[FairfieldLife] Re: Happy Patriot Day

[Jason]

Barry2 is usually a sensible guy.  But the fact that he 
dosen't believe that 9/11 happened is very much like 
Ahmednutjob stating that he dosen't believe that the 
Holocaust ever happened. 


---  Mike Dixon  wrote:
>
> You freaking idiot! Everybody knows Elvis did it!
> 
>  
> 
>  From: Bhairitu 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 12:05 PM   
>   
>  
> I was looking at my calendar a few days back and notice a holiday or red 
> date on it for today.  It was titled "Patriot Day".  I didn't know that 
> the 11th of September now has an official "day" attributed to it.  With 
> what the government has done in the name of "protecting" us it should be 
> called "Treasonist Day."
> 
> As you know I never bought the "official story" of 9-11.  I don't 
> believe it was done by a pack of Arab terrorists armed with box cutters 
> and who couldn't even fly a Cessna right.   But I also don't believe the 
> government was totally behind it.  Instead I believe that factions of 
> the military industrial complex in conjunction with some members of the 
> military and government and even a certain foreign power had something 
> to  do with it.  After all, what would Islamic terrorists have to gain 
> from such an attack?  They would have reasoned that what such an attack 
> would have brought the US military down on their heads and indeed that 
> happened.
> 
> Just look at all the money the military industrial complex has made 
> since 9-11.  Billions upon billions and probably such an attack with 
> it's collateral damage would be justifiable in their minds for all that 
> money.  After all they deal in the business of murder.  Besides they had 
> the money to have think tanks design such an attack without knowing what 
> they were doing (like telling them that they needed the scenario to 
> figure out some defensive gear against them).  Plus how convenient to 
> have a military exercise on that day to confuse things.
> 
> There is a lot of conflicting evidence over 9-11.  WTC 7 which was not 
> hit by any plane yet brought down apparently by internal explosives. 
> The crash pattern of flight 93 which doesn't make sense either and even 
> first reported brought down by members of the Happy Hooligans, a 
> military flight group.   And then with all the video cameras around the 
> Pentagon and footage from private company cameras in that area 
> confiscated why do we have only one "brief" video of the supposed 
> "airliner" flying into the building.  Even that looks more like a 
> missile than some jet.  I have a cousin that was working in the hit 
> section of the Pentagon but he was told to work at home that day due to 
> remodeling of that section.
> 
> Dr. Gary Null had a great show this morning on 9-11 on his Progressive 
> Radio Network.  You can download the podcast here:
> http://www.prn.fm/
> 
> And of course Alex Jones (who sounds more like a meditator noticing how 
> large segments of the public seem ignorant anymore,  hey, maybe he's 
> "enlightened") has a show you can download at http://www.infowars.com/ .  
> Alex 
> is focusing on a lot of evidence that is not speculation but factually 
> reported.
> 
> So anyway have a happy Patriot Day and go get yourself groped by the TSA.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Open Letter Apology From Barry Wright

[Jason]

Actually, it's Barry's way of saying, "All hands to 
battle-stations, this is not a drill.  All hands to 
battle-stations, this is not a drill."

"Red alert,  Judy alert,  Red alert,  Judy alert..."

---  "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> LOL! Nailed it!
> 
>
> ---  awoelflebater  wrote:
> >
> > There have been two apology letters written just today  
> > from two of the higher-profile posters here at FFL Judy 
> > and Robin. Well, the hell with that. I too want to make 
> > my indelible mark with regard to apologizing. And here  
> > it is, so pay attention folks as I'm only going to say  
> > this once.
> >
> > I, Barry Wright, will never write an apology letter here 
> > at FFL. And not only that, I am going to tell you ten  
> > reasons why.
> >
> > 1) I am Barry Wright.
> >
> > 2) Apologizing is for sissies. And in case you hadn't  
> > noticed, I ain't no sissy. I am the counterpoint to all 
> > that is sissy on this planet.
> >
> > 3) I am an experienced spiritual seeker who has spent  
> > years of my life devoting myself to a range of spiritual 
> > teachers. I gave my life to the pursuit of the high and 
> > holy. In the end I discovered there is no holy and high 
> > refers only to the result of drinking too much Dutch  
> > beer. So, I am realized, I know many things, more than  
> > any of you so why would I need to apologize to the  
> > ignorant masses? (Pass me another beer peon.)
> >
> > 4) I am never wrong or hurtful. If you think you are  
> > hurt by what I have said I was only pushing your  
> > buttons. If you are offended or traumatized it is your  
> > fault. It has nothing to do with me. So why should I  
> > take any responsibility for your pain or confusion for  
> > having merely moved my finger and pressed your switch?
> >
> > 5) You all bore me. To death. If anything, you should 
> > all apologize to me. I am the one having to suffer  
> > through all of your interminable posting and long-winded 
> > or, in most cases, stupid ideas. In fact, I have  
> > incurred so much merit just tolerating the rest of you  
> > bores that I get an automatic "You never have to 
> > apologize to anyone" golden ticket.
> >
> > 6) I have been unjustly the victim of craziness. For  
> > example, pure, unadulterated bat-shit, loony-tune old  
> > hags and has-been or never-was ex-cult leaders have  
> > pursued me at FFL.  I have endured some of this for  
> > almost two decades. Again, I realize as I write this  
> > that it is all of you who owe me the apology as this has 
> > been relentless and totally unwarranted.
> >
> > 7) I am by far the most interesting poster here. My  
> > range of interests and subject matter encompass great  
> > scope. I add such variety and insight with my commentary 
> > and wit. If it wasn't for me you would all just remain  
> > so damn dumb. I am your cultural beacon. Just because of 
> > that I need never apologize, I am too valuable on this  
> > forum.
> >
> > 8) I am Barry Wright (and this counts twice, at least).
> >
> > 9) I have a magnificent sense of the inherent  
> > significance of any post without actually reading it. I 
> > can sense it. It is in my bones and in my blood. I can  
> > tell that 90% of what is written here is not worth a  
> > moment of my time or attention. For this reason alone I 
> > will never have to apologize.
> > 
> > 10) I will never apologize because I do not understand  
> > what good could possibly come from doing so. Because it 
> > would make me look weak and in order to apologize I  
> > would have to realize and see that I had done something 
> > hurtful or untrue to someone else. I mean, what could I 
> > possibly gain from admitting I was wrong or am not  
> > infallible? Only losers apologize.
> > 
> > 
> > ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Wow. Take a night off from Fairfield Life and it
> > > goes officially Bat Shit Crazy. I think that the
> > > bottom line on all this insanity should be given
> > > to the two people causing most of it:
> > > 
> > > APOLOGY FROM ROBIN: 
> > > Please forgive me, Curtis, and everyone. I was just 
> > > having a bad night, after realizing the truth about
> > > myself, that I am nothing more than a minor cult 
> > > wannabee who spent a few years in a minor wannabee 
> > > cult. And that I finally became so narcissistic and
> > > so deluded in that cult that I began to imagine that 
> > > I had the moxie to start my own cult. I failed 
> > > miserably at that, and was laughed out of town, and
> > > now I'm nothing. In the history of spirituality in 
> > > North America, I don't even deserve a footnote; I 
> > > was that minor and that passing a fad. Realizing
> > > all this just got me down, that's all, so I made
> > > up some shit about you. Sorry.
> > > - Robin W. Carlsen
> > > 
> > > APOLOGY FROM JUDY:
> > > Please forgive me, Curtis, and everyone. I'm a 
> > > bat shit crazy old woman with nothing going on in
> > > my life and it really, really, really gets my panties
> > > in a 

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Noblest Aspiration I Can Imagine

[Jason]

Granted that humility was never exactly one of TM-org's 
strong points nor was MMY's.  

The main complaint by people like Vaj and few others is that 
these kind of cults create a huge ego in the sadhaka by 
telling them that this is the "best path" and they have the 
"highest" and "most noble" goals.

They also create a prejudice in the minds of Sadhakas who 
fail to appreciate other valid alternate paths and ways of 
life.  Their mind becomes rigid and dogmatic.

However, please note that all organised religions on this 
planet are also guilty of this.

If Maharishi had taught a number of different meditations 
techniques, Judy would be on the forum "defending" all them 
as the "best" and "highest" and the "truest" path.

---  turquoiseb  wrote:
>
> Having rapped once this morning about the concept so often pushed out by
> TM and TMers of it/them being "The Best," I thought I'd balance things
> somewhat and rap about another concept. As much as I may appreciate
> people whose aspiration -- like Olympic athletes -- is to become The
> Best at something, I'm personally just not drawn that way.
> 
> In both spiritual pursuits and more mundane ones, I'm more attracted to
> folks who have learned the quiet joys of being ordinary.
> 
> I just did an Amazon "Look inside this book" search of Maharishi's "The
> Science of Being and Art of Living," looking for instances of a word. I
> got zero results. None. Nada. Bupkus. This doesn't surprise me, because
> in the many years I studied with him, I can't recall him having ever
> used the word in any talk or lecture.
> 
> But if you think about it, that *should* be a bit surprising, because
> this word is the *basis* of many other spiritual teachings and
> traditions. They give whole talks devoted to this word and concept. They
> write whole books about it. Much of their daily practice is devoted to
> achieving it.
> 
> The word is "humility."
> 
> The dictionary defines humility as "The quality or state of being
> humble." Looking up humble, it is defined as "Not proud or haughty;
> reflecting or expressing a spirit of deference." The Dalai Lama, in one
> of his talks on this subject, has said, "Any sense of conceit or
> self-importance gets in the way of cultivating the genuine altruistic
> intention, and the most effective remedy against this is the cultivation
> of humility."
> 
> Isn't it interesting that the quality that Buddhism considers one of the
> noblest and most altruistic intents one could have, so much so that it's
> considered a "remedy" for its opposite, self importance, is something
> that Maharishi Mahesh Yogi didn't even feel was worth mentioning?
> 
> Different strokes for different folks, eh?
> 
> Anyway, I'm a big fan of humility, in the sense of realizing one's
> ordinariness and *lack* of self importance. This, to me, is a portal
> that leads to the ability to better empathize with one's fellow human
> beings. And that, of course, leads to the ability to be more of service
> to them.
> 
> There are a few folks here on Fairfield Life who I think -- based on the
> things they write -- "get" humility. You see it in the way they describe
> the "people on the street" they interact with (think Curtis and Marek)
> and you see it in the things they aspire to or fail to aspire to (think
> Xeno and some others, who have given up the one-pointed pursuit of
> enlightenment in favor of the pursuit of just living a fun or meaningful
> life).
> 
> Then there are others, who *don't* seem content with being ordinary.
> We've been told here that the "highest goal in life" is to aspire to
> becoming enlightened. Or to create world peace by being so important
> that the very thud of your buttocks on slabs of foam creates world
> peace. Call me crazy, but I don't see a lot of humility in these
> aspirations.
> 
> I also don't see a lot of happiness and fulfillment in the people who
> pursue them.
> 
> It's as if they're never satisfied. There's this carrot dangling
> somewhere on the end of a stick in front of them, and they won't allow
> themselves to be truly happy until they've grabbed it. Sounds like a
> dumb way to live one's life to me.
> 
> Some people need big, enormous, ostentatious and above all IMPORTANT
> goals in life. Enlightenment. World peace. I like people who have more
> humble goals, like just trying to be as happy as they can in their daily
> lives, and trying to do as much as they can to help the people they
> personally interact with every day to be a little happier themselves.
> Those goals sound just fine to me; I don't see why anyone would need
> loftier ones.
> 
> But then I have listened to a lot of songs by Bruce Cockburn, a guy who
> "gets" humility, too. His lyrics and his way of looking at things may
> have warped me. When he sings verses like the following, I get the
> feeling he's actually onto something:
> 
>   To be one more voice in the human choir
>   Rising like smoke from the mystical fire
>   Of the heart
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] From the Ruins of Empire

[Jason]

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pankaj Mishra's new book, From the Ruins of Empire, which 
challenges Western narratives of the 'white man's burden', 
has been raising hackles in the West and in India. Such 
reactions are pointers to an existing imbalance in cultural 
and political power, he tells Tabish Khair. Excerpts from a 
conversation.
 
 
Pankaj Mishra is not a stranger to controversy, but his new 
book, From the Ruins of Empire, has been met with a barrage 
of criticism, implicit and explicit, from not just 
right-wing circles in the West but also from some British 
authors who cannot be described as right wing. Of course, 
there have been very positive reviews too: Piers Brendon's 
review in the Literary Review states that the book 
"incisively anatomizes what Orwell called the 'slimy humbug' 
of the white man's burden". In another review, John Gray 
bestows unstinted praise on the book as 'an assault on false 
consciousness and self-deception in both east and west'. On 
the other hand, right-wing and conservative reviewers have 
attacked the book for being a 'polemic' and not seeing the 
(mostly) 'good sides' of the British Empire. One complex 
example of this reaction was provided by the historian 
Dominic Sandbrook, who reviewed it for the Sunday Times: 
Sandbrook is known for his belief that the British Empire 
was a 'beacon for tolerance, decency, and the rule of law'. 
More interestingly, the British novelist, Philip Hensher, 
who cannot be considered politically right-wing, was also 
evidently upset by the book: in the Spectator, he dubbed it 
'disappointingly blinkered'. Among other things, Hensher 
critiqued Mishra's account of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre 
for underplaying British fair-handedness (because, after 
all, the British officer in charge 'was suspended') and 
accused him of being soft on Chairman Mao.
 
 
TK - In your new book, From the Ruins of Empire, you discuss 
people like Al Afghani, who are considered by many to be the 
intellectual progenitors of today's Islamism. How can you 
justify that?
 
 
PM - I think there is no reason for us to bring to Islamism 
or political Islam the fear and ignorance of Western 
commentators and their hysterical vocabulary. Islamism 
itself is such a broad and nearly meaningless word as used 
by the mainstream Western press, including everything from 
Turkey's AKP party to al Qaeda. Al-Afghani was a very 
complex figure, who manifested many political tendencies  
from pan-Islamism to Hindu-Muslim unity  we saw later in 
South Asia and West Asia. And his disciples ranged from Saad 
Zaghlul, the Egyptian nationalist, James Sanua, the Jewish 
playwright, to Rashid Rida, the inspiration for the Muslim 
Brotherhood in Egypt. My book shows, too, how overtly 
Islamic movements grew under the lash of European 
imperialism, which made the more liberal and secular forms 
of anti-colonial nationalism look impotent.
 
 
TK - But then, can’t this also be said of what is now known 
as Hindutva in India as a broad movement with similar 19th 
century roots?
 
 
PM - Up to a point, but then we can't claim Aurobindo, who I 
quote at some length in my book, as the predecessor of 
Praveen Togadia. There is a huge difference between the 
anti-colonial nationalism of 19th century Hindu activists 
and thinkers and the business-friendly Chief Minister of 
Gujarat who desperately wants a visa to the U.S. I think 
there is a serious problem with the history of ideas, which 
I have tried to avoid, when it starts connecting apparently 
similar movements and ideologies without regard to specific 
political contexts.
 
 
TK - I am struck by the responses to your book in the 
British right-wing press, all of which describe you as a 
mere 'polemicist'. They also see your book as a response to 
Niall Ferguson, though obviously you conceived and wrote it 
long before your piece on him appeared. 
 
 
PM - I am actually relieved to see these kinds of responses, 
because they accurately reflect the GREAT imbalance of power 
in the intellectual as well as political realm  what the 
Asian voices in my book describe and protest against. For a 
long time, Western histories simply suppressed non-western 
perspectives  nobody cared what the 'native' thought. But 
even today, the benignly universalist West creates the 
standards of judgement, and the historian at the imperial 
metropole of course writes the truly objective and coolly 
rational history. And the non-westerner challenging it with 
other perspectives is prone to be described  and discredited 
 as no more than a polemicist (The word is usual preceded by 
a damning adjective like 'left-wing' and 'angry'). In this 
'universalist' and 'cosmopolitan' perspective from the West, 
the parochial-minded native always responds and reacts, he 
doesn't initiate anything or have original thoughts, let 
alone a history, of his own. But, you know, it is getting 
too late for this kind of ideological trickery. 
 
 
TK - Which brings us to your famous diff

[FairfieldLife] Narcopolis - The Secret History of Bombay

[Jason]

 
 
 
 
 

Jeet Thayil's 'Narcopolis' was nominated for the Man Booker 
longlist of 12 books. 
 
 
| EPS Jeet Thayil's 'Narcopolis' has an astonishing 
prologue. Titled, 'Something for the mouth', it is one long 
sentence that goes on for six-and-a-half pages. "I was 
trying to reproduce the effects of an opium-induced dream," 
says Thayil.
 
 
"It is an open-ended kind of experience. How do you 
approximate that in language? You cannot do it in a short 
declarative Hemingwayesque type of sentence. It has to be 
long, multi-layered and simultaneous."  'Narcopolis' is 
about Mumbai in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. Thayil spent 
several years there, in opium dens and in the shadowy 
underworld, where all sorts of characters can be found, 
including Dimple, a eunuch, an acclaimed painter Newton 
Xavier, and Chinese businessman Mr Lee.
 
 
Interestingly, in the novel, the scene suddenly shifts from 
Mumbai to China, for about 70 pages.
 
 
There is a reason why that happens, says Thayil. "The secret 
history of Bombay is that its fortunes were built on opium. 
Between 1800 and 1840, about half a dozen Parsi ship owners 
got together with the British East India Company and shipped 
thousands of tonnes of opium to China, and turned a 
generation into addicts. And that money made Bombay the 
financial capital that it is today."
 
 
All those Parsi ship owners later went on to build highways, 
roads, hospitals and art colleges. "People have forgotten 
that, originally, the Parsis made their money by being drug 
dealers." 
 
 
"People have also forgotten how Mumbai was like earlier. In 
the 1980s, it was a beautiful, laid-back, liberal and 
liberating sort of place," says Thayil. "There was a sense 
of freedom in the air, but that has gone completely. Today, 
it is a tense place, and that isn't because of the traffic, 
the noise or the huge press of people."
 
 
Thayil blames the Shiv Sena and the Hindu Right Wing for 
making Mumbai a fraught place, full of anxiety and fear.
 
 
They have pitted community against community, he says. "Much 
of the conversation that people used to have earlier one 
cannot have now because you have to be aware of the 
religious community that the person belongs to."
 
 
Thayil admits that 'Nacropolis', is semi-autobiographical. 
"A lot of the information is factual because I was part of 
that society for many years," he says. "I fell into it by 
accident and was seduced by the romance of it. I had never 
seen anything like it before." (Incidentally, Thayil grew up 
in Hongkong, studied in New York and came to India only when 
he was 18.)
 
 
Thayil, of course, paid a price for the access. He was a 
drug addict and alcoholic for 20 years. "Looking back, it 
was a colossal waste of my life," he says. But he is clean 
now and his writing career is taking off.  'Nacropolis', 
which took him five years to write, has made waves. Just a 
few days ago, it was nominated for the Man Booker longlist 
of 12 books. This list was made from an initial batch of 145 
books. In September, a further short-list of six books will 
be announced.
 
 
Meanwhile, Thayil has been on a global tour promoting the 
book.  He has been to South Africa, the United Kingdom, 
Switzerland, Italy, the United Arab Emirates and all over 
India. "I am going to Brisbane, Edinburgh, Hongkong, 
Singapore, The Hague and Dubai in the next few months," he 
says.
 
 
newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/article577897.ece
 
 
By Shevlin Sebastian / ENS - KOCHI 
28th July 2012 08:28 AM

[FairfieldLife] Amrita Ashram targeted

[Jason]

 
 
Who targets Amrita Ashram?

By S Gurumurthy,  12th September 2012 09:09 AM 

Indeed a disgusting story — a concerted, converging attempt 
to tarnish Mata Amritanandamayi Ashram in Kerala by 
demonstrable lies and falsehoods. "Amma" as Mata 
Amritanandamayi is affectionately known is not just a Hindu 
spiritual lighthouse. She is a power house of service to 
people that has grown to unbelievable heights. Before 
unfolding the despicable story, here is a helicopter view of 
this mighty spiritualised social service, all accomplished, 
believe it, in just a decade or thereabouts — and that is 
precisely what seems to have made Amma and the Ashram the 
target.

The Ashram has built and handed over more than 25,000 houses 
till 2002 to the poor and needy, with plans to build, and 
building, another 100,000 — a scale that governments will 
not dare. It has undertaken massive disaster relief in Bihar 
Kosi floods (2008), earthquake in Kashmir (2005), Katrina 
hurricane in New Orleans in the US (2005), Mumbai floods 
(2005), Tsunami in India, Sri Lanka and Indonesia (2004), 
Kumbakonam school fire (2004) and Gujarat earthquake (2001). 
It has donated $1 million for relief and rehabilitation 
after Tsunami in Japan last year, apart from offering 
services in quake-hit Haiti. The Ashram has also set up an 
orphanage in Kenya.

The Ashram has built a huge university — the Amrita 
University — that has tie-up with 25 leading American 
universities, including the Yale, Harvard and Princeton 
universities. It is one of the seven from Asia in the 
16-member consortium of European Union Educational 
Initiative funded by the European Commission. The Ashram 
runs three engineering institutes as 'technological 
gurukulas'; its Coimbatore technical institute campus has 
installed India's supercomputer, Param. It runs the Amrita 
School of Business ranked 17th among the top private 
B-Schools in India aligning management education with 
Sanatana Dharma; a school of education to train teachers; a 
school of media studies and communication.

Its medical institute at Kochi in Kerala — a 1,400-bed huge 
super speciality medical facility manned by 200 doctors 
qualified from the best medical institutes all over the 
world — is ranked as the eighth best professional medical 
colleges in India. It also runs an Ayurvedic college; a 
dental college; a college of nursing; a pharmaceutical 
college; four colleges of arts and sciences; a medical 
research institute; a nanosciences centre, with acute 
researches in molecular biology, bioinformatics, human 
genetics, immunology, hemopoesis, stem cells, cancer, cell 
signalling, neurosciences; and a research lab engaged in 
core areas of computing and communication with the MHRD, 
DST, DIT, DBT and DRDO as research partners and more than 50 
industry partners and ranked as one of the largest 
supercomputer clusters in the world. The list is still not 
complete. All this have happened and continue to happen 
because of one true spiritual soul whose magnetism has lured 
thousands of young men and women as monks, celebates and 
volunteers, to serve the needy. See how this great 
institution is targeted by lies and falsehoods by hands and 
minds that just wield a pen or a mike.

Now it all started on August 1, 2012, around noon. When Amma 
was giving dharshan to her devotees, suddenly, a bearded man 
in dhoti, with no shirt, ran through the dharshan hall, 
pushing all out of his way. Yelling "Bismillah ir-Rahman 
ir-Rahim", he shockingly removed his dhoti, scaled up the 
stage in his underwear only and was just three feet from 
Amma, when the devotees surrounded to protect her. The 
police team stationed at the Ashram since an attempt on Amma 
in 2005, immediately apprehended the man and took him into 
custody. Even as the police led him to its van, he continued 
to shout "Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim". He was a stranger, 
never seen in the Ashram ever.

