[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action here constituting his posts on FFL). In this sense: His subjectivity is entirely in the service of producing the particular effect he is seeking in those readers whom he knows are the innocent registrars of their experience--this is, as I have stipulated, likely to be unconscious or subconscious. For everyone else but BW has to bear the consequences of their deeds as they enact them. Not BW. Not only does he vaccinate himself against any feedback from others, but he vaccinates himself against any feedback from himself. This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. Thus deprives the reader of a constituent element in reading what someone writes which that reader's unconscious has always assumed is there. It is not, and this is the negative vertigo that is created in the quasi-objective and impartial FFL reader. And it is why BW is able to remain inside of himself as if he is the only person in the universe and he has been posting only to himself. As if this were the case, since he has removed himself from the context of 1. his own self-experience 2. the experience of the reader 3. the interactive fact of BW in relationship to reality and what abstractly even might be the actual truth of the matter about which he is writing. BW's game goes unnoticed. But it is critic-proof. The more agitated or scornful or ironic or commonsensical or reasonable someone is in attempting to challenge what BW has written, to the extent to which this represents a real intention inside the other person, is the extent to which that intention--and the writing of a counter-post--will end up in empty space--No one is there. BW has delighted himself by becoming dead to
[FairfieldLife] Hollis Brown!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn_gxRPHIvQ Wiki: Technically speaking, Hollis Brown is a tour de force. For a ballad is normally a form which puts one at a distance from its tale. This ballad, however, is told in the second person, present tense, so that not only is a bond forged immediately between the listener and the figure of the tale, but there is the ironic fact that the only ones who know of Hollis Brown's plight, the only ones who care, are the hearers who are helpless to help, cut off from him, even as we in a mass society are cut off from each other Indeed, the blues perspective itself, uncompromising, isolated and sardonic, is superbly suited to express the squalid reality of contemporary America. And what a powerful expression it can be, once it has been liberated (as it has in Dylan's hands) from its egocentric bondage! A striking example of the tough, ironic insight one associates with the blues (and also of the power of understatement which Dylan has learnt from Guthrie) is to be found in the final lines of Hollis Brown: There's seven people dead on a South Dakota farm, There's seven people dead on a South Dakota farm, Somewhere in the distance there's seven new people born.
[FairfieldLife] My four posts! Post 1
Post number One of Four...
[FairfieldLife] My Four Posts! Post 2
Post 2 of 4 of My Four Posts!
[FairfieldLife] Re: My Four Posts! Post 2
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: Post 2 of 4 of My Four Posts! If it's not about Hitler, IT'S CRAP!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: ** There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: (snip) FWIW Curtis, this was my understanding when I first read your response of ...from the outset as being the *current* exchange...not going back to the beginning. It surprises me that Robin, in his response, doesn't seem to understand this, but at least he's consistent...or maybe he's being ironic (disingenuous smiley face). FWIW, when I read Curtis's response, I also thought he meant going back to the beginning (this was before I'd read Robin's reply saying the same thing). on·set noun 1. a beginning or start: the onset of winter. 2. an assault or attack: an onset of the enemy. Actually the word you used was outset, not onset. Outset can't be used in your sense #2 for onset above. Outset just means beginning or start. But you knew that. Since you have no substantive comments, let alone any refutations, of any of the case I made, there's nothing else in this post for me to respond to, thankfully. Stevie and laughinggull and possibly even feste will no doubt find your rejoinder brilliant, however, so it will have been worth your time. *plonk* please continue... [snip] My experience of you, Curtis, has been that you are consistently dishonest. You're usually quite subtle about it, such that only the person you're being dishonest *with* is likely to be able to spot it. From the outset is a very peculiar way to refer to the most recent in a long series of exchanges. The most obvious understanding would be that you meant from the outset of the series. The idea that From the outset meant the most recent seems to me to be the twisted one. I think if you had meant the most recent one you would have indicated this, e.g., From the outset of your most recent exchange with Share... That you claim to be unable to understand how anyone could have assumed you did not mean the most recent exchange says to me that you are being disingenuous, at the very least about how obvious it was that you did mean the most recent. It was not at all obvious, it was ambiguous. And you being a wordsmith of sorts should have been able to easily recognize the potential for misunderstanding. If that's what it was. I think you are actually trying to backpedal from a mistake. You were not here, after all, when Robin and Share began their conversations, which were indeed extremely friendly. You returned to FFL after a longish absence several weeks later, just in time to see Share turn on Robin based on her misunderstanding of something he had said to her. You leaped into their conflict without knowing how Share had misrepresented the situation, having seen an opportunity to attack Robin by supporting Share. You claimed he had been deliberately setting her up for a confrontation, an idea she eagerly picked up on. It made an appearance later on in her unconscionable claim that she had been psychologically raped by Robin. I believe that's what you were remembering, and why you assumed Robin's mission with Share had never been friendly. That conflict, not incidentally, hardly exemplified the interactions with the intention to understand you
[FairfieldLife] Trinity College Women's Squash on Transcendental Meditation
This is an absolutely outstanding clip, please forward it to all your friends. Trinity College Women's Squash on Transcendental Meditation: o__ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwMGUoLUbBI ... If you have any comments or questions, please contact me directly by this email vedamer...@yahoo.de
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Have you ever had anything useful to say here in this forum, other than act like a fuking, puking, bitching cheerleader. The real 'E' is so elusive that most of the pretend E's don't even have a clue to whats going on inside them. --- Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: ** There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Oh Jason baby are you mad I didn't include you? I am so sorry, I haven't seen your opinion on this issue - why don't you take a shot at it and I will definitely provide my judgement on it. I always love to be surprised by idiots like you. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Jason jedi_sp...@yahoo.com wrote: ** Have you ever had anything useful to say here in this forum, other than act like a fuking, puking, bitching cheerleader. The real 'E' is so elusive that most of the pretend E's don't even have a clue to whats going on inside them. --- Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: ** There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too.
[FairfieldLife] Free Man In Paris, v2.06
I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de Paris, celebrating its 850th year. I didn't go inside, having been there done that far too often; the photo of me in the FFL Photos area was taken on its roof. But I did pause for a moment outside the front entrance to photograph one of my favorite mini-monuments to the French mindset: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8384/8626608325_62d317266e.jpg] This is called Point Zero. It is the point from which all distances in the known physical universe were measured. In other words, not only did the French consider their country (and thus themselves) the center of the universe, they had an actual point in space that was the *exact* center. It's sorta like how Buck thinks of the Men's Dome in Fairfield. :-) After that I walked over to St. Michel, always one of my favorite people-watching areas, and settled in this cafe, which is right outside one of the exits from the Metro/RER stop there: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8103/8626608551_d573287d07.jpg] Yes, it's touristy later in the day, but at this hour it's 1) mainly empty, 2) has heaters on the terrace so I can sit outside, and 3) has Wistro, so I can post this if I feel like it. (Although I'll probably wait until I get back to the apartment because I have photos to process and include.) This is My Kinda Heaven. Buck can have his heaven on Earth in Fairfield. Sipping a cafe creme in Paris, watching people walk by, writing about what I see, and smiling big-time. Spring is as late here as it is in most other places (global colding), and it was 0 degrees Celsius this morning, but now the sun is starting to come out and warm things up. It's all just so PARIS that I have a tremendous smile on my face that I do not seem to be able to remove: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8537/8627720330_2354db4318.jpg] Some people here seem to get uptight when I write shit like this, claiming that I'm bragging about my life or making myself seem more
[FairfieldLife] Free Man In Paris, v2.07
There is a Parisian artform that might be lost on many spiritual seekers I have met in my life. That is the art of people-watching. So *many* of the seekers I've encountered over the decades really don't look around much at the other people who pass through their lives. It's as if they're so inward-focusing that all they can see -- even when they're looking outwards -- is inwards. They're missing a lot. People are just endlessly fascinating. As should have become obvious by now, I sit in cafes a lot, and watch people a lot. I've been doing this most of my life, ever since I got over all that inward-focusing horseshit I might have believed in and adhered to earlier in life. Yes, I still love movies, and watch a lot of them, but frankly, who needs 'em, when there is a good people-watching cafe handy? The people passing by are an Endless Movie, true characters -- each with his or her own arc and back story, each with his or her own here-and-now concerns or lack thereof. At this cafe (still the same one), I've been having fun watching the leggy brunette at a table near me. It's now nearly 11:30 am, but she's still dressed in Last Night's Finery, just now stumbling home after a (seemingly successful) evening of looking for love in all the right places. She watches me writing and comes over to ask for a light for her cigarette, even though I'm not smoking. I suspect it's because she wants to catch a glimpse of my computer screen, and figure out what I'm writing about. Her flirtation is not wasted, because I actually carry a lighter, just in case someone asks for a light or I need to start a fire. She seems satisfied by what she saw on my screen (I hadn't started writing about her yet), and goes back to her table and calling her girlfriends on her mobile to tell them about her exploits the night before. Outside the cafe, people -- mainly tourists at this hour of a Sunday morning -- are emerging from the St. Michel Metro stop and walking a few feet to catch their first glimpse of Notre Dame de Paris. It's a fascinating scenario to watch happening over and over and over, the outcome almost always the same. If they're in a group, they have one of the group photograph them with Notre Dame in the background; if they're alone, they ask someone else to take the photo. This is a very tourist thang that I've never completely understood, the need to take photographs of oneself while on vacation, as if to prove that you really were there. Some tourists are so busy taking these photos that you can tell they never really ARE there. But they're all still lovely in their own way, and today I smile at the sight of all of them. This being Paris, the ethnic makeup of all the people passing by is astounding. The city is obviously still a favorite destination for people from all over the world, and justifiably. It's a lovely city, the gift to the world (interestingly enough) of the German General who refused Hitler's direct orders to burn it to the ground before evacuating the city to escape the approaching Allied forces during WWII. Good on him. His crisis of conscience, and his making the Right Choice when faced with it, was one of the great humanitarian acts of modern times. Paris remains a living monument to history, in ways that many cities have not. Over 80% of the buildings inside the périphérique (the ring road surrounding Paris) were built before 1900; 60% of them were built centuries earlier. They make for a great movie set, as do the people inhabiting it. Living with a young girl as I do, these days my people-watching tends to focus on mothers and fathers with their children, and how they relate. In France, that relationship is almost always loving, and smile-provoking. These people really CARE about their kids. As for the art of people-watching itself, there are some on this forum who (needing to rag on me out of habit) will probably characterize it as being non-involved, and distant from the people I'm watching. To them I might say, There are times for social interaction, and there are times for just kicking back and watching. This morning is one of the latter. Later today I'll go out to more social hangouts, and practice my French or Spanish or Dutch with the people I meet there. For now I'm content to just watch the movie, and enjoy it. In the tradition of the late, lamented Roger Ebert, I award it five stars, and give it a big thumbs up. The characterization is brilliant, and the casting even more so. Each of the characters seems *perfectly* cast to portray themselves, and do so without pomp, pretense, or overacting. Each of them is completely comfortable and completely believable in their roles, whether those roles be major, supporting, or just as extras. And that's important -- both in a film, and in real life.
