in the way she is thinking about it, this is right for her. It might not be right for me. But I did agree that the whole concept of life without suffering is bogus and I'll take it a step further, childish. It reveals a lack of maturity in facing how hardships bring out the best in us and shape our character. Maharishi's immaturity in this area was recently exposed in the Charlie Lutes chapters where his deceitfulness in not taking responsibility for ending a meeting put Charlie in discomfort and conflict, so Maharishi could avoid his own discomfort. Did you buy Charlie' co-dependent explanation that Maharishi lied to avoid hurting the student's feelings? Uh huh. Maharishi was pretty explicit. He did elaborate his beliefs more in his teacher training tapes, so I guess you could make a case that teachers are in a better position to judge what he taught from their 8 months or so of 3 tapes a day exposure. But both you and Ruth were at the same training level of his teaching so that doesn't apply. In my observation, Curtis, some people get it and some don't, no matter how much training they've had. It's not a matter of smarts; I'm not sure what makes the difference. Not everyone has the capacity for thinking metaphysically, just as not everyone has musical
[FairfieldLife] Small Centres vs Huge Towers
Why can't the build small meditation centres in small localities.?? I don't understand the logic of building huge towers and huge palaces and gathering large number of people in one place. Square root of 1% percent. No proof of it so far. From: curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:32:56 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Employment Op that I'm sure you won't want to miss... Those with earthly needs need not apply. BTW, the dropping of deuces(#2) in the peace palace bathrooms is strictly prohibited. Please arrange for a celestial dove to come down and take it away. the no time for eating policy will make this easier. Men will wear 800,000 volt stun rings on their unholy linghams 24/7. Any uncoiling of the dhoti demon will trigger a three second blast to subdue the one-eyed yogi. Repeated infractions will result in being fitted with the Jaws of Yama device on the twins of impurity. This is a wonderful opportunity for someone with no personal needs to live in an environment that recognizes none. A strict eyes closed, mouth shut policy will be enforced. Please remain seated for the term of your employment. Sounds like heaven on earth to me! *
[FairfieldLife] Real Feminists Just STFU
Barry moved the goal posts. He has a new requirement following up his complaint that women who talk the talk rather than walk the talk are not real feminists. Not only must real feminists prove they have DONE something in life but provide evidence they have selflessly helped OTHERS. Now that Judy says she has actually helped others, will Barry find another way to discredit her? IMO his only real requirement to consider Judy a real feminist is that she just STFU. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Thirty-two years ago, I decided my goal in life was to work for myself, after having worked for other people since I graduated from college. And I just did it. I started my own editing business and have supported myself that way ever since. Cool. Now, in those 32 years, and in the years that preceded them, what have you done for anyone *else*? I don't have the drive or the talent for activism, but I've supported women's (and many other) causes financially using the drive and the talent I *do* have. I've made more of a contribution that way than I ever could have trying to do the kind of things your friend has done. snip I appreciate you speaking up about what you have accomplished in terms of your personal goals, and I think that's admirable. It's just that from time to time, especially on *this* forum, you should remember that you are addressing a lot of people who put their personal goals aside or on hold for decades because it was more important to them to help other people than it was to help themselves. Helping others has always been one of my goals, and I've done it in a way that was best suited to my abilities. I respect the contributions of activists. But I would expect the same respect for my contributions. Thing is, they've been private rather than public. You and the others who boast about helping others should remember from time to time that not everyone who contributes to human welfare does so in a way that you can see. (This is 50 for me.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Curtis, if you're going to paraphrase me, please try to be accurate. I didn't invite someone to believe anything. I suggested they leave their minds open a crack to the possibility there were some insights they hadn't grasped. I did try but I am open to correction to understand what you meant. I'm not sure I understand the distinction you are making here. We don't share the same perspective on how deep Maharishi's insights were. That may be why. Maharishi wasn't exactly presenting Hegelian philosophy. He was extremely repetitive on very view, easily grasped points. I suggest you leave your mind open a crack as well on this point. On me not understanding what Maharishi taught? Sorry but given my history with his teaching that is not an option. To paraphrase a great quote from Guitar Slim, I studied his teaching so much it would make your ass hurt. I'm very confident that I understood his POV to my own satisfaction. Or did I make a specific statement concerning MMY? That's what I guess I don't understand, why are you making a special case for him? Is he the only such special case? I don't know, most likely not. But his case is the only one I'm talking about here. This is the interesting question for me: How have you determined his uniqueness? I don't see any reason for someone who has spent some time with his 3 books and especially after meditating for a while to doubt their conclusions about his teaching based on how well they have understood it. Do you think someone who has spent some time with three books about the Delta blues and has played and/or listened to the music for a while can be certain they understand it completely? Keith Richards said To play this music you need three chords, two fingers and one asshole. Understanding something completely may be as unrealistic as understanding it perfectly. But I spent less than an hour with two groups of kids today and they understood the most important parts of the music to me when I was done. It is actualizing it in performance that is the life long journey which might be a match for how you feel about meditation as a practice. But the intellectual part is not so hard in either case. Do you equate leaving one's mind open a crack with lack of confidence? How about just lack of *certainty*? I guess we all put in the time we feel we need for any thinker and then come to a conclusion. I'm not sure certainty is the best goal for knowledge. No, neither am I. I don't think in some cases that we can even be certain we've put in all the time we need to come to a valid conclusion. I guess we each choose out battles here. Valid enough for ourselves is probably the only thing possible. But that is good enough to support a great life for me, and I suspect for you. snip Maharishi was not the biggest intellectual even by his own admission in his own field of interest compared to the professional pundits around Guru Dev. I think that depends on how one defines intellectual. snip To put it in more general terms, you can't *rule out* other interpretations of a teaching if you aren't even aware there *are* other interpretations. I'm not sure what you are referring to here. I had in mind some of the conclusions that Ruth has drawn, such as that no suffering means no empathy. That is her take on the teaching, not the teaching itself. I don't doubt that in the way she is thinking about it, this is right for her. It might not be right for me. But I did agree that the whole concept of life without suffering is bogus and I'll take it a step further, childish. It reveals a lack of maturity in facing how hardships bring out the best in us and shape our character. Maharishi's immaturity in this area was recently exposed in the Charlie Lutes chapters where his deceitfulness in not taking responsibility for ending a meeting put Charlie in discomfort and conflict, so Maharishi could avoid his own discomfort. Did you buy Charlie' co-dependent explanation that Maharishi lied to avoid hurting the student's feelings? Uh huh. Maharishi was pretty explicit. He did elaborate his beliefs more in his teacher training tapes, so I guess you could make a case that teachers are in a better position to judge what he taught from their 8 months or so of 3 tapes a day exposure. But both you and Ruth were at the same training level of his teaching so that doesn't apply. In my observation, Curtis, some people get it and some don't, no matter how much training they've had. It's not a matter of smarts; I'm not sure what makes the difference. Not everyone has the capacity for thinking metaphysically, just as not everyone has musical
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:12 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: I find it odd that I am assumed to be smug when all I say is that I understand the theories and I don't agree. Is not agreeing smug? I also find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. I've often experienced the same thing here. There's a high amount of cognitive dissonance I've noticed in addition when you refuse to use common TM-org buzzwords for describing your own experience--which often come with a lot of accumulated baggage and instead use your own words. That's regarded very suspiciously and often with great anger. And heaven forbid you were actually trained by an acharya in the same tradition that MMY claims to come from and have some little perspective on things, then a whole host negativity gets aimed at you: ad hominems, poisoned well tactics, ambiguation, misdirection, lies--you name it--a long list of logical fallacies--which despite being untenable argumentation, people will often pile on to as if honesty in discussion didn't matter! Some posters may even claim to be perfectly honest at the same time. Pretty funny to watch, again and again, but pretty sad too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Feminists Just STFU
