[FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick
the discussions between Buck and Rick sparked the question and I don't care what you think of me From: awoelfleba...@yahoo.com awoelfleba...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 9:49 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Rick, you seem to have found a bit of evidence of Movement shenanigans when it comes at least to money, plus the Movement propensity for covering stuff up like Hagelin's hitting on his students, the recent firing of a faculty member for sexual and financial impropriety, yet you seem quite keen on the Movement's latest efforts to push TM through David Lynch, saying that many people are getting good stuff (meaning I suppose like soldiers learning TM) My question is, with an organization that has shown systemic deceit, and penchant for improprieties, do you think they have just suddenly cleaned up their act, or what? I mean from my point of view, the last many years TM has been primarily a means for making money for M's family and keeping up the big boys like Bevan, keeping their gravy train going. Do you feel they no longer do this, or is it your POV that the people who learn TM now get the good out of it in spite of the shenanigans of the Movement? Sometimes MJ you remind me of some of the women I know who arrive at their hairdresser just drooling to know the latest gossip (or old gossip). There are two groups of people I have come across that know all the juicy stuff: hairdressers and farriers.
RE: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of awoelfleba...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 8:50 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Rick, you seem to have found a bit of evidence of Movement shenanigans when it comes at least to money, plus the Movement propensity for covering stuff up like Hagelin's hitting on his students, the recent firing of a faculty member for sexual and financial impropriety, yet you seem quite keen on the Movement's latest efforts to push TM through David Lynch, saying that many people are getting good stuff (meaning I suppose like soldiers learning TM) My question is, with an organization that has shown systemic deceit, and penchant for improprieties, do you think they have just suddenly cleaned up their act, or what? I mean from my point of view, the last many years TM has been primarily a means for making money for M's family and keeping up the big boys like Bevan, keeping their gravy train going. Do you feel they no longer do this, or is it your POV that the people who learn TM now get the good out of it in spite of the shenanigans of the Movement? Sometimes MJ you remind me of some of the women I know who arrive at their hairdresser just drooling to know the latest gossip (or old gossip). There are two groups of people I have come across that know all the juicy stuff: hairdressers and farriers. I think the organization is multifaceted, not monolithic. It’s not the Aryan Brotherhood or the KKK after all. There have been and are some creeps in the movement (and even they have their good qualities), but despite them (and sometimes because of them) the movement has been and is doing good things. From my vantage point, it’s a lot more positive than negative.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick, NICELY ANSWERED RICK, I FULLY AGREE
WELL STATED RICK In a message dated 09/04/13 11:51:53 Eastern Daylight Time, r...@searchsummit.com writes: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of awoelfleba...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 8:50 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Rick, you seem to have found a bit of evidence of Movement shenanigans when it comes at least to money, plus the Movement propensity for covering stuff up like Hagelin's hitting on his students, the recent firing of a faculty member for sexual and financial impropriety, yet you seem quite keen on the Movement's latest efforts to push TM through David Lynch, saying that many people are getting good stuff (meaning I suppose like soldiers learning TM) My question is, with an organization that has shown systemic deceit, and penchant for improprieties, do you think they have just suddenly cleaned up their act, or what? I mean from my point of view, the last many years TM has been primarily a means for making money for M's family and keeping up the big boys like Bevan, keeping their gravy train going. Do you feel they no longer do this, or is it your POV that the people who learn TM now get the good out of it in spite of the shenanigans of the Movement? Sometimes MJ you remind me of some of the women I know who arrive at their hairdresser just drooling to know the latest gossip (or old gossip). There are two groups of people I have come across that know all the juicy stuff: hairdressers and farriers. I think the organization is multifaceted, not monolithic. It’s not the Aryan Brotherhood or the KKK after all. There have been and are some creeps in the movement (and even they have their good qualities), but despite them (and sometimes because of them) the movement has been and is doing good things. From my vantage point, it’s a lot more positive than negative.
