[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination. Um, Peter, you're still banned from Wikipedia, are you not? No. Why do you ask? Just that little exchange above would result in banning. If you'd care to read the responses to the 'exchange' you'll notice that it has provoked OffWorld and TB to finally id:ed themselves as symphatizers with Satanist. It has been noted that this quite astounding revelation causes lesser concern with you than pererklutz' ramblings. Who are you, sparaig, really?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination. Um, Peter, you're still banned from Wikipedia, are you not? No. Why do you ask? Just that little exchange above would result in banning. If you'd care to read the responses to the 'exchange' you'll notice that it has provoked OffWorld and TB to finally id:ed themselves as symphatizers with Satanist. It has been noted that this quite astounding revelation causes lesser concern with you than pererklutz' ramblings. Who are you, sparaig, really? Someone who appreciates irony and sarcasm better than you, I'm sure.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
. . . Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. You think Skolnick has moved on? The second I showed up he started accusing me of everything that went wrong in the wikipedia article. It's not easy to move on from a $194 million lawsuit. He DID finally bow out claiming that he couldn't take the vandalism, but in fact, his bowing out coincided with requests by TMers for mediation. And for that matter, you and judy have been sparring for over a decade now and you haven't moved on either.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. You think Skolnick has moved on? The second I showed up he started accusing me of everything that went wrong in the wikipedia article. With some reason. It's not easy to move on from a $194 million lawsuit. Or from an obsession with destroying your enemies, it would seem. What else can you call your crusade? He DID finally bow out claiming that he couldn't take the vandalism... Which is EXACTLY what some of the things you and other idiots were doing. ...but in fact, his bowing out coincided with requests by TMers for mediation. And for that matter, you and judy have been sparring for over a decade now and you haven't moved on either. Mea culpa. I have a strange fascination with insanity. And now for something completely different, I reinsert the part of my post that you snipped out, obviously not wishing to deal with: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. You think Skolnick has moved on? The second I showed up he started accusing me of everything that went wrong in the wikipedia article. With some reason. ? It's not easy to move on from a $194 million lawsuit. Or from an obsession with destroying your enemies, it would seem. What else can you call your crusade? He DID finally bow out claiming that he couldn't take the vandalism... Which is EXACTLY what some of the things you and other idiots were doing. Really? You were watching from the sideliens, I assume? In fact, Skolnick eventually apologized to me for accusing me of things I had nothing to do with. ...but in fact, his bowing out coincided with requests by TMers for mediation. And for that matter, you and judy have been sparring for over a decade now and you haven't moved on either. Mea culpa. I have a strange fascination with insanity. And now for something completely different, I reinsert the part of my post that you snipped out, obviously not wishing to deal with: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Eh. we all have our lapses.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I mean, Dude, didn't you even NOTICE that the only person here who you could lure into your insane revenge fantasies against Andrew Skolnick was *Peter Klutz*? You three stand out like sore thumbs among the more sane and balanced proponents of TM here, who actually seem to have LIVES. I mean, YOU are so obsessed that you went diving into old court records in an attempt to get something on the person who you have your decade-old revenge obsession about. And then the other two just played pile on the latest victim. I repeat my name for all 3 of you -- stalkers, and my assertion that your insanity is not only well established, but because that insanity tends to revolve around attempting to destroy the critics of TM and Maharishi and the TMO, the sanity of the more balanced and sane followers of all three has ALSO been brought into question, by association. The three of you -- between here, a.m.t., sci. skeptic, alt.meditation, and Wikipedia -- have probably done more to turn off people to the value of TM and meditation in general than John Lennon ever did, and *certainly* more than Andrew Skolnick ever did. And yet you think of yourselves as defenders of the faith. Go figure. And what do the three of you have in common that most of the more balanced and sane and obviously more happy TMers here do not? They became TM teachers and you did not. They actually put their lives on the line and worked to spread light, whereas the three of you only dedicate your lives to spreading darkness and perpetuating the hold that your puny selves have over you. A little selfless service would have done wonders for all three of you, as it seems to have done for those here who had the humility to practice it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I think someone needs to get a 1-900 number and donate the money to the Maharishi's World Piece.