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barry moved the goal posts. He has a new requirement following up his complaint that women who talk the talk rather than walk the talk are not real feminists. Not only must real feminists prove they have DONE something in life but provide evidence they have selflessly helped OTHERS. Raunchy, your life will be happier if you ignore Turq. He teases and trolls you. He has admitted as much. You haven't been in the dance to the death with him for long. You still can be saved. Otherwise, you might find yourself 15 years from now having the same battles with him. Yes, I believe you are a feminist.And I also believe you have some wacky ideas. It might comfort you to know that I believe Turq has some wacky ides too. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it odd that I am perceived as smug and dismissive. I am confident enough in myself to know that I am neither. For the record, I suspect that most people here know it, too. Smug and dismissive is the claim that anyone who doesn't believe the TM dogma just hasn't understood it properly. From my end, I find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. I think it helps to realize what people were taught ABOUT the things they were taught. They were not merely claims or theories, they were the highest knowledge. EVERY other teaching by EVERY other spiritual group in history was lesser. And most of the others were just flat-out WRONG. Therefore if you do not agree with something from the highest teaching, there can only BE one possible reason. You don't understand the teaching properly. If you did, you couldn't possibly have any doubts about the highestknowledgenessitude of those teachings. About feeling as if you were being minimalized and that your opinion and feelings are not valid, well Duh!...that's the whole POINT. You are WRONG to not believe every word of the highest teaching. And because you are WRONG after having spent years studying the highest teachings, and do not repent your WRONGness, you MUST be minimalized. If you lived in Fairfield, they would take away your dome pass so that you could become SO minimalized that no one could even SEE you. Your opinions AREN'T valid, because they differ from the highest teaching. Thank your lucky stars that here on FFL the most they can do is suggest that You just don't under- stand these profound teachings the way that *I* do. Look at the I saying it, and thank your lucky stars a second time that you have failed to under- stand things as well as she has, and that as a result your life isn't as happy and fulfilled and as compassionate as hers. Jibes aside, I'm with you, and even more with Curtis on this one. Maharishi's teachings are by far the most superficial, repetitive, and non- convincing of any I have ever encountered in the spiritual smorgasbord. Ever. Think what it says about the mental capacity of someone who considers them profound.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Feminists Just STFU
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog raunchydog@ wrote: Barry moved the goal posts. He has a new requirement following up his complaint that women who talk the talk rather than walk the talk are not real feminists. Not only must real feminists prove they have DONE something in life but provide evidence they have selflessly helped OTHERS. Raunchy, your life will be happier if you ignore Turq. He teases and trolls you. He has admitted as much. You haven't been in the dance to the death with him for long. You still can be saved. Otherwise, you might find yourself 15 years from now having the same battles with him. Yes, I believe you are a feminist.And I also believe you have some wacky ideas. It might comfort you to know that I believe Turq has some wacky ides too. :) Does something follow the colon? : Since, I've jumped on board with Judy taking turns calling Barry out on his nasty attacks, and fabrications, he has become the wizened voice of He who must not be named Lord Voldemort trapped in a snakes body. The only thing that will set him free from his terrible fate is the consistent thumping he gets from the Amazon women kicking his butt. Not to worry. I'm having fun. Thanks anyway.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Employment Op that I'm sure you won't want to miss...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe that to get the $700 a month for the IAA, you will meditate in the morning until just before 1:00pm and then start again about 4:30 and finish up just before 8:00. When do you eat? When do you get your chores done? Those with earthly needs need not apply. BTW, the dropping of deuces(#2) in the peace palace bathrooms is strictly prohibited. Please arrange for a celestial dove to come down and take it away. the no time for eating policy will make this easier. Men will wear 800,000 volt stun rings on their unholy linghams 24/7. Any uncoiling of the dhoti demon will trigger a three second blast to subdue the one-eyed yogi. Repeated infractions will result in being fitted with the Jaws of Yama device on the twins of impurity. This is a wonderful opportunity for someone with no personal needs to live in an environment that recognizes none. A strict eyes closed, mouth shut policy will be enforced. Please remain seated for the term of your employment. Sounds like heaven on earth to me! ...heaven on earth, plus commission. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: The Maharishi Peace Palaces are looking to fill an Accommodation manager/marketing position.This is a full-time position but is flexible to allow for one to participate in the Invincible America Assembly. Hours would be 1:00 - 4:30 and 8:00 - 9:00 6 days a week. Qualifications include experience in sales, marketing, financial management, good self - organizer with computer skills and customer service oriented manner. ~Remuneration would be accommodation in one bedroom of the Maharishi Peace Palace ~$500 basic plus 4% of gross accommodation income per month ~Opportunity to enjoy a further $700 per month exits as hours have been set to accommodate the Invincible America Assembly. To set up an interview please send resumes to us at tmcenter@ mailto:tmcenter@ . Anyone want to write up a resume and send it in? :) D Sal I believe that to get the $700 a month for the IAA, you will meditate in the morning until just before 1:00pm and then start again about 4:30 and finish up just before 8:00. When do you eat? When do you get your chores done?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find it odd that I am perceived as smug and dismissive. I am confident enough in myself to know that I am neither. From my end, I find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. Ruth, here's a fun thing to do if you ever run into such a person in real life (or even the next time you run into them on this board). When the person suggests that you just don't understand, say to them: Just to prove to me that *you* are not being 'smug and dismissive,' can you say aloud the words, 'There is a possibility that the things Maharishi has taught are wrong.' I used to do this, in L.A., after I had walked away from the TMO and people tried to run the you just don't understand number on me. The fascinating thing was that they *couldn't* say it, *even as a theoretical possibility*. And some of them were no longer True Believers. It was as if some part of them still believed that if they said something that heretical aloud, lightning would strike them or that their karma would be fucked for yugas. I'd bet that a lot of people still believe that. I'd bet that a number of people on this forum still believe that, and could not possibly say, Maharishi might be wrong. I can certainly say it, about *any* teacher I've ever read or worked with, and about *everything* that I believe in. I suspect you can, too. It's just the bottom line of having the intellectually open mind that some have claimed you don't have. But I'd bet that even you would be surprised at the number of people who can't say aloud, What I believe in might be wrong.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:52 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Jibes aside, I'm with you, and even more with Curtis on this one. Maharishi's teachings are by far the most superficial, repetitive, and non- convincing of any I have ever encountered in the spiritual smorgasbord. Ever. Think what it says about the mental capacity of someone who considers them profound. But also keep in mind: they were widespread--probably largely due to the popularity of the Beatles, Donavan and more recently Dave Lynch-- but nonetheless spread widely. Even though it appears to be a dying org, also consider that since TM is largely being shunned (except when someone is underwriting it or handing it out for free) they're still trying to get it into our schools and our children (at the taxpayers expense) and into medical reimbursement schemes (your insurance) via questionable research and pseudoscience. And they won't rest until that happens. ...and then there's the third world.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -snip- Maharishi's teachings are by far the most superficial, repetitive, and non- convincing of any I have ever encountered in the spiritual smorgasbord. Ever. Think what it says about the mental capacity of someone who considers them profound. interesting comment, and you wonder why not many here respond to what you have to say? could it be that you too come across often as superficial, repetitive, and non-convincing? the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. he was never looking for recognition as just a blabbermouth. again, i don't share the facile assuptions of these mythical followers of the Maharishi that you have invented. i find you, and others here utterly incapable of having a reasonable discussion about TM (with the exception of curtis), because you are more interested in spinning your tired old tapes than actually taking a fresh look at anything.