[FairfieldLife] Free Man In Paris, v2.08
I've been having some Internet conversations lately with one of the women I knew only slightly during the Rama Daze, but whom I've come to appreciate more As Time Goes By (cue Hoagy Carmichael, who didn't even play piano when he played 'Sam' in Casablanca). Like me, she bailed on the Rama trip before he bailed on it by croaking himself. That is, she left before he did, realizing that his (and its) path was no longer hers. That, to me, makes her interesting. Over the years, cruising the Internet version of the different spiritual paths that people find themselves following, I've noticed that those seekers (or former seekers) I find myself most attracted to are those who at some point in their travels felt it expedient to...uh...beat feet, and leave the path that had been laid out for them as the highest path by the teacher or teachers they were currently studying with. Some here, who have bought into the never change boats while crossing the river platitudes spouted by Maharishi and other spiritual teachers, might look down on such decisions. Moi, I applaud them. My experience along the Way causes me to believe that those who have been able to take a step back and WALK AWAY from a heavy-duty spiritual path to which they had previously committed themselves body and soul have something going for them. There is a strength of character that I find in those who have been able to break free from the dogma and indoctrination of their previous paths and choose their *own* path that I simply do not find in those who have never taken that step, and who have remained True Believers. In particular, lately I have been having conversations with a lovely woman who spent some time with the same Rama guy I did, but at a...uh...somewhat closer distance. That is, when asked by a Rama TB who was writing a completely hagiographic biography of him to describe what inner teachings he conveyed to her over the years when they were obviously...uh...close, she chose to characterize it as, Well, his dick was inside me, so I guess you could call those moments 'inner teachings.' I think you can imagine the horrified reaction on the part of the True Believer wannabee historian. :-) Her response makes 'A' my kinda gal. Like me, she does *not* write off all the time we spent with that particular Narcissistic Personality Disordered personality (Rama). We learned much, much of which has been of use to us over the years. Other parts of what he taught we rightly consigned to the Trash Bin of spiritual teaching, from which it originated and from which it should never have emerged. But some wisdom was present, and is not to be discarded. Being able to make the decision as to which parts of a spiritual teaching are valuable and which should be consigned to the Trash Bin is, in my opinion, a high art, the very heart and soul of pursuing a spiritual path. So many teachers claim that to do them -- or the path they represent -- justice or respect, one has to honor ALL that they teach. I cry bullshit. I have not in this lifetime encountered a single spiritual teacher or a single spiritual path for which that is true. Each of them is a mix of good/bad, positive/negative, egolessness/ego, and usefulness/not-so-muchness. Those who have never walked away from a particular teaching or a particular teacher or a particular path don't, in my experience, fully understand the high art of pursuing a spiritual path that one can call one's own. As the great Joseph Campbell once said, If the path before you is clear, you're probably on someone else's. As the equally great Oscar Wilde once quipped, Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation. Nowhere is this latter quote more apparent than in those who feel the need to trot out a quote from the teacher they're oh-so-devoted to to counter every argument, to squelch every criticism. My experience -- which is limited but is all that I really have to guide me -- is that those who have at some point in their lives walked away from reliance on such quotes and reliance on such teachers are simply more interesting than those who never have. Your mileage may vary.
[FairfieldLife] Je ne comprends pas...je ne comprends pas
The Subject line is from Amélie. It is a phrase repeated often by Amélie's father, as he continues to get photographs in the mail of his stolen garden gnome, taken in front of buildings and monuments all over the world. He just doesn't understand. This is a wonderful vignette, based like most events in that movie on a real event, but in this case one of the only real events that didn't happen to the director and writer of the movie. This one happened to someone else, and he read about it in the press and felt that it just fit with all the other vignettes from his own life. I just love that moment, and that confused look on Amélie's father's face, as he tries to rationalize the completely irrational. That's the way I feel, zipping past the first few words of yesterday's posts on Fairfield Life in Yahoo's Message View. Je ne comprend pas...je ne comprends pas. I simply do not understand how someone can take themselves so seriously as to have to defend their fictional image of themselves as if it mattered. I simply do not understand the mindset of those who seem to feel that FFL is a battleground on which *to* defend these fictional images, as if there really IS a battle going on, and they (or anyone else) could win it. Most of all I simply do not understand how the people who do this -- day in and day out, for YEARS -- can do it while espousing the benefits of a meditation technique which ostensibly allows them to dissolve the self they are so desperate to defend in the bliss of Absolute blissitudedness. HOW can anyone who has been meditating this long still have so much self to defend? HOW can anyone in their Fifties, Sixties, and in at least one case Seventies still pursue these seemingly endless ego-battles defending egos that should have been lightened up (if not dissolved) decades ago? HOW can these adults spend so much time and energy writing endless narcissotracts to defend something THAT DOES NOT EVEN EXIST, their puny selves? Je ne comprends pas...je ne comprends pas. I would characterize reading yesterday's flood of narcissoposts on FFL as like watching kindergarteners, except that I have first-hand experience with kindergarteners, and *they're* not as obsessed with themselves as these Drama Queens seem to be. Their personalities are fluid, and change with the winds. The narcissistic Drama Queens seem to be rigid and fixed in their obsession-patterns, repeating the same scenarios (and often the same defences) over and over and over, laying waste in their minds to hordes of enemies, most of whom don't even seem to be aware that there is a battle going on because they...uh...have lives. Who could possibly CARE about the things that these people obsess over and write endless rants about? Who could possibly harbor such grudges against others on this forum full of people THEY HAVE NEVER MET, clinging to these grudges so strongly that they feel the need to diss their enemies so often, and try to convince others to do the same. The pettiness of it just boggles my mind. Je ne comprends pas...je ne comprends pas... The plaster garden gnome in Amélie had more fun with his life than these people seem to have had in years.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Free Man In Paris, v2.06
You have an innocent smile Barry baby - hard to believe all that paranoid, delusional garbage spews from this same man with that seemingly innocent smile. Oh the wonders of this amazing creation !!! On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:40 AM, turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: ** I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [image: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [image: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [image: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de Paris, celebrating its 850th year. I didn't go inside, having been there done that far too often; the photo of me in the FFL Photos area was taken on its roof. But I did pause for a moment outside the front entrance to photograph one of my favorite mini-monuments to the French mindset: [image: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8384/8626608325_62d317266e.jpg] This is called Point Zero. It is the point from which all distances in the known physical universe were measured. In other words, not only did the French consider their country (and thus themselves) the center of the universe, they had an actual point in space that was the *exact* center. It's sorta like how Buck thinks of the Men's Dome in Fairfield. :-) After that I walked over to St. Michel, always one of my favorite people-watching areas, and settled in this cafe, which is right outside one of the exits from the Metro/RER stop there: [image: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8103/8626608551_d573287d07.jpg] Yes, it's touristy later in the day, but at this hour it's 1) mainly empty, 2) has heaters on the terrace so I can sit outside, and 3) has Wistro, so I can post this if I feel like it. (Although I'll probably wait until I get back to the apartment because I have photos to process and include.) This is My Kinda Heaven. Buck can have his heaven on Earth in Fairfield. Sipping a cafe creme in Paris, watching people walk by, writing about what I see, and smiling big-time. Spring is as late here as it is in most other places (global colding), and it was 0 degrees Celsius this
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
hi John, due to unfelicitous previous lifetime, any occasion wherein the words monks, murder and Middle Ages appear together, I seek other entertainment. However I did find a good synopsis of the tale online, though in true Gemini fashion read it very quickly and thus missed the vital part about laughter being a sin. Thank you for supplying that and sorry for both my dimwittedness and hastiness, what a combination! I know it's no fun to have to explain a post thus using another post, like that like that. Anyhoo I admit to you that I am once again tempted to watch this movie but I'm guessing it's a bit gory what with the Inquisition being a subtext, murders being the main events, etc. As for laughing being a sin, I'm not sure. But if you laugh at Death, you're a goner for sure (-: From: John jr_...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 8:30 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE Share, The movie is a detective story in a monastery setting during the Middle Ages. The character (that Sean Connery was playing) was in a hot pursuit of the murderer of the monks in the monastery. It turned out that the culprit was the old blind abbot who poisoned the pages of an ancient book of comedy. Why? Because the old abbot believed that laughing was a sin. I just thought that you may have seen the movie. But you can probably see the application of the movie plot here on FFL with this particular thread. :) JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: Oy, another cryptic man! Recommending a movie about a whole monastery of cryptic men! Ah, time for the Dome, cryptic women (-: Hey John, worried about Mars Ketu coming up in June, I had a reading with Bill Levacy. His prediction: accelerated (Mars) stable (Saturn) expansion (Guru). I have seen this movie in the library but Sean Connery, as cute as he is, was not inspiration enough to induce me to borrow. Thanks for good wishes. From: John jr_esq@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 3:19 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  Share, The message that you seek is in this film. Have fun. :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-yYJgpQ-CE JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy, this post to Xeno, and also the 2 Dolphie posts are called HAVING FUN! Duh! If that's what you call being out of control, then so be it. Also I was asking for Xeno's feedback on this reality topic. I both enjoy and understand his writing. Now to reflect a little Judy back to you: what exactly was my dumb comment about Hitler? PS If I'm proving everything Robin said about me then maybe you could relax a little? Have some fun yourself? Instead of trying to prevent WWIII on FFL? Just a suggestion.  From: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 12:34 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  Share, you're out of control. You made a dumb comment about Hitler. Just own it, then forget it and move on. Don't try to start World War III here on FFL. You continue inadvertently to prove everything Robin said to you about yourself. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Xeno, I'd appreciate your feedback on the idea that reality is a very complex piece of music and we're dancing to it. Sometimes we're in step with the main melody and sometimes our dancing is more in tune with a secondary melody. Sometimes we're dancing to the same melody that someone else is and that's delightful. And it's as if Robin and Judy are the judges at a dance extravaganza. Robin is gifted at hearing many strands of melodies. Judy is gifted at focusing on the individuals steps. But really, only the dancer himself or herself can know which melody is best for them to dance to. True the judges can be helpful sometimes. But some judges are hearing VERY loud music in his or her own head. Then not so helpful to dancer. Now Xeno I must disagree with you about Judy not being willing to truck with idiots or even nitwits. Look how much attention she has given to my Dolphie valentine, which even this morning she posted about, saying she considers it idiocy and nitwit er nitwiticism. Will you allow me to create a new word just for Judy? Anyway, your PROMPT reply is urgently needed as Judy so kindly informs me that I have fallen behind. Of course I didn't realize FFL is a competition so I'm not sure
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
dear Ravi, would you like to share my appt this afternoon with my pastoral counselor? love, BirchyShare From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:56 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: (snip) FWIW Curtis, this was my understanding when I first read your response of ...from the outset as being the *current* exchange...not going back to the beginning. It surprises me that Robin, in his response, doesn't seem to understand this, but at least he's consistent...or maybe he's being ironic (disingenuous smiley face). FWIW, when I read Curtis's response, I also thought he meant going back to the beginning (this was before I'd read Robin's reply saying the same thing). on·set noun 1. a beginning or start: the onset of winter. 2. an assault or attack: an onset of the enemy. Actually the word you used was outset, not onset. Outset can't be used in your sense #2 for onset above. Outset just means beginning or start. But you knew that. Since you have no substantive comments, let alone any refutations, of any of the case I made, there's nothing else in this post for me to respond to, thankfully. Stevie and laughinggull and possibly even feste will no doubt find your rejoinder brilliant, however, so it will have been worth your time. *plonk* please continue... [snip] My experience of you, Curtis, has been that you are consistently dishonest. You're usually quite subtle about it, such that only the person you're being dishonest *with* is likely to be able to spot it. From the outset is a very peculiar way to refer to the most recent in a long series of exchanges. The most obvious understanding would be that you meant from the outset of the series. The idea that From the outset meant the most recent seems to me to be the twisted one. I think if you had meant the most recent one you would have indicated this, e.g., From the outset of your most recent exchange with Share... That you claim to be unable to understand how anyone could have assumed you did not mean the most recent exchange says to me that you are being disingenuous, at the very least about how obvious it was that you did mean the most recent. It was not at all obvious, it was ambiguous. And you being a wordsmith of sorts should have been able to easily recognize the potential for misunderstanding. If that's what it was. I think you are actually trying to backpedal from a mistake. You were not here, after all, when Robin and Share began their conversations, which were indeed extremely friendly. You returned to FFL after a longish absence several weeks later, just in time to see Share turn on Robin based on her misunderstanding of something he had said to her. You leaped into their conflict without knowing how Share had misrepresented the situation, having seen an opportunity to attack Robin by supporting Share. You claimed he had been deliberately setting her up for a confrontation, an idea she eagerly picked up on. It made an appearance later on in her unconscionable claim that she