RE: RE: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick
OK thanks, that's what I was wondering. From: Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 11:51 AM Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick From:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of awoelfleba...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 8:50 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Rick, you seem to have found a bit of evidence of Movement shenanigans when it comes at least to money, plus the Movement propensity for covering stuff up like Hagelin's hitting on his students, the recent firing of a faculty member for sexual and financial impropriety, yet you seem quite keen on the Movement's latest efforts to push TM through David Lynch, saying that many people are getting good stuff (meaning I suppose like soldiers learning TM) My question is, with an organization that has shown systemic deceit, and penchant for improprieties, do you think they have just suddenly cleaned up their act, or what? I mean from my point of view, the last many years TM has been primarily a means for making money for M's family and keeping up the big boys like Bevan, keeping their gravy train going. Do you feel they no longer do this, or is it your POV that the people who learn TM now get the good out of it in spite of the shenanigans of the Movement? Sometimes MJ you remind me of some of the women I know who arrive at their hairdresser just drooling to know the latest gossip (or old gossip). There are two groups of people I have come across that know all the juicy stuff: hairdressers and farriers. I think the organization is multifaceted, not monolithic. It’s not the Aryan Brotherhood or the KKK after all. There have been and are some creeps in the movement (and even they have their good qualities), but despite them (and sometimes because of them) the movement has been and is doing good things. From my vantage point, it’s a lot more positive than negative.
Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Question for Rick
Aw, don't be sore. I just wish I had more gossip for you. But seeing as I haven't followed what the Movement is doing since 1987 I'm a lousy source.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:11 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Question for Rick Archer 2) the next SEVEN results, however, are all commercial sites that are trying to sell you term insurance; sites such as statefarm.com, term4sale.com, quickquote.com, etc. It's only until we get to the 9th entry (the moneyalert.com website) is there another information article about term insurance that is not trying to sell me something. Question: are those seven results I refer to above coming up at or near the top of the results because those companies are paying Google to favor them? In other words, not only would I as, say, a life insurance company who is interested in selling term insurance pay google for a sponsored ad to the right or in the shaded yellow area but I could also pay them to prioritize my site as a result that would come out at the beginning of the list as the seven I point out above? Is this what I am seeing? No one is paying Google to be listed in the free or organic results. Some have wondered whether Google might favor sites that also buy advertizing, but that correlation has never been proven. The sites which come up highest in the free listings do so because Google's algorithm detects that those sites are most closely related to the search term. That relationship is determined by both on-page criteria - the site content and the way in which site pages have been optimized for various keywords - and off-site criteria, namely, link popularity. The latter is especially influenced by keyword-rich links from respected, well-established sites. There's nothing wrong with commercial sites ranking well in the organic listings, since very often, they offer what people are looking for. Thanks to both Richard M. and Rick for their answers. I understand it a lot better as a result. Although I'm not 100% convinced that Google isn't doing something with the organic listings. There always seems to be a set of specific sites that come up on the first page and they all seem commercial or ones that Google knows you want to see first (e.g. Wikipedia and/or imdb.com) and then ones that are totally useless but transparently commercial such as linkedin.com and manta.com. These two sites always seem to come up when I'm looking up someone's name but they are useless sites -- at least to me -- and I can't imagine anyone else using them. And that's why I assume that Google is being paid to list these kinds of companies first. It's a pain because I always have to waste my time on the first page and then get to the next one. Another thing I've noticed: it used to be that when I did a search on my own name on Google that about half of the results were Google groups postings. And then all of a sudden -- about 2 years ago -- that was cleaned up overnight. So they definitely were playing with the algorithm. I was just about to reply No really Shemp - you SHOULD be 100% convinced that Google isn't doing something with the organic listings when a bit of synchronicity kicked in and I got a link to this article today: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/12/googlewashing_revisited/ Google this week admitted that its staff will pick and choose what appears in its search results. It's a historic statement - and nobody has yet grasped its significance. It IS a huge seismic shift really. If true, (big if maybe) this is as big a shock to us geeks as is the collapse of the banks. Both represent the end of hubris: On the hand that the days of borrowing and boom will never end, and on the other that the computer wizards of Google can achieve near perfect search given a big enough server farm and a clever algorithm. If I can operate Google, I can find anything... Google, combined with Wi-Fi, is a little bit like God. God is wireless, God is everywhere and God sees and knows everything. Throughout history, people connected to God without wires. Now, for many questions in the world, you ask Google, and increasingly, you can do it without wires, too. (NYT 2003) It may not be widely publicised - but behind the scenes Google has been waging a vicious and bloody war against Black Hat SEO. This term refers to those very clever and inventive Search Engine Optimizer experts who are forever trying to trick Google so as to get their sites to appear high in the organic listings. (Rick of course is White hat SEO!). They are to search engines what spammers are to email. If it's indeed true that Google are planning to plug the weaknesses in the algorithm with human review, then this suggests that