[FairfieldLife] Re: New section on TM and Cults posted on Truth About TM
dawn11 wrote: Quit trying to go after TM when your own preferred method of spiritual advancement just plain sucks. This is outrageous - apparently one of Vaj's 'Godmen' is now in the dock, accused of murder, yet Vaj is making up stuff about the Marshy. Read more: Godman in the Dock: http://tinyurl.com/4nohc9
[FairfieldLife] The new movie of the beloved Che
Che's Useful Idiot By Humberto Fontova FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, December 10, 2008 I'd like to dedicate this to the man himself, Che Guevara! announced Benicio del Toro this May, as he received a best actor award for his starring role in Che, a reverent new film about the communist revolutionary. As the crowd at the Cannes Film Festival erupted in thunderous ovation, the Puerto Rico-born actor gushed that I wouldn't be here without Che Guevara, and through all the awards the movie gets you'll have to pay your respects to the man! But some stubbornly refuse to pay their respects. Thus, the actor received a much cooler reception when Che, directed by Oscar-winner Steven Soderbergh, had a private screening in Miami Beach this past Thursday. Cuban-Americans, including the mayor of Miami Beach, protested the 4-and-a-half hour glorification of the man they consider a Stalinist mass-murderer. Miami's media proved equally unwelcoming. At a press conference after the screening in Miami Beach's Byron Carlyle Theater, Marlene Gonzalez of the Spanish language America TeVe network asked del Toro about some glaring omissions in the movie. What of Che's role in ordering the executions of ordinary Cubans? And why no mention of the forced-labor camps established on the guerilla fighter's orders? A suddenly hurried Del Toro denied that Che bore any culpability for these horrors. He refused even to admit Che's bitter falling out with Fidel Castro, claiming that, to the contrary, the two always got along splendidly and that Castro was genuinely heartbroken when Che was captured and killed after fighting to his last bullet. The contrast made for a moving scene. As protestors outside the Carlyle Theater brandished pictures of relatives murdered by Che Guevara, del Toro paid tribute to their murderer. Questions about Che's brutalities meticulously recorded in books like Exposing the Real Che Guevara he brushed aside as the embittered fabrications of Cuban exiles. The following day, del Toro flew to Havana to present his film at the Havana Film Festival and hob-knob with Castro regime officials. Che was billed as the highlight of the festival and the Stalinist regime rolled out the carpet for their honored guest. It's a privilege to be here! effused del Toro. I'm grateful that the Cuban people can see this movie! And why shouldn't Castro's subjects be allowed to view his movie? Weren't Stalin's subjects allowed to watch The Battleship Potemkin? Weren't Hitler's subjects allowed to watch Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of Will? Both were produced at the direction of the propaganda ministries of totalitarian regimes, to be sure, but then the same might well be said of Che. The screenplay was based on Che Guevara's diaries, which were published by Cuba's propaganda ministry; the diaries' forward was written by Fidel Castro himself. The film includes several Communist Cuban actors, while other Latin American actors spent months in Cuba being prepped for their roles by members of Cuba's Che Guevara Institute. The Cuban Film Institute is an arm of Stalinist Cuba's propaganda ministry. On December 7, Castro's own press ministry announced that Actor Benicio del Toro presented the film (at Havana's Karl Marx Theater) as he thanked the Cuban Film Institute (ICAIC) for its assistance during the shooting of the film, which was the result of a seven-year research work in Cuba. That del Toro considers the Cuban regime a reliable source for the film is telling. Consider that the Castro government has jailed more political prisoners as a percentage of population than Stalin's and executed more people (out of a population of 6.4 million) in its first three years in power than Hitler's executed (out of a population of 70 million) in it's first six. These figures come from the human rights group Freedom House and from the Black Book of Communism, authored by French scholars and translated into English by Harvard University Press, not exactly headquarters for the vast-right wing conspiracy. The irony is that del Toro himself is a noted advocate of artistic freedom and an outspoken opponent of the armed struggle that Che Guevara led, to such disastrous effect, in Cuba. But not only has he starred in a film glorifying the communist killer, but he has just deigned to be feted as guest of honor at Havana's Film Festival by a totalitarian regime that, for half a century, has jailed and tortured any Cuban movie director who strayed from Stalinist dictator's party line. Del Toro needn't look to Cuban exiles to undermine his convictions. He has done well enough on his own.
Re: [FairfieldLife] What to do...
shempmcgurk wrote: ...when we're afraid to make that first move out of our comfort zone and do something new. Live dangerously. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Real Feminists Just STFU
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Raunchy, your life will be happier if you ignore Turq. He teases and trolls you. He has admitted as much. [snip] Barry Wright is a member of the obscure Baby Herman Buddhism cult in which its adherents practise the opposite of compassion. Their goal is to belittle, needle, and otherwise strip away the self-esteem and positive world view of those whom they come in contact.
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mention My decisions are based on objective criteria as well as subjective criteria. But I think all of what you say relates to objective stuff? So I'm wondering - what was your SUBJECTIVE experience of TM? Did it do anything at all for you? Did it have anything at all going for it would you say? Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became believers in the techniques and are long time meditators. I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill and transcend. My meditation experiences frequently were of thee when can I get up or only five minutes have passed? type. Sometimes I could go quite a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit and family. I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it was over because I had a WTF moment.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: snip I don't know that you would continue if you got TM, but wonder if you have anyway. THing is, there isn't anything to get with TM. So, if you're not finding it satsifying in some way, then you might as well move on. Certainly, you can't expect it to somehow get better because it never does anything anyway. We were actually talking about the metaphysics, not experience of the technique. MEtaphysics is all very well, but there are an infinite number of self-consistent theories out there. WHy should someone chose one over another if there's no evidence (in their mind) to base their choice on? Lawson Yup. And I have moved on. The only reason I continue here and continue talking about TM is my interest in my friends as well as my interest in how people think and feel. Totally apart from the TM technique, I am also interested in the beliefs of those closely affiliated with the TMO because of my friends who are TBs.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. Just for fun, I should point out that this is being said by someone who is incapable of telling us when and where she was instructed in the TM technique, and by whom. It is also being said by someone who has since claimed to have learned the TM-siddhi techniques. And I'll bet she can't tell us where and when she learned them, either. Steve Martin voice I forgot! :-) And for the *most* fun, this is being said by the person who only a short while ago was chiding people on this forum for believing in spiritual teachers. Now she's saying that in order to under- stand one, they have to do exactly what that spiritual teacher told them to do, and they have to do it for 20 years. We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. - H. L. Mencken
[FairfieldLife] Re: It's Only Cardboard â¦
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 9, 2008, at 10:09 PM, sparaig wrote: Well, don't know how fratboys are THESE days, but 25 years ago, they were definitely dehumanizing towards women. The ones I met were pretty nice, and worked very well with those of us in sororities. I obviously wasn't there during their most private moments, but at least at my school, I never saw any evidence of what you or raunch claim. I know that's the stereotype, but there are obviously lots of exceptions. My brother was in a frat, and he never did any of that crap either. Heh. Different colleges I guess. Or perhaps you have a different definition of dehumanizing towards women, given you were a greek yourself. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I find it odd that I am perceived as smug and dismissive. I am confident enough in myself to know that I am neither. From my end, I find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. Thing is, MMY may not have grasped all that he was saying, either, so to assume that YOU have IS rather smug and dismissive. OF course, people (like myself, admittedly) who think they get what he was trying to say ALSO can be characterized that way. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:12 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: I find it odd that I am assumed to be smug when all I say is that I understand the theories and I don't agree. Is not agreeing smug? I also find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. I've often experienced the same thing here. There's a high amount of cognitive dissonance I've noticed in addition when you refuse to use common TM-org buzzwords for describing your own experience--which often come with a lot of accumulated baggage and instead use your own words. That's regarded very suspiciously and often with great anger. And heaven forbid you were actually trained by an acharya in the same tradition that MMY claims to come from and have some little perspective on things, then a whole host negativity gets aimed at you: ad hominems, poisoned well tactics, ambiguation, misdirection, lies--you name it--a long list of logical fallacies--which despite being untenable argumentation, people will often pile on to as if honesty in discussion didn't matter! Some posters may even claim to be perfectly honest at the same time. Pretty funny to watch, again and again, but pretty sad too. WEll, MMY always claimed to have revived something lost, so the fact that people from his tradition might disagree with him is kinda a given since his claim repudiates their interpretation of their own tradition. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Jibes aside, I'm with you, and even more with Curtis on this one. Maharishi's teachings are by far the most superficial, repetitive, and non- convincing of any I have ever encountered in the spiritual smorgasbord. Ever. Think what it says about the mental capacity of someone who considers them profound. Yep (goes both ways though). Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:12 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: I find it odd that I am assumed to be smug when all I say is that I understand the theories and I don't agree. Is not agreeing smug? I also find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. I've often experienced the same thing here. There's a high amount of cognitive dissonance I've noticed in addition when you refuse to use common TM-org buzzwords for describing your own experience--which often come with a lot of accumulated baggage and instead use your own words. That's regarded very suspiciously and often with great anger. And heaven forbid you were actually trained by an acharya in the same tradition that MMY claims to come from and have some little perspective on things, then a whole host negativity gets aimed at you: ad hominems, poisoned well tactics, ambiguation, misdirection, lies--you name it--a long list of logical fallacies--which despite being untenable argumentation, people will often pile on to as if honesty in discussion didn't matter! Some posters may even claim to be perfectly honest at the same time. Pretty funny to watch, again and again, but pretty sad too. ad hominems? honesty in discussion? From Vaj? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/175437
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I can certainly say it, about *any* teacher I've ever read or worked with, and about *everything* that I believe in. I suspect you can, too. It's just the bottom line of having the intellectually open mind that some have claimed you don't have. But I'd bet that even you would be surprised at the number of people who can't say aloud, What I believe in might be wrong. Until you can look me in the eye and honestly say that your world view has been so shattered that you cried so hard it riped a hole in your body and your guts fell out, don't talk to me about admitting what I believe in might be wrong. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] James Carville on 'It's Only Cardboard'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-K06LwcGK8
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: [...] I find it odd that I am perceived as smug and dismissive. I am confident enough in myself to know that I am neither. From my end, I find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. Thing is, MMY may not have grasped all that he was saying, either, so to assume that YOU have IS rather smug and dismissive. OF course, people (like myself, admittedly) who think they get what he was trying to say ALSO can be characterized that way. Lawson I guess it is impressions created from strong POVs.Smug means Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one's situation; self-righteously complacent. I don't feel that way at all and do not believe that I create a general impression of self righteousness or complacency. You don't either Lawson. I can say that MMY may not have grasped what he was saying because there was not much to grasp. This is my conclusion based upon my review of the evidence and my own experience. It might not be yours. That is fine. Just like I can accept that my sister is religious and it adds much to her life. I am not religious in same sense and that is fine too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Until you can look me in the eye and honestly say that your world view has been so shattered that you cried so hard it riped a hole in your body and your guts fell out, don't talk to me about admitting what I believe in might be wrong. Lawson Tell me more.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
just for fun, this is being said by someone who sets themselves up as a petty tyrant on this board, who is incapable of clearly articulating themselves on any spiritual topic related to TM, and just for fun, writes crap like this. let's ignore him, just for fun. oh wait...:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. Just for fun, I should point out that this is being said by someone who is incapable of telling us when and where she was instructed in the TM technique, and by whom. It is also being said by someone who has since claimed to have learned the TM-siddhi techniques. And I'll bet she can't tell us where and when she learned them, either. Steve Martin voice I forgot! :-) And for the *most* fun, this is being said by the person who only a short while ago was chiding people on this forum for believing in spiritual teachers. Now she's saying that in order to under- stand one, they have to do exactly what that spiritual teacher told them to do, and they have to do it for 20 years. We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. - H. L. Mencken
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It's Only Cardboard â ¦
On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:22 PM, sparaig wrote: The ones I met were pretty nice, and worked very well with those of us in sororities. I obviously wasn't there during their most private moments, but at least at my school, I never saw any evidence of what you or raunch claim. I know that's the stereotype, but there are obviously lots of exceptions. My brother was in a frat, and he never did any of that crap either. Heh. Different colleges I guess. Or perhaps you have a different definition of dehumanizing towards women, given you were a greek yourself. Kinda misses the whole point, spare...I never would have gone Greek if the kind of shenanigans you mention were in evidence, and neither would have a whole lot of others.The comment about having a different definition is just a subtle minimizing slam on your part. We may have been greeks, but we were still people first. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just for fun, this is being said by someone who sets themselves up as a petty tyrant on this board, who is incapable of clearly articulating themselves on any spiritual topic related to TM, and just for fun, writes crap like this. let's ignore him, just for fun. oh wait...:-) Please explain to us why you can't just say when and where you learned TM and the siddhis. Doing so has *nothing* to do with your privacy, since nothing of any consequence could possibly be revealed by giving out this information. I am *completely* open to the possibility that you really did learn TM as you claim. But this behavior on your part just *screams*, I never really learned TM and am lying to people here about having done so. Do you really not realize this? How could I or anyone else possibly take anything you say about TM or anything else seriously enough to discuss it with you when you are basically saying with your actions, I am lying to all of you, every day? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. Just for fun, I should point out that this is being said by someone who is incapable of telling us when and where she was instructed in the TM technique, and by whom. It is also being said by someone who has since claimed to have learned the TM-siddhi techniques. And I'll bet she can't tell us where and when she learned them, either. Steve Martin voice I forgot! :-) And for the *most* fun, this is being said by the person who only a short while ago was chiding people on this forum for believing in spiritual teachers. Now she's saying that in order to under- stand one, they have to do exactly what that spiritual teacher told them to do, and they have to do it for 20 years. We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. - H. L. Mencken
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost1uk@ wrote: You mention My decisions are based on objective criteria as well as subjective criteria. But I think all of what you say relates to objective stuff? So I'm wondering - what was your SUBJECTIVE experience of TM? Did it do anything at all for you? Did it have anything at all going for it would you say? Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became believers in the techniques and are long time meditators. I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill and transcend. My meditation experiences frequently were of thee when can I get up or only five minutes have passed? type. Sometimes I could go quite a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit and family. I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it was over because I had a WTF moment. That's interesting and I quite get it. Unlike you though, I have always enjoyed TM so it's no real effort to do it. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't be here and I wouldn't have persevered (it wasn't *perseverance* ;-) ). Because I enjoy it and it seems to be (subjectively) profound - I feel there must be something to it. Quite what I'm not sure. If you describe it as restful alertness then I don't think that's a misuse of language. That term might seem a bit prosaic, but I am more inclined to think it has a deeper significance than, say, Curtis would allow. As for the Vajs and Knapps of this world - I don't recognise the dangerous TM they froth and fret about (in the former case at least with such self-regarding and zealous fervour). That comes from both my own experience and from all the folks I have met down the years who have done TM. Of all the people who have been around the planet in my lifetime, I feel MMY embodied something genuinely special. Having said that, I can't say the same for any of the folks I met in the TMO - which is on the face of it puzzling. Bottom line? Thinking about it 'duz me 'ead in'.