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
LOL.. the useless pastoral counselor would be so sorry he ever met me - but is that, by any chance a she? And is she hot? If so I am totally in baby. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: ** dear Ravi, would you like to share my appt this afternoon with my pastoral counselor? love, BirchyShare -- *From:* Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:56 AM *Subject:* Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com wrote: ** There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: (snip) FWIW Curtis, this was my understanding when I first read your response of ...from the outset as being the *current* exchange...not going back to the beginning. It surprises me that Robin, in his response, doesn't seem to understand this, but at least he's consistent...or maybe he's being ironic (disingenuous smiley face). FWIW, when I read Curtis's response, I also thought he meant going back to the beginning (this was before I'd read Robin's reply saying the same thing). on·set noun 1. a beginning or start: the onset of winter. 2. an assault or attack: an onset of the enemy. Actually the word you used was outset, not onset. Outset can't be used in your sense #2 for onset above. Outset just means beginning or start. But you knew that. Since you have no substantive comments, let alone any refutations, of any of the case I made, there's nothing else in this post for me to respond to, thankfully. Stevie and laughinggull and possibly even feste will no doubt find your rejoinder brilliant, however, so it will have been worth your time. *plonk* please continue... [snip] My experience of you, Curtis, has been that you are consistently dishonest. You're usually quite subtle about it, such that only the person you're being dishonest *with* is likely to be able to spot it. From the outset is a very peculiar way to refer to the most recent in a long series of exchanges. The most obvious understanding would be that you meant from the outset of the series. The idea that From the outset meant the most recent seems to me to be the twisted one. I think if you had meant the most recent one you would have indicated this, e.g., From the outset of your most recent exchange with Share... That you claim to be unable to understand how anyone could have assumed you did not mean the most recent exchange says to me that you are being disingenuous, at the very least about how obvious it was that you did mean the most recent. It was not at all obvious, it was ambiguous. And you being a wordsmith of sorts should have been able to easily recognize the potential for misunderstanding. If that's what it was. I think you are actually trying to backpedal from a mistake. You were not here, after all, when Robin and Share began their conversations, which were indeed extremely friendly. You returned to FFL after a longish absence several weeks later, just in time to see Share turn on Robin based on her misunderstanding of something he had said to her. You leaped into their conflict without knowing
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.08
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: I've been having some Internet conversations lately with one of the women I knew only slightly during the Rama Daze, but whom I've come to appreciate more As Time Goes By (cue Hoagy Carmichael, who didn't even play piano when he played 'Sam' in Casablanca). Oops, my bad. Hoagy Carmichael played piano in another Bogey movie; the person who played 'Sam' in Casablanca was Dooley Wilson. The story about him, however, is true. He was a singer, but didn't play any instruments, someone else's fingers being shot playing the piano in that movie in close-ups. People kept booking him for years afterwards as a solo act, and he'd get there and have to ask, Where is my pianist? and they'd have to run out and find one to back him up. No one actually ever said, Play it again, Sam in that movie, either. That's just a myth.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
The pictures added a lot, thanks for the great report. My Nigerian musician friend just came back from Paris, so,I'll get an update from him on the Parisan music scene today. He'll be back in Paris at the end of the month. He is worth looking up. We've been busking on the same boardwalk for years here. One of the really exceptional people I've met out there. We will be out today for the first nice busking day of the season. Hope your day in Paris is just as bright. Here is my brother Kuku's site, check him out. http://kukulive.com/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de Paris, celebrating its 850th year. I didn't go inside, having been there done that far too often; the photo of me in the FFL Photos area was taken on its roof. But I did pause for a moment outside the front entrance to photograph one of my favorite mini-monuments to the French mindset: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8384/8626608325_62d317266e.jpg] This is called Point Zero. It is the point from which all distances in the known physical universe were measured. In other words, not only did the French consider their country (and thus themselves) the center of the universe, they had an actual point in space that was the *exact* center. It's sorta like how Buck thinks of the Men's Dome in Fairfield. :-) After that I walked over to St. Michel, always one of my favorite people-watching areas, and settled in this cafe, which is right outside one of the exits from the Metro/RER stop there: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8103/8626608551_d573287d07.jpg] Yes, it's touristy later in the day, but at this hour it's 1) mainly empty, 2) has heaters on the terrace so I can sit outside, and 3) has Wistro, so I can post this if I feel like it. (Although I'll probably wait until I get back to the apartment because
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: The pictures added a lot, thanks for the great report. My Nigerian musician friend just came back from Paris, so, I'll get an update from him on the Parisan music scene today. He'll be back in Paris at the end of the month. He is worth looking up. We've been busking on the same boardwalk for years here. One of the really exceptional people I've met out there. We will be out today for the first nice busking day of the season. Hope your day in Paris is just as bright. Here is my brother Kuku's site, check him out. http://kukulive.com/ Cool. Love his music, love his vibe. Do let me know when he's back in Paris, and where/when he might be playing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this more obvious than for most posters. But I'm ready to be proven wrong. Perhaps you could show us how much more Judy reveals about her experience of herself in her writing, as a clear contrast. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. Fill the page. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any concern--this is mathematical--about himself (whether what he is saying he really believes, how he experiences his relationship to what is true, how successful he envisages he will be when others read what he has written). BW plays against all these forces. He knows he will outrage and offend persons: he lines up on this contingency and makes sure that as he writes his main focus is on stimulating the frustration and disapproval in those readers who will be a victim of this singular method of provocation. BW, then, does not allow the reader, either consciously or unconsciously, to derive any experience of what kind of experience BW must be having as he so slovenly and insincerely (the latter is quite subtle and can easily be missed) argues for his position. But note: BW cannot really have any investment in or commitment to anything he says by way of controversy. And why is this? Because he excludes from his experience in the act of writing any possible feedback he might get from himself as he writes into reality and the consciousness of other persons. If you examine your experience of reading one of BW's intensely opinionated posts you will realize that BW is making himself immune to your very deepest response to what he is saying. You are put in a kind of psychological and intellectual vacuum as you sense that BW not only will ignore your experience--and possible response--but that he is actually acutely aware of this very phenomenon: that he can be heedless of any responsibility to truth--to his sense of truth, to the reader's sense of truth. This becomes the context out of which he writes: to generate an unnoticed vulnerability in the reader as he [BW] writes out his opinion but anaesthetizes himself in the very execution of this act such that only you are feeling and experiencing anything at all. For BW makes sure he is feeling nothing. A zero. What this means is that BW deprives the reader of any subconscious sense that BW is in any way responsible for being judged by both how sincerely interested he is in doing justice to what he thinks the truth is, and by how much he cares about what the reader thinks about how sincere he is. You see, BW plays against all this, and out of this deliberate insulation from reality (reality here being the experience of the reader reading BW's post; reality being the experience of BW of himself as he writes his opinion of some controversial issue; reality being what actual reality might think about what he has written) BW creates a context which makes those readers who are not predetermined to approve of BW (no matter what he says) the perfect victim of BW's systematic and controlled mind game. BW relishes the fact that he knows that he has complete control over his subjective experience of himself as he acts (action here constituting his posts on FFL). In this sense: His subjectivity is entirely in the service of producing the particular effect he is seeking in those readers whom he knows are the innocent registrars of their experience--this is, as I have stipulated, likely to be unconscious or subconscious. For everyone else but BW has to bear the consequences of their deeds as they enact them. Not BW. Not only does he vaccinate himself against any feedback from others, but he vaccinates himself against any feedback from himself. This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. Thus deprives the reader of a constituent element in
[FairfieldLife] My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=982E49KAMyw
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
I noticed his schedule has some in May and June in Paris. MAY/04/2011 - GOUTTE DE TERRE, PARIS FR JUNE/01/2013 - L'AFRIQUE DANS TOUS LES SENS FEST, PARIS FR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- Cool. Love his music, love his vibe. Do let me know when he's back in Paris, and where/when he might be playing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Well, it's about effin time isn't it? The fort is about three quarters of the way burnt down, and here Ravi comes with a puny little fire extinquisher. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: ** There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: (snip) FWIW Curtis, this was my understanding when I first read your response of ...from the outset as being the *current* exchange...not going back to the beginning. It surprises me that Robin, in his response, doesn't seem to understand this, but at least he's consistent...or maybe he's being ironic (disingenuous smiley face). FWIW, when I read Curtis's response, I also thought he meant going back to the beginning (this was before I'd read Robin's reply saying the same thing). on·set noun 1. a beginning or start: the onset of winter. 2. an assault or attack: an onset of the enemy. Actually the word you used was outset, not onset. Outset can't be used in your sense #2 for onset above. Outset just means beginning or start. But you knew that. Since you have no substantive comments, let alone any refutations, of any of the case I made, there's nothing else in this post for me to respond to, thankfully. Stevie and laughinggull and possibly even feste will no doubt find your rejoinder brilliant, however, so it will have been worth your time. *plonk* please continue... [snip] My experience of you, Curtis, has been that you are consistently dishonest. You're usually quite subtle about it, such that only the person you're being dishonest *with* is likely to be able to spot it. From the outset is a very peculiar way to refer to the most recent in a long series of exchanges. The most obvious understanding would be that you meant from the outset of the series. The idea that From the outset meant the most recent seems to me to be the twisted one. I think if you had meant the most recent one you would have indicated this, e.g., From the outset of your most recent exchange with Share... That you claim to be unable to understand how anyone could have assumed you did not mean the most recent exchange says to me that you are being disingenuous, at the very least about how obvious it was that you did mean the most recent. It was not at all obvious, it was ambiguous. And you being a wordsmith of sorts should have been able to easily recognize the potential for misunderstanding. If that's what it was. I think you are actually trying to backpedal from a mistake. You were not here, after all, when Robin and Share began their conversations, which were indeed extremely friendly. You returned to FFL after a longish absence several weeks later, just in time to see Share turn on Robin based on her misunderstanding of something he had said to her. You leaped into their conflict without knowing how Share had misrepresented the situation, having seen an opportunity to attack Robin by supporting Share. You claimed he had been deliberately setting her up for a confrontation, an idea she eagerly picked up on. It made
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: TMO trivia test question
Palase don't! I'll take a double frozen Margarita though! From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 4:24 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TMO trivia test question Give that man a cigar! --- In mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@... wrote: Jerry Jarvis From: Duveyoung mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com To: mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 2:00 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] TMO trivia test question  In the film, Silver Streak, at one point a person answers a phone call from the FBI to warn about the runaway train coming into the station at full speed. What was the name of the person who answered the phone?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
That was great Barry. Thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de Paris, celebrating its 850th year. I didn't go inside, having been there done that far too often; the photo of me in the FFL Photos area was taken on its roof. But I did pause for a moment outside the front entrance to photograph one of my favorite mini-monuments to the French mindset: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8384/8626608325_62d317266e.jpg] This is called Point Zero. It is the point from which all distances in the known physical universe were measured. In other words, not only did the French consider their country (and thus themselves) the center of the universe, they had an actual point in space that was the *exact* center. It's sorta like how Buck thinks of the Men's Dome in Fairfield. :-) After that I walked over to St. Michel, always one of my favorite people-watching areas, and settled in this cafe, which is right outside one of the exits from the Metro/RER stop there: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8103/8626608551_d573287d07.jpg] Yes, it's touristy later in the day, but at this hour it's 1) mainly empty, 2) has heaters on the terrace so I can sit outside, and 3) has Wistro, so I can post this if I feel like it. (Although I'll probably wait until I get back to the apartment because I have photos to process and include.) This is My Kinda Heaven. Buck can have his heaven on Earth in Fairfield. Sipping a cafe creme in Paris, watching people walk by, writing about what I see, and smiling big-time. Spring is as late here as it is in most other places (global colding), and it was 0 degrees Celsius this morning, but now the sun is starting to come out and warm things up. It's all just so PARIS that I have a tremendous smile on my face that I do not seem to be able to remove:
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... wrote: An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi Well, Dear Ravi, I will say one thing. This blossoming of writing and posts yesterday (and most likely today if certain people decide not to disengage) tells us way more than the subject matter being discussed. It was like a fascinating but almost macabre autopsy-like exposure of the inner workings and inner guts of participants here. All of these bodies laid out on tables with their insides exposed. I think it went way past content (although a lot of that was revealing) into something usually hidden. And perhaps the ACT of involving oneself in the creation of these posts, where it took an individual to engage in these, was the most important thing. Whatever it was it took some care and time and intention to read it all. If people don't want to read it why do they? Or, if they don't read it, why react so strongly? Revelatory on all counts I'd say. Good old FFL, the measure of a man (and women too of course). On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 12:15 PM, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: ** There is a secret under all your bluff and bluster Judy. This is why you have to derail all conversations into idiotic word parsing like this beyond all reason. You can't follow conversations here with any depth. It is why you are eager to engage people about the details of what Robin said about his enlightenment by cutting and pasting, but you never tried to engage in a conversation about the problems with his epistemology. So here you are once again trying so desperately to get a pat on the head for your blindly following his misunderstanding into the ground. Come on Robin, she is willing to show up as a complete idiot for you. And here we come to a problem with no solution. He knows your secret too. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote: (snip) FWIW Curtis, this was my understanding when I first read your response of ...from the outset as being the *current* exchange...not going back to the beginning. It surprises me that Robin, in his response, doesn't seem to understand this, but at least he's consistent...or maybe he's being ironic (disingenuous smiley face). FWIW, when I read Curtis's response, I also thought he meant going back to the beginning (this was before I'd read Robin's reply saying the same thing). on·set noun 1. a beginning or start: the onset of winter. 2. an assault or attack: an onset of the enemy. Actually the word you used was outset, not onset. Outset can't be used in your sense #2 for onset above. Outset just means beginning or start. But you knew that. Since you have no substantive comments, let alone any refutations, of any of the case I made, there's nothing else in this post for me to respond to, thankfully. Stevie and laughinggull and possibly even feste will no doubt find your rejoinder brilliant, however, so it will have been worth your time. *plonk* please continue... [snip] My experience of you, Curtis, has been that you are consistently dishonest. You're usually quite subtle about it, such that only the person you're being dishonest *with* is likely to be able to spot it. From the outset is a very peculiar way to refer to the most recent in a long series of exchanges. The most obvious understanding would be that you meant from the outset of the series. The idea that From the outset meant the most recent seems to me to be the twisted one. I think if you had meant the most recent one you would have indicated this, e.g., From the outset of your most recent exchange with Share... That you claim to be unable to understand how anyone could have assumed you did not mean the most recent exchange says to me that you are being disingenuous, at the very least about how obvious it was that you did mean the most recent. It was not at all obvious, it was ambiguous. And you being a wordsmith of sorts should have been able
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this [what his own experience is of himself] more obvious than for most posters. Interesting insight. Obviously, I am somewhat comfortable with, as you say, stream of consciousness writing. I tend to think that's because I'm comfortable with my consciousness. While there is a case to be made for self-editing what one writes, I honestly do very little of it, for a couple of reasons. The first is that while I am as prone to typos and left-out words as anyone else who types as fast as he thinks, I spend at most one quick read-through of the posts I write in this fashion before sending it off. The reason is that I rarely find that spending any more time than that improves the writing, and it often makes it worse. The second is that I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE. I don't have any particular image of myself that I'm pushing out during these cafe writing sessions. That is the *furthest* thing from my mind. In fact, the less awareness of self I have, the better the writing seems to flow. Self gets in the way. Feeling that one has to edit that self gets even further in the way. You know what I mean, Curtis, because you are able to get out of the way of your own writing, too. Try to imagine the opposite -- being a person stuck inside an ego that is always monitoring everything the person says or writes to make sure it's consistent with the image they wish to present to others. What a fuckin' waste of time. And, in my opinion, a great way to create terrible writing. I tend to agree with you about the nature of Robin's writing. It's as if he never actually has an audience for it other than to hear his own words echoing around in his mind. And because he doesn't actually write *for* others, he doesn't bother to make his writing intelligible to others. He writes for the inside of his own head, and to support the image of that stuck-in-one's-mindedness he is so invested in, and wants others to believe. Me, I just write. When I write in cafes, I just write -- fast and with absolutely no self-monitoring and self-editing. I spent no time at all editing the first one of my FMIP posts this morning, because I had to spend time inserting photos into it, and after that I didn't really feel like going back to check for typos. I don't feel bad about that, and in fact cannot be *made* to feel bad about that. Part of what allows me to write the way I do is that I am a very fast typist, one who makes his living churning out words, and who literally never has to pause to allow his typing to catch up with his train of thoughts. What you see in my cafe stream-of-consciousness writing is *real time*. It was written *exactly* as the thoughts occurred to me. I never have to sit there and ponder the right phrase or word or way of expres- sing myself. I have just done the same thing while writing this. It is fully WYIWYG, having been written in real time as I thought it up. When I get to the end of the last sentence I'll just push Send without spending even an instant re-reading it to check for typos or try to make it better. Heck, I may not even wait until the end of the last sentence, and may cut it off in mid-wo
Re: [FairfieldLife] parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
dear Ravi, she must be hot. She keeps that dang office cold enough! And I'm supposedly pure pitta! Guess the old Share circulation is not what it once was. Anyway, she is happily married so rein in. Now onto Descartely parsing my offer: it was a joke in the sense of ludicrous because Ravi is in San Diego and I and my appt are in Iowa it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* it was a suggestion that given his rants, Ravi might also benefit from a wonderful pastoral counselor it was only partially an offer as most likely I would prefer to have the appt to myself. Does this make it a lie? I think not. *This is a mercy since my significant other of 15 years and I used to talk on Sunday afternoons until he died in fall 2009. Dear Robin, I can tell you for sure that on Oct 6, 2009 around 2 pm Central I was totally out of contact, nay in total denial of reality when I found out, via his older brother phoning from London, that Gere was dead at the age of 46 from a heart attack. All I could say over and over was, it's not true, it's not true, like a totally crazy person. So, I know what it is to be out of touch with reality. And I am grateful to you for your continued efforts on my behalf in this matter. Neither Robin Irony nor Defensive Irony present. BTW you weren't here in January so you might not know about my Christmas epiphany in which I realized that if I was lucky I had 30 more years to live and that I did not want those years to be filled with conflicts such as I experienced on FFL after our Sept 6 upset. So I told Ann and Emily that I would not be entering into any discussions that seemed to be carrying the grudge energy into 2013. I haven't kept to this perfectly but I aim to do so. Consequently I am enjoying FFL a lot more. My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. Meaning that each of us is simply being himself or herself. And life reality, dear Robin, knows just how much contact we can experience in any moment. I am content to trust life reality about this. And I am grateful for your good wishes on my behalf. From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 7:00 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE LOL.. the useless pastoral counselor would be so sorry he ever met me - but is that, by any chance a she? And is she hot? If so I am totally in baby. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com wrote: dear Ravi, would you like to share my appt this afternoon with my pastoral counselor? love, BirchyShare From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.r...@gmail.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:56 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this more obvious than for most posters. The sentence *doesn't* make much sense when you take it out of context like that, does it? Especially when you go on to suggest that Barry's stream-of-consciousness style would tend to refute it. Too bad you didn't think of this ploy the first time you tried to argue against the post. Then, according to you, Robin couldn't see Barry's experience of himself in his posts because Barry isn't open to being vulnerable to people he doesn't like. Neither attempted refutation has much of anything to do with Robin's actual analysis, which is considerably more subtle and complex than you've been able to grasp (or at least wanted anybody else to grasp). (Barry's response to your post is amusing. To support your attempted refutation of Robin's analysis, he offers the fact that he types very fast and doesn't do any editing, which has even less to do with anything Robin wrote.) But I'm ready to be proven wrong. Perhaps you could show us how much more Judy reveals about her experience of herself in her writing, as a clear contrast. It isn't something that can be shown, in either my case or Barry's (or anybody else's, for that matter). Where it shows (or doesn't show) is in our respective posts. If you can't see the difference in what Robin is talking about between my posts and Barry's, perhaps it's *your* lack of perceptiveness that's the problem. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. Just a manufactured insult, not something you actually believe to be the case. You aren't *that* undiscerning.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Share, Since you brought it up, who and where were you in the previous lifetime? If you were joking, just forget it. JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: hi John, due to unfelicitous previous lifetime, any occasion wherein the words monks, murder and Middle Ages appear together, I seek other entertainment. However I did find a good synopsis of the tale online, though in true Gemini fashion read it very quickly and thus missed the vital part about laughter being a sin. Thank you for supplying that and sorry for both my dimwittedness and hastiness, what a combination! I know it's no fun to have to explain a post thus using another post, like that like that. Anyhoo I admit to you that I am once again tempted to watch this movie but I'm guessing it's a bit gory what with the Inquisition being a subtext, murders being the main events, etc. As for laughing being a sin, I'm not sure. But if you laugh at Death, you're a goner for sure (-:   From: John jr_esq@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 8:30 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  Share, The movie is a detective story in a monastery setting during the Middle Ages. The character (that Sean Connery was playing) was in a hot pursuit of the murderer of the monks in the monastery. It turned out that the culprit was the old blind abbot who poisoned the pages of an ancient book of comedy. Why? Because the old abbot believed that laughing was a sin. I just thought that you may have seen the movie. But you can probably see the application of the movie plot here on FFL with this particular thread. :) JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Oy, another cryptic man!àRecommending a movie about a whole monastery of cryptic men!àAh, time for the Dome, cryptic women (-: Hey John, worried about Mars Ketu coming up in June, I had a reading with Bill Levacy.àHis prediction:àaccelerated (Mars) stable (Saturn) expansion (Guru).àI have seen this movie in the library but Sean Connery, as cute as he is, was not inspiration enough to induce me to borrow. Thanks for good wishes. From: John jr_esq@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 3:19 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE àShare, The message that you seek is in this film. Have fun. :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-yYJgpQ-CE JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Judy, this post to Xeno, and also the 2 Dolphie posts are called HAVING FUN!ÃâàDuh!ÃâàIf that's what you call being out of control, then so be it.ÃâàAlso I was asking for Xeno's feedback on this reality topic.ÃâàI both enjoy and understand his writing.ÃâàNow to reflect a little Judy back to you: what exactly was my dumb comment about Hitler? PSÃâàIf I'm proving everything Robin said about me then maybe you could relax a little?ÃâàHave some fun yourself?ÃâàInstead of trying to prevent WWIII on FFL?ÃâàJust a suggestion. ÃâàFrom: authfriend authfriend@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 12:34 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE ÃâàShare, you're out of control. You made a dumb comment about Hitler. Just own it, then forget it and move on. Don't try to start World War III here on FFL. You continue inadvertently to prove everything Robin said to you about yourself. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Xeno, I'd appreciate your feedback on the idea that reality is a very complex piece of music and we're dancing to it.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàSometimes we're in step with the main melody and sometimes our dancing is more in tune with a secondary melody.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàSometimes we're dancing to the same melody that someone else is and that's delightful.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàAnd it's as if Robin and Judy are the judges at a dance extravaganza.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàRobin is gifted at hearing many strands of melodies.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàJudy is gifted at focusing on the individuals steps.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàBut really, only the dancer himself or herself can know which melody is best for them to dance to.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàTrue the judges can be helpful sometimes.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàBut some judges are hearing VERY loud music in his or her own head.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ÃâàThen not so helpful to dancer. Now Xeno I must disagree with you about Judy
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could make the case for this reading of this passage, Curtis)--then I think it brilliant. But you are ever the shrewd scheming fellow, Curtis (when it comes to controversy over truth or human motives or what is real--once the fight begins). But in the context of my having written all that I wrote to you yesterday, for this to be your first attempt at answering me (and you want this post to do the work of this, Curtis), well you have (if you were not being deliberately ironic) proven that those four posts are unanswerable. I am perceptive, Curtis, and my four posts addressed to yourself yesterday touch upon reality. As does my analysis of Barry Wright. Do you give the stars permission to come out in the sky tonight? We are both extremely objective, Curtis. Me for one purpose, you for another. Robin --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this more obvious than for most posters. But I'm ready to be proven wrong. Perhaps you could show us how much more Judy reveals about her experience of herself in her writing, as a clear contrast. In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. Fill the page. Here is BW's secret. Whereas almost everyone else when expressing a strong opinion about a controversial topic reveals their personal and subjective experience of themselves when they do this--even if that person (and even the reader) is unaware of this fact,--BW eliminates any