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. If you like coherence, check out Willytex's comment to Paul's latest blog entry over on TM-Free. In it he says, So, Paul, you're saying that Mahesh was in Calcutta with the Shankaracharya, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, when the Guru sat up in bed with his legs crossed and took his last breath. And, you're saying that after the Swami expired, Mahesh took the body and put it on a train and sent it to Kashi. Then Mahesh put the upright-sitting body in a concrete trunk and sank it in the Ganges River in front of a large group of people. And you're saying that after that, the Mahesh took the Guru's sandals, his high chair, his umbrella, and other official accoutrements, including all the land and buildings at Jyotirmath and gave them to Shantanand, who he then installed on the Gaddi at Jyotirmath. The hilarious thing is that Paul said NONE of those things in the blog entry Willytex is responding to. Not one of them. Now I think we all know that Willy's got a few linger- ing mental problems from all that prairie dog poontang he's been tasting, but he does present himself as an On The Program TMer. So doesn't THAT just give you a warm feeling of peace and serenity? OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? Damn straight. Laughter is always a good thing. I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL, she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's contributions to the film, and how her TM-inspired...uh...perkiness added to its overall coherence and general sense of family values. * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar positive reviews will be made for Aliens from Spaceship Earth (1977) and Romeo und Julia 70 (1969), for the same reason. There can, after all, be no better recommendation for a film than it containing a cameo by not only an enlightened being, but the MOST enlightened, BESTEST spiritual teacher in all of recorded history, on any planet anywhere in this universe or any other. :-)
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. Cf. observation below. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. You have evidently 'missed' A Skolnick's crusade against anything TMO at wikipedia. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right.
Re: [FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
* Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar Click on MMY's name and the blurb about him begins with Indian cult leader. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0948343/ --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. If you like coherence, check out Willytex's comment to Paul's latest blog entry over on TM-Free. In it he says, So, Paul, you're saying that Mahesh was in Calcutta with the Shankaracharya, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, when the Guru sat up in bed with his legs crossed and took his last breath. And, you're saying that after the Swami expired, Mahesh took the body and put it on a train and sent it to Kashi. Then Mahesh put the upright-sitting body in a concrete trunk and sank it in the Ganges River in front of a large group of people. And you're saying that after that, the Mahesh took the Guru's sandals, his high chair, his umbrella, and other official accoutrements, including all the land and buildings at Jyotirmath and gave them to Shantanand, who he then installed on the Gaddi at Jyotirmath. The hilarious thing is that Paul said NONE of those things in the blog entry Willytex is responding to. Not one of them. Now I think we all know that Willy's got a few linger- ing mental problems from all that prairie dog poontang he's been tasting, but he does present himself as an On The Program TMer. So doesn't THAT just give you a warm feeling of peace and serenity? OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? Damn straight. Laughter is always a good thing. I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL, she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's contributions to the film, and how her TM-inspired...uh...perkiness added to its overall coherence and general sense of family values. * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at:
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . [Peter wrote:] Actually, it just might be quite entertaining to see the guy talk himself out of that corner :-) [I wrote:] I imagine there are various word games he can play, but they'll look awfully cute beside his accusations that *Lawson* was playing word games. More important, however, is the fact that being and acting in the capacity of journalist, Andrew Skolnick is de facto bound by a set of minimum ethical requirements it is not in his interest that people think he has violated. If the trial record containing the incriminating language can be tightly documented, perhaps it and his relevant posts could be reproduced-- without comment--on various journalism forums. I wonder if the National Association of Science Writers has an appropriate public forum... http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=387 http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp I suppose the guy also can be sued It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more Uh, Barry, it seems you haven't been paying attention. Skolnick has been actively working to turn the Wikipedia entry on TM into a Skeptical Inquirer-type expose. His participation in the group editing process is the only reason this came up in the first place. Lawson's made several posts about what's been happening over at Wikipedia, but you appear to have missed them all. , especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. Hilarious. Barry was very much present during a good part of Skolnick's tenure on alt.m.t. Unless he's managed to do a memory wipe of those years, he knows how far from the truth his description above is. In fact, Barry was an active participant himself in attacking Skolnick for his chronic and malicious dishonesty. (Not only that, Barry was one of Skolnick's favorite targets.) It wasn't just a matter, of course, of Skolnick having written a few things we didn't like about Chopra. It was that Skolnick wrote a documentably deceptive expose of the entire movement that maliciously attacked many of the people in it. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. Actually, what we're gleeful about is the revelation that Skolnick *did*, in fact, lie through his teeth about the issue of whether there was a settlement in the court case, as we always suspected he had. Don't know about Peter, but I'm just having fun fantasizing about what we might do with this information. Skolnick would almost certainly sue us if we tried to follow through, so I'm not about to risk it. And Lawson has explicitly said he doesn't think it's worth it. Somehow you managed to miss that too. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Uh, no, that's not true either. We grouse about Chopra, but we haven't even been *fantasizing* about destroying him and his reputation. In fact, whenever Skolnick's article trashing him has come up, we've defended him. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? What you've written above speaks volumes about your memory and/or your honesty, but most clearly about *your* obsession with Lawson and me.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I mean, Dude, didn't you even NOTICE that the only person here who you could lure into your insane revenge fantasies against Andrew Skolnick was *Peter Klutz*? Nobody was trying to lure anybody into anything. And Peter, of course, was a participant in the whole editing kerfuffle at Wikipedia and a target of Skolnick's attacks in that process, so of course he was interested. You three stand out like sore thumbs among the more sane and balanced proponents of TM here, who actually seem to have LIVES. I mean, YOU are so obsessed that you went diving into old court records in an attempt to get something on the person Was it Lawson who dived into old court records? who you have your decade-old revenge obsession about. And then the other two just played pile on the latest victim. Skolnick *made his reputation* with his maliciously deceptive article on TM in JAMA, and he's continued to pursue *his* obsession with his participation in editing the Wikipedia article on TM. He's hardly the victim here. I repeat my name for all 3 of you -- stalkers Which, as you know, is entirely inappropriate. , and my assertion that your insanity is not only well established, but because that insanity tends to revolve around attempting to destroy the critics of TM and Maharishi and the TMO Only those who aren't *honest* in their criticisms. And destroy is just a *wee* bit hyperbolic, don't you think? Skolnick was and is out to *literally* destroy the TM movement, and to do so dishonestly. Skolnick is a menace. As a journalist, he has a great deal of credibility he doesn't deserve. It's hardly likely that TM is the only target he's pursued with no concern for fairness or accuracy. (In fact, we know it isn't; his hit piece on the Chinese educational system was discussed in detail on alt.m.t.) , the sanity of the more balanced and sane followers of all three has ALSO been brought into question, by association. The three of you -- between here, a.m.t., sci. skeptic, alt.meditation, and Wikipedia -- have probably done more to turn off people to the value of TM and meditation in general than John Lennon ever did, and *certainly* more than Andrew Skolnick ever did. And yet you think of yourselves as defenders of the faith. Go figure. And what do the three of you have in common that most of the more balanced and sane and obviously more happy TMers here do not? They became TM teachers and you did not. They actually put their lives on the line and worked to spread light, whereas the three of you only dedicate your lives to spreading darkness and perpetuating the hold that your puny selves have over you. Dedicated our *lives* to critiquing the critics?? Whereas you, in contrast, have left your criticism of TM, MMY, the TMO, and MMY behind long since and spend absolutely *no* time indulging in it. Right? A little selfless service would have done wonders for all three of you, as it seems to have done for those here who had the humility to practice it. Speaking for myself, I've chosen to do my selfless service elsewhere.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: snip I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. snip I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. As both Barry and Vaj know, I never reviewed Apocalypto. Unlike Barry, who in fact did exactly that by calling Lynch's film a stupid movie, I don't review films I haven't seen. What I did was make some comments on the film's *content*, as reported by many reviewers. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL There were no such elements, as Barry well knows. , she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, Unlike Barry's stupid movie review... Barry, you're really slipping. This is about the weakest attempt at parody you've ever come up with, not least because it bears no relationship whatsoever to reality. As I've attempted to explain to you before, satire and parody work only when they're quasi-realistic. This doesn't even rise to the level of *burlesque*. stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's contributions to the film, and how her TM-inspired...uh...perkiness added to its overall coherence and general sense of family values. * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar positive reviews will be made for Aliens from Spaceship Earth (1977) and Romeo und Julia 70 (1969), for the same reason. There can, after all, be no better recommendation for a film than it containing a cameo by not only an enlightened being, but the MOST enlightened, BESTEST spiritual teacher in all of recorded history, on any planet anywhere in this universe or any other. :-)