Re: [FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:50 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became believers in the techniques and are long time meditators. I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill and transcend. My meditation experiences frequently were of thee when can I get up or only five minutes have passed? type. Sometimes I could go quite a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit and family. I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it was over because I had a WTF moment. Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
Please explain to us why you can't just say when and where you learned TM and the siddhis. And if you have indeed learned TM, please state whether or not you have done it twice a day for twenty years. :) Love will swallow you, eat you up completely, until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Wed, 12/10/08, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, December 10, 2008, 2:33 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: just for fun, this is being said by someone who sets themselves up as a petty tyrant on this board, who is incapable of clearly articulating themselves on any spiritual topic related to TM, and just for fun, writes crap like this. let's ignore him, just for fun. oh wait...:-) Please explain to us why you can't just say when and where you learned TM and the siddhis. Doing so has *nothing* to do with your privacy, since nothing of any consequence could possibly be revealed by giving out this information. I am *completely* open to the possibility that you really did learn TM as you claim. But this behavior on your part just *screams*, I never really learned TM and am lying to people here about having done so. Do you really not realize this? How could I or anyone else possibly take anything you say about TM or anything else seriously enough to discuss it with you when you are basically saying with your actions, I am lying to all of you, every day? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. Just for fun, I should point out that this is being said by someone who is incapable of telling us when and where she was instructed in the TM technique, and by whom. It is also being said by someone who has since claimed to have learned the TM-siddhi techniques. And I'll bet she can't tell us where and when she learned them, either. Steve Martin voice I forgot! :-) And for the *most* fun, this is being said by the person who only a short while ago was chiding people on this forum for believing in spiritual teachers. Now she's saying that in order to under- stand one, they have to do exactly what that spiritual teacher told them to do, and they have to do it for 20 years. We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. - H. L. Mencken 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. Just for fun, I should point out that this is being said by someone who is incapable of telling us when and where she was instructed in the TM technique, and by whom. It is also being said by someone who has since claimed to have learned the TM-siddhi techniques. And I'll bet she can't tell us where and when she learned them, either. Steve Martin voice I forgot! :-) And for the *most* fun, this is being said by the person who only a short while ago was chiding people on this forum for believing in spiritual teachers. Now she's saying that in order to under- stand one, they have to do exactly what that spiritual teacher told them to do, and they have to do it for 20 years. We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. - H. L. Mencken I find your pursuit of qualifications extremely boorish and uninteresting. Are you incapable of looking at the idea that is expressed without having to give it a pedigree? If you told me you had a 100 years of experience doing TM and sitting at MMY's right hand - you could still be full of shit. Or don't you think so? You would have to be a TB to think otherwise, no? Or are you one such? (Though folks' history with TM can be extremely interesting, but not as a *qualification*!)
[FairfieldLife] Obama-Abraham Lincoln or, 'Chance' of Being There?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYLy1Yj_P_Q and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzVHlfk0WXM
[FairfieldLife] GM's new cars of the future..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcEYv_hI3-sfeature=related
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: [...] Jibes aside, I'm with you, and even more with Curtis on this one. Yep (goes both ways though). Lawson What I find utterly fascinating with this Turq character is that 30 years after he stopped TM he still can't stop talking about it, literally day out and day, year after year here on FFL. Makes you wonder if his life somehow stopped overnight when he quit - and what a tremendous impact Maharishi has had on this soul !
[FairfieldLife] resveratrol - antiaging compound
Extreme calorie restriction is not a practice that most people should try. Too many people are likely to simply yo-yo out of any initial weight loss. And pregnant women and children should never attempt it, lest they hinder development. But Harvard's Sinclair is hoping to develop pills that will mimic the benefits of calorie restrictionwithout depriving us of chocolate or crumpling our sex drive. In 2006, he published a much-heralded study in Nature on a compound from red wine called resveratrol. Obese mice that received concentrated doses were just as healthy as skinny mice. They also lived longer and had superior endurance. They were Lance Armstrong mice, except they were fat, he says. In a study this year, lean mice on resveratrol also had less heart disease, fewer cataracts, stronger bones and better motor functionthough they did not live longer than normal. To the extent that resveratrol mimics calorie restriction and exercise, it may be because all three activate a protein called SIRT1, a member of the sirtuin family of enzymes. SIRT1 increases the formation of new mitochondria, the power plants of cells, and it revs up existing ones. Last month Sinclair published a study showing that SIRT1 also repairs chromosome breaks, helping to keep youthful genes switched on and aging genes turned off.
Re: [FairfieldLife] GM's new cars of the future..
We wish it could be, but the big three make shit cars for the most part and people don't buy them. That's the main reason why they're having such problems. --- On Wed, 12/10/08, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] GM's new cars of the future.. To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, December 10, 2008, 3:40 PM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcEYv_hI3-sfeature=related 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
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
Jim wrote: What I find utterly fascinating with this Turq character is that 30 years after he stopped TM he still can't stop talking about it, literally day out and day, year after year here on FFL. Makes you wonder if his life somehow stopped overnight when he quit - and what a tremendous impact Maharishi has had on this soul ! Some people just feel better when they have someone to talk to, Jim. At one time, Barry, who says there is no such thing as a cult victim, followed the Maharishi. However, Maharishi apparently wasn't crazy enough for Barry's tastes. So he left to find another guru. He settled on Freddie Lenz, one of the most destructive cult leaders of the past decade. Lenz left a path of ruined lives, including women who charged him with sexual abuse, suicides, and at least one member who mysteriously vanished. The police suspect foul play. Earlier this year, Crazy Freddie swallowed a bottle of barbiturate pills and went swimming. He tried to take his girlfriend and dog with him (drugged them both). The girl and dog survived. - Andrew A. Skolnick Read more: From: TurquoiseB Subject: No apology here Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: October 21, 1998 http://tinyurl.com/5qfqta
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: just for fun, this is being said by someone who sets themselves up as a petty tyrant on this board, who is incapable of clearly articulating themselves on any spiritual topic related to TM, and just for fun, writes crap like this. let's ignore him, just for fun. oh wait...:-) Please explain to us why you can't just say when and where you learned TM and the siddhis. -snip- us? did His Petty Tyrantness say, us? is that like the royal we? i don't owe you anything. take it or leave it-- i don't care. go ahead continue to parade about the miserable courtroom of your mind, playing judge to your fantasies. what a goofball you are sometimes, B.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