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this more obvious than for most posters. The sentence *doesn't* make much sense when you take it out of context like that, does it? Especially when you go on to suggest that Barry's stream-of-consciousness style would tend to refute it. The rest of the piece just amplifies this impression. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. Too bad you didn't think of this ploy the first time you tried to argue against the post. Then, according to you, Robin couldn't see Barry's experience of himself in his posts because Barry isn't open to being vulnerable to people he doesn't like. That was also true and reveals a common cognitive problem you have. You cannot hold to different ideas in your mind together. Hint:One deals with his direct communication with someone and one is a general writing piece for people like me who enjoy them. Neither attempted refutation has much of anything to do with Robin's actual analysis, which is considerably more subtle and complex than you've been able to grasp (or at least wanted anybody else to grasp). Jesus Robin will you plze throw some holy water on this long suffering disciple. I liked the little insinuation that I can magically control how other people view Robin by expressing an opinion. I wonder if you believe you have such magical powers? (Barry's response to your post is amusing. To support your attempted refutation of Robin's analysis, he offers the fact that he types very fast and doesn't do any editing, which has even less to do with anything Robin wrote.) Unless you are seeing it my way which is that he is describing the mechanics of why I see his thought process about himself in his writing. But I'm ready to be proven wrong. Perhaps you could show us how much more Judy reveals about her experience of herself in her writing, as a clear contrast. It isn't something that can be shown, in either my case or Barry's (or anybody else's, for that matter). Where it shows (or doesn't show) is in our respective posts. Another hidden fault like the ones you see in me that you are uniquely able to see... If you can't see the difference in what Robin is talking about between my posts and Barry's, perhaps it's *your* lack of perceptiveness that's the problem. Snaaap! No you dn't! In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. Just a manufactured insult, not something you actually believe to be the case. You aren't *that* undiscerning. And the winner of I know more about your internal processes than you do award is... sorry Judy, it is still Robin. But keep it he may not enter some year.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
Sorry Robin, I'm gunna have to let your word flood posts stand on their own without commentary. I think that does you the most justice because Judy has informed me that when I respond I can keep others from seeing the truth of your post. Hey great job on deflecting the feedback. Not a drop ever reached you. I guess you must have ascertained that I really didn't believe what I wrote so you could dismiss it out of hand. Mighty handy that little trick. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@... wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could make the case for this reading of this passage, Curtis)--then I think it brilliant. But you are ever the shrewd scheming fellow, Curtis (when it comes to controversy over truth or human motives or what is real--once the fight begins). But in the context of my having written all that I wrote to you yesterday, for this to be your first attempt at answering me (and you want this post to do the work of this, Curtis), well you have (if you were not being deliberately ironic) proven that those four posts are unanswerable. I am perceptive, Curtis, and my four posts addressed to yourself yesterday touch upon reality. As does my analysis of Barry Wright. Do you give the stars permission to come out in the sky tonight? We are both extremely objective, Curtis. Me for one purpose, you for another. Robin --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this more obvious than for most posters. But I'm ready to be proven wrong. Perhaps you could show us how much more Judy reveals about her experience of herself in her writing, as a clear contrast.
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Great post. So much conveyed and covered. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: dear Ravi, she must be hot. She keeps that dang office cold enough! And I'm supposedly pure pitta! Guess the old Share circulation is not what it once was. Anyway, she is happily married so rein in. Now onto Descartely parsing my offer: it was a joke in the sense of ludicrous because Ravi is in San Diego and I and my appt are in Iowa it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* it was a suggestion that given his rants, Ravi might also benefit from a wonderful pastoral counselor it was only partially an offer as most likely I would prefer to have the appt to myself. Does this make it a lie? I think not. *This is a mercy since my significant other of 15 years and I used to talk on Sunday afternoons until he died in fall 2009. Dear Robin, I can tell you for sure that on Oct 6, 2009 around 2 pm Central I was totally out of contact, nay in total denial of reality when I found out, via his older brother phoning from London, that Gere was dead at the age of 46 from a heart attack. All I could say over and over was, it's not true, it's not true, like a totally crazy person. So, I know what it is to be out of touch with reality. And I am grateful to you for your continued efforts on my behalf in this matter. Neither Robin Irony nor Defensive Irony present. BTW you weren't here in January so you might not know about my Christmas epiphany in which I realized that if I was lucky I had 30 more years to live and that I did not want those years to be filled with conflicts such as I experienced on FFL after our Sept 6 upset. So I told Ann and Emily that I would not be entering into any discussions that seemed to be carrying the grudge energy into 2013. I haven't kept to this perfectly but I aim to do so. Consequently I am enjoying FFL a lot more. My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. Meaning that each of us is simply being himself or herself. And life reality, dear Robin, knows just how much contact we can experience in any moment. I am content to trust life reality about this. And I am grateful for your good wishes on my behalf. From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 7:00 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  LOL.. the useless pastoral counselor would be so sorry he ever met me - but is that, by any chance a she? And is she hot? If so I am totally in baby. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:  dear Ravi, would you like to share my appt this afternoon with my pastoral counselor? love, BirchyShare From: Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:56 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  An awesome display of grace, poise, honesty and integrity dear Judy - while being under this nauseating attack by the forces of deception, manipulation viz His Holiness Curtis; idiocy viz Steve, laughinggull, feste; inauthentic, passive aggressive, vindictive, neurotic birches viz Share, platitude puking Gurus viz Guru Xeno and the pure, unadulterated stench of His Filthiness King Baby Barry. Love, Ravi
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: My Four Posts! Post 2
On 04/07/2013 03:54 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, card cardemaister@... wrote: Post 2 of 4 of My Four Posts! If it's not about Hitler, IT'S CRAP! I'm waiting for LUIGI'S FOXTROT and OSCAR'S LAMENT.
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Sorry Robin, I'm gunna have to let your word flood posts stand on their own without commentary. I think that does you the most justice because Judy has informed me that when I respond I can keep others from seeing the truth of your post. Hey great job on deflecting the feedback. Not a drop ever reached you. I guess you must have ascertained that I really didn't believe what I wrote so you could dismiss it out of hand. Well, since you *didn't* believe what [you] wrote, I feel it would have been naive of me not to have dismiss[ed] it out of hand. But I have not, Curtis. I wrote four posts to you yesterday. Those four posts, each one of them, constitutes a comprehensive response to what you wrote to me this morning, which I just responded to now. We are talking about a Curtis Principle. But I think I might not forget *this*: I guess you must have ascertained that I really didn't believe what I wrote so you could dismiss it out of hand. Orgasm. You came, Curtis. I finally got you to come. Mighty handy that little trick. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: Me, I'm gonna stick with my three-word description of the guy, which I think explains it all, and in the least possible number of words: Narcissistic Personality Disorder, in spades. OK, that was five words. :-) People here must be really, Really, REALLY masochistic to put up with this kinda abuse by continuing to read and respond to this asshole's crap. My suggestion is that people would have to shower less if they just ignored him like the pisshole in otherwise new and pristine snow he is. [Barry about Robin--from yesterday) CURTIS: In my analysis of your friend, I have been careful to stipulate that I am referring only to his intensely opinionated posts--not, for example, to the posts he just wrote from Paris. But you knew this. What he wrote here about me perfectly reveals the truth of my analysis of him. It is his freak of nature persona [AWB], not his fluent and engaging travelogues--or even movie reviews. But you knew this. The analysis of this person stands, even as you have chosen to make a comment in some way that would suggest that his posts of today are specimens by which the reader can test the truthfulness of my analysis of him. They are not. Your conscience hardly shows itself here, Curtis. And for the discerning FFL reader for you to MAKE THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF A REAL RESPONSE TO THOSE FOUR POSTS TO YOU OF YESTERDAY (where I did say everything I could want to say) is an extraordinary thing. You have, I must assume, answered my four posts by this post. This certainly is WHAT YOU WANT THIS POST TO DO FOR YOU. I think it may very well work in the majority of those FFL readers who come upon this; especially right after reading Barry's posts from Paris of today. Paris is not The Stupid Cunt category. Stream of consciousness? That has nothing whatsoever to do with my analysis, Curtis In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. This is the most ludicrous and dishonest and absurd thing you have ever said about me, Curtis. Each word is a lie--and the entire meaning of this, it has no application, for example, to my four posts I wrote to you yesterday. You are the most beautiful liar I know, Curtis. I suppose I should, just for purposes of not excluding any possibility, hold before me the notion that this last paragraph is the performance of irony which exceeds anything we have read on FFL. If it is this--and from some perspective I think it could be argued that this is indeed what you are doing here (I believe I could make the case for this reading of this passage, Curtis)--then I think it brilliant. But you are ever the shrewd scheming fellow, Curtis (when it comes to controversy over truth or human motives or what is real--once the fight begins). But in the context of my having written all that I wrote to you yesterday, for this to be your first attempt at answering me (and you want this post to do the work of this, Curtis), well you have (if you were not being deliberately ironic) proven that those four posts are unanswerable. I am perceptive, Curtis, and my four posts addressed to yourself yesterday touch upon reality. As does my analysis of Barry Wright. Do you give the stars permission to come out in the sky tonight? We are both extremely objective, Curtis. Me for one purpose, you for another. Robin
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robin Carlsen maskedzebra@ wrote: This means the FFL reader experiences a strange kind of reality: A person who is expressing a strong opinion who, when he does this, does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself when he does this. This might be a good example of the lack of perceptiveness I referred to in an earlier post Robin. Barry's frequent stream of consciousness writing style makes this more obvious than for most posters. The sentence *doesn't* make much sense when you take it out of context like that, does it? Especially when you go on to suggest that Barry's stream-of-consciousness style would tend to refute it. The rest of the piece just amplifies this impression. You believe only a word flood can answer a word flood, I do not. You know, Curtis, the dismissively loaded phrase word flood may have had some impact the first time you used it, but it doesn't wear too well with constant repetition. About all it conveys now is that you're at a loss to deal with detailed reasoning. If you had understood what Robin wrote, you could have made an appropriate succinct comment. The one you did make about stream of consciousness was irrelevant. Too bad you didn't think of this ploy the first time you tried to argue against the post. Then, according to you, Robin couldn't see Barry's experience of himself in his posts because Barry isn't open to being vulnerable to people he doesn't like. That was also true and reveals a common cognitive problem you have. (snicker) Right, Curtis. It's my cognitive problem that I am able to spot your inconsistencies. You cannot hold to different ideas in your mind together. Hint:One deals with his direct communication with someone and one is a general writing piece for people like me who enjoy them. Robin was explicit that his analysis *excluded* the latter. Neither attempted refutation has much of anything to do with Robin's actual analysis, which is considerably more subtle and complex than you've been able to grasp (or at least wanted anybody else to grasp). Jesus Robin will you plze throw some holy water on this long suffering disciple. I liked the little insinuation that I can magically control how other people view Robin by expressing an opinion. I didn't mean to suggest you're *successful* at it. I wonder if you believe you have such magical powers? (Barry's response to your post is amusing. To support your attempted refutation of Robin's analysis, he offers the fact that he types very fast and doesn't do any editing, which has even less to do with anything Robin wrote.) Unless you are seeing it my way which is that he is describing the mechanics of why I see his thought process about himself in his writing. I wonder whether Barry would acknowledge that he shows his own experience of himself in his writing: Barry: In fact, the less awareness of self I have, the better the writing seems to flow. Self 'gets in the way.' Robin: ...does not offer up any evidence of what his own experience is of himself... But I'm ready to be proven wrong. Perhaps you could show us how much more Judy reveals about her experience of herself in her writing, as a clear contrast. It isn't something that can be shown, in either my case or Barry's (or anybody else's, for that matter). Where it shows (or doesn't show) is in our respective posts. Another hidden fault like the ones you see in me that you are uniquely able to see... (I think you meant to type this underneath the paragraph immediately below.) If you can't see the difference in what Robin is talking about between my posts and Barry's, perhaps it's *your* lack of perceptiveness that's the problem. Snaaap! No you dn't! In your writing, you seem to only be able to focus on your experience of yourself. That is what is killing your ability to perceive others beyond your internal cartoon images of them. Carried away by your internal experience, you fill the page with observations that only apply to your internal world. Just a manufactured insult, not something you actually believe to be the case. You aren't *that* undiscerning. And the winner of I know more about your internal processes than you do award is... OK, maybe you *are* that undiscerning. sorry Judy, it is still Robin. But keep it he may not enter some year. Having a bit of a hard time here, ain'cha?