The police video shows him walking and climbing on to the 
police van on his own. Since he was bare-bodied, there was 
not a scratch on his front or back, both visible on the 
video. Anyone can see the dramatic episode, captured in 
security cameras. The police registered the Ashram's 
complaint as FIR. He was therefore in police custody from 
around noon on August 1, 2012. Later it became known that he 
was one Satnam Singh from Bihar.

A shocking news appeared that, on August 4, Satnam died of 
severe injuries in police custody. His cousin, Vimal 
Kishore, a reporter in Aaj Tak channel in Delhi, addressed a 
press meet on August 5. The transcript of his interview 
showed Vimal Kishore as saying that he had visited Satnam in 
Karungappally police station sub-jail cell on August 2.

Kishore said: "And at that time, as I had seen him in 
underwear only, there were no marks on his body. Not a 
single mark! And today [August 5], which I had seen, there 
are around 30, 35 marks on his body. He was beaten by a rod, 
I think-hot rod. Maybe it's a m

[FairfieldLife] Re:to Raunchy -- writing for the Church of $cientology

[Jason]

> 
> 
> ---  "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > 
> > And these derisive remarks, which raunchy characterized
> > accurately as heartless and gratuitous, were made by Sal
> > *after she had learned of the fire in which Jennifer had
> > lost everything*.
> > 
> > No wonder Curtis didn't want us to see them.
> > 
> 
---  "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > 
> > Sal is shit about Jennifer's fundraiser in November 
> > 2011.
> > Sal is a shit to Mark Landeau trying to sell Maharishi's 
> > sandals in March 2012.
> > RD says Sal is a bully in March 2012. Duh?
> > Curtis pisses on RD but Sal is blameless. Unbelievable.
> > Sal is a shit to Emily.
> > Curtis pisses on Emily but Sal is blameless.  
> > Unbelievable.
> > 
> > Starting to see a pattern here, folks?
> > 
> > Did Sal apologize about Jennifer's fundraiser? No. She  
> > doubled down.
> > Did Sal apologize to Mark? No. She doubled down.
> > Did Sal apologize to Emily. No. Curtis doubled down.
> > 
> > So in Curtis' warped view of things raunchydog needs to 
> > "make it right." WTF?
> > 
> > Curtis *you* need to make it right.
> 
> Thanks, Judy for setting the record straight and  
> accurately recounting the sequence of events. It was a big 
> load of stinky laundry to sort through. I wouldn't have  
> known where to start and probably would have lost a few  
> socks along the way. Jeezus, you've got a mind like a  
> steel trap. Still can't figure why Curtis insists on  
> defending Sal for being a shit about Jennifer's fundraiser 
> and comes after me for pointing out the obvious, that Sal 
> is a bully. It's the same thing he recently did with  
> Emily. Sal was a shit to Emily but he defended Sal, going 
> after Emily and misrepresenting her motives, which he  
> still hasn't owned up to by the way. If anyone needs  
> calling out as the  Spinmeister of FFLife, it's Curtis. 
>  
> Hope you're paying attention, Steve, this is an object  
> lesson in how Curtis spins the truth right down the 
> rabbit hole.
>
> 

Frankly, I am puzzled by the entire thread.  If 'milk and 
cookies' are general courtesies then calling it as "Pathetic 
juvenile inducement" is a bit out of line.

I wonder what her reaction would be if it was "tea and 
buns".  Would that be adult enough?  Maybe, TM-org wouldn't 
approve of even that.

She said something like 'ducks and drakes' to emphasis that 
adult point.


> > 
> > > #296961 
> > > On Nov 30, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Alex Stanley wrote:
> > > Hello everyone:
> > >
> > > We wanted to let you know that you have another chance to see
> > > Jennifer's ceramics and paintings at our house this Thursday
> > > night, 1 December, at 7pm. See map attached.
> > >
> > > We will provide cookies and milk.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sal:
> > > 
> > > > Presumably along with lollipops, balloons,
> > > > and a game of duck-duck-goose as well.
> > > > Unbelievable.
> > > >
> > > > Sal
> > > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: The Language Of Penis Envy

[Jason]

I think this is the 100th time Bariatric has made references
to 'penis envy' and his other pet theme 'romantic
homo-erotic' relationships, which he raps here again and
again with regularity.


---  Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Oh man, LOL..let this go Barry baby, you are coming off as more and
more
> paranoid and delusional than ever.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 2:10 AM, turquoiseb
no_reply@yahoogroups.comwrote:
>
> >
> > Since Susan and some others are occasionally entertained by the odd
> > connections I make between things, here's another one for them. I
was
> > researching an article on new directions in psychotherapy, and as a
result
> > had to read some Freud. I've never quite been convinced of the
validity of
> > his theory of "penis envy" in women, but then I got to thinking
about some
> > of the language commonly used on this forum by Judy, Raunchydog, and
Ann,
> > and how interestingly it connects to Freud's "penis envy" theories.
I'm not
> > saying that Freud's theory is true, just that it's an interesting
> > connection, doncha think?
> >
> > "Women who stand up to Barry..."
> >
> > "Oh, it's just fun to puncture his arrogance."
> >
> > "I've repeatedly made a point of explaining why I was doing so--to
> > 'puncture his balloon'..."
> >
> > "I've been 'poking and prodding' him..."
> >
> > "...once his demonizing diatribes have been thoroughly punctured..."
> >
> > "...when she drills holes in your diatribes..."
> >
> > *:-)*
> >
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Getting India on track

[Jason]

 
 
Getting a nation on track

Anu Kumar 

Anu Kumar tells the story of two unsung Britishers in the 
19th century, whose efforts kicked off the railways in 
India. 

Imagining a world linked by a network of railway lines was 
well nigh impossible in the 19 century, but in 1850, an 
engineer called Rowland Macdonald Stephenson believed it 
entirely feasible. He wrote of a railway line that would run 
from London to Calcutta, reducing journey time to 10 days, 
with only two halts in between: One on the French side of 
the English Channel and the other at Dardanelles, the narrow 
strait off north-western Turkey. Not only that, Stephenson 
wrote of a railroad connecting Persia (Iran) through 
Afghanistan to Baluchistan, and still another that ran along 
Nepal, following the Eastern Himalayas, down the course of 
the Brahmaputra, to China and farther on. 

Stephenson's railway dreams began in 1841, when, as a 
33-year-old engineer looking for prospects, he left London 
for Calcutta. Calcutta was the centre of the East India 
Company’s operations and to young men with initiative it 
held a world of opportunity. 

There were some who went to work in the native courts, 
others sought employment in the EIC, and then there were 
those with dreams and little finance, who, despite the 
backwardness of a new country, saw its potential as an arena 
for investment, for construction and manufacturing, and to 
support their arguments, they wrote that such moves would 
benefit a country like India. 

Among these men were railway promoters such as the one 
Stephenson became, and his contemporary, John Chapman. If 
the "Orientalists" discovered India for the west, the 
railway adventurers created it anew. Both were men shaped by 
the Industrial Revolution. By the 1840s though, railways in 
Britain had lost much of its way. In an age of laissez faire 
capitalism, companies had come up chaotically; lines were 
made haphazardly, people displaced. It's a story that has 
hardly been told. 

The line from Calcutta

Once in Calcutta, Stephenson noticed that coal from Raniganj 
coalfields, near the present Bengal-Bihar border was 
transported to Calcutta in expensive slow-sailing country 
boats. The river Damodar had a circuitous route and was 
unpredictable in seasons of heavy rainfall. Stephenson 
instantly realised the possibilities of a railway line that 
could shorten costs and distance. He was supported by Indian 
merchant princes such as Dwarkanath Tagore and Mutty Ram 
Seal, yet his initial proposals were dismissed as wild. Not 
just the East India Company, its court of directors in 
London and the Board of Control of the British Parliament 
were equally dismissive. 

An undaunted Stephenson made a trial survey of the Ganga 
plain in 1844 with three assistants. That same year, he set 
up the East Indian Railway company to negotiate with the 
three government bodies that were always trying to scale 
down each other's terms, especially with regard to the 
guarantee. The latter would become a permanent feature of 
early rail construction of India, where shareholders were 
assured a minimum return on their capital by the government. 

Not really convinced about the efficacy of the railways, the 
EIC engaged its own engineer Frederick Walter Simms, to tour 
the country in 1846, in just the manner Stephenson had. 
Simms’ report confirmed the railways were possible in India 
but being understandably circumspect about its ultimate 
prospects, he suggested that an "experimental" line be built 
first: one running from Allahabad to Kanpur or from Calcutta 
to Barrackpore. This was in keeping with the current view, 
still largely sceptical about the railways in India. 

Stephenson for his part remained certain that railways in 
India would in time prove a commercial success. Already 
native merchants travelled extensively with their goods, 
many had gomashtas (agents) in the main cities of Bombay and 
Calcutta. Pilgrim traffic too would sustain the railways and 
lastly, if India had good infrastructure, such as the 
railways would ensure, it could produce almost anything. His 
arguments paid off. In 1847, an agreement was signed for the 
EIR to build its line from Calcutta to Ranigunj. It would 
soon stretch on towards Delhi via Mirzapore. 

All the equipment and building materials including chairs, 
fish-plates, pins, bolts and even iron for building bridges 
were shipped from England to Calcutta via the Cape of Good 
Hope in South Africa, for the Suez Canal would open only in 
1869. A lot of the ironwork for construction was stolen 
during the revolt of 1857. There were other hazards when a 
cholera epidemic in late 1859 claimed the lives of hundreds 
of labourers and their British supervisors. 

His Indian railway dream fulfilled in large measure, 
Stephenson moved on to China. In 1864, he was commissioned 
by Jardine, Matheson and Company, a trading body that had 
made its fortune from the opium trade, to plan a railway 
network for

[FairfieldLife] Science, the ultimate iconoclast on Earth

[Jason]

 
 
Home > Magazine 
 

Science, the ultimate iconoclast on Earth

By A Sarwar, 13th July 2012 09:09 AM

The Earth is not the centre of the universe

More than 400 years ago, when Copernicus proposed that the 
sun and other planets do not revolve around the earth, it 
changed man’s perception of the Universe and his place in 
it. Fellow scientists confounded Copernicus's theory as 
"patently absurd".

It would take several generations to sink in. Galileo's 
telescope made things worse: when he provided evidence for 
the heliocentric theory, fellow scientists were profoundly 
upset by the revelations: craters on a supposedly perfectly 
spherical moon, other moons circling Jupiter. Galileo was 
condemned as a heretic by the Catholic church. Found guilty 
of heresy, Galileo lived out the rest of his days in house 
arrest.

We may be in the midst of a mass extinction right now

Dinosaur bones are quaintly wonderful when seen in a museum. 
But knowing that paleontologists have identified five points 
in Earth's history when many reasons — asteroid impact, 
volcanic eruptions and atmospheric changes are the main — 
have caused mass extinctions and destroyed many or most 
species is frightening. Many biologists say we're in the 
midst of a sixth great extinction, the earliest victims 
being mastodons. The continental migration of human beings 
eliminated animal populations that had thrived for millions 
of years — mastodons in North America, giant kangaroos in 
Australia, dwarf elephants in Europe. More continue to 
disappear.

Things that taste good are bad for you

Its probably the world's longest scientific study. In 1948, 
more than 5,000 residents of Framingham, Massachusetts, 
participated in the Framingham Heart Study to evaluate 
cardiac risk factors. Now the grandchildren of the original 
subjects have been enrolled. It is this study that is 
indirectly responsible for diets, exercise and organic food: 
 painstaking epidemiological studies have shown that risk of 
heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer and other health 
problems increases with consumption of delectable food. 
Steak, salty French fries, eggs Benedict, paranthas, oily 
curries and many rich desserts are killers. This is because 
human taste preferences evolved during times of want when 
our hunter-gatherer ancestors would consume as much salt and 
fat and sugar as possible.

The microbes will eventually win

If there were no antibiotics and vaccines, the human race 
would be dying because of diseases like smallpox and 
influenza. But what’s scary is some microbes are evolving 
faster than our ways to fight them. New viruses migrate from 
animals to humans — ebola from apes, SARS from masked palm 
civets, hantavirus from rodents, bird flu from birds, swine 
flu from swine. The return of tuberculosis is worrying; some 
strains developed multi-drug resistance. It kills, even in 
the 21st century.

Memory is farce and fact

Freud's theory is that most of our behaviour as well as many 
of our beliefs and emotions are driven by factors we are 
unaware of. The weather makes you feel happy and optimistic 
or gloomy and sullen: sunny days make people happier and 
more obliging. In a taste test, the first sample you taste 
will be the favourite, even if all the samples are 
identical. Smell dictates mating decisions. We are subject 
to cognitive failings: a few anecdotes are enough to make 
incorrect generalisations; information is misinterpreted to 
support preconceptions, and irrelevant factors that catch 
our fancy distract us and or sway decisions. Memories, even 
flashbulb memories — the ones that feel as though they've 
been burned into the brain — are really stories the mind 
tells itself afresh each time we recall an event. Many 
psychologists find even detailed memories to be surprisingly 
inaccurate.

Einstein was bad for humans

Einstein’s equation may have changed the world of physics, 
but the byproduct became one of the most frightening things 
for the human race — the nuclear race. The power explained 
by the equation rests in the c²—or the speed of light 
(186,282 miles per second) times —which equals 
34,700,983,524. Using multiplier, very little mass — a pinch 
of plutonium — is enough to create energy needed to 
annihilate a whole city.

We're just a new primate species kind of ape.

It's the most unflattering discovery about the human race. 
Understanding nature and appreciating its variety and power 
may be what makes us special, but it also made us realise 
that humans are merely a recent variation of the primate. 
Our abstract thought capability may be better than that of 
the apes, but we don’t have the strength of the gorilla, and 
can't swing along treetops except for Tarzan. The theory of 
evolution which upset the Church came about during Charles 
Darwin's travels on the Beagle. From 151 years ago, when On 
the Origin of Species was published, biology, geology, 
genetics, paleontology, chemistry and physics support his 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Ayn Rand & Aleister Crowley: Two peas in a pod

[Jason]

Don't you think it's a paradox that our economic system is 
more socialistic than our political system.  Agriculture, 
medicine and even defence research is subsidised by Govt.

On the other hand, it's brute money power that runs our 
political system.  Any political party that has more that 
33% of the vote base should be funded and maintained by the 
State.  Also, any politician who had gathered 33% of votes 
in the previous election should be given campaign funds by 
the state itself.

A cap or ceiling should be put on how much campaign funds 
should be used in an election.  Any left over funds should 
be put in a trust fund and the intrest from that fund should 
be used for the day to day maintenance of the party.

A 'socialistic political system' will counter balance a 
'capitalistic economic system'.  A kind of Yin-Yang balance.

Let's say a paradigm shift in the way we view the political 
process itself is necessary for reforms in political finance 
and campaign finance.


---  "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
>
> The last sane Republican, President Eisenhower, would not 
> recognize the Republican party, nowadays, overtaken by  
> greedy bastards. Paul Ryan plans to replace Medicare with 
> a voucher system and Romney thinks 47% of Americans are  
> dependent moochers. What dark and creepy philosophy allows 
> the Republican party to justify a Libertarian agenda that 
> would eliminate the social safety net and redistribute  
> wealth upward to the wealthy?  
> 
> I found a test that compares the writings of Ayn Rand, the 
> Philosopher Queen of Objectivism and Aleister Crowley, the 
> Beast 666 and prophet of the Age of Horus. It will be  
> difficult to distinguish the two, but one cannot miss the 
> heartlessness of these writers. Which of the following  
> quotes are from Ayn Rand and which are from Alester  
> Crowley? No fair using Google. Answers are at end of test.
> 
> 1. "What are your masses...but mud to be ground underfoot, 
> fuel to be burned for those who deserve it?" 
> 
> 2. "The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer 
> and die, but to enjoy yourself and live." 
> 
> 3. "I am alone. There is no God where I am."
> 
> 4. "The definition of self-respect contains a clause to  
> include pitiless contempt for some other class." 
> 
> 5. "How right politicians are to look upon their  
> constituents as cattle! Anyone who has any experience of  
> dealing with any class as such knows the futility of  
> appealing to intelligence, indeed to any other qualities  
> than those of brutes." 
> 
> 6. "A strong man can eventually trample society under his 
> feet."
> 
> 7. "You love only those who deserve it" 
> 
> 8. "I spit on your crapulous creeds." 
> 
> 9. "According to the Christian mythology, he died on the  
> cross not for his own sins but for the sins of the  
> non-ideal people. In other words, a man of perfect virtue 
> was sacrificed for men who are vicious and who are 
> expected or supposed to accept that sacrifice. If I were a 
> Christian, nothing could make me more indignant than that: 
> the notion of sacrificing the ideal to the non-ideal, or  
> virtue to vice. And it is in the name of that symbol that 
> men are asked to sacrifice themselves for their 
> inferiors." 
> 
> 10. "We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit: let  
> them die in their misery. For they feel not. Compassion is 
> the vice of kings: stamp down the wretched and the weak:  
> this is the law of the strong..." 
> 
> 11. "Each man must live as an end in himself." 
> 
> 12. "The Way of Mastery is to break all the rules" 
> 
> 13. "Some men are born sodomites, some achieve sodomy, and 
> some have sodomy thrust upon them..." 
> 
> 14. "Pity not the fallen! I never knew them. I am not for 
> them. I console not: I hate the consoled & the consoler." 
> 
> 15. "What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a  
> moral duty" 
> 
> 16. "Ask yourself whether the dream of heaven and  
> greatness should be waiting for us in our graves – or  
> whether it should be ours here and now and on this earth." 
> 
> 17. "All this talk about 'suffering humanity' is  
> principally drivel based on the error of transferring  
> one's own psychology to one's neighbour. The Golden Rule  
> is silly." 
> 
> 18. "Ordinary morality is only for ordinary people." 
> 
> 19. "I am the creator of a new code of morality... a  
> morality not based on faith." 
> 
> 20. "I slept with faith and found a corpse in my arms on  
> awakening; I drank and danced all night with doubt and  
> found her a virgin in the morning." 
> 
> 21. "The person who loves everybody and feels at home 
> everywhere is the true hater of mankind." 
> 
> 22. I am unique & conqueror. I am not of the slaves that 
> perish. 
> 
> 1. Rand 
> 2. Rand 
> 3. Crowley 
> 4. Crowley 
> 5. Crowley 
> 6. Rand 
> 7. Rand 
> 8. Crowley 
> 9. Rand 
> 10. Crowley 
> 11. Rand 
> 12. Crowley 
> 13. Crowley 
> 14. Crowley 
> 15. Rand 
> 16. Rand 
> 17. Crowley 
> 18. Crow

[FairfieldLife] Re: Holy Father (to Raunchy -- writing for the Church of $cientology)

[Jason]

EmptyBill is senior to you and yet you call yourself as his
father.  Man, you are totally nuts.

Even Barry with all his stunted intellect and lies is easier
to deal with.

You OTOH make no sense in this empirical reality.


---  Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Empty baby - you don't give up do you? You have to
> challenge your father every time you naughty boy - anyway
> I like it. It's OK, it's your lucky day boy - remember the
> 3 S's of self-deception - this is what my Devi advises for
> everyone - sadhana, seva and satsang.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:05 PM, emptybill  wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> > Ravi you are indeed an arrogant fool. The only thing you like to
> > f--- is your ego.
> > However, maybe She will feel sorry for you.
> >
> > Go smoke more charas. You'll feel like a real brahmana. Apparently
> > mahà sunya is your destiny. In fact, maybe the dvaita
> > madhvacharya was
> > correct.
> > Maybe you're just a nitya-samsarin.
> >
> > In that case why should I bother about it? Maybe Durga-devi
> > smokes the
> > chillium and YOU are just one of the charas posing as a human.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---  Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> > >
> > > Empty - look you are blabbering and not making any
> > > sense. Think about this with a clear head - by
> > > slandering me you hurt Devi and thereby idiots like
> > > you and million of others who fantasize on her will be
> > > disturbed. Imagine the havoc, destruction caused by
> > > millions of people left vulnerable to reality. Because
> > > you know what at the end of day Devi & I still sleep
> > > together. So please in the interest of global peace
> > > back off from this slander, it's doomed to failure
> > > empty baby.
> > >
> > > So I order you go back to your sadhana - stop being an
> > > errant child, have some respect for your father.
> > >
> > > Ravi Shiva.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:32 PM, emptybill emptybill@ wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > > Then wake the f--- up Ravioli.
> > > > Those who slander the devotees of Devi
> > > > slander Devi herself.
> > > >
> > > > Throw away the ahamvritti charas in you chillium
> > > > and get straight. You talk like the western-grubbing
> > > > guru-s you purport to hate.
> > > >
> > > > Are you a devi-bhakta or just another bragging fake?
> > > > Look how far down her throne you've slid!
> > > >
> > > > Wake the f--- up before it's too late for you "this very
> > > > kalpa" .
> > > >
> > > > The great void awaits. It knows nothing.
> > > > It speaks nothing. It enjoys nothing.
> > > > It is insentient tamo-guna and you are
> > > > french-kissing it in your ego-masturbation.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---  "Ravi Chivukula" chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Empty - stop irritating me OK? Yeah - Devi will be
> > > > > happy to see her lover being slandered like this.
> > > > > She really loves me empty, she is very attached to
> > > > > me, poor girl - please don't break her heart man.
> > > > > Come on I beg you.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 8:48 PM, emptybill emptybill@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > **
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To bad Raviola.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Better face up to the truth.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You're just a delirious little
> > > > > > manysha-brahmarakshasa.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You have no future but the great void.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---  "Ravi Chivukula" chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Lord Knows - I really don't know why you are
> > > > > > > so hung up over Robin.
> > > > > > > you need to fucking let it go man because
> > > > > > > Robin comes across as a very sincere person to
> > > > > > > me, you just have to look at all his posts
> > > > > > > here on FFL and you will get an idea -
> > > > > > > assuming you are open of course. Even assuming
> > > > > > > he is  insincere one thing is for sure -
> > > > > > > licking Curtis's ass is leading you nowhere.
> > > > > > > That guy is not interested in truth, he is not
> > > > > > > interested  in anything but himself and he
> > > > > > > represents nothing but perversion, distortion
> > > > > > > of truth. Good luck.
> > > > > > >

[FairfieldLife] Re: Holy Father (to Raunchy -- writing for the Church of $cientology)

[Jason]

And why *should* Devi sleep with you? Anything on this forum
ain't a personal issue.

Durga Shakti is my mother and your mother too. You would
surely admit that divinity is present in everyone dormant or
active.


--- Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> What is so confusing boy? Devi is Emptybill's mother but Devi sleeps
with
> me so I'm Emptybill's father. Why are you interfering in our personal
> issues? Is Devi your mother too? Let me know boy - 'cause I need to
know.
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Jason jedi_spock@... wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> > EmptyBill is senior to you and yet you call yourself as his
> > father. Man, you are totally nuts.
> >
> > Even Barry with all his stunted intellect and lies is easier
> > to deal with.
> >
> > You OTOH make no sense in this empirical reality.
> >
> >
> > --- Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Empty baby - you don't give up do you? You have to
> > > challenge your father every time you naughty boy - anyway
> > > I like it. It's OK, it's your lucky day boy - remember the
> > > 3 S's of self-deception - this is what my Devi advises for
> > > everyone - sadhana, seva and satsang.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:05 PM, emptybill emptybill@ wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > > Ravi you are indeed an arrogant fool. The only thing you like to
> > > > f--- is your ego.
> > > > However, maybe She will feel sorry for you.
> > > >
> > > > Go smoke more charas. You'll feel like a real brahmana.
Apparently
> > > > mahà sunya is your destiny. In fact, maybe the dvaita
> > > > madhvacharya was
> > > > correct.
> > > > Maybe you're just a nitya-samsarin.
> > > >
> > > > In that case why should I bother about it? Maybe Durga-devi
> > > > smokes the
> > > > chillium and YOU are just one of the charas posing as a human.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Empty - look you are blabbering and not making any
> > > > > sense. Think about this with a clear head - by
> > > > > slandering me you hurt Devi and thereby idiots like
> > > > > you and million of others who fantasize on her will be
> > > > > disturbed. Imagine the havoc, destruction caused by
> > > > > millions of people left vulnerable to reality. Because
> > > > > you know what at the end of day Devi & I still sleep
> > > > > together. So please in the interest of global peace
> > > > > back off from this slander, it's doomed to failure
> > > > > empty baby.
> > > > >
> > > > > So I order you go back to your sadhana - stop being an
> > > > > errant child, have some respect for your father.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ravi Shiva.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:32 PM, emptybill emptybill@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > **
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then wake the f--- up Ravioli.
> > > > > > Those who slander the devotees of Devi
> > > > > > slander Devi herself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Throw away the ahamvritti charas in you chillium
> > > > > > and get straight. You talk like the western-grubbing
> > > > > > guru-s you purport to hate.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Are you a devi-bhakta or just another bragging fake?
> > > > > > Look how far down her throne you've slid!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wake the f--- up before it's too late for you "this very
> > > > > > kalpa" .
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The great void awaits. It knows nothing.
> > > > > > It speaks nothing. It enjoys nothing.
> > > > > > It is insentient tamo-guna and you are
> > > > > > french-kissing it in your ego-masturbation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- "Ravi Chivukula" chivukula.ravi@ wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Empty - stop irritating me OK? Yeah - Devi will be
> > > > > > > happy to see her lover be

[FairfieldLife] Helen Gurley Brown - The woman who wanted it all

[Jason]

 

Today's Paper » FEATURES » SUNDAY MAGAZINE 

The woman who wanted it all

Sali Hughes 

Pioneering magazine editor Helen Gurley Brown taught 
generations of women that it was their right to have it all 
-- a career, a family and great sex. Sali Hughes recalls the 
life of a fascinating woman.

Helen Gurley Brown, creator of the Cosmopolitan magazine 
brand as we know it, died in Manhattan on August 13, aged 
90. To many, she is the founding mother of women's magazine 
publishing and the woman who first put the concept of sex 
and single girls into the mainstream. Decades before Sex and 
the City and 50 Shades of Grey , and at a time when single 
women couldn’t even obtain a mortgage, Cosmopolitan was 
telling them to celebrate their unmarried status, demanding 
better sex, better orgasms and better men.

But despite Gurley Brown's notoriety as the editor who 
invented sex talk for women, former U.K. Cosmo editor Sam 
Baker says it wrongly overshadows her passion for careers 
and financial independence for women. "Right up until I 
left, she would still be sending editors notes, saying: 'I 
love what you’re doing, but more careers! Careers are so 
important!'" Gurley Brown is credited with inventing the 
term "having it all", a sentiment that endures to this day, 
if only in making women feel failures for not achieving her 
ultimate feminist goal. But what Gurley Brown arguably 
intended was for us to want more, to not have to choose 
between having a family and retaining our own identities, or 
between caring for our families and providing for ourselves. 
"Don’t use men to get what you want in life -- get it for 
yourself," she often said. And she never suggested women use 
anything but hard graft to make it. "Nearly every glamorous, 
wealthy, successful career woman you might envy now started 
out as some kind of schlepp."

Self-made

She was no exception. Gurley was born in Green Forest, 
Arkansas, to schoolteacher parents. Her father, Ira, went 
into politics soon after and moved his family to Little 
Rock. When Helen was 10, in 1932, he was killed in a freak 
elevator accident. Broke, at the tail-end of the Great 
Depression, her mother, Cleo, took her two daughters to Los 
Angeles, whereupon Helen's elder sister, Mary, contracted 
polio and never walked again. The family was uninsured and 
lost what little they had to Mary’s medical bills. Helen 
said much later: "Why am I so driven? It seems logically to 
have derived from things that happened to me after my father 
died, but some of it must have been residual from very 
early." She cut short her education to go out to work to 
support her mother and sister (she remained obsessed with 
the importance of money management throughout her career). 
She became an advertising copywriter at a New York agency in 
the time of Mad Men and, within five years, was one of 
Manhattan’s most celebrated ad execs. She pitched a new 
magazine to Hearst publications and instead was offered the 
job of relaunching Cosmopolitan , where she remained for the 
next 32 years as editor.

According to everyone who knew her, "Gurley was girly". In 
stark contrast with the "dour feminist anger" she banned 
from Cosmopolitan when she successfully overhauled the 
ailing literary magazine in 1965, she revelled in her 
femininity. Her existing Manhattan corner office on the top 
floor of the Hearst building was pink, full of flowers and 
heavily accented with animal print. She described herself as 
neurotic, as plain (she saw herself as a champion of the 
unexceptional-looking woman, and an example of what they 
could achieve).

Forever young

She remained young at heart and obsessed with maintaining an 
appearance to match. Gurley Brown was still exercising for 
45 minutes beside her desk at 85 years old, and was from a 
young age rarely without her custom-cut wigs and false 
eyelashes -- though as former employee Nora Ephron observed: 
"It never quite comes together properly. An earring keeps 
falling off. A wig is askew. A perfect matched stocking has 
run." A relentless self-critic, Gurley Brown was a big fan 
of plastic surgery and claimed the only sick days of her 
60-year career in order to undergo facelifts, a nose job, 
injections and various other nips and tucks, none of which 
she denied (she once even wrote a Cosmo feature on how to 
have great sex while wearing a hairpiece). She was known to 
weep at criticism or disagreements, and was regarded by some 
as emotionally incontinent ("Whether it was group therapy or 
what, there’s nothing left inside Helen. It all comes out," 
her husband told Ephron). She believed in love and being 
sexually available to one’s partner. Through it all, her 
girlish sense of fun never left her.

Gurley's marriage (at 37) to film producer David Brown 
marked the beginning of her most important personal and 
professional relationship, continued until his death in 
2010. She called him 'Lambchop' and kept a photograph of him 
on her pinboar

[FairfieldLife] Microsoft's last Window of hope

[Jason]

 

S & T » Technology 

Microsoft's last Window of hope

Deepa Kurup 

The past decade saw Microsoft Corporation, the company that 
two decades ago gave us the proprietary Windows operating 
system, take a nose dive — from being the market leader to 
losing out in one tech area after the other, search, social 
networking, email, music and mobility.

A late entrant into the mobility game, where globally 
tablets have been replacing the good old personal computer, 
Microsoft's new operating system, Windows 8, is its 
last-ditch attempt at reclaiming the space it has yielded 
over the years to its tech rivals, Apple Inc. and Google 
Inc. 

This release, slated for October 26, represents a major 
rethink for the software major, one that acknowledges the 
tectonic shift in technological choice: from desktops, then 
laptops to tablets and smartphones.

First impressions look good. At the Windows AppFest that 
Microsoft organised in Bangalore in an attempt to build 
traction around the upcoming release, Microsoft gave 
journalists a detailed demo of Windows 8. We tried out 
Windows on tablets as well as desktops, but the news is that 
there's no difference -- it's one OS that fits both (unlike 
Apple that has iOS and OS X, and Google that's building 
Chrome for netbooks and has Android for mobile).

There's no doubt that the interfaces are slick, smooth and 
offer a lot of scope to organise. It's quite intuitive, and 
going by what they show of the user experience, it's an 
attempt to blur the line between the traditional desktop and 
tablet experience. It is packed with new features and, 
understandably, there's a learning curve, but it is all 
quite interesting.

The main feature of the new look is that the entire user 
interface is arranged into neat tiles. These tiles, that are 
grouped together (you can change the grouping to suit your 
usage style) represent different services and applications. 
This interface resembles Metro, its Windows Phone interface 
where it is called 'Live Tiles'. Under the tiles you can 
view live updates for each of your services.

The other big-ticket technological offering is integration 
with the cloud and social media. The Microsoft executive 
giving the demo spent a lot of time on photo-sharing 
features, and on how the new feature set makes updating or 
connecting with friends on multiple social networks or email 
clients easy. At the media interactions, top India leaders 
described the product as a "radical game-changer". 

One of them even compared it to Windows 95, which introduced 
32-bit computing to home PCs and represented a "generation 
shift" in computing. 

While techies at Microsoft are visibly excited, the hard 
truth is that Microsoft needs this product to succeed not 
only in order to remain relevant but also to resuscitate its 
market value. In July this year, Microsoft reported its 
first quarterly loss, a net loss of $492 million. This is 
the first time the corporation saw net profits dip after it 
went public in 1986.

While some of this had to do with the grim market 
environment, a lot of this is expected given that personal 
computer sales have been stagnant for a few years now, and 
registered a decline in recent quarters. Analysts have also 
been harping on that unless Microsoft comes up with a 
product that's a real game-changer, it can barely hope to 
catch up with its adversaries. Microsoft also hopes that the 
new touch-friendly product will make some impact among 
enterprise clients, where its major revenues lie.

Slip-on keyboard?

It's also being widely reported that tablets being shipped 
with Windows 8 are planning on offering snap-on keyboards. 
This will mark a shift from the 'touch-only' approach to 
computing, and several hardware biggies including Samsung, 
HP and Acer are set to do this. 

Tablet makers perhaps hope that this add-on could wean 
consumers away from Apple's iPad, which remains a market 
leader in this segment. This detachable keyboard, which was 
part of the demo equipment shown here, is sleek and goes 
well with the device design. 

Samsung's already demoed a new version of Slate, which runs 
on Windows 8 and will hit the market on the same date as 
Windows 8. This keyboard costs a little less than $ 100, 
which seems to be a good bargain for those who still 
struggle with typing on touch, or feel they'd like it if 
their tablets could double as more traditional computing 
devices.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS

[Jason]

Here is another instance of Bariatric making an imaginary 
allegation, that "The others piled on "against" Share and 
"for" Robin because they were still trying to "get" Curtis."

And this is the zillionth time he used the dick comparison 
analogy.


---  "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Oh, shut up, Barry. You are clueless and irrelevant.
>  
> >
> > ---  "curtisdeltablues"  wrote:
> > >
> > > M: Sorry Robin, Share's response supersedes our opinions 
> > > in this matter.  I don't need to have a long conversation 
> > > about it with you about it now.  
> > >
> > >
> ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > Hint:  You never did. 
> > 
> > Robin's part in all of this was just to be 
> > what he is -- an abusive psychopath trying
> > to get people to believe he can "fix" them.
> > 
> > The others piled on against Share and "for"
> > Robin because they were still trying to 
> > "get" you. 
> > 
> > Idiocy as usual. Easier just to stay out of
> > it and allow everyone in the who-has-the-
> > biggest-dick contest to shoot their wads 
> > and go limp so that we can get back to 
> > talking about ideas instead of people...
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The difference between charisma and narcissism

[Jason]

Here below is a "full monty agreement" and the "feedback" 
which you are talking about.


> > --- Sal Sunshine  wrote:
> > >
> > > Shemp was specifically asking about *xanax.*
> > > What's so difficult about that?
> > >
> > > Any number of responses have nothing whatsoever
> > > to do with that, but are instead trying to peddle
> > > some nonsensical junk "treatment" that will
> > > do nothing, or else something like xanax (and
> > > other psycotropic medications) never would
> > > have been necessary in the first place.
> > >
> > > Talking about fruit diets, "doshas," herbal
> > > teas et al when someone is trying their best
> > > to get informed opinions on what could be
> > > a potent drug just shows, IMO, the desperation
> > > of people who will do anythying for attention.
> >
> >
> ---  "TurquoiseB"  wrote:
> >
> > I have to agree.
> >
> >
---  "off_world_beings"  wrote:
>
> Yes, a dumb fuck like you would agree. Turq, you are so stupid you can't
> even see it. You have nothing of value to offer for anyone, you are an
> extremely prejudiced and arrogant ass, and you too will be on
> anti-depressants within a year.
> 
> OffWorld
>
>
>
---  "turquoiseb"  wrote:
>
 
> In my experience, it rarely is. And there is a simple way to tell the
> difference between "narcissistic confidence" and real charisma. The
> former requires constant feedback; the latter does not.
> 
> The narcissist is trolling for attention. He or she CARES -- and CARES
> deeply -- whether other people agree with his or her pronouncements. The
> narcissist often declares that others "owe" him or her a reply or an
> "answer" to their pronouncements. They fly into rages when the other
> person suggests that they are owed nothing, and then often go on long
> vendettas against them to "get" them for not giving him or her the
> attention they were trolling for.
> 
> *Let alone* the greater sin of not bowing reverently in the direction of
> the narcissist and saying, "Wow. You got me. You are just SO RIGHT in
> what you say. Mea culpa. How could I have been so misguided as to not
> see myself (or the thing or concept the narcissist is making
> pronouncements about) the way you do? Please forgive me, and tell me
> more about how I can become as all-wise and all-knowing as you are."
> 
 

> The hangers-on who glom onto narcissists rarely appreciate the truly
> charismatic, because they don't give *them* the narcissistic feedback
> they're looking for. The charismatic don't tend to gather those people
> who agree with them into cliques or cults. They just continue on their
> Way, valuing neither the people who agree with their statements highly,
> nor the people who disagree with them. All of them are *entitled* to
> their own view, and welcome to it, think the truly charismatic.
> 


> The narcissists, on the other hand, very much DO NOT believe that others
> are entitled to their own view. They argue incessantly against any view
> that contradicts theirs, and even any view that only partially agrees
> with it. In the mind of the narcissist, only Full Monty Agreement is
> acceptable.
> 
 

> As a result, there are people here on this forum whose posts I tend to
> ignore, and not even bother reading. The lesson of history has indicated
> over time that these posters fall into the narcissistic category, if not
> the downright abusive category. So why waste any time at all on them, or
> on what they have to say?
> 


> From their side, these people whom I have chosen to ignore seem to
> believe that I'm "really" doing what *they* do -- reading every word
> they write, as needy for feedback as they are. Bt. Not true. The few
> words of theirs I cannot escape, quoted in the posts of others I do
> read, are more than enough to reveal their intent, and their true
> nature. As are their constant attempts to lure me -- and others -- into
> long, protracted arguments with them so that they can "prove" their
> "superiority." BORING.
> 


> But for those of you who get off on becoming groupies to the narcissists
> of this world, carry on with that if it makes you happy. Seems like a
> waste of time and life to me, but hey! it's your life. Waste it as you
> will...
>

[FairfieldLife] Gospel of Matthew - linked to bizarre trail of self-mutilations

[Jason]

 
 
Gospel of Matthew linked to bizarre trail of 
self-mutilations

June 13, 2012, Special to World Science  

It happens only sporadically -- a bit more than every three 
years on average, judging by published medical re­ports -- 
but that makes it no less disturbing each time for hospital 
staff faced with the situation.

"It" may be de­scribed by citing the most recent ex­am­ple, 
re­ported in a medical journal last month: that of a 
62-year-old man whom physicians dubbed Mr. P to protect his 
privacy. Mr. P showed up at the emer­gen­cy room of St. 
Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoe­nix, Ariz., 
complaining of a case of "Mat­thew 19:12." Asked to clarify, 
he just kept repeating the same thing: Mat­thew 19:12.

The nurse on du­ty searched the Internet for Matthew 19:12. 
The result was, to put it mildly, wo­risome. The Biblical 
verse, as she learned, reads as follows. 

For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their 
mother's womb; and there are some eunuchs, which were made 
eunuchs of men; and there be eunuchs, which have made 
them­selves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He 
that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

As it quickly be­came clear, Mr. P had made this hospital 
visit un­accompanied by his penis. That, he explained, he 
had flushed down the toilet three days ago after severing it 
with a pocket knife. His testicles were al­so absen­t -- 
re­moved four years earlier at Mr. P's re­quest by a doctor 
in Mexico. 

Matthew 19:12

"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their 
mother's womb; and there are some eunuchs, which were made 
eunuchs of men; and there be eunuchs, which have made 
them­selves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He 
that is able to re­ceive it, let him re­ceive it."

Mat­thew 18:8

"Where­fore if thy hand or thy foot of­fend thee, cut them 
off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter 
in­to life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or 
two feet to be cast in­to ever­lasting fire."
 
Mat­thew 5:30

"And if thy right hand of­fend thee, cut it off and cast it 
from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy 
members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be 
cast in­to hell."

Matthew 5:29

"But if thy right eye of-fend thee, pluck it out and cast it 
from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy 
members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be 
cast in­to hell."
 
 
Al­though his speech and thoughts appeared muddled, Mr. P 
did state that he had "done this be­cause his penis had 
caused him to sin and as an eunuch he could be closer to God 
as de­scribed in Mat­thew 19:12," three re­searchers 
affiliated with St. Joseph's wrote in a re­port de­scribing 
the incident. Mr. P al­so claimed to have pondered the 
decision for months be­fore acting.

Mr. P received u­gent treatment at St. Joseph's, including a 
skin graft on­to the stump. He was then confined to a local 
psychiatric hospital by court order, leaving little but 
questions be­hind.

The three investigators pro­ceeded to search an on­line 
medical literature database, PubMed, for other cases of this 
nature. They discovered that the Bi­ble -- in­deed, the 
Gospel of Matthew specifically -- has left a trail of 
self-mutilations inspired largely by four of its verses. 

The bloody toll listed in case re­ports dating back to 1967 
-- PubMed doesn't go back much further -- in­cluded three 
partially or fully amputated penises; four pairs of 
castrated testicles; three amputated hands and 11 severely 
damaged eye­balls. Saws, circular saws, screw­drivers and 
pencils were among the tools used for the horrifying 
procedures, al­though several patients put out their eyes 
with their fingers alone.

"Our literature re­view re­vealed 16 patients in addition to 
[Mr. P] who had injured them­selves in connection with 
specific religious text," the re­searchers wrote. Their 
re­view of the cases is published in the May 29 on­line 
issue of the re­search journal Psychosomatics.

All but one of the patients were diagnosed with psychiatric 
dis-orders or psychotic dis-orders or had substance abuse 
issues, they wrote; Mr. P., for example, "had a long history 
of severe bi­polar illness marked by hyper-religious 
delusions."

And every case was connected with at least one of four 
verses in Mat­thew’s Gospel: 19:12, 18:8, 5:29 and 5:30. The 
three latter verses are more cryptic than the first, 
referenced by Mr. P. What they have in common is that they 
appear to suggest that if a hand, foot or right eye are 
some­how offensive, cutting them off is the way to go, 
be­cause at least, that much less of the body will end up in 
Hell.

"Several biblical verses reference self-mutilation as 
metaphoric acts of sacrifice or contrition," wrote the 
re­searchers,

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Robin

[Jason]

>
> ---  "maskedzebra"  wrote:
> >
> > ROBIN2: A lot more is being said here in this segment of 
> > my letter than you choose to respond to, Share: that is 
> > a fault in you. The equivalence principle: that is what 
> > you should have addressed. How can I respect your 
> > honesty and good faith, Share, if you choose to respond 
> > so selectively to what is being said to you?
> >
> >
---  "curtisdeltablues"  wrote:
>
>  
> M: This is the verbal overwhelm technique.  A dump truck  
> of cement is unloaded on the person, and then when you get 
> so bogged down you can't even find your cell phone to dial 
> 911, you are accused of not addressing EVERYTHING that was 
> dumped on you.
> 
> I drowned in the same La Brae pit Share. 
> 
> Robin, I am usually the most anti Strunk and White  
> Elements of Style advocate because I believe its worship  
> leads to boring writing.  But in your case, you really  
> need to pick up a copy. You are asking too much of your  
> readers.
> 
> 
You are right on the point.  It's this kind of "dumping" 
that worries me.  He needs 600 words to convey a single 
point.  His insistence that we read every single word of it 
is like force feeding 2 litres of vinegar down someone's 
throat.

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS to Ravi and Judy

[Jason]

Huh!  How can anyone be in a "painfully blissful" state?
Even Robin with all his oxymoronish contradictions dosen't
come close to this.

He says that the whole thing was a lie and a snare, yet the
Unity was "real".  In fact I remember him telling me last
year that he was "Just passing himself as 'enlightened'."

Old Judy girl bats for him for one simple reason.  She has
to "Prove" that 'Unity consciousness' exists and thereby MMY
was right and so on and so forth.  It's bad news for the TM
mov't if Robbie boy was just in delusion.  It "hurts" Judy's
cause and makes the entire TM mov't look loony.


--- Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Awesome dear Share. I have nothing to say about anything else now -
I'm in
> a totally nervous, above normal vulnerable, painfully blissful,
intoxicated
> state today. So I need to make sure I continue to focus at work.
>
> Love,
> Ravi
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Share Long sharelong60@... wrote:
> >
> > **
> >
> > Hi Ravi, yes you are a cool and totally cool blast (-:
> >
> > But Ravi, about Marek: maybe he has his moronic moments as we all
do.
> > Maybe he has his inauthentic moments as we all do. But I don't think
he
> > could do the job he does and be moronic by nature. Nor do I think he
could
> > surf if he was inauthentic. Nature's the best reality check.
> >
> > As for me, I realize I have my non grown up moments. But I also do
my
> > spiritual practice, going to the Dome twice a day every day. I do
this no
> > matter the weather, no matter my mood. That's grown up in my book. I
face
> > my fears including fear of dying. That's grown up in my book. I
admit I
> > make mistakes. Also grown up in my book. I forgive others their
> > mistakes. Also grown up in my book. etc. etc.
> > Share
> >

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS [to Judy]

[Jason]

An excellent point Taxius.  In fact I, emptybill and 
iranitea did point out many months back when Robin claimed 
that individuality was "completely" gone.  That is possible 
only when one drops the body in samadhi.

The analogy of body as the 'light bulb' and electricity as 
'consciousness', (I think Ramana gave it) you look down from 
your 'higher self' at your 'lower self' (individuality) which 
like everybody's individualty is also a part of your 
consciousness.

That 'residue' of individuality enables you to function in 
this plane till you die.