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard M Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:45 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer It may not be widely publicised - but behind the scenes Google has been waging a vicious and bloody war against Black Hat SEO. This term refers to those very clever and inventive Search Engine Optimizer experts who are forever trying to trick Google so as to get their sites to appear high in the organic listings. (Rick of course is White hat SEO!). They are to search engines what spammers are to email. If it's indeed true that Google are planning to plug the weaknesses in the algorithm with human review, then this suggests that Google could be raising the white flag and giving in, overwhelmed by the bad guys. A great shame. (But then the evidence for this in the article seems a bit weak?) My understanding is that Google's very smart and well-paid Ph.D.'s are always doing searches, seeing what comes up, and then tweaking the algorithm if those results don't effectively fulfill the search queries. But there are so many web sites and so many search terms that they can't possibly manually manipulate a significant percentage of search results. Of course, if they can fairly block a black hat technique, that may sweep many sites off the SERPS (search engine results pages) in one fell swoop. And they have done this many times over the years. That's why it's good to stick with white hat techniques. Go for long-term results, unless you're working with a throw-away domain.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M compost...@... wrote: It's all going tits up isn't it? The banks, then the car industry, and now Google? Interesting times! Big brother and the New World Order. What a pair.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 4:44 AM, Richard M compost...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: It IS a huge seismic shift really. If true, (big if maybe) this is as big a shock to us geeks as is the collapse of the banks. Both represent the end of hubris: On the hand that the days of borrowing and boom will never end, and on the other that the computer wizards of Google can achieve near perfect search given a big enough server farm and a clever algorithm. To try to give perspective to those who think of Google as just a software company, let's try to put the scale of Google's server farms into perspective. Google's server farms in the US use more electricity than all of the TVs in the US.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcg...@... wrote: Rick, I ask the following questions because I understand you are in the search engine result-optimizer business (sorry if I am using an incorrect term to describe what your business is called, but you get the idea). When I do a Google search the results that come up seems to me to be listed in specific orders. For example, if I do a search on term insurance (see: http://tinyurl.com/6e98km ) we get the sponsored links on the right side as well as the sponsored links at the top on the left in the yellow shaded areas. Okay, I understand that; Google has to make money through the ads, which are the sponsored links. And they have two places where they put them on the results page. Great. But look at what comes in the regular results under the yellow shaded sponsored links: 1) the first entry appears legit: a Wikipedia entry for term insurance. Great, everyone loves Wiki and their entry is very clear and informative. 2) the next SEVEN results, however, are all commercial sites that are trying to sell you term insurance; sites such as statefarm.com, term4sale.com, quickquote.com, etc. It's only until we get to the 9th entry (the moneyalert.com website) is there another information article about term insurance that is not trying to sell me something. Question: are those seven results I refer to above coming up at or near the top of the results because those companies are paying Google to favor them? No, that's not the case. No one can pay for those links. They are known as organic listings - and although Google's algorithm for this is secret, the ranking is a function of (a) information content in the site's web pages and (b) an evaluation of the links on other sites pointing to those pages (think of them as votes for those pages. However it is the quality of those links as much as the quantity of links that counts). Unfortunately computers, even when powered by Google, are rather stupid. So organic listings are often iffy. But the brilliance of Google is that a purely robotic procedure is nevertheless able to have a pretty good stab at estimating page relevance in a way which we all find incredibly useful. In other words, not only would I as, say, a life insurance company who is interested in selling term insurance pay google for a sponsored ad to the right or in the shaded yellow area but I could also pay them to prioritize my site as a result that would come out at the beginning of the list as the seven I point out above? Is this what I am seeing? If this is so, isn't this just another form of advertising through Google? Wwhat does Google call this type of advertising and how much does it cost? Are there other ways that Google makes money on advertising? I thank you in advance for your attention to these questions...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick Archer