---I totally agree! I'm convinced she's the same Sunyata. I've asked her about 5 times at least to say something - anything at all - regarding her experiences having gone through CC, BC, and the UC; but all she has to say is Being, Being. In addition, Lakshmanjoo mentions at least 4 levels of Witnessing while the body is in the dreaming and deep sleep states. The progression of awareness levels he describes involve the degree of conscious (in the ordinary sense) participation in the Witnessing. For example, in the lowest level of continuous Pure Consciousness Witnessing, the person is entirely blank in deep sleep and is only partially aware in dreaming. If PC is relatively advanced, Witnessing will be there upon awakening but there's no recollection of a continuous Witnessing. It's just a wake-up call and the person is Witnessing, and then assumes he/she was Witnessing throughout the dream and deep sleep states. Much higher levels are described by Lakshmanjoo but let's go to the 3-rd eye. Let's take Ramana Maharshi, the Grand-Papa of most Neo-Advaitins (along with Nisargadatta Maharaj). Ramana was well known for continually saying Self, Self... and preferred not to engage in discussions regarding relative symptoms of Enlightenment. However, if one reads his recorded statements closely, and thos of Nis. Maharaj, you will find that both had the LIVING FLAME present at their 3-rd eye center continually, 24/7. This is corroborated by the Kriya Yoga Gurus such as Swami Satyeswarananda Giri (initiated me into Kriya Yoga in 1982). The Living Flame is symbolized by the Diwali torch that is lit every year on Arunachala Hill in Nov which can be seen for miles away. Without such indicators, one cannot have stated that he/she has gone through CC, BC, and then into UC (a state that - apparently - involves BOTH: 1. BEING and 2. THE LIMITLESS LIGHT. Without the LIGHT part, one is not EnLIGHTened. End of story. Let's see what Gopi Krishna has to say: Entirely unprepared for such a development, I was completely taken by surprise; but regaining my self-control, keeping my mind on the point of concentration. The illumination grew brighter and brighter, the roaring louder, I experienced a rocking sensation and then felt myself slipping out of my body, entirely enveloped in a halo of light. It is impossible to describe the experience accurately. I felt the point of consciousness that was myself growing wider surrounded by waves of light. It grew wider and wider, spreading outward while the body, normally the immediate object of its perception, appeared to have receded into the distance until I became entirely unconscious of it. I was now all consciousness without any outline, without any idea of corporeal appendage, without any feeling or sensation coming from the senses, immersed in a sea of light simultaneously conscious and aware at every point, spread out, as it were, in all directions without any barrier or material obstruction. I was no longer myself, or to be more accurate, no longer as I knew myself to be, a small point of awareness confined to a body, but instead was a vast circle of consciousness in which the body was but a point, bathed in light and in a state of exultation and happiness impossible to describe. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: just for fun, this is being said by someone who sets themselves up as a petty tyrant on this board, who is incapable of clearly articulating themselves on any spiritual topic related to TM, and just for fun, writes crap like this. let's ignore him, just for fun. oh wait...:-) Please explain to us why you can't just say when and where you learned TM and the siddhis. Doing so has *nothing* to do with your privacy, since nothing of any consequence could possibly be revealed by giving out this information. I am *completely* open to the possibility that you really did learn TM as you claim. But this behavior on your part just *screams*, I never really learned TM and am lying to people here about having done so. Do you really not realize this? How could I or anyone else possibly take anything you say about TM or anything else seriously enough to discuss it with you when you are basically saying with your actions, I am lying to all of you, every day? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: the key to understanding the Maharishi is to do his technique, not for 5 or 10 years, but at least 20 years, 2x per day. Just for fun, I should point out that this is being said by someone who is incapable of telling us when and where she was instructed in the TM technique, and by whom. It is also being said by someone
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
TurquoiseB wrote: I learned TM from Jerry Jarvis in L.A. in 1968. I learned the TM-siddhis in St. Moritz in 1977, on the same course that Shemp did. All of this and a buck-fifty will buy me a cup of bad coffee at Starbucks. It doesn't make me qualified for anything at all. Listen you fuckin' quack bull-shiter, it's about time you really came clean and started repaying some of those poor students you cheated out of all that money. It's because of idiots like you that cults are taking over the planet. From what I've read, you were one of the biggest cult enablers of all time - money laundering, political manipulation, to sexual improprieties - the list goes on and on. This is just outrageous! Vaj wrote: ...it's former leader was involved in numerous scandals from money laundering, to political manipulation to sexual improprieties--the list goes on and on--all the while working hard to conceal his tracks and his past. The technique they're selling and the org that administers it has been the cause of suicide, murder, insanity and a long list of ills that could potentially be prevented. http://tinyurl.com/6ercyj
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost1uk@ wrote: You mention My decisions are based on objective criteria as well as subjective criteria. But I think all of what you say relates to objective stuff? So I'm wondering - what was your SUBJECTIVE experience of TM? Did it do anything at all for you? Did it have anything at all going for it would you say? Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became believers in the techniques and are long time meditators. I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill and transcend. My meditation experiences frequently were of thee when can I get up or only five minutes have passed? type. Sometimes I could go quite a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit and family. I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it was over because I had a WTF moment. That's interesting and I quite get it. Unlike you though, I have always enjoyed TM so it's no real effort to do it. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't be here and I wouldn't have persevered (it wasn't *perseverance* ;-) ). Because I enjoy it and it seems to be (subjectively) profound - I feel there must be something to it. Quite what I'm not sure. If you describe it as restful alertness then I don't think that's a misuse of language. That term might seem a bit prosaic, but I am more inclined to think it has a deeper significance than, say, Curtis would allow. As for the Vajs and Knapps of this world - I don't recognise the dangerous TM they froth and fret about (in the former case at least with such self-regarding and zealous fervour). That comes from both my own experience and from all the folks I have met down the years who have done TM. Of all the people who have been around the planet in my lifetime, I feel MMY embodied something genuinely special. Having said that, I can't say the same for any of the folks I met in the TMO - which is on the face of it puzzling. Bottom line? Thinking about it 'duz me 'ead in'. Thank you. This was a nice post. I think Knapp does not believe that TM is troublesome for most people but it can be for some especially when people do a lot of rounding. I think that his concerns relate more to the cultish relationship that some can have with the TMO. That does not seem to be an issue with the people who frequent this forum.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ---I totally agree! I'm convinced she's the same Sunyata. -snip- awesome-- you and B. can get together for a bubble bath.
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:50 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became believers in the techniques and are long time meditators. I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill and transcend. My meditation experiences frequently were of thee when can I get up or only five minutes have passed? type. Sometimes I could go quite a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit and family. I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it was over because I had a WTF moment. Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? :)
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:50 AM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Subjective impressions also included what are the meditators like that I know personally. For example, from the first three sutras, do they seem more friendly, compassionate, happy than they were before meditating or from others I know? These impressions were important to me because my exhusband and very good friends from college days became believers in the techniques and are long time meditators. I have talked some about my own experiences here. I am a person who finds it difficult to sit still unless I am doing something like reading or on the computer. I like being on the move and I find it tremendously relaxing to swim or run. I can hike to the top of a hill and transcend. My meditation experiences frequently were of thee when can I get up or only five minutes have passed? type. Sometimes I could go quite a while being able to meditate, but I did not find much in the way of positive effects. I stuck with it for quite a while because of habit and family. I mentioned before that I walked out of the siddhis course before it was over because I had a WTF moment. Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:09 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? :) It would be interesting to see if they'd honor the agreement. My bet is no. Sal
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:09 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? :) It would be interesting to see if they'd honor the agreement. My bet is no. Sal speaking of agreements i recall that a few years ago the tmo was offering bonds in the US for a set amount of interest. i don't recall all of the details, but i do remember the rate of return was pretty good. does anyone have any info about whether they paid up, or anyone purchased these? (not looking to invest-- just curious about the follow up). thanks.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
TurquoiseB wrote: ...I'll bet she can't tell us where and when she learned them, either. Richard wrote: I find your pursuit of qualifications extremely boorish and uninteresting... In addition to being a world-class snowboarder and scuba diver, Rama is a black belt... http://www.fredericklenz.com/
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:09 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? :) It would be interesting to see if they'd honor the agreement. My bet is no. Sal After 30 plus years I wouldn't expect them to anyway.