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: (snip) it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* Um, and you thought you were correcting what from me? My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. Interesting, Share will apologize at the drop of a hat even when she hasn't done anything to apologize for, but she simply cannot pry an apology out of her mouth (or fingers) for having accused Robin of psychological rape. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Hmmm, I don't either. And somehow it doesn't seem to be in the archives. Ann, do *you* remember saying this? Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. I hope Robin is able to see you're making progress in learning how to do irony. (Fortunately I use a plastic cover on my keyboard, or it would be dead of coffee poisoning.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: (snip) Do you think that either of them (Judy and Robin) is even *capable* of understanding how insane this level of self-absorbed narcissism reveals them to be? Well over 40 posts between the two of them, in one day, ranting to (as far as I can tell) no one, because no one sane would bother to read them. Interesting. Barry seems to have added Curtis and Steve and Share to his Do Not Read list.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Previous Lives was HITLER'S VALENTINE
John, for me, the images of previous lives usually offer helpful insights about a current life situation. Once a friend and I had an upset. I left the building and sat in the car just being upset and gazing mindlessly. Suddenly an image of her as Mother Superior and me as novice appeared in my mind's eye. It helped me understand that current dynamic between us. Another time a healer and I were saying goodbye after a session. Suddenly I heard: I'm never going to see him again. Later I realized that that thought was from a previous life wherein he and I had been married, he went off to war, was killed and I never saw him again. How I also know that the thought was from a previous life is that I have seen him often since he lives in FF part of the year. Me and my ex both had insights about our previous lives together including an image that we both had. Again, they were helpful for understanding our relationship. I've never done any workshops about previous lives, nor read any books about accessing them. It's all been quite spontaneous and not such a big deal. Except in being helpful in the present. As for The Name of the Rose, I'm pretty sure I was a judge in at least one of the Inquisitions. Wish it wasn't true but I'm pretty sure I was. Probably still burning off that karma. One memory about my ex: in a very early human life we were mates and very happy. Then he died unexpectedly, I was so grief stricken that I vowed I would never let that happen again. What followed were many lives, almost all unhappy, of being a nun. And many lives as a uh working girl. Happier but still not wonderful. I also have intuitions about the previous lives of others, even here on FFL, but usually I keep that to myself unless asked. How about you? Any memories, images, etc. of previous lives? Share From: John jr_...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 11:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE Share, Since you brought it up, who and where were you in the previous lifetime? If you were joking, just forget it. JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: hi John, due to unfelicitous previous lifetime, any occasion wherein the words monks, murder and Middle Ages appear together, I seek other entertainment. However I did find a good synopsis of the tale online, though in true Gemini fashion read it very quickly and thus missed the vital part about laughter being a sin. Thank you for supplying that and sorry for both my dimwittedness and hastiness, what a combination! I know it's no fun to have to explain a post thus using another post, like that like that. Anyhoo I admit to you that I am once again tempted to watch this movie but I'm guessing it's a bit gory what with the Inquisition being a subtext, murders being the main events, etc. As for laughing being a sin, I'm not sure. But if you laugh at Death, you're a goner for sure (-:   From: John jr_esq@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 8:30 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  Share, The movie is a detective story in a monastery setting during the Middle Ages. The character (that Sean Connery was playing) was in a hot pursuit of the murderer of the monks in the monastery. It turned out that the culprit was the old blind abbot who poisoned the pages of an ancient book of comedy. Why? Because the old abbot believed that laughing was a sin. I just thought that you may have seen the movie. But you can probably see the application of the movie plot here on FFL with this particular thread. :) JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Oy, another cryptic man! Recommending a movie about a whole monastery of cryptic men! Ah, time for the Dome, cryptic women (-: Hey John, worried about Mars Ketu coming up in June, I had a reading with Bill Levacy. His prediction: accelerated (Mars) stable (Saturn) expansion (Guru). I have seen this movie in the library but Sean Connery, as cute as he is, was not inspiration enough to induce me to borrow. Thanks for good wishes. From: John jr_esq@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 3:19 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  Share, The message that you seek is in this film. Have fun. :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
You're right. I did an advanced search and it was Raunchy who used the term social aikido to describe an exchange I had with turq. Sorry if I offended you Ann. Sorry if I didn't give you credit, Raunchy. Sorry, Robin for my faulty memory. Sorry, Emily that I thought you were enjoying yourself on FFL when you weren't. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 12:26 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: (snip) it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* Um, and you thought you were correcting what from me? My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. Interesting, Share will apologize at the drop of a hat even when she hasn't done anything to apologize for, but she simply cannot pry an apology out of her mouth (or fingers) for having accused Robin of psychological rape. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Hmmm, I don't either. And somehow it doesn't seem to be in the archives. Ann, do *you* remember saying this? Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. I hope Robin is able to see you're making progress in learning how to do irony. (Fortunately I use a plastic cover on my keyboard, or it would be dead of coffee poisoning.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: (snip) This seems to be one of the axes that Robin's arguments revolve on. Does 'reality' in fact ever say anything at all? In fact? Oooopsie! That was a question, not a statement about reality as a fact. 'What does reality say?' I don't know. For example, if reality had something to 'say', of what would that saying consist and how would it be delivered? Whatever reality might be, it seems we, as individuals, spend a lot of time trying to tell the world how it should be and how we ought to be. But the world just does what it does, and people change rather slowly if at all. This is just a straw man argument that puts Robin in charge of interpreting what 'reality' wants of us. You never learn anything from Robin, except that eventually you are under attack for not knowing what is expected of you. You should probably speak for yourself, Xeno. Sometimes I am inspired to excess. But in my 'conversations' with Robin, it always seems to come around to him telling me reality is trying to tell me something. It's better to just walk away from that mental prison he wants you to ensnare you with, unless you feel like jousting, but you need to have a lot of time on your hands, because you will be swamped with long discourses which take forever to decipher. Judy seems to indicate she understands these, but if you ask her to interpret them for you, she will not comply, for it is beneath her to truck with idiots, and thus she does not have to demonstrate she understands what Robin says. Now, don't *you* start lying too, Xeno. Or at least if you do, try to pick a lie that has some likelihood of getting by at least some of the idiots, er, folks here. Anyone who's followed the traffic knows I've spent a great deal of time interpreting and explaining what Robin has said (I shouldn't have to because he isn't that hard to understand). I did refuse *once* to interpret him to you, because you demanded that I do so in order to show that I understood him. I have no need to prove myself on that score. It is nice courtesy to give people hints and explanations about things one feels one understands and which one feels others do not get. Actions speak louder than words, the trite phrase goes. I do not know just how you understand Robin. Obviously you defend him, somewhat in the manner of a pit bull at times. It would be nice, at some point, for you to review those points about Robin you tend to keep to yourself in a form that is not a rebuttal to someone else's view. Now that might prompt someone to attack it, but that is standard procedure on FFL. Maybe even Robin would attack it, though that is just speculation on my part. Perhaps my failing here is I do not have time to read everything on FFL. I suppose I have missed a number of things you said about Robin. I do feel you may attribute a certain grandeur to his expositions. That is fine. We all have our likes and dislikes. Here is one of the ideas I think is grand. The Ouverture to Handel's Occasional Oratorio. He even stole the ideas for the fugal section from Telemann but reworked it in his own inimitable style. http://youtu.be/EE78nsIAfLo
[FairfieldLife] Re: Previous Lives was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Share, I'm not sure if it means anything. But I've always been fascinated by the ancient Roman culture. So, I decided to spend my vacation in Rome in September 2003. But due to scheduling conflicts, I ended up first in Paris, France (my favorite place was the Jardin de Luxembourg, and the Louvre). Then, I took the train to Lausanne, Switzerland where I spent two nights. From there I continued to Milan and Rome, Italy. During my stay in Rome, I visited the Roman Forum, the Colossium, Palatino (that's the hill where the emperors once lived), and the Vatican, including the Sistine Chapel and St. Peter's Basilica. So, with the recent media coverage of the papal selection, it was pleasant to recall that I was in the Vatican, at least once. :) JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: John, for me, the images of previous lives usually offer helpful insights about a current life situation. Once a friend and I had an upset. I left the building and sat in the car just being upset and gazing mindlessly. Suddenly an image of her as Mother Superior and me as novice appeared in my mind's eye. It helped me understand that current dynamic between us. Another time a healer and I were saying goodbye after a session. Suddenly I heard: I'm never going to see him again. Later I realized that that thought was from a previous life wherein he and I had been married, he went off to war, was killed and I never saw him again. How I also know that the thought was from a previous life is that I have seen him often since he lives in FF part of the year. Me and my ex both had insights about our previous lives together including an image that we both had. Again, they were helpful for understanding our relationship. I've never done any workshops about previous lives, nor read any books about accessing them. It's all been quite spontaneous and not such a big deal. Except in being helpful in the present. As for The Name of the Rose, I'm pretty sure I was a judge in at least one of the Inquisitions. Wish it wasn't true but I'm pretty sure I was. Probably still burning off that karma. One memory about my ex: in a very early human life we were mates and very happy. Then he died unexpectedly, I was so grief stricken that I vowed I would never let that happen again. What followed were many lives, almost all unhappy, of being a nun. And many lives as a uh working girl. Happier but still not wonderful. I also have intuitions about the previous lives of others, even here on FFL, but usually I keep that to myself unless asked. How about you? Any memories, images, etc. of previous lives? Share From: John jr_esq@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 11:05 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE  Share, Since you brought it up, who and where were you in the previous lifetime? If you were joking, just forget it. JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: hi John, due to unfelicitous previous lifetime, any occasion wherein the words monks, murder and Middle Ages appear together, I seek other entertainment.àHowever I did find a good synopsis of the tale online, though in true Gemini fashion read it very quickly and thus missed the vital part about laughter being a sin.àThank you for supplying that and sorry for both my dimwittedness and hastiness, what a combination!àI know it's no fun to have to explain a post thus using another post, like that like that.àAnyhoo I admit to you that I am once again tempted to watch this movie but I'm guessing it's a bit gory what with the Inquisition being a subtext, murders being the main events, etc.àAs for laughing being a sin, I'm not sure.àBut if you laugh at Death, you're a goner for sure (-: ààFrom: John jr_esq@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 6, 2013 8:30 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE àShare, The movie is a detective story in a monastery setting during the Middle Ages. The character (that Sean Connery was playing) was in a hot pursuit of the murderer of the monks in the monastery. It turned out that the culprit was the old blind abbot who poisoned the pages of an ancient book of comedy. Why? Because the old abbot believed that laughing was a sin. I just thought that you may have seen the movie. But you can probably see the application of the movie plot here on FFL with this particular thread. :) JR --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: Oy, another cryptic man!ÃâàRecommending a movie about a whole monastery of cryptic men!ÃâàAh,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