---  "anartaxius"  wrote:
>
>
> 
> Suspicion is that lurking feeling something is not quite 
> right, one cannot always put one's finger on it. In your  
> conversations with Robin, have you ever had a back and  
> forth about the nature of Reality? I ask this because it  
> is in this situation that what I 'suspect' becomes 
> evident. Normally you do not discuss ideas, you edit or  
> correct statements in relation to those ideas that others 
> make, but normally do not seem to enter the fray with a  
> direct discussion of what you think about the 'truth' of  
> conceptions about reality, in which case you would not  
> butt heads with Robin.
> 
> I am always experimenting. But there seems to be a  
> difference in my approach and what Robin seems to  
> advocate. My experience is the sense of individuality gets 
> dismembered with spiritual practice. This does not mean it 
> ever completely goes away, but it becomes more  
> transparent, as if it were a convenient fiction, a useful 
> construction for dealing with other human bodies and  
> objects, but the experience is everything is an aspect of 
> an inclusive whole, and everything seamlessly fits  
> together. It is an incredible delicious simplicity.
> 
> I am always experimenting. But there seems to be a  
> difference in my approach and what Robin seems to  
> advocate. My experience is the sense of individuality gets 
> dismembered with spiritual practice. This does not mean it 
> ever completely goes away, but it becomes more  
> transparent, as if it were a convenient fiction, a useful 
> construction for dealing with other human bodies and  
> objects, but the experience is everything is an aspect of 
> an inclusive whole, and everything seamlessly fits 
> together. It is an incredible delicious simplicity.
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Memorandum 1: Smoothing things out

[Jason]

> 
> On Oct 5, 2012, at 8:32 AM, "Richard J. Williams"  wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > "Alright, I will say it: Emily did a major number on 
> > > my ass."
> > >
> > > 
> > But, did you enjoy?
> > 
> > It's Friday here and you're not even making any sense,
> > yesterday - Curtis has already left the room. LoL!
> > 
> >
---  Ravi Chivukula  wrote:
>
> Barry - oh come on can't you at least avoid your bullying on
> Fridays.
> 
> 
 
This is the second time today the blame landed on Barry's 
doorstep, in the exact same thread.

Somebody chided Barry fo steamrolling and now someone else 
is accusing him of bullying.

Maybe yahoo switches names and drive people crazy?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Tea Party Stupid

[Jason]

People would do anything for money and power.  He is 
obviously playing to the gallery.  Do you think he would say 
this if the majority of the electorate didn't believe this?

---  "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
>
> Georgia Rep. Paul Broun, Science & Technology Committee,  
> is Tea Party Stupid: "All that stuff I was taught about  
> evolution and embryology and the Big Bang Theory, all that 
> is lies straight from the pit of Hell," Broun said. "And  
> it's lies to try to keep me and all the folks who were  
> taught that from understanding that they need a savior."  
> http://www.addictinginfo.o*g/2012/10/05/republican-
> science-is-all-lies/
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Tea Party Stupid

[Jason]

> 
> ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > People would do anything for money and power.  He is 
> > obviously playing to the gallery.  Do you think he would say 
> > this if the majority of the electorate didn't believe this?
> > 
> >
---  "raunchydog"  wrote:
>
> Smart Kotch Brother money buys Congressional seats for useful Tea Party 
> idiots. Broun isn't playing to a gallery, he *believes* his own bullshit. The 
> day the majority of Americans believe ignoramuses like Broun is the day 
> corporate media will have won the propaganda war on an educated electorate. 
> http://youtu.be/DvlbZWZWzOM
>   
> 

The link isn't opening. Have they taken down the page?


> 
> > ---  "raunchydog"  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Georgia Rep. Paul Broun, Science & Technology Committee,  
> > > is Tea Party Stupid: "All that stuff I was taught about  
> > > evolution and embryology and the Big Bang Theory, all that 
> > > is lies straight from the pit of Hell," Broun said. "And  
> > > it's lies to try to keep me and all the folks who were  
> > > taught that from understanding that they need a savior."  
> > > http://www.addictinginfo.o*g/2012/10/05/republican-
> > > science-is-all-lies/
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Best TM Rumor to Judy and PS to laughingG

[Jason]

> ---  Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > PS to laughingG: just in case I've been bad in the reply 
> > above, maybe you better include FF in your itinerary (-: 
> >
> >
---  laughinggull108  wrote:
>
> Why you little tart you! How dare you try to deprive me of 
> a good ass spanking by trying to lure my gully boy away 
> from me! I forbid you to have any further contact with my 
> gully boy, either electronically or physically. 
> Furthermore, you are to give no credence whatsoever to 
> anything he writes because he just doesn't have enough 
> *skin* in the game...and probably never will.
> 
> 
>

So, is this gully girl, probably gully boy's wife?

[FairfieldLife] Re: today PS [to Judy]

[Jason]

 
> 
> ---  "Jason"  wrote:
> >
> > That 'residue' of individuality enables you to function in 
> > this plane till you die.
> 
---  "j_alexander_stanley"  wrote:
>
> Is that the same residue of individuality that compels you to email me 
> pornography? I may be way out in left field, but it seems to me that one 
> should be able to function perfectly well in this plane without doing that.
>

I was planning to delete all those files. But was also keen 
to pass the junk to others so that it can survive in another 
incarnation.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Tea Party Stupid

[Jason]

>
> On 10/06/2012 10:36 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
>
> > Bhairitu:
> >
> > > I think the demons from hell have arrived
> > >
> > You sound really scared, for a tantric yogi.
> >
> > Looks like Eastwood was right: debate an empty
> > chair; empty promises; failed to win the war;
> > failed to improve the economy; failed to to
> > not raise taxes; failed at hope & change.
> >
> >> and they've taken the form of Republicans
> >> and the Reich Wing.
> >>
> > So, Hitler formed the Third Reich party and
> > then murdered millions, but U.S. Repugs are
> > your enemy. ;-)
> >
> > "This sad behavior precipitated a search by
> > Obama that brought him in contact with several
> > father surrogates, notably Frank Marshall Davis
> > and Jeremiah Wright, that it would be hard to
> > brand as anywhere near satisfactory. (Davis
> > was a pornographer and about Wright the less
> > said the better.) No Mitt Romneys there..."
> >
> > 'The Real Debate: The Good Father vs. The Abandoned Son'
> > http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/10/06/the-real-debate/
> > 
> >
> >
> >
---  Bhairitu  wrote:
>
> So you must believe that the Republicants and the Reich Wing are angels 
> from heaven?  How much money have they pissed down on you so far?
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5CYqZbgK6Q
>


Don't you think it's bizzare that established political 
parties are left to the mercy of corporate funds for 
survival, which always comes with strings attached?

This is the the real reason the communists and Islamists 
hate and distrust the western world.  This hatred has very 
little to do with the economic system or even cultural 
system.

Don't you think it's better to give subsidies to established 
political parties with considerable vote base, rather than 
private companies and corporate banks?

Don't you think it's incredible that the modern day 
politicians feel more insecure that monarchs of the past?

Don't you think reforms for political finance and campaign 
finance should have been done more that 50 years ago?

Nothing in the universe is static.  All things change, 
mutate and evolve.  Why should political systems alone 
remain static and dogmatic?

Don't you think one of the challenges for this present 
generation is to evolve a better political system?  Don't 
you think untainted funding from the state will attract 
better and more ethical politicians into the system?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Forum ranking (was Best TM Rumor to Judy

[Jason]

You sound familiar to Barry and this forum? In case you 
don't know the rules, let me explain it to you.

The three pips are Raunchy, Jim and Lawson.

The pippettes are Robin, Bob Price, Emily, Ann, Ravi, 
WillyTex and Duveyoung.

I, Xeno, Salyawin, Bhairitu, John are annoying gnats.


---  laughinggull108  wrote:
>
> Barry, you degenerate piece of shit. Don't you know that it has to be white! 
> Get a life, man!
> 
> > >
> > > ---  laughinggull108 no_reply@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Good morning Share. Sorry to butt in here but I can never pass on a
> > > > good teaching opportunity. This is what I meant by "Turn away, turn
> > > > away, it's hideous." Now are you catching on? Did you figure out the
> > > > ML shop opening on the square? Have a wonderful day!
> > >
> > ---  "Alex Stanley"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Maharishi Latex?
> > >
> > >
> ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> > 
> > Release your Inner Siddha. Invest in Maharishi Latex today.  A new look
> > for a new you.
> >  
> > 
> > http://veeklog.info/images_articles/latex-54edbd.jpg
> > 
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Romney is a Liar

[Jason]

Politicians are not an isolated community.  They are a part 
of the general society.  Whatever values the general society 
has the politicians would also have.

I too always believed in MMY's quote that the government is 
a reflection of the collective.

All preceding generations down the ages had their share of 
"wacky" views and beliefs.  But there was no internet and 
mass media then which is why they didn't get attention.  
Today we have the internet and these "wacky" politicians 
come under spotlight.


---  "seekliberation"  wrote:
>
> that goes back to many posts that i've done before.  I've always believed 
> vehemently in MMY's quote:  "government is an innocent reflection of 
> collective consciousness".  
> 
> That being said, why do we get upset with our politicians?  How is it that we 
> have politicians who run up big deficits, cheat on their spouses, and lie 
> about it?  Because we have people in our society who max out credit cards, 
> cheat on their spouses, and lie about it.  We shouldn't expect anything more 
> from our leaders than we ourselves are.  
> 
> 
> seekliberation
> 
> ---  Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > Reading this seekliberation, the thought came that if we want honest 
> > politicians we have to start by being honest ourselves.  Probably also 
> > applies if wanting honest gurus, honest spouses, honest friends, etc.
> > 
> > 

[FairfieldLife] Re: How to Know Reality's Point of View

[Jason]

 
> 
> ---  turquoiseb  wrote:
> >
> > A new world's record.
> > 
> > Needing 50,527 words just to say "I'm insane."
> > 
> > Impressive.
> >
> >
---  awoelflebater  wrote:
>
> You counted them all. If you didn't read them you sure  
> know how to miss the boat. Barry thinks (giving him the  
> benefit of the doubt), "Let's see, I'll count the words,  
> not read them and then use 14 ill-chosen words of my own  
> to show how idiotic I really am." Go pick up some dog  
> poop, fish a cat out of the canal or hire another hooker, 
> these activities are apparently much more worthwhile in  
> your addled world. You don't have to read Robin's posts 
> Barry and I am sure you did not so how could you possibly, 
> even remotely, say one valid thing about it? You couldn't 
> and you didn't. Just because "War and Peace" was a long  
> book does it make Tolstoy insane?
> 
>

Hey Ann, you sound like a little girl 'defending' her drunk 
father after he crashed his car against a tree.

Can't you just admit that you fell for this crappy gag and 
wasted years of your life on it?  We all did.  Even Barry 
was a "bug eyed cult zombie" in the 1970's

[FairfieldLife] Re: How to Know Reality's Point of View

[Jason]

What a moron you are, Robin.  Darwin is not a 'materialist', 
but is a 'naturalist'.  Maintain the distinction between the 
two.

There is no such thing as 'neo-darwinism'. Darwin's 
discovery is not an "ism".  Science is a methodology, a tool 
to understand the empirical laws of nature.

In fact there is no contradiction between Darwin and 
vedanta.  They are on two parallel tracks.

You pepper your points with "accusations" about the motives 
of Curtis.  This is one trick you have been playing all 
alont since you came here.

Darwin is *not* a materialist.  Darwin was a scientist and a 
naturalist.

You don't seem to understand the process of science itself. 
 Unlike religion, Science has self-correcting mechanisms. 
It's an open ended structure were new data is added theories 
constantly refined.

Darwin never wanted his theory to become a dogma.  He 
himself once said that 'if you come up with something better 
then discard it'.  Paleontaology, genetics, bio-chemistry, 
study of ecosystems all have added credence to Darwin's 
theory.  Renowned biologist Theodonius Dobzhansky states, 
"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of 
evolution." 

Modern biology is evolutionary biology and if you take away 
evolution, there is no biology.

You are in the same boat with that other moron Barry who 
also thinks of science as an "ism".


---  "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
>
> 
> How to Know Reality's Point of View: Robin's Response to Curtis, Part 2 of 3
> 
> (continued from Part 1)
> 
> 
> 
> ROBIN2: I am sure there have been a hundred books written 
> by professional philosophers in the last twenty years to  
> the effect: *Why Materialism Cannot Possibly Be True*. One 
> of the most distinguished philosophers in the world--by  
> every consensus--who is an avowed atheist--has a book 
> coming out this month (Thomas Nagel again) titled *Mind  
> and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception  
> of Nature Is Almost Certainly False*.
> 
> Did you notice that subtitle, Curtis? Some think Nagel the 
> greatest living philosopher--and he is an atheist as you  
> are. And he has just smashed to pieces your assumption  
> about reality and philosophy and nothingness.
> 
> CURTIS2: No he hasn't, that is a book title. He isn't  
> going to overturn Darwin's evolutionary thoery with a  
> book. And I might agree with him depending on how he  
> defines his terms concerning materialism. He has to make  
> his case.
> 
> ROBIN3: He is saying that your basic assumptions--about  
> what is real, what materialism can explain and what it  
> cannot explain, the limits of Neo-Darwinism, the origin  
> and nature of consciousness--ARE ALMOST CERTAINLY FALSE.  
> Did you hear that, Curtis? The book comes out here in  
> Canada on October 15. I will be reading that book. And I  
> can assure you that what I say here will be most certainly 
> proven to be true. Shall we bet on it, Curtis? Nagel is  
> not going to say that God exists--he cannot bear that that 
> could be true. But he is going to demonstrate that the  
> models for understanding human beings, consciousness, and 
> reality promulgated by Patricia and Paul Churchland are 
> "most certainly false". You will not become a convert to  
> the Nagel view; I doubt any Neo-Darwinian Materialist will 
> be--they will say that Nagel has betrayed the cause of  
> evolution and science and neuroscience. This will HAVE to 
> be your verdict too, Curtis. But who knows? Maybe if you  
> write to him as you have written to me--and you would be  
> forced to if his ideas are as interesting and provocative 
> as mine are:)--he might rewrite his book, because that is 
> exactly what he should do if he hears from you the way I  
> am hearing from you, Curtis. Thomas Nagel's book will most 
> certainly challenge the hysterical metaphysic of your  
> first person ontology, Curtis.
> 
> 
> 
> (continued in Part 3)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: How to Know Reality's Point of View

[Jason]

I wonder how "reality" can have a POV? Is reality an entity 
to have a POV?

I wonder how someone can "kill" the truth?  Robin accuses 
Curtis of killing the truth.


> ---  "Robin Carlsen"  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > You are working away here, Curtis, in your customary   
> > fashion: from within the animus you have to the   
> > metaphysical principle which has enabled me to suggest a 
> >  possibility of human accountability that infuriates you 
> >  and inflames your pride. And you attack me without any 
> > willingness to even consider a single thread of   
> > plausibility or meaningfulness in what I have said. This 
> >  is a dead giveaway to your ultimate and hidden   
> > metaphysical purpose: Kill the truth which you find   
> > abhorrent and inconvenient to your way of living your  
> > life. 
> > 
> > 
> > You are perfectly nonresponsive to what I have just  
> > said, Curtis. Can you never deal with the truth except
> > aslant, Curtis? You are not serious here, Curtis, 
> > surely. You have become a devotee of Lawrence Krauss,  
> > who has come under withering attack not just from  
> > philosophers, but from fellow physicists (some of whom  
> > are trained in philosophy, as Krauss is not) for his *A 
> > Universe from Nothing*. This is a very stupid thing to  
> > do, Curtis, trying to make FFL readers believe there is 
> > a consensus about what nothingness is and what  
> > nothingness isn't, and that the only persons who  
> > disagree with you are benighted and antediluvian. 
> > 
> > 
> > But no, Curtis doesn't do this. If he has nothing to say 
> > by way of retort, he just changes the topic, or 
> > generalizes it out of all meaning and pertinence to what 
> > was being discussed. You kill the reality, the momentum, 
> > the context within which truth wishes to create the 
> > necessary tension so an issue can be seen from various  
> > points of view, Curtis. Once again you lead the reader  
> > astray by simply turning away from what is being 
> > said--this, after your vociferous protestations about my 
> > ignorance, dishonesty, ad hominem arguments. Suddenly  
> > just passive and deliberately irrelevant.
> >  
> > 
> > Again, you will never face a question or challenge  
> > directly, Curtis. You will never let a question strike 
> > against your consciousness. If you smell trouble, you  
> > walk away, as you have right here. You have not begun to 
> > address what I have said here. That is always revealing, 
> > isn't it, Curtis? I cannot understand, in all the  
> > quarrels you have had with various posters here on FFL, 
> > why everyone who is normal, intelligent, and reasonable 
> > can't see that you are a moral and intellectual--and 
> > metaphysical--cheat, Curtis. > Why would I set myself up 
> > for a takedown like this with you, Curtis? No, you are  
> > consciously and compulsively misrepresenting me. 
> > 
> > 
> > You would be asked to go to your room and STFU if you  
> > answered like this at the dining room table, Curtis.  
> > This is stupid, obstinate, and painfully obstructionist. 
> > 
> > 
> > I am shocked that so many persons on FFL are intimidated 
> > by your way of arguing that you just shut them up. You  
> > would not have lasted around where I grew up, Curtis. 
> > You would have been censured, and you would have felt  
> > the ignominy of your false posturing. This is ruled out 
> > of order, Curtis, for you to rule my question to you out 
> > of order. 
> > 
> > 
> > Go to your room, Curtis. WTF? This is getting strange. I 
> > am surprised that those who love you have not told you  
> > to just shut up. You should just shut up, Curtis. You  
> > have nothing to say to what I have said here. You are 
> > tediously the same, Curtis: You will never know what  
> > it is like to find your ideas, your consciousness, 
> > altered by some idea which is opposed to your sacred 
> > beliefs, the beliefs which are tantamount to the 
> > survival of your first person ontology. 
> > 
> > 
> > You are a primitive kind of thinker, Curtis--you do not 
> > go near the elegance and musicality and loveliness of  
> > what it really means to think about an idea. Too bad. 
> >You are missing out on one of the great privileges of  
> > being a human being. You should be Fidel's right-hand  
> > man. You would do well reinforcing his socialist utopia 
> > there in Cuba. 
> > 
> > 
> > You are terrified of bumping up against reality such 
> > that reality might invade your consciousness, alter your 
> > beliefs, shape you, influence you in any way. I see this 
> > most vividly and disappointingly, and shockingly, in  
> > your heated exchanges with other posters here on this  
> > forum, Curtis. You don't fight fair--but you know this. 
> > 
> > 
> > No, Curtis, I am just tracking what the inner person  
> > Curtis is doing when he pretends to be arguing honestly 
> > and sincerely--which you never are, Curtis. Not these  
> > days, anyhow. Not in hand-to-hand fighting. T

[FairfieldLife] Re: How to Know Reality's Point of View

[Jason]

> ---  "Jason" jedi_spock@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > I wonder how "reality" can have a POV? Is reality an entity
> > to have a POV?
>
>

---  "curtisdeltablues"  wrote:
>
> M: I agree, this is a central issue. It is using a term which has less
emotional load than "God" (who would be such a dick that they would not
respect "reality" right?) and then basically giving the word the same
function and qualities of what the term "God" usually refers to. A form
of concept smuggling.
>
> And it ignores the issues concerning how we can have confidence that
someone is speaking for it, he she, whatever.
>
> >
> > I wonder how someone can "kill" the truth? Robin accuses
> > Curtis of killing the truth.
>
> M: It is all in the choice of your round. Truth has a particularly
thick skin so only a magnum round for a high velocity penetration will
work. But don't try to use a 223 round because that doesn't have the
spreading impact needed to stop truth in its tracks.
>
> You need at least a 30/30 commonly used for deer hunting, but if you
have something like one of those hand held cannons they use on big game
in Africa, so much the better.
>
> The truth doesn't end up with much edible meat anyway, so don't worry
about blasting the shit out of it. I have used some truth carcases for
stock, but with all the little bullshit bones to strain out, it is
hardly worth the trouble and certainly doesn't add more flavor than a
well roasted duck carcass.
>
> Most of us dedicated truth killers are in it for the sport. I've tried
to get the same satisfaction stalking and shooting it with a camera, but
somehow is just isn't the same. Plus I get paid one degree cooler in my
future in hell for each truth's foot I deliver to the big guy
downstairs, and so far I'm looking at eternity at a toasty but livable
83 degrees. I figure with a ceiling fan I'll be just fine and I'm pretty
sure Walmart has a store down there to sell me one once I arrive. Free
refills at Hell's Starbuck too from what i hear. Those bastards are
everywhere.
>
>


  [air conditioning cartoons, air conditioning cartoon, air conditioning
picture, air conditioning pictures, air conditioning image, air
conditioning images, air conditioning illustration, air conditioning
illustrations ]



-

[FairfieldLife] Is this Judy?

[Jason]

 
 
  Is this Judy?

[FairfieldLife] Is this Raunchy?

[Jason]

 
 
 
 Is this Raunchy?

[FairfieldLife] Is this Emily?

[Jason]

 
 
    Is this Emily?

[FairfieldLife] Is this Share?

[Jason]

 
 
  Is this Share?

[FairfieldLife] Is this Ann?

[Jason]

 
 
    Is this Ann?

[FairfieldLife] Is this Sal?

[Jason]

 
 
 Is this Sal?

[FairfieldLife] Bow and Arrows

[Jason]

 
 
Are there any more women in the forum?

[FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

[Jason]

 
And you are a pseudo-enlightened cosmic bitch 
whoring your fake 'awakening' around.
And he is a pseudo-critic and an intellectual 
strip queen who stripteases in internet forums.
Both of you make a good pair don't you.  You both 
are made for each other.
 
 
 
From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2011 10:31 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

 
> heheh - Bob, truly inspired by the idea of a screenplay, perhaps as an 
> animated component of said holiday gift manual, I decided to finish the scene 
> I began earlier, only this time Vaj's wife is indeed King Baby:
> 
> Vaj: (staring a little too intensely at the computer screen) "Fuck!" "Shit!"
> 
> KB: (dusting, in another room) "What's wrong honey?"
> 
> Vaj: "The fourth person this week on FFL is saying I never learned or taught 
> TM
> - bastards, I'd like t..."
> 
> KB: "Your-medication-is-on-the-bathroom-counter-upstairs (for the
> millionth time)!"
> 
> Vaj: "fuck...What?!"
> 
> KB: "(sigh) Nothing!! (drops duster, stands up, arms akimbo, apron on) When 
> are you going to get rid of that crazy idea that the only time anyone is 
> going to take your Buddhist teachings seriously, is if you say you used to be 
> a TM Teacher? Just say, OK what's the big deal I didn't get within a mile of 
> ever knowing TM, but here's why Buddhism will bring you salvation..."
> 
> Vaj: (yelling over his shoulder, a cold Mountain Dew and a few loose m&ms 
> next to his PC)"Yeah, it *would* make my family happy...After all of their 
> ties to HHDL, it is like a knife through their hearts every time I fake it 
> with TM. But I HAVE TO, even though the last time over at my dad's, I 
> mentioned that Intro Lecture I snuck into back in '74, and he sent me out to 
> his "meditation cave" in the backyard for three frikkin' hours!! Sitting on 
> those old stained magazines, its gross!"
> 
> KB: "...I know, you put up with a lot from him (rolls her eyes)...Anyway it 
> wouldn't hurt for you to ditch the bathrobe and look for work today..."
> 
> Vaj: "huh?...Wait! I just found an old box of polaroids! I think I figured 
> out how to kill two birds with one stone...this'll distract 'em...bastards..."
> 
> KB: "Bills are due!"
> 
> Vaj: "Look!!! Dearest, we've discussed this many times. This my life's work! 
> I am saving the world! Tibet is for everyone! His Holiness..."
> 
> KB: "OK...OK...OK...O...K..." (whispered to her "sister" on the phone:
> "I hate it when VJ gets like this")
> 
> KB's "sister": (split screen aka Pillow Talk) "How long has it been since 
> she, y'know...like...worked?"
> 
> KB: "Don't ask. Don't. Ask. It's a wonder I can put food on the table. VJ's 
> been *very* upset these days. So bitchy sometimes -  that's my Opinion, 
> anyway...So snide this morning after I had made omelettes and brioche for us, 
> she says, "Going out to the...`café' to do some...`writing'??", like my 
> talent is lost on her...Hasn't she read my online masterpiece, "Roadtrip 
> Highway Travelin' Thang"?? VJ *said* I was good...she always encourages me to 
> continue with my new book..." 
> 
> KB's "sister": Know'wcha'mean..."
> 
> KB: "fuck, cracked my nail, gotta go sis!"
> 
> KB's "sister": "toodles! call me - "

 
 
 
 
  
Ha Ha Ha! Yes, I think I sufficiently explored within the realms of 
consciousness the genesis of Barry's use of the term, "drama queen", which has 
now been supported further with the media you have supplied. He is truly 
everywhere, secure in his infinite archetype, kosmic King Baby. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

[Jason]

 
Fucking asshole, He just wants to send you a 
private message.  So have a chat with him in 
private.
So, now you fuck with the Pope, do you?  A 
pseudo-enlightened nutball like you with verbal 
diarrhea you seem to have a mouth of a high speed 
computer and the intuition of a snail.
  