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
Ruth wrote: I think Knapp does not believe that TM is troublesome for most people but it can be for some especially when people do a lot of rounding. I think that his concerns relate more to the cultish relationship that some can have with the TMO. That does not seem to be an issue with the people who frequent this forum. My guess is that TMers become mildly addicted to increased endorphin levels or some other naturally occurring hormonal change. Fortunately, it's an addiction that is relatively easy to overcome. The passage of time works wonders. (Kathleen Taylor writes in Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control, Oxford University Press, 2004 that trance stimulates serotonin, dopamine, and endorphin levels, creating receptive state to suggestions. 'TM and Trance Addiction: Kicking the TM Habit' Posted by John Knapp TMFree Blog, March, 31, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/6gnful
Re: [FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:22 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:09 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Had you paid the full $3000? Did they offer any kind of a refund? Sal Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? :) It would be interesting to see if they'd honor the agreement. My bet is no. Sal After 30 plus years I wouldn't expect them to anyway. Oh, I wouldn't either. But it sure would be fun bashing them for it anyway. :) Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: GM's new cars of the future..
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We wish it could be, but the big three make shit cars for the most part and people don't buy them. That's the main reason why they're having such problems. i'm still waiting for the bubble top cars featured in popular mechanics in the 50's, that were to be the cars of the future, 1980 and beyond. until i can buy one, i'm sticking with japanese.
[FairfieldLife] Re: GM's new cars of the future..
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcEYv_hI3-sfeature=related DEJA VU, ALL OVER AGAIN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDgS3FE674o
[FairfieldLife] Re: GM's new cars of the future..
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We wish it could be, but the big three make shit cars for the most part and people don't buy them. That's the main reason why they're having such problems. I've been very happy and satisfied with my Regal
Re: [FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:07 PM, ruthsimplicity wrote: Thank you. This was a nice post. I think Knapp does not believe that TM is troublesome for most people but it can be for some especially when people do a lot of rounding. I think that his concerns relate more to the cultish relationship that some can have with the TMO. That does not seem to be an issue with the people who frequent this forum. Trance addiction is a well-known phenomenon, and not just in TM. It's acknowledged in Buddhist transcending style meditation as well. It's probably some kind of endorphin addiction that's common to thought- free states. IME that's why it's helpful to have a progression of stages in ones meditative practice just so these formless attachments, as they're called, don't end up hindering rather than helping one. For that reason, I can see (perhaps) why Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's TM 2.0 might be a much better implementation.
[FairfieldLife] A fellow ain't got a soul of his own...
A fellow ain't got a soul of his own, just little piece of a big soul, the one big soul that belongs to everybody. ~~ Tom Joad in the film Grapes of Wrath Watch the scene here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM0rb_kT9yE
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
Ruth wrote: Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? You paid the Marshy $3,000 to learn how to bun-hop? Barry paid over $5,000 - go figure. Falling Down the Rabbit Hole: http://www.suggestibility.org/
[FairfieldLife] Re: For Bongo Brazil
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Here's a detailed response to your silly U.N. report allegedly proving
catastrophic man-made global warming:
UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over
Man-Made Global Warming Claims December 10, 2008
Chuckle
That report...
[here's the link:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.BlogsContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
http://snipurl.com/7r6ec
...was apparently released today {December 10, 2008] by the familiar
fringe wingnut global warming denier Marc Morano and
paid-off-by-Big-Oil Republican Sen James Inhofe touted as an update of
their so-called 2007's blockbuster U.S. Senate Minority Report of
over 400 dissenting scientists.
Before I begin, here's a key misleading quote from Inhofe's report:
The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number
of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary
for Policymakers.
That's *blatantly false*:
From the IPCC:
The IPCC's technical reports derive their credibility principally from
an extensive, transparent, and iterative peer review process that, as
mentioned above, is considered far more exhaustive than that
associated with scientific journals.
This is due to the number of reviewers, the breadth of their
disciplinary backgrounds and scientific perspectives, and the
inclusion of independent review editors who certify that all
comments have been fairly considered and appropriately resolved by the
authors. For example, see [2].
...Experts from more than 130 countries are contributing to this
assessment, which represents six years of work. More than 450 lead
authors have received input from more than 800 contributing authors,
and an additional 2,500 experts reviewed the draft documents.
To be as inclusive and open as possible, a balanced review effectively
begins with the choice of lead authors. By intentionally including
authors who represent the full range of expert opinion, many areas of
disagreement can be worked out in discussions among the authors rather
than waiting until the document is sent out for review...
The first round of review is conducted by a large number of expert
reviewersmore than 2,500 for the entire AR4who include scientists,
industry representatives, and NGO experts with a wide range of
perspectives.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/ipcc-backgrounder.html
http://snipurl.com/7r69y
+++
Since the debunking of today's release hasn't had time to fully
develop, let's look at who was behind their 2007 report:
--Sen. James Hoax Inhofe, the Archbishop of Denial, and his alter
boy Marc Morano (formerly of the Exxon funded Media Research Center),
today released a report through the Environment and Public Works
minority website, with the headline:
Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims
in 2007 - Senate Report Debunks Consensus
Looking through Inhofe's list of disputers we find a large number of
familiar names.
Here's an interactive ExxonSecrets map
of the 35 plus we have already data on:
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/index.php?mapid=1154
These individuals have been linked through the years with:
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Tech Central Station - set up by Exxon's operatives at DCI Group
Heartland Institute
Cato Institute
Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
Frasier Institute
The Annapolis Center
The George Marshall Institute
...and numerous other Exxon-funded groups who have together received
millions of dollars since 1998 from the corporation.
More on Inhofe's 2007 so-called report
As discussed at Energy Smart in Inhofian Reporting: Peerless Work,
http://www.bpsdb.orgSenator James M. Inhofe (R-Exxon) certainly has
staff who understand how to play the media and influence game. On the
eve of the Senate recess for Christmas, out went a truthiness
(disingenuous, misleading, etc) report about over 400 prominent
scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced
significant objections to major aspects of the so-called `consensus'
on man-made global warming'.
While Energy Smart (and others) provided ample material about how
ridiculous this report is, Mark Johnson at The Daily Green has made
the effort to go through the report, prominent scientist by
prominent scientist to underscore the significant (lack of)
qualifications of the 413 listed in this `cut-and-paste' report.
Like any conspiracy theory, the sheer magnitude of the effort
lends it a first-blush air of credibility. And, like any conspiracy
theory, it just doesn't hold up under scrutiny.
No. Even cursory study, as so many of us discovered at first blush,
but the more indepth look underlines the utter absurdity of the
so-called report.
* Inhofe's list includes 413 people. (Score one Inhofe; the math holds
up.)