Share, I have no idea why you are apologizing for this. You have exactly demonstrated the principle of what Judy is saying. First, the comment you made about isn't it fun and funny was completely dismissive of my posts. Not to mention, you missed entirely what I was writing, why I was writing it, the context for why I was writing it. With regard to yourself, my communication to you started with my objection to your Dolphie posts and my posting, in response, that gypsy lament. I thought your posts callous and crude and disrespectful to all of the WWII casualties, also completely irrelevant/dismissive to what Robin was saying, but more than that, I was simply offended and was giving you feedback. I am just telling you how what you wrote affected me in the moment - I am over it and won't hold it against you. I am acutely aware that I don't think or communicate like you and I can't know what you were thinking or feeling when you wrote those posts - I give you, as a person certainly, the benefit of the doubt - I didn't give your posts as much. In applying what Steve said about you communicating from a different angle, etc., I see that more and more and I often get a kick out of what you post (I am not holding a grudge either.) I appreciate that you acknowledge below that you did have a grudge or two last year and that you were not choosing to carry the term psychological rape forward. It's not an apology, but it is an indirect acknowledgement of a shift in your perception. One thing about FFL being an internet forum Share...it's conducive to illuminating our inner selves, our internal reality about ourselves, how we think, judgments we hold, potential discrepancies between our inner and our outer presentation, etc. (to ourselves and others'). If we show up, we subject ourselves to the possibility of feedback in many forms. It may or may not apply, but it may show up and one has no real control over it. You both give and receive here, whether you like it or not. And, just for the record, you never *owe me* an apology Share, just so you know. I'm over that misconception when it comes to FFL and the role it plays in my life. From: Share Long sharelon...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 10:49 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE You're right. I did an advanced search and it was Raunchy who used the term social aikido to describe an exchange I had with turq. Sorry if I offended you Ann. Sorry if I didn't give you credit, Raunchy. Sorry, Robin for my faulty memory. Sorry, Emily that I thought you were enjoying yourself on FFL when you weren't. From: authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 12:26 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: (snip) it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* Um, and you thought you were correcting what from me? My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. Interesting, Share will apologize at the drop of a hat even when she hasn't done anything to apologize for, but she simply cannot pry an apology out of her mouth (or fingers) for having accused Robin of psychological rape. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Hmmm, I don't either. And somehow it doesn't seem to be in the archives. Ann, do *you* remember saying this? Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. I hope Robin is able to see you're making progress in learning how to do irony. (Fortunately I use a plastic cover on my keyboard, or it would be dead of coffee poisoning.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend authfriend@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ wrote: (snip) This seems to be one of the axes that Robin's arguments revolve on. Does 'reality' in fact ever say anything at all? In fact? Oooopsie! That was a question, not a statement about reality as a fact. Yes, I'm aware of that. 'What does reality say?' I don't know. For example, if reality had something to 'say', of what would that saying consist and how would it be delivered? Would it have anything to say that could be characterized as fact in the first place? And if so, how would we know? You appeared to be disputing that it did, and if so, that we could know it, so in fact seemed rather out of place. Whatever reality might be, it seems we, as individuals, spend a lot of time trying to tell the world how it should be and how we ought to be. But the world just does what it does, and people change rather slowly if at all. This is just a straw man argument that puts Robin in charge of interpreting what 'reality' wants of us. You never learn anything from Robin, except that eventually you are under attack for not knowing what is expected of you. You should probably speak for yourself, Xeno. Sometimes I am inspired to excess. But in my 'conversations' with Robin, it always seems to come around to him telling me reality is trying to tell me something. Right. I just meant you should replace you in the paragraph above with I. Robin has gone to great lengths to try to explain how he interprets what reality wants of him *so the rest of us could do it for ourselves*. To suggest that he wants to be in charge of interpretations of reality is directly opposed to his actual intention, as demonstrated by many of his posts (none of which, apparently, have you bothered to read). It's better to just walk away from that mental prison he wants you to ensnare you with, unless you feel like jousting, but you need to have a lot of time on your hands, because you will be swamped with long discourses which take forever to decipher. Judy seems to indicate she understands these, but if you ask her to interpret them for you, she will not comply, for it is beneath her to truck with idiots, and thus she does not have to demonstrate she understands what Robin says. Now, don't *you* start lying too, Xeno. Or at least if you do, try to pick a lie that has some likelihood of getting by at least some of the idiots, er, folks here. Anyone who's followed the traffic knows I've spent a great deal of time interpreting and explaining what Robin has said (I shouldn't have to because he isn't that hard to understand). I did refuse *once* to interpret him to you, because you demanded that I do so in order to show that I understood him. I have no need to prove myself on that score. It is nice courtesy to give people hints and explanations about things one feels one understands and which one feels others do not get. Which I've done many, many times (usually when he isn't around to do it himself). Actions speak louder than words, the trite phrase goes. I do not know just how you understand Robin. Obviously you defend him, somewhat in the manner of a pit bull at times. It would be nice, at some point, for you to review those points about Robin you tend to keep to yourself in a form that is not a rebuttal to someone else's view. I don't know what points about Robin you imagine I keep to myself. I'm certainly not aware of any. As I said, I didn't comply with your demand because I didn't think I needed to prove anything to you. In most cases, as I've said elsewhere, I shouldn't really have to explain what Robin has said. It seems to me folks aren't clear about it because they don't bother to read his posts with attention; yet they feel they're qualified to comment anyway. Now that might prompt someone to attack it, but that is standard procedure on FFL. Maybe even Robin would attack it, though that is just speculation on my part. Perhaps my failing here is I do not have time to read everything on FFL. I suppose I have missed a number of things you said about Robin. Yes, I imagine you have. More importantly, you've missed much of what he's said about himself. I do feel you may attribute a certain grandeur to his expositions. That is fine. We all have our likes and dislikes. I'm not sure I attribute any grandeur to Robin's expositions. Insight and integrity and courage, perhaps, but I wouldn't describe those qualities as grandeur. Here is one of the ideas I think is grand. The Ouverture to Handel's Occasional Oratorio. He even stole the ideas for the fugal section from Telemann but reworked it in his own inimitable style. http://youtu.be/EE78nsIAfLo
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
Barry, just to say, I fully enjoyed this and all the pictures. Curtis, this is extraordinarily beautiful. I think I'm going to have an orgasm - that's how much I love this. Now, to all, I did want to leave on a positive note, so there ya go - doesn't get more positive than that for a 50 year old single woman. Feste - being here requires sacrifices in time - it is true. It is time again to attend to the rest of my life. Catch ya on the flip side. Emily. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:20 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06 The pictures added a lot, thanks for the great report. My Nigerian musician friend just came back from Paris, so,I'll get an update from him on the Parisan music scene today. He'll be back in Paris at the end of the month. He is worth looking up. We've been busking on the same boardwalk for years here. One of the really exceptional people I've met out there. We will be out today for the first nice busking day of the season. Hope your day in Paris is just as bright. Here is my brother Kuku's site, check him out. http://kukulive.com/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de Paris, celebrating its 850th year. I didn't go inside, having been there done that far too often; the photo of me in the FFL Photos area was taken on its roof. But I did pause for a moment outside the front entrance to photograph one of my favorite mini-monuments to the French mindset: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8384/8626608325_62d317266e.jpg] This is called Point Zero. It is the point from which all distances in the known physical universe were measured. In other words, not only did the French consider their country (and thus
[FairfieldLife] Boycott Monsanto A Simple List of Companies to Avoid
Boycott Monsanto A Simple List of Companies to Avoid http://fracturedparadigm.com/2013/04/02/boycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-\ of-companies-to-avoid/ By Fractured Paradigm http://fracturedparadigm.com/author/fractured-paradigm/ April 2, 2013Posted in: Featured http://fracturedparadigm.com/category/featured/ , GMOs http://fracturedparadigm.com/category/population-control/gmos/ , Population Control http://fracturedparadigm.com/category/population-control/Help spread the word: [Facebook] http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.com\ %2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to-avoid\ %2F [Twitter] http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.com%2F2013%\ 2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to-avoid%2Ftext\ =Boycott+Monsanto+%26%238211%3B+A+Simple+List+of+Companies+to+Avoid [Reddit] http://www.reddit.com/login?dest=%2Fsubmit%3Furl=http%3A%2F%2Ffractured\ paradigm.com%2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-compan\ ies-to-avoid%2Ftitle=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.com%2F2013%2F04%2F0\ 2%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to-avoid%2F [Digg] http://digg.com/submit?partner=addthisurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadi\ gm.com%2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to\ -avoid%2Ftitle=Boycott+Monsanto+%26%238211%3B+A+Simple+List+of+Companie\ s+to+Avoidbodytext= [Stumbleupon] http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.co\ m%2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to-avoi\ d%2Ftitle=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.com%2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott\ -monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to-avoid%2F [Tumblr] http://www.tumblr.com/share/link?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.com\ %2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-companies-to-avoid\ %2Fname=Boycott+Monsanto+%26%238211%3B+A+Simple+List+of+Companies+to+Av\ oiddescription= [Delicious] http://www.delicious.com/save?v=5nouijump=closeurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffrac\ turedparadigm.com%2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a-simple-list-of-c\ ompanies-to-avoid%2Ftitle=Boycott+Monsanto+%26%238211%3B+A+Simple+List+\ of+Companies+to+Avoid [Email] mailto:?subject=Check out http%3A%2F%2Ffracturedparadigm.com%2F2013%2F04%2F02%2Fboycott-monsanto-a\ -simple-list-of-companies-to-avoid%2F In light of the recent public anger over the Monsanto Protection Act, here's a simple, printable list of companies that use Monsanto products. By avoiding products made by companies on this list, you can help ensure your money isn't going to Monsanto and also watch out for the health of your family and yourself. [monsanto_companies] http://fracturedparadigm.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/monsanto_compan\ ies.jpg If you wish to print, simply click on the list and choose Print from your browser's menu (or press CTRL+P/CMD+P).