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
Date: Thu Dec 1, 2011 11:20 am 
Subject: Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife 
 
 >>Vaj: Well, unfortunately, since I cannot send 
>>you things privately, you basically forced a 
>>situation where i had no choice but to post them 
>>publicly. It's not something I wanted to do.
 
>RESPONSE: Bullshit. (I feel merciful in this 
>moment, so I am not going to use anything but 
>that one word euphemism.)
>These latest tactic of yours, Vaj, it is a serous 
>breach of what any civilized and honest person 
>would understand to be the 'rules of the game'.
 
>>Vaj: Actually I insisted on privately emailing 
>>them. You refused. So in all honesty, this was 
>>not my preference.
 
>RESPONSE: It will get more serious than this when 
>you have to die, Vaj: that's where the BS ends. 
>Why not end it right now, Vaj—at least with 
>respect to this
>whole business of TM, Maharishi, and myself? 
>Look: will a little love help? I am going to pray 
>to the Good Lord tonight. I hope it helps.

[FairfieldLife] Richard Branson on Steve Jobs

[Jason]

 
 
True business leaders think differently
 
 
Leadership doesn’t have a secret formula; all true 
leaders go about things in their own way. It’s 
this ability to think differently that sets them 
apart - and that enabled Steve Jobs to create 
perhaps the most respected brand in the world.

What leadership boils down to is people. Whatever 
your style, whatever your method, you need to 
believe in yourself, your ideas and your staff. 
Nobody can be successful alone – and you cannot be 
a great leader without great people to lead.

Steve Jobs’s leadership style was autocratic; he 
had a meticulous eye for detail, and surrounded 
himself with like-minded people to follow his 
lead. While he was incredibly demanding of his 
people, he wasn’t the best delegator – he wanted 
to involve himself in every detail, which is the 
opposite of my own approach. Personally, I have 
always believed in the art of delegation – finding 
the best possible people for Virgin and giving 
them the freedom and encouragement to flourish. 
When I set up Virgin Records, I even decided to 
separate myself physically from the company, by 
moving into a houseboat.

If you are not always there, it forces other 
people to call the shots, which in turn improves 
their own leadership skills, builds their 
confidence and strengthens your business. But 
whatever your approach, it is necessary to give 
other people the space to thrive, to catch people 
doing something right, rather than getting things 
wrong. Look for people who take their roles 
seriously and lead from the front, but who are not 
slow to see the lighter side of life. People who 
are inventive yet organised, focused yet fun, tend 
to be determined to succeed, and equally keen to 
have a good time doing it. A company should 
genuinely be a family, who achieve together, grow 
together and laugh together.

Steve Jobs wasn’t known for his sense of fun, but 
he was always at the centre of everything Apple 
did. Over his extraordinary career, he learnt the 
same lesson I have – that even when you’re 
successful, it is vital that you don’t solely lead 
your company from a distance. Walk the floor, get 
to know your people. Even though I don’t run 
Virgin’s companies on a day-to-day basis any more, 
I still find it crucial to get out and about among 
our staff. No one has a monopoly on good ideas or 
good advice, so as a leader you should always be 
listening. Be visible, note down what you hear and 
you’ll be surprised how much you learn.

Having said that, you also need to know your own 
mind. You have to walk the walk as well as talk 
the talk – and that’s something Jobs showed in 
everything he did. Nobody respects a leader who 
doesn’t know how to get his hands dirty and 
innovate personally. The trick is in striking the 
right balance between empowering your staff and 
being an example for them to follow.

Of course, there will be times when strong and 
decisive leadership is necessary, to make sure the 
right moves are made. If you place the emphasis on 
getting the little things right, and address the 
everyday problems that come up, you can encourage 
a culture of attention to detail. You can also 
have a lot of fun with these relatively tiny 
issues, whether it’s dealing personally with 
customers’ complaints – as Jobs often did via 
email – or surprising your front-line staff with a 
visit.

Despite his long battle with illness, Jobs never 
lost his love of Apple. Indeed, if you don’t enjoy 
what you do, then it isn’t likely to work out. I 
try to find fun in everything I do, from business 
commitments to philanthropic ventures, to my 
personal life. You are far more likely to be 
inspired and have great ideas if you love what you 
do, and can instill that spirit of fun throughout 
your company.

Jobs may not always have been the best leader of 
people – which may, in part, have been due to his 
health problems – but he was innovative, 
determined and, above all, passionate. Finding 
gaps in the market, and creating products that 
make a real difference to people’s lives, can only 
be accomplished if you have passion for what you 
are doing. If you make something you are proud of, 
that filters down to your staff, as well as your 
customers. Today, more than ever, you’ve got to do 
something radically different to make a mark.
In a 1997 marketing campaign for Apple, entitled 
“Think Different”, Jobs said: “Here’s to the crazy 
ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. 
The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who 
see things differently.” I am proud to say that, 
in the accompanying montage, he counted me as one 
of them. I think it’s an attitude that’s shared by 
all leaders who make a difference – and it’s one 
reason why, despite our vastly different styles, 
Steve Jobs was always the entrepreneur whom I most 
admired.
 
virgin.com/richard-branson/blog/true-business-lead
ers-think-differently

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

[Jason]

 
What do you mean the preceding post was 
manufactured by a perverse charity?
What I meant is Jim and Barry are made for each 
other.  One is pseudo-enlightened and the other is 
a pseudo-critic who stripteases on internet 
forums.

>From Maharishi to Constantine you have come a 
pretty long way.  Atleast give a clear answer why 
you refuse a private message from Vajra boy.
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 1:24 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife


 
 
 
  
Jason, baby:

Are you a hired gun? And why the silence all this time—coming in now when the 
shooting has more or less stopped.

Your posts have a sense of immediacy about them; I am surprised you kept your 
gun in your holster all this time.

I would only say one thing: the extremity of your anger on behalf of Barry and 
Vaj is a substitute for anything sincere you might really have to say.

So the violence and the abuse is to make up for the fact that, when it comes 
down to it, Jason baby, *you have nothing to say*.

What the fuck is your point? When you attack someone, you must realize, that in 
order to be taken seriously, we must feel the sincerity behind your passion.

This post, and the one preceding it, are entirely manufactured out of a 
perverse charity on behalf of two persons who themselves have nothing more to 
say.

What is left to say? Something coming from some anonymous assassin—someone as 
far as I know, who hasn't posted on FFL during all the time that these 
discussions have gone on.

Do you know Vaj and/or Barry, Jedi Spock?

Look at your first two sentences: the violence of your words makes it seem as 
if my reluctance to enter into a private offline conversation with a poster I 
do not know personally is somehow the hard and indefensible response of someone 
who hates small children and dogs.

I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than this, Jason, my boy.

I look forward to your committing yourself to the disclosure of what possibly 
could be behind these two posts—other than acting as a surrogate someone else 
(who has been silenced).

So, bring it on, Jason; I'd like to find out there was some truth in what you 
have said here.

So far, though, you have made a convincing case that you are someone contriving 
to use whatever bitterness and anger is in you in the cause of something which, 
intrinsically, has nothing to with the very bitterness and anger you bring to 
these posts.

And where does the poor Pope come into this?

Jason, get a grip, buddy.

Oh. And by the way: some name-calling bathroom graffiti will not take the place 
of substance.—I refer to your next post in response to this one.

You are full of shit, Jason, until you can prove otherwise.

Now, tell me precisely what this is about—if, that is, it is not about acting 
as proxy for your two acquaintances?

That said, you have a nice day now, OK?

This might be fun. What do you say, Jason?

Robin

Fucking asshole, He just wants to send you a 
private message. So have a chat with him in 
private.
So, now you fuck with the Pope, do you? A 
pseudo-enlightened nutball like you with verbal 
diarrhea you seem to have a mouth of a high speed 
computer and the intuition of a snail.

[FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

[Jason]

 
Now you are coming to the point.  What exactly did 
he lie about you?
 
Are you sure that he is a stranger to you?  Vajra 
boy seems to think otherwise.
 
 

>So, then, I must assume a person is an asshole 
>for not giving out their personal e-mail address 
>to strangers, that is, strangers who ask for this 
>information, with the intention to send e-mails 
>to oneself. It seems to me, Jason, there are 
>quite a few fucking assholes out there who would 
>sympathize with me (especially given the 
>circumstances: someone who lied about me, and 
>published that lie to the world); more than this, 
>most everyone would have been surprised had I 
>acceded to Vaj's request. You are going to have 
>to deal with this fact.
 
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 2:36 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

 
Dear Jason,

Compare the rhetoric of this last post of yours with the two previous ones.

This disturbs me. If you were able to express yourself like you have in this
last post, why did you Mr Hyde yourself in those first two?

In the non-technical sense (literary) sense of the word, this seems
schizophrenic. Or else—I must withhold, given what you say here, this other
interpretation— it is classic Vaj.

So, then, you only meant to insult whynotnow and Amsterdam. This seems peculiar
to me, since it is unusual for someone to take a violently negative position
about two persons who are in conflict. The tendency is to assume you are for one
or the other. Evidently in this case, that is not true.

I will, out of deference to your good will in this, leave that aside, then,
except to say that whatever are the merits of whynotnow's claim to be
enlightened, he writes with passion and sincerity, and in this particular case,
he is hitting his mark. For your judgment of him to stick, you should have found
something else to quote, as you lampoon yourself by not recognizing the
appositeness of his little dialogue. I must suppose that the adjudication of Big
Sur did not bother you in the least, then, even as he was commenting favourably
on whynotnow's little dialogue.

As for myself, you have called me a fucking asshole, a pseudo-enlightened
nutball [like that, Sal?] with verbal diarrhea, with a mouth of a high speed
computer and the intuition of a snail.

So, then, I must assume a person is an asshole for not giving out their personal
e-mail address to strangers, that is, strangers who ask for this information,
with the intention to send e-mails to oneself. It seems to me, Jason, there are
quite a few fucking assholes out there who would sympathize with me (especially
given the circumstances: someone who lied about me, and published that lie to
the world); more than this, most everyone would have been surprised had I
acceded to Vaj's request. You are going to have to deal with this fact.

"Pseudo-enlightened nutball": This will not hold, dear Jason baby: I have
disavowed my enlightenment—No: I refuse to even address this issue. To call me a
pseudo-enlightened nutball does not get at the truth of my experience, not any
of my long posts about my enlightenment. In saying this you avoid dealing with
the complexity of the reality of my purported enlightenment. It is nil ad rem.

"Verbal diarrhea": well, I suppose a case can be made for saying that the value
of a given post at FFL lies in the eye of the beholder. There are others here at
FFL—a few anyway: and some of them seem reasonably sophisticated and
intelligent—who do not share this view of me—at least not to make all that I
write rendered into fecal material. I think there is substance in what I say;
but, Jason, if you can ferret out some examples of "verbal diarrhea" I will be
happy to go under the knife.

"Intuition of a snail": this is interesting, because this I consider the most
developed part of me—and I have felt this to be the case since I was even a
baby, when I started having my own thoughts. Again, I would like you to
present—just for *my sake*—examples of my failure of intuition. (Assuming that
you are not some biologist who has studied the intelligence of snails—and you
mean this as a compliment—in that case it would another instance of having
misinterpreted you.)

I shall be interested, Jason, to really pin down what made you go off in those
two posts. You were out of control there. And you seemed to be venting a lot of
rage—false, artificial, in my book. But I could hardly not answer you the way I
did, given my understanding of what was going on in you in those two posts.

Whynotnow seems a normal and civilized and intelligent human being, regardless
of whatever he claims to have attained in terms of a particular state of
consciousness. I am very interested in the whole matter of enlightenment—and I
have posted extensively about this, too. What is it about why

[FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife

[Jason]

 
I am sorry for the misunderstanding Bob.  Pardon me, I 
wasn't refering to you.

I was refering to Jim and Barry.  Both make a good pair.  
Uncle Tantra is a pseudo-critic and a teaser.
 
 
 
 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price  wrote:
 
 
Jim,

Is it something we said, or something he ate---I'm going with the latter. Maybe
he's related to Sal and your pictures set him off; probably not, better chance
he lives with Vaj

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIJt9LYbtBs&feature=related



____
From: Jason 
To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" 
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2011 9:32:14 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife




And you are a pseudo-enlightened cosmic bitch
whoring your fake 'awakening' around.
And he is a pseudo-critic and an intellectual
strip queen who stripteases in internet forums.
Both of you make a good pair don't you.  You both
are made for each other.



From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2011 10:31 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Robin Carlsen file uploaded to FairfieldLife


Ha Ha Ha! Yes, I think I sufficiently explored within the realms of
consciousness the genesis of Barry's use of the term, "drama queen", which has
now been supported further with the media you have supplied. He is truly
everywhere, secure in his infinite archetype, kosmic King Baby.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mussolini and Hitler in Munich

[Jason]

 
Hey yifuxero, could you tell me if there are similar 
pictures to this?
 
I think there are a number of variations of the same 
painting.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
From: Yifu 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 11:56 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Mussolini and Hitler in Munich

 
  
1940
http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/4/34737.jpg

[FairfieldLife] Re: Mussolini and Hitler in Munich

[Jason]

 
No Robert, It's Napolean.  The Lion in the front is the 
British.  The Bear is Russia.
THE VALLEY OF THE SHADOW OF DEATH.
Published by Hannah Humphrey: September 24, 1808
Etching and aquatint with engraving, hand-colored
This print was inspired by the news of Sir Arthur 
Wellesley’s victory over French forces under Junot at 
Vimeiro in Portugal (August 21, 1808). Although claims of 
Napoleon’s imminent doom, bolstered by the Spanish 
resistance, were premature, victories at Baylén and Vimeiro, 
among others, proved that the French were not unbeatable. 
Gillray ironically portrays Napoleon as Christian, the 
protagonist of John Bunyan’s anti-Catholic tract The 
Pilgrim’s Progress. 
 
The beleaguered Emperor faces a frontal attack from Death on 
a Spanish mule, a Portuguese wolf, a Sicilian terrier, and 
the British lion, while his Russian ally, portrayed as a 
bear, seems restless. 
 
On the left, Napoleon’s brother, King Joseph of Spain, only 
his crown and his hands visible, drowns in the Ditch of 
Styx. An Austrian eagle swoops down from the sky, while out 
of the murky ditch in the foreground hop, slither, and crawl 
Dutch spitting frogs, an American rattlesnake, and a 
“Rhenish Confederation of Starved Rats.” 
 
However, by 1810, Napoleon had reached the height of his 
fortunes. Only with the disastrous Russian campaign in 1812 
did the tide of the war irrevocably turn. Gillray never saw 
the final defeat of “Little Boney.” Insane by the end of 
1810, Gillray died on June 1, 1815, at age 58. Napoleon lost 
the Battle of Waterloo on June 18 and abdicated on June 22, 
1815.
 
 
 
From: Robert 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 4:33 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mussolini and Hitler in Munich


 
 
 
  
Looks like Dantes Infuerno

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
>  
> Hey yifuxero, could you tell me if there are similar 
> pictures to this?
>  
> I think there are a number of variations of the same 
> painting.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: Yifu 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 11:56 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Mussolini and Hitler in Munich
> 
>  
>   
> 1940
> http://www.museumsyndicate.com/images/4/34737.jpg
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: Aquinas' Quinque Subjectio, was Fanboy Robin

[Jason]

 
You know Judy, Vajra boy always has the habit of flubbing 
when things are going well for him.  Maybe deep inside he 
has a propensity for self-goal or auto goal as they say in 
latin america.

Uncle Tantra the bumble boy hasn't come to his rescue yet.
 
 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote
 
> > > > Well Robin - that's a good start, for you given you're totally
> > > > still hiding behind a false email address! Is that legal on
> > > > Yahoo!.com?
 
> > Yes, I was aware of that, but it is not his actual email address  
> > nonetheless. Therefore it is impossible to contact him and 
> > therefore it is impossible to answer offlist questions.

 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:

 
> Right. Vaj was aware that Yahoo provides the no_reply
> email address. That's why he wondered aloud if it was
> "legal" on Yahoo (see above).
> 
> There are only two possibilities here.
> 
> One is that Vaj had somehow not noticed, in all the
> years he's been on FFL, that many people have the
> no_reply address, and mistakenly thought it was one
> Robin had dreamed up and was probably using in
> contravention of Yahoo's rules. If that's the case,
> he's now pretending to have known all along because 
> he doesn't want to look stupid.
> 
> The other possibility is that he knew perfectly well
> what the situation was and was hoping he could mislead
> readers to think Robin had dreamed up the no_reply
> address and was using it in contravention of Yahoo's
> rules.
> 
> Either he was being deliberately deceptive in the
> original post, or he's being deliberately deceptive
> now. The only way he could possibly have honestly
> speculated that the address was illegal is if he
> was unaware that it was provided by Yahoo. And if he
> *was* aware of this, as he now claims, then his
> speculation about its illegality was dishonest.
> 
> Readers can make up their own minds about which was
> the attempted deception. It isn't possible for both
> of his posts to have been honest.
> 
> I'm going with the more malicious attempt, to 
> mislead readers to think Robin was breaking Yahoo's
> rules, because it's so vastly unlikely he didn't
> know the address was provided by Yahoo.
> 
> Liars so often convict themselves out of their own
> mouths. This is a classic example. It's a relatively
> trivial lie, but so revealing because it was so
> unnecessary and so stupid. Chronic liars never expect
> to be caught, and when they are, they typically
> think they can cover it up, but in most cases the
> attempted coverup just makes it worse, as it does here.
> 
> Let's recall what Vaj declared two days ago:
> 
> "There are people on this list (often the liars themselves)
> who call people liars time after time (as if repeating lies
> about others somehow makes it true) so you do tend to get
> used to such false accusations. If you actually know the
> truth behind the matter, after a while you just roll your
> eyes at the liars calling you liars. I've had to listen to
> it, so has Curtis, so has Barry, Sal and many others. For
> me it merely casts a dark shadow on the validity of the
> person making the false claims and the dark side of
> meditation-induced pathology. Certain folks are screaming
> out loud examples of such pathology like Ravi, while others
> are more sinister and calculating."
> 
> In light of Vaj's current self-exposure as a liar, the
> above is a serious contender to challenge Barry's long-
> held title of Master of Inadvertent Irony.
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: IT'S NOW OFFICIAL WE LIVE IN A POLICE STATE LIKE NAZI GERMANY

[Jason]

 
 
 
Should this suffice?
 
 
 
 
 
From: richardatrwilliamsdotus 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 8:46 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: IT'S NOW OFFICIAL WE LIVE IN A POLICE STATE LIKE 
NAZI GERMANY



johnlasher:
> "Left unresolved by the new language is just 
> exactly what is constitutional when it comes to 
> detaining American citizens in the United States. 
> But opponents of the original provision said at 
> least it would remain up to judges, not 
> politicians..."
>
I'm not in favor of having any more terrorist 
trials in downtown New York City, or anywhere else 
in the U.S. As far as I'm concerned, just keep the 
terroists down at Gitmo. 

Nobody that I know around here wants a trial for 
somebody like Osam bin Laden in their back yard! 

Attorney General Eric Holder ordered the trial of 
9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four 
others in a federal criminal court in Manhattan, 
New York! Can you believe that!!!

The question is should 9/11 suspects be tried in 
NY courts, as ordered by US AG Eric Holder or have 
military trials at Gitmo? 

"Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., compared the decision 
to try accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 
and other terrorists in New York City to trying Nazi 
war criminal Hermann Goering in San Francisco. "It's 
ridiculous. These are war criminals and terrorists 
and they should not be privy to regular courtroom 
procedures." 

Debatepedia:
http://tinyurl.com/d32otoh

> Senate Passes Controversial Defense Bill 
> WRITTEN BY RAVEN CLABOUGH 
> FRIDAY, 02 DECEMBER 2011 12:00

[FairfieldLife] Re: "I'm having an emotion" / the pre-qualification (was.... Bob)

[Jason]

 
Dont get upset Steve.  Ravi is teaching us a new form of 
yoga.

He learnt it from his Guru Jim.
 
 
 
On Dec 3, 2011, at 6:24 AM, "seventhray1"  wrote:
  
>Do you think you'll get the reaction you want with this post Rav?  To say it's 
>in poor taste, doesn't quite do it.  I'll go on record saying I think you 
>should be given a one week hiatus.  Rick?
>
>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi  wrote:
>>
>> Hey Raunchy baby doll,
>> 
>> I don't know why you are publicly humiliating with your lies.
>> 
>> I can't imagine your paranoid jealousy would lead to this?
>> 
>> You clearly know you have the sole rights to give me a blow job, and my 
>> tongue hasn't touched another man, never will.
>> 
>> You know we clearly had a blowjob section in our pre-nuptial. 
>> 
>> Are you now going to lie about this as well?
>> 
>> Baby, I hope you are not dumping me.
>> 
>> I an enlightened for others but always your slave.
>> 
>> How could I ever repay you back for the kindness of the blow jobs you have 
>> given me? 
>> 
>> The sweet ones, the sour ones, the salty, the spicy, the soft ones, the hard 
>> ones, and the really rocky ones. The whole range of ice cream ones, the 
>> vanilla, the chocolate, the strawberry, the bright full moon ones, the dark 
>> new moon ones.
>> 
>> The wet ones, the dry ones
>> 
>> How I can forget the blow jobs you gave in the car, the ones in the shower, 
>> the ones in all nooks and corners of the bathroom and the bedroom and the 
>> kitchen.
>> 
>> Baby I would never get tired of describing the sheer variety, I could spend 
>> the whole eternity writing poems on it.
>> 
>> Raunchy, please stop this madness.
>> 
>> Raunchy baby, Come back home, I'm... oops my dick is akways ready for you 
>> and always yours (remember that pre-nuptial)
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'President Newt?'

[Jason]

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Small Govt,
 
 
 
 
 
From: richardatrwilliamsdotus 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 7:44 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'President Newt?'



Bhairitu:
> The sheeple
>
So, you're thinking that you're part of the 1%,
and the rest are the 99% - "sheeple", but you're
wearing a 99% button? You are not making any
sense at all.