* 84 have either taken money from, or are connected to, fossil
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: [...] I find it odd that I am perceived as smug and dismissive. I am confident enough in myself to know that I am neither. From my end, I find it frustrating when some TMers assume that my thinking is flawed or I don't get certain metaphysical concepts. No matter how often I say I get it, they never will believe me because they cannot conceive that I understand but simply do not agree. The problem with this is that it feels like I am being minimized, that my opinion and feelings are not as valid as the believers' opinions and feelings. Thing is, MMY may not have grasped all that he was saying, either, so to assume that YOU have IS rather smug and dismissive. OF course, people (like myself, admittedly) who think they get what he was trying to say ALSO can be characterized that way. Lawson I guess it is impressions created from strong POVs.Smug means Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one's situation; self-righteously complacent. I don't feel that way at all and do not believe that I create a general impression of self righteousness or complacency. You don't either Lawson. I can say that MMY may not have grasped what he was saying because there was not much to grasp. MMY had a tendency to speak off the cuff. I believe the first time he blurted Damn Democracy in a lecture, he was a startled as anyone else or so his expression suggested. This is my conclusion based upon my review of the evidence and my own experience. It might not be yours. That is fine. Just like I can accept that my sister is religious and it adds much to her life. I am not religious in same sense and that is fine too. Shurg. I am not certain that you have honestly reviewed the evidence (noted little quote marks) even if you are unable to be honest with YOURSELF about that point. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: Until you can look me in the eye and honestly say that your world view has been so shattered that you cried so hard it riped a hole in your body and your guts fell out, don't talk to me about admitting what I believe in might be wrong. Lawson Tell me more. Why? Feeling ghoulish? Suffice to say it happened to me. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: It's Only Cardboard â¦
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:22 PM, sparaig wrote: The ones I met were pretty nice, and worked very well with those of us in sororities. I obviously wasn't there during their most private moments, but at least at my school, I never saw any evidence of what you or raunch claim. I know that's the stereotype, but there are obviously lots of exceptions. My brother was in a frat, and he never did any of that crap either. Heh. Different colleges I guess. Or perhaps you have a different definition of dehumanizing towards women, given you were a greek yourself. Kinda misses the whole point, spare...I never would have gone Greek if the kind of shenanigans you mention were in evidence, and neither would have a whole lot of others.The comment about having a different definition is just a subtle minimizing slam on your part. We may have been greeks, but we were still people first. Sal Heh. Can't be sure about you from your net persona, but honestly, are you defending greek culture in general, or just the greeks at the college where you happened to go to school? If it is greek culture in general, than I have naught more to say. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Nobel Physicist to head the Department of Energy
Who Is Steven Chu? A Nobel Physicist Who Believes In Bold Energy Transformation Numerous media outlets are reporting Dr. Steven Chu will be President-elect Obama's choice to head the Department of Energy. Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, is the director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California where he has been addressing the climate crisis by pushing breakthrough research in energy efficiency, solar energy, and biofuels technology. Colleagues who know Chu best say he's not a manager, he's a leader. In an interview with the Wonk Room, David Roland-Holst, an economist at the Center for Energy, Resources and Economic Sustainability at UC Berkeley, described Chu as a very distinguished researcher and an extremely effective manager of cutting edge technology initiatives. This past summer, Dr. Chu spoke at the National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas, convened by the Center for American Progress, UNLV, and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV). In one of the lighter moments during his remarks, Chu claimed that efficiency gains and lowered costs have been shown to be possible when the jobs were assigned to engineers, not lobbyists. Chu also laid out in stark terms the climate crisis that we now face: Consider this. There's about a 50 percent chance, the climate experts tell us, that in this century we will go up in temperature by three degrees Centigrade. Now, three degrees Centigrade doesn't seem a lot to you, that's 11° F. Chicago changes by 30° F in half a day. But 5° C means that it's the difference between where we are today and where we were in the last ice age. What did that mean? Canada, the United States down to Ohio and Pennsylvania, was covered in ice year round. Five degrees Centigrade. So think about what 5° C will mean going the other way. A very different world. So if you'd want that for your kids and grandkids, we can continue what we're doing. Climate change of that scale will cause enormous resource wars, over water, arable land, and massive population displacements. We're not talking about ten thousand people. We're not talking about ten million people, we're talking about hundreds of millions to billions of people being flooded out, permanently. Joe Romm cautions that the 3°C figure is just a mid-range warming if we're able to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Links here: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/10/chu-energy-secretary/
[FairfieldLife] Post Count
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): Sat Dec 06 00:00:00 2008 End Date (UTC): Sat Dec 13 00:00:00 2008 551 messages as of (UTC) Thu Dec 11 00:05:04 2008 50 authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] 43 TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] 41 sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] 37 enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 31 Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] 30 do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] 28 shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] 27 raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] 23 ruthsimplicity [EMAIL PROTECTED] 23 Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20 Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 18 curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] 16 Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14 off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14 Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14 BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12 Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11 dhamiltony2k5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8 I am the eternal [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7 John M. Knapp, LMSW [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6 Richard M [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6 Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 yifuxero [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5 Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4 Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 pranamoocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Dick Mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2 Samadhi Is Much Closer Than You Think -- Really! -- It's A No-Brainer. Who'd've Thunk It? [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 ysoy10li [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 ultrarishi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 sgrayatlarge [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 satvadude108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 martyboi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 globalpeace777 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Randy Meltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 John [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 JoAnn Lang Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Janet Luise [EMAIL PROTECTED] Posters: 49 Saturday Morning 00:00 UTC Rollover Times = Daylight Saving Time (Summer): US Friday evening: PDT 5 PM - MDT 6 PM - CDT 7 PM - EDT 8 PM Europe Saturday: BST 1 AM CEST 2 AM EEST 3 AM Standard Time (Winter): US Friday evening: PST 4 PM - MST 5 PM - CST 6 PM - EST 7 PM Europe Saturday: GMT 12 AM CET 1 AM EET 2 AM For more information on Time Zones: www.worldtimezone.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Shurg. I am not certain that you have honestly reviewed the evidence (noted little quote marks) even if you are unable to be honest with YOURSELF about that point. Lawson You can't know one way or another. Or you could agree that maybe just maybe she is honest with herself, has reviewed the evidence, has had her own experiences, and comes to a different conclusion than you do. I put evidence in quote marks as it included subjective opinions and some of the evidence is better than other evidence. I still remain curious about your intense experience you mentioned in an earlier post on this thread.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ruthsimplicity no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: Until you can look me in the eye and honestly say that your world view has been so shattered that you cried so hard it riped a hole in your body and your guts fell out, don't talk to me about admitting what I believe in might be wrong. Lawson Tell me more. Why? Feeling ghoulish? Suffice to say it happened to me. Lawson Ghoulish? No, I am just interested in people and what happens to them. So what shattered your world view? TM? What were the circumstances? I have no intent to belittle your experience.
[FairfieldLife] For Ruth S (was Re: The Attention Vampire: An occult theory of energy management
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ruth wrote: Yes I paid. My husband asked if I could come back and finish the course at a later date and they said yes. Their theory was that I wasn't ready. No refund. Should I go back now? You paid the Marshy $3,000 to learn how to bun-hop? Barry paid over $5,000 - go figure. Falling Down the Rabbit Hole: http://www.suggestibility.org/ I still want to know how much time you spend on the Internet looking up stuff. :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: It's Only Cardboard â ¦
On Dec 10, 2008, at 5:58 PM, sparaig wrote: Kinda misses the whole point, spare...I never would have gone Greek if the kind of shenanigans you mention were in evidence, and neither would have a whole lot of others.The comment about having a different definition is just a subtle minimizing slam on your part. We may have been greeks, but we were still people first. Sal Heh. Can't be sure about you from your net persona, but honestly, are you defending greek culture in general, or just the greeks at the college where you happened to go to school? If it is greek culture in general, than I have naught more to say. I'm not defending anything, Lawson--I thought we were just talking. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
I my only comment on this continuing discussion with Barry, and ED, and Raunchy, and Judy, and Ruth, is that FFL is immensely more enjoyable with the input of these awesome women.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I my only comment on this continuing discussion with Barry, and ED, and Raunchy, and Judy, and Ruth, is that FFL is immensely more enjoyable with the input of these awesome women. Here, here Lurk!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
On Dec 10, 2008, at 7:48 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I my only comment on this continuing discussion with Barry, and ED, and Raunchy, and Judy, and Ruth, is that FFL is immensely more enjoyable with the input of these awesome women. And what am I--chopped liver? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 7:48 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I my only comment on this continuing discussion with Barry, and ED, and Raunchy, and Judy, and Ruth, is that FFL is immensely more enjoyable with the input of these awesome women. And what am I--chopped liver? Sal You are refined pâté Sal. No, foie gras!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Post Count
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 10, 2008, at 7:48 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: I my only comment on this continuing discussion with Barry, and ED, and Raunchy, and Judy, and Ruth, is that FFL is immensely more enjoyable with the input of these awesome women. And what am I--chopped liver? Sal You are refined pâté Sal. No, even better, foie gras!