Re: [FairfieldLife] My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds!
Cardemaister, I was blown away by this and told my pastoral counselor about it. She wondered if it had been replicated. Anyway, thanks for posting. From: card cardemais...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 7:46 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] My Third Post: Wisdom of Crowds! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=982E49KAMyw
[FairfieldLife] FYI
[FairfieldLife] How to subdue evil tyrants
First, use Psalm 91; but definitely get Psalm 91 - True Life Stories with case histories from Peggy Joyce Ruth. .. Next, pray to St. Michael the Archangel to subdue the evil dictators. http://www.theworkofgod.org/Saints/Lives/SMichael.htm ... If enough people do this, the evil ones will self-destruct. However, we don't know in advance how the situation(s) will play out - whether there will be an actual physical war or not. In any event, the prayers will help insure the victory of Good over evil; and we can look to cases like Nebuchadnezzar to get an idea of the end result.
[FairfieldLife] Woman in corset
1899 http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/8/78035.jpg
[FairfieldLife] Museum of Purgatory
http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/museum-holy-souls-purgatory
[FairfieldLife] Dr. Royal Rife silenced by the medical Mafia
http://www.naturalnews.com/027104_cancer_WHO_Chi.html
[FairfieldLife] Post Count Mon 08-Apr-13 00:15:02 UTC
Fairfield Life Post Counter === Start Date (UTC): 04/06/13 00:00:00 End Date (UTC): 04/13/13 00:00:00 212 messages as of (UTC) 04/07/13 23:40:45 35 authfriend 24 seventhray27 16 Robin Carlsen 14 curtisdeltablues 12 Share Long 11 John 10 Buck 9 turquoiseb 9 Richard J. Williams 8 card 8 Ann 7 laughinggull108 7 feste37 7 Bhairitu 6 Michael Jackson 4 Yifu 4 Ravi Chivukula 4 Mike Dixon 4 Emily Reyn 2 nablusoss1008 2 emilymae.reyn 2 Xenophaneros Anartaxius 2 Duveyoung 1 sparaig 1 merlin 1 Jason 1 Dick Mays 1 Alex Stanley Posters: 28 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: Woman in corset
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Yifu yifuxero@... wrote: 1899 http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/8/78035.jpg A friend of mine wore something like that to a sci-fi convention once. Add green sparkly fabric, and antennae, and you get a great alien hive queen costume.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@... wrote: Barry, just to say, I fully enjoyed this and all the pictures.  Curtis, this is extraordinarily beautiful.  I think I'm going to have an orgasm - that's how much I love this.  Now, to all, I did want to leave on a positive note, so there ya go - doesn't get more positive than that for a 50 year old single woman.  Feste - being here requires sacrifices in time - it is true.  It is time again to attend to the rest of my life.  Catch ya on the flip side.  Emily.   Well, all I have to say is nice climax. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:20 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06  The pictures added a lot, thanks for the great report. My Nigerian musician friend just came back from Paris, so,I'll get an update from him on the Parisan music scene today. He'll be back in Paris at the end of the month. He is worth looking up. We've been busking on the same boardwalk for years here. One of the really exceptional people I've met out there. We will be out today for the first nice busking day of the season. Hope your day in Paris is just as bright. Here is my brother Kuku's site, check him out. http://kukulive.com/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de Paris, celebrating its 850th year. I didn't go inside, having been there done that far too often; the photo of me in the FFL Photos area was taken on its roof. But I did pause for a moment outside the front entrance to photograph one of my favorite mini-monuments to the French mindset:
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote: You're right. I did an advanced search and it was Raunchy who used the term social aikido to describe an exchange I had with turq. Sorry if I offended you Ann. Sorry if I didn't give you credit, Raunchy. Sorry, Robin for my faulty memory. Sorry, Emily that I thought you were enjoying yourself on FFL when you weren't. Sorry, seems to be your word for the day. Did you know that when Canadians say sorry it sounds more like sore-y'? This small bit of trivia might come in useful for you, I'm not sure. I think, if it makes you feel less sorry, that I said something about a Japanese tea ceremony with reference to your interaction with Robin, back in the early days (Curtis?). You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that, just like I don't believe he read Proof of Heaven. Of course, I may be completely wrong but that is my intuition. At this point, it probably doesn't matter. I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. But have no fear - most of the time no one is taking offense. The other times you may be unlucky enough to have missed the fact that what you thought benign was, in fact, fairly potent. But, hey, welcome to the human condition - it's called fallibility. By the way, have you and I met in a past life? I have no inklings of this but I would enjoy your take on it. From: authfriend authfriend@... To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 12:26 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: (snip) it was a Judy style correction for Judy who forgot that my appt is on Sunday afternoon* Um, and you thought you were correcting what from me? My not carrying the grudge energy into 2013 also is applied to you as best as I can in any given moment. So no need to be concerned about psychological rape on my account. Interesting, Share will apologize at the drop of a hat even when she hasn't done anything to apologize for, but she simply cannot pry an apology out of her mouth (or fingers) for having accused Robin of psychological rape. It seems that you don't remember that AWB also compared our exchanges to verbal aikido (-: Hmmm, I don't either. And somehow it doesn't seem to be in the archives. Ann, do *you* remember saying this? Sorry, yahoo is still being wonky and sometimes I forget to look at Message View. I missed your first posting of the poignant poem about talking in bed. It touched me and my sentimental heart. I hope you can, in relation to me, adopt Curtis' style of gentle acceptance. I hope Robin is able to see you're making progress in learning how to do irony. (Fortunately I use a plastic cover on my keyboard, or it would be dead of coffee poisoning.)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn emilymae.reyn@ wrote: Barry, just to say, I fully enjoyed this and all the pictures.  Curtis, this is extraordinarily beautiful.  I think I'm going to have an orgasm - that's how much I love this.  Now, to all, I did want to leave on a positive note, so there ya go - doesn't get more positive than that for a 50 year old single woman.  Feste - being here requires sacrifices in time - it is true.  It is time again to attend to the rest of my life.  Catch ya on the flip side.  Emily.   Well, all I have to say is nice climax. I missed the parentheses. I think something like that deserves all the trappings and window dressing it can get. So, let me rephrase: Well, all I have to say is, NIce climax. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 7, 2013 5:20 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Free Man In Paris, v2.06  The pictures added a lot, thanks for the great report. My Nigerian musician friend just came back from Paris, so,I'll get an update from him on the Parisan music scene today. He'll be back in Paris at the end of the month. He is worth looking up. We've been busking on the same boardwalk for years here. One of the really exceptional people I've met out there. We will be out today for the first nice busking day of the season. Hope your day in Paris is just as bright. Here is my brother Kuku's site, check him out. http://kukulive.com/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: I know that a few here have been hoping for more of a travelogue in these epistles than a rantalogue, and today I may be able to provide one. So far, I've been literally commuting to Paris -- working here during the week, and going home to Leiden on the weekends. But this weekend I decided to stay, because I have to look for a more permanent apartment, and it's difficult to do that while working. Yesterday I did just that, and hopefully have found a place that is PERFECT for my needs -- it's a one-bedroom apt, with a full bed but also a remarkably comfortable sofabed that accommodates two more people, should any of my extended family choose to visit while I'm there (and they will). Just outside the door is the Metro stop that will take me to work, and the area is just littered with great cafes, restaurants, sushi bars, and hangout bars. Steps away is rue Mouffetard, one of the great streets of Paris, full of markets, shops, and even more bars and restaurants. I hope I get it -- the only issue is that Paris landlords are pickier than Judy Stein (imagine that!) and want you to document everything about your life before they'll rent to you. I felt comfortable signing the agreement to provide her with my first-born male child if I default on the rent (since that's not likely to happen anyway), but one can never be sure she'll go for it. I hope she does...it's a great place in a wonderful location. Right now I'm staying a little further away, in a lovely (but tiny) apartment in the 5th arrondissement. The building is old and historical, and used to be (get the irony of this) a cloister for the nuns and priests who taught at L'université de Cardinal Lemoine. These days it has been converted into upscale apartments: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8523/8626604507_d9a0713621.jpg] although the rooms are still nun-sized. Fascinatingly, next door is a cabaret/strip joint: [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8525/8626603253_ae4192.jpg] so the nuns must be restless in their graves. I think one of them may have visited me in the dream plane last night. I turned her down...she was old and gnarly and frankly far too frustrated from a life of denial for me to even think of trying to rectify that situation. :-) The apartment-hunting hopefully over, I decided to walk along the Seine this morning and find a nice cafe with free Wifi (often here charmingly called Wistro) at which to write this over un petit dejeuner of cafe creme, jus d'orange, croissants and tartines. On the way, I walked over the Pont de l'Archevêché, now famous because lovers have decorated it with padlocks with their names inscribed, as if to declare their undying love. Color me unconvinced; in one particular area I saw at least ten padlocks inscribed with the name Pascal, each one with a different woman's name on it. Pascal got around, and his sense of undying love seems to be a lot like Maharishi's idea of how long promises to his TM teachers were to be kept. [http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8122/8626606361_5f9f6d7e34.jpg] Then I walked past Notre Dame de
[FairfieldLife] Re: parsing a la Descartes was HITLER'S VALENTINE
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann awoelflebater@... wrote: (snip) You and Robin seemed to be able to engage in some wonderful dialogue back then. And for the record, I DO think Curtis meant that from the BEGINNING, (I'm not bothering with the outset or the onset, I'm not getting embroiled in the semantics of that) Right, that's irrelevant. That was laughinggull's error, and even if LG had been correct, it would have made no difference to what Curtis said. that Robin was itching for some kind of fight with you. Curtis is arguing against this but I am not buying that There are a number of reasons not to buy it, including his insistence that it was obvious what he meant when what was obvious was that what he said was at best *ambiguous*. Furthermore, he completely ignored the fact that Robin was responding to an extremely unfriendly post of Share's, in which she had accused him of being sarcastic and accusatory when [Curtis] sounded reasonable. This was with reference to Robin's critique of Curtis's response to your post about Barry, Ann. (snip) I believe I have said this before to you, but not in quite the same way; apologizing can be a means of avoidance. It can appear so generalized, so non-specific that it seeks to encompass everything and manages to address nothing relevant. You blanket the world with apologies just in case offense has been taken somewhere. It is like you seek to inoculate yourself against possible offense taken by others before they even have time to react. It also cheapens the significance of the apology. If someone is constantly apologizing for insignificant or nonexistent offenses thinking it will make themselves look good, what will an apology from this person mean for something that really requires an apology? If an apology costs nothing to make, it's worthless to the person to whom it is given. It would cost Share something to apologize for calling Robin a psychological rapist. But she isn't willing to give that much of herself to right the grievous wrong for which she was responsible.
[FairfieldLife] Sanskrit: speech and splendour!
Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon: Search Results 1 AbhASa m. speech , talking ; addressing R. ; a saying , proverb ; introduction , preface L. 2 AbhAsa m. splendour , light R. Veda1ntas. 195 ; colour , appearance R. Sus3r. Bhag. ; semblance , phantom , phantasm of the imagination ; mere appearance , fallacious appearance Veda1ntas. S3a1n3khS3r. ; reflection ; intention , purpose ; (in log.) fallacy , semblance of a reason , sophism , an erroneous though plausible argument (regarded by logicians as of various kind) ; ifc. looking like , having the mere appearance of a thing Gaut. Sa1h. c. (Can you spot the difference between those two words? LOL!)