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shempmcgurk Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:11 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Question for Rick Archer 2) the next SEVEN results, however, are all commercial sites that are trying to sell you term insurance; sites such as statefarm.com, term4sale.com, quickquote.com, etc. It's only until we get to the 9th entry (the moneyalert.com website) is there another information article about term insurance that is not trying to sell me something. Question: are those seven results I refer to above coming up at or near the top of the results because those companies are paying Google to favor them? In other words, not only would I as, say, a life insurance company who is interested in selling term insurance pay google for a sponsored ad to the right or in the shaded yellow area but I could also pay them to prioritize my site as a result that would come out at the beginning of the list as the seven I point out above? Is this what I am seeing? No one is paying Google to be listed in the free or organic results. Some have wondered whether Google might favor sites that also buy advertizing, but that correlation has never been proven. The sites which come up highest in the free listings do so because Google's algorithm detects that those sites are most closely related to the search term. That relationship is determined by both on-page criteria - the site content and the way in which site pages have been optimized for various keywords - and off-site criteria, namely, link popularity. The latter is especially influenced by keyword-rich links from respected, well-established sites. There's nothing wrong with commercial sites ranking well in the organic listings, since very often, they offer what people are looking for. Thanks to both Richard M. and Rick for their answers. I understand it a lot better as a result. Although I'm not 100% convinced that Google isn't doing something with the organic listings. There always seems to be a set of specific sites that come up on the first page and they all seem commercial or ones that Google knows you want to see first (e.g. Wikipedia and/or imdb.com) and then ones that are totally useless but transparently commercial such as linkedin.com and manta.com. These two sites always seem to come up when I'm looking up someone's name but they are useless sites -- at least to me -- and I can't imagine anyone else using them. And that's why I assume that Google is being paid to list these kinds of companies first. It's a pain because I always have to waste my time on the first page and then get to the next one. Another thing I've noticed: it used to be that when I did a search on my own name on Google that about half of the results were Google groups postings. And then all of a sudden -- about 2 years ago -- that was cleaned up overnight. So they definitely were playing with the algorithm.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was trying to be funny...oh well! Nah, we KNOW its just your pent up anger. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was trying to be funny...oh well! Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit OffWorld said...sarcastically. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, The Secret [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick, You might have once stated that there is a silent witness within you. May I ask if this witness was there while you were going to the Dome before your trips to Mt. Pleasant or afterwards? Ha ha, with a name like his - ie. Richo Akshare (Rick Archer) - believe me, he's had that silent witness for A LONG TIME. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On behalf of Rick, WTF is this? Rick also might have once beat his dog and kept his grandmother locked in the attic! Is this a new age swiftboat attack? Yes. And Rick's chart showed all of this clearly. But it was buried in a deep pile of shit so it was not apparent to those not so brave to look. --- The Secret [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick, You might have once stated that there is a silent witness within you. May I ask if this witness was there while you were going to the Dome before your trips to Mt. Pleasant or afterwards? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On behalf of Rick, WTF is this? Rick also might have once beat his dog and kept his grandmother locked in the attic! Is this a new age swiftboat attack? Hi Peter, I have consistently ignored your posts, yet months later, I come back, and you are still embroiled in the same psychosis. Peter, WTF is wrong with your brain? Have you nothing of worth or integrity to say whatsoever to the world? What is the psychological condition that you have that is so fearful of life that it eschews all rationality for the mere illusion of safety of living in a pack, like an unwanted mongrel? Seriously Peter, seek psychological help NOW...before it is too late, for the sake of your family for god's sake man. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 6:29 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Question for Rick On behalf of Rick, WTF is this? Rick also might have once beat his dog and kept his grandmother locked in the attic! Is this a new age swiftboat attack? Peter, he's referring to Amma's visits to Mt. Pleasant, not to the mental hospital there. So it's a sincere question, not an attack. My answer is that the witness has been growing in clarity ever since I started meditating. I used to witness very clearly while lecturing in the early 70's. Ha ha, Mr. Akshare, its just like I tried to explain to the retard earlier. With a name like yours - ie. Richo Akshare (Rick Archer) - believe me, I knew you had that silent witness for A LONG TIME. You can't fool me with your lame attempts to bite the hand that feeds you. Wink Wink, know what I mean? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