> watch too much FOX News and are essentially 
> biological androids. Even in this blue of blue 
> areas of the country I get fisheye looks from 
> people if I wear a 99% percent button as if 
> I am doing something illegal. It's a good 
> test to see who you are going to save in a 
> disaster and who you won't.
> 
> But then I've predicted there may well not be 
> an election next November. Welcome to life 
> if fascist Amerika.
>
Don't you just hate America!

[FairfieldLife] Re: "I'm having an emotion" / the pre-qualification (was.... Bob)

[Jason]

 
 
    
 
    
 
 
Paper Matrix
 
 
 
 
From: raunchydog 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 11:04 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: "I'm having an emotion" / the pre-qualification 
(was Bob)


 
 
 
  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
>
> I think Ravi is missing some of the subtleties of western culture. He
> equates his use of the work "blowjob" with Raunchy's and doesn't seem to
> see any difference. Raunchy is Mack the Knife. Ravi is Chainsaw
> Massacre.

Denn die einen sind im Dunkeln
Und die andern sind im Licht
Und man siehet die im Lichte
Die im Dunkeln sieht man nicht 

There are some who are in darkness
And the others are in light
And you see the ones in brightness
Those in darkness drop from sight 

http://youtu.be/aPG9GcykPIY

And that's how the fight started...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/297016

...and ended.
http://youtu.be/nXJkqYf-LNU

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dont get upset Steve. Ravi is teaching us a new form of
> > yoga.
> >
> > He learnt it from his Guru Jim.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 3, 2011, at 6:24 AM, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@ wrote:
> >
> > >Do you think you'll get the reaction you want with this post Rav? To
> say it's in poor taste, doesn't quite do it. I'll go on record saying I
> think you should be given a one week hiatus. Rick?

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'President Newt?'

[Jason]

 
 
Heads we win.
 
 
 
From: seekliberation 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 4:30 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'President Newt?'



I would probably disagree with your cousin too. Some people in the military 
think the whole world revolves around them, and they forget that if we invest 
too much in defense we can become bankrupt in other areas of life that are just 
as, if not more, important. Needless to say, i'm not the most popular among my 
co-workers in my point of view. 

> I guess we should expect such a reply from someone who "supposedly" gets 
> his paycheck from the US military. BTW Seek, I have a cousin who is a 
> retired Marine Colonel who also complained about military budget cuts of 
> the Clinton administration. I countered him of course.

> You're being a bit tricky here by saying that the "increase" is only 
> responsible for about 25% of the deficit. Maybe so but then we should 
> also look at the ENTIRE defense budget not just the increase.

Yes, we should look at the entire defense budget. Many companies who hire 
business consultants to evaluate their efficiency should send those consultants 
to the military. They would clean up a lot of the waste that goes on. If I told 
you about all the BullS**t that i've seen in terms of waste and fraud, you'd be 
a more pissed off person than you seem to be about our defense spending. 
Unfortunately, higher ranking officers tend to be unwelcoming to the advice of 
knowledgeable civilians who know how to organize and structure things 
effectively. 

> 
> Employment? So is being a hit man for the mafia. It's a paycheck too. 
> The US should not be in the business of being the world's policemen.

I agree 100% about not being the world's policemen. However, your hit man 
analogy is inaccurate because less than 15% of our military really fits in that 
category. Most of them are simple working class people who work for the 
government instead of WalMart. In any military in the history of the world is 
over 80% of that military is 'support' for the less than 20% who actually 
fights.

> About defense cuts, my role in a software company gave me visits from 
> defense contractors (including Lockheed-Marinetta), who with the 1990s 
> cutbacks were out to license their libraries to new markets.
> 
> Remember those cutbacks helped lead to a surplus when Clinton left office.

Good, we need a surplus, and the military can shrink in terms of the people 
that never should've been there in the first place. 

> Most "wars of empire" are committed because they make someone money. We 
> were in Iraq not to depose Saddam to destroy the country so money could 
> be made rebuilding it after we destroyed it not to mention all the 
> lucrative defense contracts for people like Halliburton and KBR. And we 
> are in Afghanistan offering free health care to Afghanis while Americans 
> die because of lack of health care here. That alone is a crime.
> 
> It's all about money and not about democracy.

This will take too long to explain, but in short: It's cheaper for the 
government to use civilian companies/contractors for the work that the military 
used to do for itself. KBR provided our dining facilities because it's cheaper 
to pay a civilian to cook for us than it is to pay someone to cook for us who 
we also have to train to use a weapon and issue him $30k worth of other gear 
(body armor, Night Vision, and ammo aren't cheap) and equipment prior to 
deploying. 

The whole 'afghan medical care' issue is more complex than you think. Army SF 
(green berets) realized a long time ago that you will win over an entire 
province a lot faster by helping the villages rather than fighting the 
insurgents face to face. So they developed a nationwide strategy in Afghanistan 
to live among villagers throughout the country and help develop and sustain 
those villages. By doing so, the local population turns to the side of the USA 
and other coalition forces. The Navy Seals and Marsoc (the unit I work with) 
have followed suit with this strategy. It's working and it's much less costly 
in terms of money and life. The Taliban are losing credibility day by day in 
some provinces because they provide little or no help whatsoever. All they do 
is kidnap young boys and force them to fight the Afghan government. 

The only problem I see with Afghanistan is that we're broke, and we don't have 
the money to fix A-stan's issues. So, IMO, we should leave before we completely 
default financially as a nation. Afghanistan is a very strategic country in 
terms of Heroin production and transportation of illegal materials. That being 
the case, Mafias and corrupt governments will never allow the US to be 
successful there. 

seekliberation

[FairfieldLife] Re: "I'm having an emotion" / the pre-qualification (was.... Bob)

[Jason]

 
 

 
    
 
      
 
 
Seems familiar
 
 
 
 From: raunchydog 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 1:36 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: "I'm having an emotion" / the pre-qualification 
(was Bob)
  
http://youtu.be/ti3MkTt5qv4

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
>  
> Paper Matrix
>  
>  
> From: raunchydog 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 11:04 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: "I'm having an emotion" / the pre-qualification 
> (was Bob)
> 
>   
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"  wrote:
> >
> > I think Ravi is missing some of the subtleties of western culture. He
> > equates his use of the work "blowjob" with Raunchy's and doesn't seem to
> > see any difference. Raunchy is Mack the Knife. Ravi is Chainsaw
> > Massacre.
> 
> Denn die einen sind im Dunkeln
> Und die andern sind im Licht
> Und man siehet die im Lichte
> Die im Dunkeln sieht man nicht 
> 
> There are some who are in darkness
> And the others are in light
> And you see the ones in brightness
> Those in darkness drop from sight 
> 
> http://youtu.be/aPG9GcykPIY
> 
> And that's how the fight started...
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/297016
> 
> ...and ended.
> http://youtu.be/nXJkqYf-LNU
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dont get upset Steve. Ravi is teaching us a new form of
> > > yoga.
> > >
> > > He learnt it from his Guru Jim.
> > >
> > > On Dec 3, 2011, at 6:24 AM, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@ wrote:
> > >
> > > >Do you think you'll get the reaction you want with this post Rav? To
> > say it's in poor taste, doesn't quite do it. I'll go on record saying I
> > think you should be given a one week hiatus. Rick?

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Personal Letter to Ravi Yogi (Dr Ravi Chivukula)

[Jason]

 
  
 
 
 
Yo, It's the Shankaracharya of North America.
 
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 4:38 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] A Personal Letter to Ravi Yogi (Dr Ravi Chivukula)


 
 
 
 
 
 
  
Dear Ravi,

You are such a positive guy. By this I mean that with all your fooling around 
and shameless antics, you never show to me that, no matter how extreme you get, 
how far you go, that something nasty escapes from you and shows itself. That 
just might make you unique. To be as audacious and unafraid as you are, and yet 
never to express something dark and unhappy inside of you, that is a feat which 
needs explaining. You are, in effect, defying human nature as we know it, as 
history knows it.

Now, if what I have said is true: that you are 'being Ravi' in this outrageous 
and incurable way, and in your lavish spontaneity and unabashed mocking you 
remain a force of intelligence, energy, and delight—no matter how much you 
cross the line, and transgress all norms of decency and protocol (what we 
Westerns assume are the norms anyway)—then the question comes on: *How is this 
possible*? How can a human being be so crazy, so playful, so insulting, so 
unusual—seeming to exist and act inside a context which cannot be accessed by 
any other person on the planet (Met, ever, anyone like you, Ravi? I think 
not—no Guru either: too bad you can't sense what an idiot your friend Rajneesh 
is—perhaps less so now that he has sobered up)—and yet still seem flesh, bone, 
and blood—human?

Now if you are the Creator of the universe, this might in some sense make 
sense—although I would feel the Creator was not showing all that I would wish 
him to be (you being him); but as it is, I doubt when you did not exist, you 
created yourself out of that nothingness. You clearly are not the author of 
your breathing, nor how you developed as a foetus in the womb, and then came 
out into the world as a special baby—always given the window seat on the train. 
Your existence precedes your essence. May I say that? So, then, the question 
for me becomes: what is going on here with this Ravi Yogi fellow? *How does he 
fit into the universe*? What should I make of him? What should be my response 
to him? How does the universe feel about Ravi Yogi?

These are questions for which I seek answers. And I know you can't help me in 
this. So I am going to try something out here, Ravi. Did you listen to Sade's 
"Your Love is King"? [one of the Price videos] Because if you did, the 
tenderness and poignancy of that song cannot be mocked. Even if you are in the 
midst of one of your pirouettes of perfect nonsense and delight and rudeness, 
you have to be stopped by that song—the rendition by Sade on that video. Now if 
your context of being a yogi will not permit you to suddenly be stilled and 
made serious by that song—disrupting your creative and unconditioned 
routine—then I have, have I not, found a limitation? Now it is quite possible 
that you could maintain to me that you refuse under inspiration to put the 
breaks on—exteriorly—but this does not mean that interiorly you miss the beauty 
and sweetness of Sade when she sings this song. Is this the case, then Ravi, 
that sometimes while acting externally
 as the divine enlightened clown of Creation—whose purpose nevertheless is 
quite serious—we'll get to that in a moment—you are able, simultaneously to 
entertain an internal experience—particularly in the realm of suffering, 
tragedy, sorrow, affection, beauty—which seemingly is at odds with the ongoing 
performance—which I assume never ceases?

You see, Ravi, I am looking past the actor Ravi, and trying to examine the 
ingredients that make up who Ravi Yogi is. Those ingredients for the time being 
in your enlightened state are in the service of the performance you give 
consistently here at FFL—and from what you tell us, in the rest of your life as 
well. You never walk off stage, take off the make-up and the mask and return to 
a non-performing life. Well, I am interested in the proposition as to whether 
the ingredients that constitute Ravi's being, his personality, his whole 
person, could be rearranged in such a way that Ravi could, while still 
retaining his special state of consciousness, discover within himself a whole 
different mode of self-expression, one which would, while retaining his 
originality and freshness and brilliance, nevertheless result in a completely 
different presentation of himself.

Now if your experience of Sade was not one which deprived you of the quality of 
appreciation that I think the rest of us more sober and controlled persons 
felt, then my point really becomes irrelevant, for this would mean that you 
already can—concealed from the rest of us—contain whatever truths and 
experiences that the rest of us enjoy, all the while not inhibiting your 
intrepid, coherent and genius goof

[FairfieldLife] Re: Shring? Buddhist and Hindu mantras.

[Jason]

 
Spencer Wells and his team spent four years gathering DNA 
information from 350,000 people of diverse backgrounds.
Excellent documentary in National Geographic, narrated by 
actor Kevin Bacon, that puts Texan geneticist, Dr. Spencer 
Wells, front and center.  The Harvard-educated scientist 
explains to us all the roads mankind took out of Africa, 
reveals our common ancestral birthplace and what our DNA and 
genetic markers reveal of our ancient ancestors' paths; all 
unique migrations that saw some of the earliest descendants 
of Mitochondrial Eve, our common African Über-Great 
Grandmother, head North, East, and West.

Dr. Spencer Wells fascination with the past has led the 
scientist, author, and documentary filmmaker to the farthest 
reaches of the globe in search of human populations who hold 
the history of humankind in their DNA. By studying 
humankind's family tree he hopes to close the gaps in our 
knowledge of human migration.

A National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence, Wells is 
spearheading the Genographic Project, calling it "a dream 
come true." His hope is that the project, which builds on 
Wells's earlier work (featured in his book and television 
program, The Journey of Man) and is being conducted in 
collaboration with other scientists around the world, will 
capture an invaluable genetic snapshot of humanity before 
modern-day influences erase it forever.

Wells's own journey of discovery began as a child whose 
interests led him to the University of Texas, where he 
enrolled at age 16, majored in biology, and graduated Phi 
Beta Kappa three years later. 

He then pursued his Ph.D. at Harvard University under the 
tutelage of distinguished evolutionary geneticist Richard 
Lewontin. Beginning in 1994, Wells conducted postdoctoral 
training at Stanford University's School of Medicine with 
famed geneticist Luca Cavalli-Sforza, considered the "father 
of anthropological genetics." It was there that Wells became 
committed to studying genetic diversity in indigenous 
populations and unraveling age-old mysteries about early 
human migration.

Wells's field studies began in earnest in 1996 with his 
survey of Central Asia. In 1998 Wells and his colleagues 
expanded their study to include some 25,000 miles (40,000 
kilometers) of Asia and the former Soviet republics. His 
landmark research findings led to advances in the 
understanding of the male Y chromosome and its ability to 
trace ancestral human migration. Wells later went to Oxford 
University, where he served as director of the Population 
Genetics Research Group of the Wellcome Trust Centre for 
Human Genetics at Oxford.

Following a stint as head of research for a 
Massachusetts-based biotechnology company, Wells made the 
decision in 2001 to focus on communicating scientific 
discovery through books and documentary films. 

Since the Genographic Project began, Wells's work has taken 
him to over three dozen countries, including Chad, 
Tajikistan, Morocco, Papua New Guinea, and French Polynesia, 
and he recently published his second book, Deep Ancestry: 
Inside the Genographic Project. He lives with his wife, a 
documentary filmmaker, in Washington, D.C.

On "The Human Family Tree," NGC producers trace the 
ancestral footsteps of all humanity in a very bold 
experiment. On one day, on just one street in Queens, New 
York, National Geographic and the Genome project collected 
DNA from hundreds of random neighbors. 

This was part of the landmark genographic project led by the 
National Geographic Society and corporate underwriter IBM to 
map out how people originally populated our planet. There 
are now over 350,000 participants, myself included, in this 
ongoing study.  

You can go to the Nat Geo website and order a kit for 
yourself, and find out where your DNA traveled through time: 
LINK

Dr. Wells, obviously, mother Africa, we all come from, and 
the human race then spread out. What caused aborigines to be 
aboriginal, Caucasians to be Caucasians, Mongoloids to be 
Mongoloids? What caused these distinctive racial categories? 

SPENCER WELLS: Great question. First, they are really only 
skin deep. So we all came out of Africa within the last 
60,000 years. We are all effectively members of an extended 
African family, and we've come back together in places like 
Queens. But over that 60,000 years, we scattered like the 
wind around the world, and we adapted to the different 
climates and the places where we lived. 

So people, as they moved out of the tropics, had to lose 
some of the pigmentation in their skin that they needed to 
protect themselves from the sun in the tropics. We actually 
have to let some UV light through to make Vitamin D. 

So that's the reason people in Northern Europe have lighter 
skin. Probably something Darwin called sexual selection, 
choosing people we mate with on the basis of what we find 
attractive, that varies according to where you are in the 
world. That probably played a role as well, proba

[FairfieldLife] Re: 'President Newt?'

[Jason]

Colombian Soccer Player Reportedly Detained in Saudi Arabia 
Over Jesus Tattoo

A soccer player from Colombia reportedly was detained in 
Saudi Arabia for walking through a mall wearing a sleeveless 
shirt that revealed his religious tattoos, including one of 
Jesus.

Juan Pablo Pino, 24, a member of Saudi Arabia’s Al Nasr 
soccer club, was taken into custody in Riyadh on Friday by 
Saudi moral police after mall customers complained about the 
tattoos. Pino was visiting the mall with his pregnant wife, 
the Catholic News Agency reports.

Nayimi Sheik Mohammed, a Saudi cleric, told Colombia Reports 
that the country respects Shariah law and that tattoos must 
be covered at all times.

Pino later apologized for his actions and was released from 
custody after a team delegate discussed the matter with 
police.

Last year, Romanian soccer player Mirel Radoi of the Al 
Hilal team drew criticism when he kissed the tattoo of a 
cross he has on his arm after scoring a goal, the Catholic 
News Agency reports.

The conservative Muslim country also has faced international 
condemnation recently for its law banning women from 
driving. Last month, Saudi King Abdullah, facing global 
pressure, revoked the sentence of a Saudi woman ordered to 
receive 10 lashes for driving.
 
Read more: 
foxnews.com/world/2011/10/11/colombian-soccer-player-arreste
d-in-saudi-arabia-over-jesus-tattoo/#ixzz1ff7lbpT8
 
 
 
From: richardatrwilliamsdotus 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2011 7:24 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'President Newt?'

 
Bhairitu:
> So why are we there?
> 
To help the Afghans get free from the Taliban?

"The United States and the West walked away from 
Afghanistan once before. When we did, the country 
became a base for religious fanatics who made the 
execution of women a sporting event and who 
eventually exported their violent ideology to 
American shores.

You can despise war and nation building all you 
want. But if those fanatics take power once again, 
they won't be content to simply cut off the noses 
of disobedient Afghan women."

Read more:

'Women will suffer if U.S. walks from Afghanistan'
By Jonathan Gurwitz
San Antonio Express-News, September 25, 2010
http://tinyurl.com/2de3xu3

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
Hey Vaj, the Buddha boy.  Atleast tell Robin which year you 
did your TTC.

You seem to be more keen to bullshit with him than tell him 
certain basic facts about your association with TM.
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 12:44 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula



Robin: It is the very same with Transcendental Meditation, Maharishi Mahesh 
Yogi, and your status as a former TM initiator.

Vaj: These types of disconnects we call "non sequiturs" (note: this is 
different from a Steinian "non sequitur", which is when a person cannot 
understand an implication, often due to not adhering the linear laws of 
"Flatland").

Robin2: "Chieftain Iffucan of Azcan in caftan/ Of tan and henna hackles, halt!/ 
Damned universal cock, as if the sun/ Was blackamoor to bear your blazing 
tail./ Fat! Fat! Fat! Fat! I am the personal./ Your world is you. I am my 
world./ You ten-foot poet among inchlings. Fat!/ Begone! An inchling bristles 
in these pines,/ Bristles, and points their Appalachian tangs,/ And fears not 
portly Azcan nor his hoos." [WS]

Robin: But more than this, Vaj: you cannot even summon up the bluff and bravado 
and appropriate subjective response—that defines us as human beings—in the face 
of these challenges to the veracity of your claims. You don't even defend 
yourself. This is telling. [But this no-defence is itself no defence: don't 
pull the supreme disinterestedness argument here, Vaj: you would be a total 
idiot to do this. But if you must, go ahead. You can tell me you are Guru Dev's 
grandson, and I would have to assign to this claim the same status as I would 
if you claim you are not defending yourself here because of some imperturbable 
state of spiritual equilibrium.]

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
I wonder what would work for those 99% then?

Osho Rajneesh wrote about dozens of techniques giving the 
sadaka the option to choose what suits him.  Maharishi 
didn't give people that variety.  In the long run that hurt 
the people who were in the TM mov't.
 
I think this uni-dimensional monochrome approach of 
Maharishi really pissed off Vaj.
 
 
 
From: cardemaister 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:51 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula


 
  Vaj doesn't seem to realize, that for about 99 percent of
human beans, for instance "advaitic" meditation techniques
are as useless as, say, reading Kaama-suutra is for e.g.
kindergarten kids...LoL!




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
>  
>  
> Hey Vaj, the Buddha boy.  Atleast tell Robin which year you 
> did your TTC.
> 
> You seem to be more keen to bullshit with him than tell him 
> certain basic facts about your association with TM.
>  
>  
>  
> From: maskedzebra 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 12:44 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
> Chivukula
> 
> 
> 
> Robin: It is the very same with Transcendental Meditation, Maharishi Mahesh 
> Yogi, and your status as a former TM initiator.
> 
> Vaj: These types of disconnects we call "non sequiturs" (note: this is 
> different from a Steinian "non sequitur", which is when a person cannot 
> understand an implication, often due to not adhering the linear laws of 
> "Flatland").
> 
> Robin2: "Chieftain Iffucan of Azcan in caftan/ Of tan and henna hackles, 
> halt!/ Damned universal cock, as if the sun/ Was blackamoor to bear your 
> blazing tail./ Fat! Fat! Fat! Fat! I am the personal./ Your world is you. I 
> am my world./ You ten-foot poet among inchlings. Fat!/ Begone! An inchling 
> bristles in these pines,/ Bristles, and points their Appalachian tangs,/ And 
> fears not portly Azcan nor his hoos." [WS]
> 
> Robin: But more than this, Vaj: you cannot even summon up the bluff and 
> bravado and appropriate subjective responseâ€"that defines us as human 
> beingsâ€"in the face of these challenges to the veracity of your claims. You 
> don't even defend yourself. This is telling. [But this no-defence is itself 
> no defence: don't pull the supreme disinterestedness argument here, Vaj: you 
> would be a total idiot to do this. But if you must, go ahead. You can tell me 
> you are Guru Dev's grandson, and I would have to assign to this claim the 
> same status as I would if you claim you are not defending yourself here 
> because of some imperturbable state of spiritual equilibrium.]
>

[FairfieldLife] Rajah's conflict with Saints

[Jason]

 
And who teaches this course at MUM?

The Rajahs in drag who can't defuse conflict in their own 
backyard or Maharajah Nader Ram in his clown suit.
 
 
From: Buck 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 4:18 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dome meeting with Maharaja-ji


 
The immediate urgent priority for national invincibility and world peace is to 
join the Invincible America Course at MUM. Only 2000 Flyers, rising to 2500, in 
Fairfield/Maharishi Vedic City will bring security to America and defuse the 
precarious escalation of conflict in the world.

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 Hey Curtis, better delete this post before Duveyoung comes 
back with moral outrage and indignation.
 
 
From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 8:41 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula


  
Much appreciation to Steve and Obbajeeba for getting the intent behind my post 
and posting a defense for Robin's unflattering assumptions about me better than 
I could.