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Candy Baby (1969) -- the best review of all, for what will be obvious reasons if you check out its IMDB page at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182866/ Similar Click on MMY's name and the blurb about him begins with Indian cult leader. Oh, well, that settles it, then. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0948343/ --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Feb 22, 2007, at 3:11 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: It's...what...eight years later now? And Andrew Skolnick, the non-meditator, has moved on and wisely doesn't even THINK about TM and TMers any more, especially about those few insane TMers who once obsessed on him and did everything they could to try to destroy him and his reputation because he wrote a few things they didn't like about Deepak Chopra in a medical journal. And the same amount of time later, those *same* pro- ponents of meditation, the thing that is supposed to free them from attachment and make their lives bliss, are *still* obsessing on Skolnick and rubbing their cyberhands together with glee as they plot how to destroy him and his reputation. The only thing that has changed for them in all these years is now they try equally hard to destroy Chopra and *his* reputation as well. Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? I was more impressed with the ability of certain sidhas to predict and make movie reviews they hadn't seen using the power of the unified field of all the laws of nature. It was SO coherent! I felt so peaceful just hearing them. If you like coherence, check out Willytex's comment to Paul's latest blog entry over on TM-Free. In it he says, So, Paul, you're saying that Mahesh was in Calcutta with the Shankaracharya, Swami Brahmanand Saraswati, when the Guru sat up in bed with his legs crossed and took his last breath. And, you're saying that after the Swami expired, Mahesh took the body and put it on a train and sent it to Kashi. Then Mahesh put the upright-sitting body in a concrete trunk and sank it in the Ganges River in front of a large group of people. And you're saying that after that, the Mahesh took the Guru's sandals, his high chair, his umbrella, and other official accoutrements, including all the land and buildings at Jyotirmath and gave them to Shantanand, who he then installed on the Gaddi at Jyotirmath. The hilarious thing is that Paul said NONE of those things in the blog entry Willytex is responding to. Not one of them. Now I think we all know that Willy's got a few linger- ing mental problems from all that prairie dog poontang he's been tasting, but he does present himself as an On The Program TMer. So doesn't THAT just give you a warm feeling of peace and serenity? OK, it was laughter, but that's bliss, right? Damn straight. Laughter is always a good thing. I was kinda expecting what's-her-name to jump into the Firefly vs. Babylon 5 debate. After all, she would feel imminently qualified to do so, having seen neither series. They don't seem as good at going back in time...but then again, the movie review siddhi twasn't dat good either... I don't know...being able to review films you've never seen gives you a *tremendous* advantage over other film critics. You could call yourself The Blindfolded Film Reviewer and beat Ebert to the punch every time. And, when someone mentions that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer included some elements in her review that weren't in the film AT ALL, she can just scream at them and make up stories about them. Hey! that approach has worked wonders for Rush Limbaugh, so I'm betting that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer show will be a big hit. The first films reviewed will be: * Inland Empire (2006) -- a glowing, positive review, stressing the filmmaker's...um...coherence and aversion to the violence that The Blindfolded Film Reviewer finds so abhorent. * One: The Movie (2005) -- a *scathing* review of this New Age film, stressing the appearance of Deepak Chopra, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hahn, Robert Thurman, and others she will refer to as spiritual lightweights, while blasting the filmmaker for not including Maharishi. * How I Won the War (1967) -- again, a real new-asshole- ripper of a review of this film in its re-release, stress- ing Lennon's obvious stress upon leaving Rishikesh and saying the things he did back then, and his lack of coherence for making such a strongly pro-war film. * Boogie Nights (1997) -- another positive review this time, stressing Heather Graham's
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination.
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination. Um, Peter, you're still banned from Wikipedia, are you not?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination. Um, Peter, you're still banned from Wikipedia, are you not? No. Why do you ask?
[FairfieldLife] The Fanatic's Mindset Revealed (was Re: Andrew Skolnick revealed)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Sure speaks volumes about the value of TM, eh? Just volumes about you, you m¤%/%#g satanist Wow. Peter's not only paranoid and near-incoherent, he can't even spell m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g right. A wonderful example of how people who are proven wrong may react: (1) in their reply censor out the stuff that prove them to be lying, cheating bastards harbouyring ulterior motives; (2) attempt to attack the messenger. The way to do it, is (1) to defeat someone with logic; AND (2) finish them off with a literary coup de grace. So, TB, you are a m¤%/%#g satanist aught lying and you should put a knife to your m¤%Ð#358;#1101;#g scrotum, thus sparing humanity further genetic contamination. Um, Peter, you're still banned from Wikipedia, are you not? No. Why do you ask? Just that little exchange above would result in banning.