'DWI' is not a term we are familiar with in the UK so I had to look it up, googling first gave me 'Drinking Water Inspectorate', then it offered me 'Dance With Intensity', so which one is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 3/23/04 9:35 AM, wmurphy77 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Congratulations on this great Newsgroup, just wondering, who is Jennifer, (The one who reported MMY amused at Americans buying all of his 'stuff') and did J. Hagelin, his excellency really have a DWI? Thanks in advance, BillyG. I don¹t think Jennifer wants her last name publicized just yet. She was one of the women whose story is told in the Sexy Sadie file in the Files section of this chat. She¹s now an attorney and head of her own law firm. She sticks by her 32-year-old story. The person who told me about Hagelin¹s DWI was Jay Latham, who is now deceased. He and John were in the same mandatory, remedial DWI classes together over in Ottumwa. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'DWI' is not a term we are familiar with in the UK so I had to look it up, googling first gave me 'Drinking Water Inspectorate', then it offered me 'Dance With Intensity', so which one is it? Driving while impaired (e.g., by booze, drugs, etc.). To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'DWI' is not a term we are familiar with in the UK so I had to look it up, googling first gave me 'Drinking Water Inspectorate', then it offered me 'Dance With Intensity', so which one is it? Neither. Visit the acronym finder: http://www.acronymfinder.com/ --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: on 3/23/04 9:35 AM, wmurphy77 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Congratulations on this great Newsgroup, just wondering, who is Jennifer, (The one who reported MMY amused at Americans buying all of his 'stuff') and did J. Hagelin, his excellency really have a DWI? Thanks in advance, BillyG. I don¹t think Jennifer wants her last name publicized just yet. She was one of the women whose story is told in the Sexy Sadie file in the Files section of this chat. She¹s now an attorney and head of her own law firm. She sticks by her 32-year-old story. The person who told me about Hagelin¹s DWI was Jay Latham, who is now deceased. He and John were in the same mandatory, remedial DWI classes together over in Ottumwa. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
It's for Driving While Intoxicated which is an old acronym that has mostly been replaced with DUI or Driving Under the Influence. Paul Mason wrote: 'DWI' is not a term we are familiar with in the UK so I had to look it up, googling first gave me 'Drinking Water Inspectorate', then it offered me 'Dance With Intensity', so which one is it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 3/23/04 9:35 AM, wmurphy77 at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Congratulations on this great Newsgroup, just wondering, who is Jennifer, (The one who reported MMY amused at Americans buying all of his 'stuff') and did J. Hagelin, his excellency really have a DWI? Thanks in advance, BillyG. I don¹t think Jennifer wants her last name publicized just yet. She was one of the women whose story is told in the Sexy Sadie file in the Files section of this chat. She¹s now an attorney and head of her own law firm. She sticks by her 32-year-old story. The person who told me about Hagelin¹s DWI was Jay Latham, who is now deceased. He and John were in the same mandatory, remedial DWI classes together over in Ottumwa. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 5/9/06 3:09 PM, shempmcgurk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the Photos section you have posted two photos of MMY's girlfriends. What I find interesting is that you named both of them -- fully - - both first and last name. Isn't that something new on your part? If I remember correctly, in earlier references that you have made to both of them the farthest you went was just using their first names: Judith and Linda. Am I correct on this? And, if so, why are you revealing their last names now? Enquiring minds want to know... Those two are more public about it. Judith has written a book which she intends to publish after MMY dies; Linda told her story to a newspaper in S. Africa. Other women don't want their name mentioned. Some don't mind the first name mentioned if it's a common name and their identity couldn't be guessed from it. There's MORE than just these two? How many others and how did you hear about them? I know you've corresponded with some of them...are the ones you corresponded with the Judith and Linda above? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Maharishi university of management Maharishi mahesh yogi Ramana maharshi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Question for Rick
on 5/9/06 7:02 PM, shempmcgurk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's MORE than just these two? There are many more. You've read the Sexy Sadie file? How many others and how did you hear about them? I know the names of about 5 others, and have spoken to two of them. I have also heard several detailed accounts of other incidents in which I wasn't told the women's names. All this from 5 or 6 different, independent sources - Maharishi's former secretaries, several friends, etc. I know you've corresponded with some of them...are the ones you corresponded with the Judith and Linda above? No. Other ones. Jennifer is one. Last name withheld. I won't give first or last name of the other. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' SPONSORED LINKS Maharishi university of management Maharishi mahesh yogi Ramana maharshi YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