I tried to write a post starting with defending the imaginative charge that I 
nefariously waited until Ravi posted out before responding, as if finding time 
to write here is all a calculated thing based on a fear of Ravi posting back. 
But your combined kindness freed me from having to wade through another long 
defensive post. I have whittled it down to this: 

Addressing Robin directly, your unflattering characterization turned two guys 
tweaking each other while having fun writing in the context of knowing each 
other through posting here a long time, into some contrived big deal. My post 
had none of the extreme harshness of your filtered interpretation. A clue to my 
intent is that I copped to the exact behavior I was describing in Ravi. I spent 
my whole 40s running this girls in their 20's dating older men program, and I 
learned some things. So unlike his tweak to me, mine contained actual good 
advice. obbajeeba hit the right note about my intentions. At Ravi's age I was 
living with a 21 year old and at the end of an intoxicating year got my song 
"the River of Missing You" out of it when it inevitably blew up. These 
mismatched relationships come with a fuse. Once I learned that, I had a 
fantastic decade in my 40's knowing what I was in for each time. But in the end 
I realized that the cons of mismatched
 decades, with their built-in life agendas, was not worth the pros. Ravi will 
learn his own way. But believe me, he will get schooled. These young chicks are 
learning to become women, and older men are are cannon fodder in their growth. 
They learn what they can and then move on, as well they should. This is often 
before the man understands how caught in an impossible fantasy he is. If he is 
lucky he gets a song out of it in the end. That is how I rolled. Now I am 
sadder but wiser and date age appropriate. I've never been so happy in 
relationship. It only took me a decade to figure it out!

Don't you trust Ravi to be outraged on his own behalf when he returns if he 
chooses to take my post the unflattering way you did? Do you believe that being 
outraged on his behalf ahead of time is making this a friendlier place where 
people are understanding each other better?

I think you need to examine your own intentions in this Robin. I'm not buying 
that it is any more friendly to Ravi than it is to me.

[FairfieldLife] Amit Agarwal's Digital inspiration

[Jason]

 
Meet the Author 
Amit Agarwal is a personal technology columnist and founder of Digital 
Inspiration, one of the most widely read tech and how-to blogs in the world..   
read more »
You can find him on Twitter, Facebook, Google+and YouTube. Or send an email at 
a...@labnol.org
 
How to Transfer Mails from one Email Account to another for Free
 
There can be several reasons why you may want to switch email service providers.
 
Reason #1. Your existing email address gets too much spam so you plan to dump 
the old account and switch to a new email address (a form of email bankruptcy).
 
Reason #2. You are leaving your existing job for higher studies and need to 
transfer all personal emails from the Microsoft Exchange server to your new 
university email account.
 
Reason #3. Your ISP's email service isn't reliable and you therefore plan to 
move to a free web based email service like Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Hotmail, etc.
 
Reason #4. You think the new email service from XYZ Inc. offers more features 
than your existing mail provider and hence want to make the move.
Moving Emails from One Account to Another
This illustration will help you visualize how to transfer email messages across 
the three most popular web email services. The transfer will happen online and 
you just need to specify the credentials (user name & password) of your old 
email account (from where you want to move message out) and your new email 
address (where you want to move messages in).
 
 
Moving to Windows Live Hotmail
Windows Live Hotmail is integrated with TrueSwitch so you can easily transfer 
emails from Yahoo Mail, AOL, Gmail, Live.com, .Mac, etc. to your shiny new 
Hotmail address. The same service may also be used for copying old email from 
an existing Hotmail account to a new Hotmail address.
 
Moving to Yahoo Mail
Like Windows Live Hotmail, Yahoo! Mail too provides integration with TrueSwitch 
so you can easy copy mails from Gmail, Hotmail, AOL, Juno, Rocket Mail, etc. 
into your Yahoo! account. With TrueSwitch, you can also copy mails from one 
Yahoo! inbox to another without upgrading to Yahoo! Mail Plus.
 
Moving to Gmail / Google Apps
Gmail (or Google Apps for Email) has a built-in Mail Fetcher feature that lets 
you download email messages from 5 different email accounts that support POP 
access. You may therefore use this feature to move your old Hotmail or AOL 
messages into Gmail as both these service provide free POP3 access.
The migration from Yahoo! Mail to Gmail is slightly tricky but possible. Keep 
reading.
 
Trick: Move emails from Yahoo Mail to Gmail or Outlook without POP
The free account of Yahoo Mail doesn't provide IMAP or POP3 access so you can't 
move these emails into Gmail or a desktop client like Microsoft Outlook.
The Yahoo! Mail Plus upgrade will add POP3 access to you account at $20 per 
year but if you want to save some money, here's an alternate but simple trick:
 
 
1. Create a new account at Windows Live Hotmail and fetch all your Yahoo! mails 
into this account using the free TrueSwitch Service.
 
2. Now that your mails are inside Hotmail, you can setup POP3 configuration to 
fetch those Yahoo messages into Gmail via Hotmail.
 
Migrating Emails Away from your ISP Account
TrueSwitch mentioned above supports all popular ISPs including Comcast, 
Verizon, CableVision, AT&T, etc. but if your ISP is not in the list and you 
don't have the time to configure your email client for POP3 or IMAP access, 
check out Yippie Move.
 
It's a online email transfer service similar to TrueSwitch but supports an even 
larger number of email service providers including the .edu addresses of 
certain colleges and universities in US. With YippieMove, you can choose 
folders (or labels in Gmail) that you want to copy to the new location without 
having to move the entire mailbox. The service is quick and easy but costs 
around $15 per email account.
 
Copying emails from Microsoft Exchange / Outlook
Every organization has a different policy with respect to corporate email so 
check with the administration if your Exchange service offers POP3 or IMAP 
access - if yes, you can easily transfer messages into any of the free web mail 
accounts directly as listed above. Also see these guides:
* Export Outlook email to your Gmail Account 
* Copy Outlook Mail to Google Apps 
* Transfer Mail to Hotmail via Outlook Connector 
Email Transfer Complete? The Next Step
Now that all your message have moved to your new email address, you can set up 
a vacation responder in your old email account to auto-inform contacts about 
your new email address. Also check this guide on how to manage multiple email 
addresses.
 
http://www.labnol.org/internet/email/move-mails-across-email-accounts/8419/

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solid State Drives

[Jason]

 
 
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/www.newegg.com/msgpage

siteadvisor.com/sites/www.endpcnoise.com?pip=false&premium=f
alse&client_uid=2013449024&client_ver=3.4.0.143&client_type=
IEPlugin&suite=false&aff_id=0&locale=en_us&ui=1&os_ver=5.1.3
.0

I think solid drives will eventually replace conventional 
drives.  Rick, BTW do you use Norton ghost as backup or some 
other company?

BTW, I reached the age of 40 this month.  I don't think 
there is any need for me to address anybody as 'Sir' or 
'Madam' anymore.  I hope there is no misunderstanding 
regarding this in this forum.
 
 
From: Rick Archer 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 9:47 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Solid State Drives


  
Hey Geeks. I’m buying a new computer from a company recommended by Alex 
Stanley. This one. Just tonight someone told me that putting your operating 
system on a solid state drive such as this would speed up even this computer 
considerably. Anyone have opinions on this strategy?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana Maharshi gives Shaktipat to Ganapathi Muni at a distance

[Jason]

 
 
Maybe some Siddhis are involuntary.  Maybe fruits of the 
past karma or subconscious sources.
 
 
From: cardemaister 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 2:30 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana Maharshi gives Shaktipat to Ganapathi Muni 
at a distance


 
 
 
  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu"  wrote:
>
> from energyenhancement.org:
> 
> "2. About a year after his first meeting with Sri Bhagavan, Ganapathi Muni 
> experienced a remarkable outflow of his [Ramana Maharshi] Grace. While he was 
> sitting in meditation in the temple of Ganapati at Tiruvottiyur he felt 
> distracted and longed intensely for the presence and guidance of the 
> Bhagavan. At that moment Sri Ramana entered the temple. 
> 
> Ganapathi prostrated himself before him and, as he was about to rise, he felt 
> the Maharshi's hand upon his head and a terrifically vital force coursing 
> through his body from the touch; so that he also received Grace by touch from 
> the Master. Speaking about this incident in later years, not Ganapathi Muni, 
> but the Enlightened sage HIMSELF Sri Ramana Maharshi said:
> 
> "One day, some years ago, I was lying down and awake when I distinctly felt 
> my body rise higher and higher. I could see the physical objects below 
> growing smaller and smaller until they disappeared and all around me was a 
> limitless expanse of dazzling light. After some time I felt the body slowly 
> descend and the physical objects below began to appear. 
> 
> I was so fully aware of this incident that I finally concluded that it must 
> be by such means that Sages using the powers of Siddhis travel over vast 
> distances in a short time and Appear and Disappear in such a mysterious 
> manner. While the body thus descended to the ground it occurred to me that I 
> was at Tiruvottiyur though I had never seen the place before. 
> 
> I found myself on a highroad and walked along it. At some distance from the 
> roadside was a temple of Ganapati and I entered it and gave Uppadesa, 
> Shaktipat to Ganapathi. I suppose that this is the experience of all the 
> ancient saints and Rishis from time immemorial"
>

Seems a bit like "Beam me up, Scotty(sp?)" -type of siddhi?? :D

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solid State Drives

[Jason]

 
 
Thanks for the advice.  FFL played a very important role in 
my evolution.  70% of indians in india are below the age of 
30.!
I feel I have now become one among the senior citizens of 
this planet.  When I first joined this forum you all seemed 
like Giants and I had this need to address people by some 
Title.  

The TM-org with their 'HIS EXCELLENCY' culture also 
brainwashed me.  I was addressing Bevan Morris excellency 
for a long time.  I think Shemp called me on it and put an 
end to it.
 
 
 
From: turquoiseb 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:22 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solid State Drives


 
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
> BTW, I reached the age of 40 this month.  I don't think 
> there is any need for me to address anybody as 'Sir' or 
> 'Madam' anymore.  I hope there is no misunderstanding 
> regarding this in this forum.

Speaking only for myself, I feel no need to be 
referred to as either 'Sir' or 'Madam.' 

There may be some on this forum who wish to be
called 'His Holiness' or 'Her Correctness' or
even 'His Awesomeness,' but I think such titles
are optional.

As always, honorary titles such as 'King Such-
And-Such,' 'Doofus,' 'REEEAAALLY REEEAAALLY 
STOOPID,' 'Lowlife,' 'Pondscum,' 'War Monger,
or 'Idiot' are up to you, and the impression 
you wish to create both of the person you apply 
such honorifics to, and to yourself for using 
them. Just trying to help. :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: The performance when you weren't here

[Jason]

 
 
Robin, I can only say that if you had joined FFL 7 years 
ago, you would have been toast and Ravi Yogi would have been 
turned into marshmallow.

He admitted that he was just acting.  He posted it himself. 
So what the big deal?  Ask Alex.  He has all the records.
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 7:37 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula

 
> Robin2: You have, then, answered Bob Price: for you have judged his post to be
devoid of substance or truth. His posts were not answered then because, try as
you might, you could not sense anything sincerely felt or intellectually
articulated that went to what was important. I think it is good to have made
this clarification: viz "He was being a dick to a stranger on the internet". Bob
Price's unanswered posts were, then, unworthy of a response. I would like, for
my own purposes, to know what set of criteria you morally or psychologically
apply to make this determination: As for example, you deemed my post something
to be answered, not Bob Price's.
>
> What is it about this post in particular which puts it in another category
from those two posts from Bob Price?

Curtis3: I just want to note that after being kinda clear about my lack of 
interest in
this subject you have doubled down with a few paragraphs, including suggesting
that you post Bob's insults again to stick them in my face. And of course I
can't control what you write but is this really friendly? Is this how you react
to all your friend's preferences?

Robin4: I mist have misinterpreted those two posts. I took them to be a moral 
and intellectual challenge; not just "Bob's little FU to all things Curtis". If 
they had been what you have characterized them here in this post, *I would have 
recognized this for myself*, and would have, had I been your friend, urged you 
not to answer them. Because they were not worthy of being answered. I have no 
bias one way or the other: I don't forge alliances in order to alter my own 
moral responsibilities: If Tom Brady does something dirty, I don't, because I 
root for the Patriots and like Brady as a person, given him a bye and judge him 
differently from how I would judge James Harrison of the Steelers, who I don't 
particularly like and think it is dirty player. When I read the first of those 
two posts I refer to, I thought: Wow: Curtis can really show what he is made of 
here by answering this putdown of himself.

When you just blew this off with some comment like: "That was the most 
disgusting post I have read at FFL" (or words to this effect), I was appalled, 
shocked, stupefied. Because I have noticed that whenever Judy criticizes you, 
you come right back at her. But even in this case, you sometimes—at 
suspiciously significant junctures in your dialogues with her—go silent, and 
refuse to take a stand which would enable the reader of this feud to know you 
have the confidence to stand up to Judy—not as an adversary, but in terms of 
the form of her arguments against what you have written.

In order to comprehend how you can walk away from those two posts, Curtis, I 
would have to have some kind of experience in reading those posts which would 
make your decision understandable to me in terms of not being a dishonourable 
act {which I deem it to be in the absence of an kind of reasonable 
explanation]. You can of course, as you do here, define those posts as just 
"Bob's little FU to all things Curtis"'; but this peremptory fiat does not make 
of them what you say they are. There has to be some kind of agreement between 
your judgment of those posts and what they really are independent of your 
saying what they are. Should one interpret and define those posts according to 
what you say they are here? Is that the last word? No, Curtis, you can choose 
to rule them out of order, declaring there is nothing there worthy of taking 
notice; but then the question comes in: Is Curtis's appraisal of Bob Price's 
critical posts about him congruent with what in
 fact is the objective nature of these Bob Price posts?

And if in this case you are correct, then the fault is all in me: since I took 
those posts to merit, to demand, to require an answer. You don't even try to 
defend your interpretation of them here as not deserving your attention: they 
in their very nature did not warrant you taking any notice of them. But you 
never explain why; you just arbitrarily legislate your own reality, and we are 
all left with only one option: either we accept Curtis's characterizing of 
these two posts of Bob Price, or we don't. But you never give any basis for us 
to make this decision, so I think most of the readers at FFL, because of your 
reputation, simply concur with you—You see, Curtis, they have never entered 
into any process by which they could justify your decision not to respond to 
those posts. And they still haven't, even as Steve is certain that you ha

[FairfieldLife] Re: Solid State Drives

[Jason]

 
Yep.  You sound familiar.  Were you posting here with 
another handle?
 
 
From: zarzari_786 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 9:12 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solid State Drives


 
 
 
 
 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
>  
>  
> Thanks for the advice.  FFL played a very important role in 
> my evolution.  70% of indians in india are below the age of 
> 30.!

So are you Indian? 

> I feel I have now become one among the senior citizens of 
> this planet.  When I first joined this forum you all seemed 
> like Giants and I had this need to address people by some 
> Title.  
> 
> The TM-org with their 'HIS EXCELLENCY' culture also 
> brainwashed me.  I was addressing Bevan Morris excellency 
> for a long time.  I think Shemp called me on it and put an 
> end to it.
>  
>  
>  
> From: turquoiseb 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:22 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Solid State Drives
> 
> 
>  
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
> >
> > BTW, I reached the age of 40 this month.  I don't think 
> > there is any need for me to address anybody as 'Sir' or 
> > 'Madam' anymore.  I hope there is no misunderstanding 
> > regarding this in this forum.
> 
> Speaking only for myself, I feel no need to be 
> referred to as either 'Sir' or 'Madam.' 
> 
> There may be some on this forum who wish to be
> called 'His Holiness' or 'Her Correctness' or
> even 'His Awesomeness,' but I think such titles
> are optional.
> 
> As always, honorary titles such as 'King Such-
> And-Such,' 'Doofus,' 'REEEAAALLY REEEAAALLY 
> STOOPID,' 'Lowlife,' 'Pondscum,' 'War Monger,
> or 'Idiot' are up to you, and the impression 
> you wish to create both of the person you apply 
> such honorifics to, and to yourself for using 
> them. Just trying to help. :-)
>

[FairfieldLife] CURTIS, WAKE UP FROM YOUR DELTA STATE

[Jason]

 
 
Curtis, I think Robin has a valid point.

Vajra boy accused Robin of "hiding" behind false mail and 
went to the extent of asking if it's "legal" on yahoo.  
Vajra boy *knows* that it's not an issue at all and yet 
makes a moronic statement. Judy called him on it.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/297274

Uncle Tantra *knows* the dome is private property and yet 
makes a long post asking people to barge in aka Clint 
Eastwood.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/295260

It's obivious that Uncle Tantra is a pseudo-critic who has 
some strange compulsion to criticise everything and sundry 
under the sun.

Now Curtis, if you are objective, logical and as Switzerland 
as you really are, please reprimand both of them.  If you 
don't, Robin will call you an asslicker.  Judy will call you 
an hypocrite.

Robin is the exact polar opposite Sal.  He needs 600 billion 
words to convey a single point.  Let everybody on this forum 
kneel down and thank God for creating an angelic being like 
Robin.  Hail Mary! Hail St. Francis of Assisi, Hail St. 
Peter the Apostle...
 
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 1:10 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula


 
> Robin: This, for me, is the evidence for some underlying  
> contradiction in Curtis. But I suppose Curtis can even get 
> away with this: But don't you see? he is making a moral   
> commitment here and *he is wrong*. This is a terrible 
> bias. I contend that this bias must and does show up in 
> almost everything he says at least in the realm of judging 
> people who are either in disagreement with him, or even in
> agreement with him. Curtis would never attempt to persuade 
> most every reader on FFL that Judy is what he thinks she  
> is a bitter and hateful bitch.
>
> >
> > Curtis3: Aren't you just putting words in my mouth here? 
> > This is not something I would use to sum up how Judy is. 
> > I have said many very nice things about her through the 
> > years, but her insistence that I scold Barry is not on  
> > the positive side from either you or her.
> >
>
> Robin4: Yes, perhaps I am putting words in your mouth  
> here. And I realize I have skewed your view of Judy. But  
> I will say something contrary to what you believe and  
> state here: *You definitely SHOULD reprimand and admonish 
> poor Barry for his behaviour on FFL*. The fact that you  
> fanatically assert not just your repugnance to do this,  
> but your own sense of somehow this being a taboo act, this 
> is strange and indefensible. Yes, Curtis, and I believe  
> your scrupulous failure to scold your friend gets at the  
> very heart of your mysterious problem. Yes it certainly  
> does, Curtis. I know of no one I have ever met who would  
> make this kind of assertion: Thou shalt not ask me to ask 
> Barry to behave decently and honourably at FFL. It is a  
> dark and secret eccentricity of yours, Curtis, and it  
> unquestionably points up a perverse blindness and  
> irresponsibility in you. And I will never back down on  
> this. To call someone your friend and then make the  
> definition of that friendship to mean you will never call 
> them on anything, well, this is just plain silliness and  
> dumb freemasonry. And more than this: *It is not  
> friendship at all*. I would never consider you a friend if 
> I thought you thought: "Oh, my friend Robin: well he is my 
> friend: ergo, I will not and must not say anything against 
> him. And I will spurn the importunate entreaties of others 
> that I speak to Robin to make him behave like a grown-up." 
> Very wrong, Curtis, and shocking beyond telling. You are  
> up your "white ass" as Ravi would say [he said that about 
> me]. An incredible doctrine of friendship and loyalty that 
> would be the subject of the most unreserved condemnation  
> in any Shakepearean play. It doesn't even make sense,  
> Curtis. You are out of your tree. Have I got my point  
> across yet? You are ridiculous here, Curtis, and I know  
> that I can, from every angle, just blow you out of the  
> water if you make of this some kind of debating point.  
> Don't. It is unmeaning. Except in some secret and  
> inexplicable way known only to yourself. But as a  
> universal concept of friendship, justice, truth? There it 
> is as far as I am concerned an actual evil—or could be  
> conceived as such.
>
>
> Consider writing a short story with this as your moral and 
> then try to explain the justification of this theme to  
> your grade 12 students. Unless you can universalize this  
> precept arising from the JudyBarry wars, you should shut  
> up about it. That you want things to conform to this  
> precept is obvious; but don't be a jerk and try to defend 
> it as if it is some moral principle that others should  
> learn and apply in their own lives. Stop it, Curtis.
> 
> 
> Like my tone tonight? I am just relis

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
Too bad, Robbie boy.  No point in sweating it.

A couple of years from now, you would notice that the 
savages to whom you have been preaching to haven't mended 
their ways.

I understand what you are trying to say.  Maybe Curtis 
thinks it's not his responsibility to rein them in.
 

> From: maskedzebra 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 11:06 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open  
> [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula
>
>
>
> 
> RESPONSE: Easily the most shocking and astonishing post  
> you have ever written to me, Curtis. I find in what you  
> say here ever more reason to believe in everything that I 
> have written in that five-part post. I have been naive and 
> trusting way beyond what was appropriate in your case.  
> That you would think that this post represents—in any way 
> whatsoever—an honest or believably sincere response to  
> what I have said, well, it just finishes me off. I can't  
> bear it. I can't fathom it. I can't accept it. But I must 
> respect the subtext as well as the outer meaning of what  
> you have written here, Curtis: I was naive and foolish in 
> whatever I read into our friendship during those long  
> conversations, both online and offline. I have assumed you 
> are someone you are not. Because in the tone and substance 
> of what you have written here you clearly have no interest 
> in uncovering any truth in this matter; you are merely 
> saying: STFU, Robin: I choose to see you as a meddling, 
> vexatious, and obsessive person who I deem unworthy and 
> undeserving of my time or my respect. 
> 
> I understand; the fault lies in me to have had such lofty 
> and unrealizable expectations. I think you do a terrible  
> injustice to the totality of what I said in those five  
> posts. But for you it is all nothing: I am but another  
> Judy and that is the end of it. I am reeling in the 
> aftermath of having read the post below. But I must sober 
> up, move on, and comply with this fate accompli: that 
> Curtis and I are through with each other. So be it, my  
> friend. You have disappointed me way beyond what I would  
> have ever imagined—not, for instance, for even a moment  
> taken into yourself the great fluctuations of my heart in 
> writing into your personal consciousness. But I am only  
> making matters worse. 
> 
> I came onto FFL because of you. Perhaps now, with this  
> definitive and negative judgment of me I am through with  
> FFL. It seems that for you to have relegated me to the  
> status of persona non grata in your life, that I had  
> better get real right away, and come to face the facts: 
> Robin, you have been JUDGED, and that judgment is most  
> unfavourable. So unfavourable that Curtis Mailloux never  
> wants to read a single thing you might ever want to 
> say—either to him or to anyone.
>
> And yes, he would not be unhappy if you unsubscribed. I  
> just might do it, Curtis.
>
> I am very sorry you have chosen to interpret me in this  
> way, Curtis. May reality have mercy on your soul.
>
> "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince,
> And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest."
>
> You have shut my mouth, and my soul. Curtis. 
>
> > Curtis; After spending over an hour responding to your 
> > responses last night I was attacked by a virus which has 
> > now eaten up 3 hours of my morning. It is a pernacious  
> > bastard that uses popups to pretend it is an aniti virus 
> > program that you must buy. No matter how I attack it it 
> > comes back. I may now have it on the run, finally being 
> > able to run my blocked malwarebytes program after  
> > renaming one of the virus files.
> >
> > I am now typing on my Ipad without any of what I wrote  
> > which may or may not be preserved in Firefox when I get 
> > through with this ordeal. But I am going into this  
> > detail because I experienced an emotion of frustration 
> > fighting this thing that keeps coming back in different 
> > forms that I recognized. It is how I feel in the endless 
> > defenses that I am asked to mount for both you and Judy. 
> > But unlike my situation with my computer where quitting 
> > is not an option, with you guys I can and will throw in 
> > the towel. This quote from your post below pretty much  
> > sums up how differently we are viewing our roles on FFL:

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
From: Alex Stanley 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 12:23 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula


 
 
  

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
>
>  Dear Alex,
> 
>  Knowing how raptly attentive you become when you first see one of my posts, 
>I have
>  considered composing a five-part thank you post for your having deleted that 
>post of mine.
> 
> What do you think?

I think you should know that I don't read your posts, but in message view I saw 
this:

" ... Curtis, I don't know how to delete that post, but I have sent an e-mail 
to Rick Archer asking him to delete post #298947. If I decide to repost it, I 
will... "

Because you are so amazingly in tune with All The Laws Of Nature, message view 
displayed the one sentence that would flag down a moderator to deal with the 
problem. It is truly a miracle.

Jai Pope Palpatine


 
 
.

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
Robbie boy, I am so glad that you are finally talking like a 
normal human being.

Even a moron like Barry understands something Maharishi 
taught us.  He dosent acnkowledge it openly.  I think you 
never really understood anything Maharishi taught.
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 6:12 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula

 
Vaj, will you just shut up please. You are stinking the joint up. You fuck with 
the truth. You are a liar. You corrupt yourself here on FFL. You are out of 
control. Stop it. You need a time out. Get some kind of real goal, Vaj. You are 
fouling your own nest.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
 
> Gee, I would of thought I warranted more of a response than another quote 
> from Dead Catholic Theologians 101. Esp. one from a mere intellectual like 
> Aquinas? Perhaps a Desert Father for dessert next time?
> 
> I wonder if Aquinas was a gelukpa in his next life? If so, he would have to 
> feign a more universal love - no doubt difficult for RC's...
 
 
> On Dec 17, 2011, at 6:40 PM, maskedzebra wrote:
> 
> > RESPONSE: Not merely learning about divine things but also experiencing 
> > them—that does not come from mere intellectual acquaintance with the terms 
> > of scientific theology, but from loving the things of God and cleaving to 
> > them by affection. Fellow-feeling comes from fondness rather than from 
> > cognizance, for things understood are in the mind in the mind's own 
> > fashion, whereas desire goes out to things as they are in themselves; love 
> > would transform us into the very condition of their being. Thus, by the 
> > settled bent of his affections, a virtuous man is well apt to judge 
> > straightway the affairs of virtue; so also the lover of divine matters 
> > divinely catches their gist.
> > 
> > Aquinas
> 
> 
> 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Happy Birthday Barry

[Jason]

 
 
 
 
 
 
  From: curtisdeltablues 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 9:11 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Happy Birthday Barry


  
To a great example of a life in progress and process at any age. I'm sure this 
year will as full of discovery for you as for the elfish little girl who lives 
in your house. Keep sharing what you notice in this world with us.

Here is a gift. You will get mileage out of this site, it is your kind of humor.

http://www.someecards.com/birthday-cards/youre-only-as-old-as-you-feel-while-getting-wildly-fucked
 

Curtis

[FairfieldLife] Re: A Christmas haiku from Whole Foods...

[Jason]

 
  It took a while for me to understand his character.  
He seems to have some psychological problem.

  I think he simply criticises for the sake of 
criticising.  He probably gets a kick out of it.  Almost 
every third post he makes is dubious-critique which is quite 
puzzling.

  Ever since Bob Price came here he stopped posting long 
peacock monologues.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/219890

  Too bad the pathetic old coot dosen't realise his 
prima donna peacock behaviour creates a bizare impression.
 
 
 From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 9:43 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A Christmas haiku from Whole Foods...


  
Ah to be relevant again, eh Turqey? The only one with a decades old grudge is 
you, loser. Never in my ENTIRE life have I heard about someone who was part of 
an organization OVER FORTY YEARS AGO, and still posts about it, Every Damned 
Day! Still gets you up in the morning, eh?

You oughta try for Guiness Book Of World Records! "Most Obsessed Former Member 
Of A Cult". :-)

[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: : Fw: Fwd: The rules in Chicago

[Jason]

 
 
 
 
 
Maybe, Obama is upset that he tried to sell his seat.
 
 
 
 
From: "wle...@aol.com" 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 11:20 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Fwd: : Fw: Fwd: The rules in Chicago [7 Attachments]

 
 
From: grandmama@wordsofwimsey.comTo: joska3311@broadstripe.netCC: 
wle...@aol.com, mokus...@yahoo.com, margoa...@gmail.com, 
bjoller53@gmail.comSent: 12/17/2011 9:10:13 A.M. Eastern Standard TimeSubj: 
Fwd: : Fw: Fwd: The rules in Chicago


-Original Message-
From: anngr...@aol.com [mailto:anngr...@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 03:12 PM
To: ashleyapa...@live.com, bflog...@msn.com, sa...@kittingergallery.com, 
sbbuff...@aol.com, co...@aol.com, datapo...@aol.com, dawn5...@aol.com, 
jad...@aol.com, djgra...@verizon.net, downing...@aol.com, reneaud...@gmail.com, 
runf...@buffalo.edu, fbeck...@aol.com, ftada...@yahoo.com, gculater...@cs.com, 
grandm...@wordsofwimsey.com, karen.gr...@att.net, gwo...@juno.com, 
njsur...@aol.com, jad...@aol.com, jaremype...@hotmail.com, jjgr...@verizon.net, 
joba...@aol.com, korchyn...@verizon.net, korchyn...@verizon.net, 
kwhe...@amherst.org, ltone...@verizon.net, macieab...@comcast.net, 
margaret.m...@gmail.com, nanagrac...@cs.com, nykat...@aol.com, 
loue...@yahoo.com, 
datapo...@aol.com, ptbar...@yahoo.com, rlpri...@aol.com, meros...@aol.com, 
rpoor...@cox.net, stacy.la...@us.hsbc.com, twatkins...@live.com, 
vwar...@theparkschool.org, woz...@yahoo.com
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Fwd: The rules in Chicago

 
From: gblumsden@yahoo.comTo: anngrano@aol.comSent: 12/16/2011 2:52:40 P.M. 
Eastern Standard TimeSubj: Fw: Fwd: The rules in Chicago
 
 The Rules In Chicago- illustrated by the six photographs below
Rod Blagojevich is the former Illinois Governor who tried to sell Obama's seat 
in Congress.
Obama was asked by the press if he had ever met Gov. Rod Blagojevich. He 
replied: "I only saw Rod Blagojevich one time ... And that was in the stands 
and from a distance at a Chicago Bears Football Game."
 
Of course, you can believe him - he's our President
The picture below? That's irrelevant.
 
   
 
Rod Blagojevich, Barack Obama, and Richard Daley during a rally in Chicago , 
April 16, 2007. (Photo Reuters) Note: Rhom has replaced Daley as Mayor! And 
Daley's brother has replaced Rhom as a chief adviser to the president.
  
You have to understand "the world according to Chicago "
  
  These two? Who are they? 
   
The guy on the left? He's Santa Claus. And the guy on the right he's the 
Easter Bunny! That's all you need to know.
   
Remember Jimmy Hoffa? He knew too much. Where is he now? Don't ask.
Do you understand? Don't look at these pictures! Remember, you've already 
forgotten them.
 
 
 
Do you understand? They don't know each other and they never met! 
How is that possible? BECAUSE OBAMA SAID SO! And don't! you! fergit! it!As a 
wise old Cartoon Character used to say!

P.S. If you pass this on to your friends: you know nothing and they will know 
nothing.

So how's that "Hope and Change" working out for you?
__
"When people fear the government - that is tyranny; when government fears the 
people - that is liberty."Thomas Jefferson
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 
2012.0.1873 / Virus Database: 2102/4669 - Release Date: 12/09/11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
These two? Don't ask.

Chicago is almost a completely different country when it comes to politics, 
with a different set of morals and language.
There are three rules and a Prime Directive.
RULE #1. No matter what you see, hear, or do -- you don't know anybody & you 
know nothing! 
RULE #2. If you capture something on tape or camera -- it reveals nothing! 
RULE #3. If you know what everybody knows in Chicago -- you still know nothing. 

The PRIME DIRECTIVE No matter what the vote, Democrats win the election. 

Now pay close attention! 

It's very simple. Remember, you know nothing.

These two? They never met! Obama said they didn't.. 

Rhom, the new Mayor of Chicago
 
 
 


 


- Forwarded Message -
From: "mcnal...@aol.com" 
To: cald...@aol.com; coov...@aol.com; barbb...@aol.com; jc...@bellsouth.net; 
luv2s...@aol.com; tiptop...@aol.com; yayab...@aol.com; ru...@buffalo.com; 
wjlawle...@aol.com; gblums...@yahoo.com; cbuzz...@mawdi.com 
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 2:07 PM
Subject: Fwd: The rules in Chicago





-Original Message- From: Minard Whitnall  To: 
Ellen Garvey ; Jack Schmitt ; Jan & 
Roger Alexander ; JESSIE PUERIFOY ; Jules & 
Mary Ann Ruggeri ; Sue & George Shriver ; 
Wayne McNally  Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 11:09 am Subject: Fwd: 
Fw: Fwd: The rules in Chicago 
  
[Attachment(s) from wle...@aol.com included below]

[FairfieldLife] Vajra boy is indeed Tm'er

[Jason]

 
 
Yes, I remember it. 1974. The initatior was so beautiful 
that Vaj humped her.

Vaj was so embarrassed by that incident that it took him 10 
years of FFL to come clean on it. 
 
 
 
From: Vaj 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 6:12 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula
>
>>
> When a major disruption comes up, like the recent national 
> airing of David Wants to Fly, where the truth was laid  
> bare on Mahesh, they go into frenzies like this. It never 
> seems to dawn on them the possibility of growing out of  
> something and moving on. They'll likely remain happily  
> stuck in the same rut for the rest of their lives.
>
> I know I had enough information - directly - so it's  
> rather bizarre to watch all this thrashing over my 35 USD 
> mantra purchase in 1974...
 
 
> > On Dec 18, 2011, at 7:29 PM, zarzari_786 wrote:
> >
> > since there are so many TM teachers on this board, nay  
> > even 'enlightened' ones, of what importance is it, that 
> > Vaj did TM or not? We have enough information about TM  
> > right? 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Happy Birthday Barry

[Jason]

 
    Christ is more of a quasi-historical figure.  Many 
researchers say the divinity of Christ is much later 
doctrine of the Church.  He was elevated to a divine level 
after he died.

    Robbie boy, do you really believe in all this shit?

    Crusader supremacy is a mirror image of the Jihadi 
supremacy and the Zionist supremacy.

    Vedic supremacy is mirror image of the Zionist supremacy 
and Nazi supremacy.

    Moses was a genocidal baby killer.  Abraham fucked both 
his wife and his maid to create two fraudulent religions to 
fool people on this miserable planet.
 
 
 > From: maskedzebra 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 7:14 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Happy Birthday Barry
>
> And Jesus wept, Barry.
>
> Goddamn beautiful post, Bob Price.
>
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price 
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > PS: You might want to let your buddy Vaj know that 
> > he is not helping your case that you don't read the 
> > posts of those on your * No Fly list;-) *. Like Vaj, I 
> > know nothing about SC; I liked the quote, and thought 
> > the fact he was a body builder would appeal to a martial 
> > arts expert like yourself, frankly, the fact he could 
> > have been Rama's guru was just gravy; that said, you 
> > could suggest to Vaj that if he's trying to establish 
> > his pedigree, he might want to delete the reference 
> > hotlinks from his Wikipedia cut and pastes. 
> >
> >
> > I have to admit that Vaj is the one poster on FFL 
> > that I did not really follow till MZ started slumming 
> > with him; please don't get me wrong, I have nothing 
> > against "making things up", I think I've mentioned, I 
> > enjoy reading people that "make things up", as long as 
> > they don't bore the hell out of everyone (as I'm sure 
> > you know, manuals can do that). The reason I stopped 
> > reading Vaj was that in the beginning I found him quite 
> > novel; most of us know initiators that, after finding 
> > success in other fields, pretend they were never 
> > initiators, I know a few myself, but Vaj is the only 
> > person I've ever come across that pretends he *was* an 
> > initiator. I certainly found that hilarious when I first 
> > read it, but after a month or two it got a bit, you 
> > know, tired. 
> >
> >
> > I must state categorically that the only guru for me is 
> > his Holiness Maharishi Mahesh Yogi; he "love bombed" me 
> > good enough for this and another life or two, but I, 
> > like Judy and Emily, am concerned about the support, I 
> > was enjoying, from creation, "leaving the building", as 
> > it were, so I want state categorically that I will try 
> > to stick to quoting less controversial characters.
> >
> >
> > "Rubin, I am not of your world. I've spent all my 
> > life in prison. When I was a child I was an orphan and 
> > too ugly to be adopted. Now I am too beautiful to be set 
> > free."
> >
> >
> >
> >  -Charles Manson; as quoted by Jerry Rubin in 
> > recounting his visit with Mansion in "We are Everywhere" 
> > (1971).
> >
> >
> > And to my fellow posters that continue to engage 
> > with  Vaj; I'm reminded of something The Wife says to 
> > The  Daughter when The Daughter asks me to clarify one 
> > of my weeping generalizations: 
> >
> >
> > "For Gods sake, don't encourage him." 
> >
> >
> > PPS: Emily, always a pleasure to hear from you. As 
> > you can imagine, I'm beginning to think that angel had 
> > an agenda when he limited my FFL posts to responding to 
> > or through Barry. The angel may be trying to make some 
> > cheesy point like: "you are what you eat", or I need to 
> > do things this way till I've grasped the quality (as you 
> > know; its not the same as rarity) of my recent behavior. 
> >
> >
> > Likely, from some type of tribalism; I've always 
> > been drawn to you and Steve (I know Steve doesn't really 
> > mean to ignore me); I feel we have much in common on the 
> > career front; with you, your Fortune 500 experience, and 
> > with Steve as a manager and stakeholder of a SME. As you 
> > may have surmised, I'm a bit of a spoiled brat when it 
> > comes to commerce; I'm grateful to my former guru MMY 
> > for that. As you mentioned, I'm a sales and marketing  
> > guy, and, as I'm sure you know, corporations are quite 
> > tolerant of any real or imagined nuttiness in salesman, 
> > if they bring home the awards. As I think I've mentioned 
> > it's been a while since I've had to work for anyone, 
> > besides the wife, but I have to admit, both when I was 
> > an executive, and a management consultant, I was only 
> > able to survive because I either traveled or lived 
> > offshore. What, I can only imagine, you were able to put 
> > up with, in a big corporation, as a single mother no 
> > less, is heroic on my opinion. I love business, and I've 
> > worked for and with some of the largest, but I find many 
> > male executives (females, in my experience, less so

[FairfieldLife] Re: Vajra boy is indeed Tm'er

[Jason]

 
 
BTW, your old FFL handle sounded like the name of a fiber 
laxative.  No intention to insult you.  But it just feels 
that way.

Maybe, you should revert back to your old handle.
 
 
 
> From: Vaj 
> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"  
>  
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 6:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Vajra boy is indeed Tm'er
>
>  
> > On Dec 19, 2011, at 4:54 AM, Jason  
> >  > wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I remember it. 1974. The initatior was so beautiful 
> > that Vaj humped her.
> >
> > Vaj was so embarrassed by that incident that it took him 
> > 10 years of FFL to come clean on it.
> > 
> 
> While 14 year olds may be like that today - in that day,  
> not so much. Nice try Spock, better work on that Mind  
> Meld.

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
 
A good point Bill. From that POV he is an irritant badass. 
His old handle on FFL, Safeite is actually a name of a 
laxative.
 
 

> From: emptybill 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 11:27 PM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] 
> Letter to Ravi Chivukula
> 
> 
> You forgot to mention the real crux of the questions to 
> Vag:
>
> 1. The place and time of his initiation into the basic  
> technique.
> 2. The place and time of his initiation into any advanced 
> techniques.
> 
> Even if you repudiate the teachings, as Robin has  
> done:
> 
> 3. The place and time of TTC and of being made an  
> initiator.
> 
> These are simply verification question that anyone would  
> answer having learned the techniques ... such as,  "Here's 
> where and when I learned, this is the name of my  
> initiator."
> 
> He doesn't provide this info because he cannot do so  
> truthfully.
> Such info is neither hidden knowledge or some kind of  
> secret handshake but is more like basic club membership. 
>
> Vag never learned TM. This  is the only rational  
> conclusion anyone can make.
>
> He doesn't want to admit this because he realizes that it 
> undermines his many claims about the technique and most of > his pompous 
> posturing. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Jason]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
>
> 
> On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:15 PM, turquoiseb wrote:
> 
> > Is it the same thing, or something different? Beats me?
> > I am no neuroscientist, or even a trained behavioral
> > scientist. All I know is that if some of the states
> > that we commonly see "awakened" people go through are
> > (as we suspect) a little more than "eccentric," it's a
> > situation that is made more serious by total belief in
> > the sanctity and "truth" of subjective experience.
> 
> What's amazing to me is to have witnessed the machinations of a so- 
> called "enlightened man" in 1983 and to find no discernible  
> difference between 1983 and 2011 - except I have a better  
> understanding now of mental illness, back then it was just the  
> intuition that 'something's not right here'. Of course once everyone  
> saw the videos of "the enlightened man" beating one of his students,  
> on official video, on the stage - that was the last straw. The  
> emperor of ice cream melted.
> 
> > 
Steve perino says "the last I heard of Robin Carlsen ..his family committed him 
to a mental health facility..Oh well I've headr worse things about 
Robin..apprently from others Robin had a bad temper"

[FairfieldLife] Re: The vedic gods

[Jason]

>
>
> > > Your assertions do not agree with these ancient
> > > deity-bhakti teachings...
> > >
> zarzari:
> > Sure, there are some theistic Upanishads. But Hara
> > wasn't known in the Rig Veda.
> >

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardatrwilliamsdotus"
 wrote:

> History in India begins with the historical Buddha
> (Shakya the Muni, 563 BC). Before that, there was no
> writing, so everything before the Ashokan Pillars is
> considered to be pre-history - the oral tradition.
>
> The language of the Indus Valley Civilization has not
> been deciphered. So, about all we have in the way of
> historical evidence is the edifice architecture such
> as stone inscriptions. The first known instance of
> writing occurs in India around around the time of the
> building of Sarnath.
>
> So, if there were any deity-bhakti teachings in South
> Asia they wouod have been mentioned by the Buddha.
> But in fact, the bhati teachings came much later
> during the Gupta Age, after the formation of the
> sects.
>
> Apparently there are no indigenous population in the
> Asian Subcontinent. If the inhabitants came from
> outside India, where and when did they come to India
> and why?
>
> Most reasonable people accept the timelines and
> chronologies of both Indian and western scholarship
> based on the historical evidence, not on any Indian
> traditions.
>
> For example, all the evidence supports the conclusion
> that the Vedas were composed after the invention of
> the spoked wheel and the use of the horse as a
> conveyance - there is no evidence for the use of
> either before 1700 B.C. in India.
>
> According to modern scholarship, based on historical
> evidence, the Aryan speakers entered into India
> around 1700 B.C., just as the Indus Civilization was
> declining. The evidence is linguistic,
> archaeological, and textual.
>
> Historians agree that there is no mention of the
> Indus Valley Civilization in the Vedas, therefore
> the Vedas must have been composed after 1700 B.C.
> While there is no mention of the Indus Valley
> Civilization, the Rig Veda mentions the use of iron,
> which was not smelted in India until after 1500 B.C.
>
> In contrast, according to Indian tradition, the
> Aryans were a race of people who spoke an eternal
> language called Sanskrit over a million years ago on
> Mt. Meru, before homo sapiens sapiens came out of
> Africa, before the dawn of civilization, before the
> invention of the wheel, before writing and the
> invention of agriculture.
>
> Frawley thinks the Aryans came OUT OF INDIA and then
> invented all the Indo-European languages, up to and
> including Finnish!
>
> Go figure.
>


Willy, this Frawley is too vedic-centric and looks at other
evidence only if it fits the vedas.  Scientific evidence
that does not fit the vedic world-view are swept under the
carpet.


I guess not too different from the TM-org.   [;)]

[FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos

[Jason]

 
What you say is probably true for Barry who is a prima-donna 
and a virtual peacock.

But old Saffy boy seems to have much larger agenda.  To show 
us the current condition of Robin the TM poster boy ie the 
net result of TM and MMY.
 
 
 
From: whynotnow7 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 8:53 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: TV yawns, plus TV kudos


 
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "whynotnow7"  wrote:
> >
> > Seems like you are bullying Robin because he has a more
> > public past than you do. What a coward. Shame on you.
> > You hide, and lob bags of poo at him. In full sight of
> > us all. That religion you are chained to must give you
> > much comfort - just don't rub your wrists so much - it
> > gives away your slavery.
> 
> You know, it strikes me as so odd, because Robin's current
> animus toward TM and MMY is so similar in many respects to
> what Vaj has been preaching here for years, you'd think Vaj
> would be cheering Robin on, thrilled to have him as an ally.
> 
> There has to be something else going on to explain this
> vendetta. It can't be just that Robin doesn't believe Vaj's
> claims to have been a TMer and TM teacher; Vaj has lobbed
> spitballs at worst toward the rest of us who doubt his TM
> status, whereas Robin gets nuclear missiles.
> 
> I think there must be some acute thirst for vengeance at
> work, perhaps for a personal injury he feels Robin did him,
> or someone he's close to, in the past.
> 
> That Robin has repudiated and essentially apologized for,
> regretted, and repented of the damage he did folks in what
> he considers his enlightened period isn't enough for Vaj.
> Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
>
What I honestly think?
1) It is a dodge for Vaj, getting all excited about MZ, so he doesn't have to 
deal with his own shit, whatever that may be.
2) There is something fundamentally truthful in what MZ says, such that it 
irritates the hell out of Vaj.
3) With MZ around, Vaj can't waltz in anymore, mystically spouting his 
spiritual-sounding nonsense and have anyone care. Same with Barry - notice how 
they both hate MZ? Its visceral. He took their stage away without trying, and 
now all they can do is snarl under it, one feigning spiritual authority, the 
other, indifference. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
Is he trying to sell Maharishi or Aquinas?

I squarely put the blame on Maharishi for all this.  Each 
man has to settle on a meditation technique that suits him 
the best.  Maharishi brainwashed a lot of people into this 
wholesale one-size-fits-all approach.

IMO, Maharishi did a lot of damage that way.  But Robin 
unlike others demoted himself back to nursery school.  All 
Robin had to do is move to some other technique that suited 
him better.

Robin seems to be more of a parrot unable to evolve his own 
philosophy.  This reflects badly only on Maharishi.  IMO 
Maharishi has failed him.
 
 On Dec 19, 2011, at 5:41 PM, zarzari_786 wrote:

I had love for Maharishi, I had devotion and worked for him, I did what he, or 
the movement told me at the time. And I think I can rightly say, you don't need 
to teach me about intense bhakti. But what he is doing is romantizising, that's 
different. Romantizising means to impose your own fancy ideas on a lover, ideas 
that aren't true, ideas you will not care to validate. Love is not just a 
feeling, you have to act upon it, if you have a Guru, you have to see what the 
guru is actually saying, and not project something onto him. Robin creates a 
world of his own.
 
From: Vaj 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula



You really get it Z. You're asking (IMO) all the right questions and catching 
the disconnects, you catch every one. Trust me, this is nothing new, the 
paradoxical/contradicting speech has not changed a wink. The romanticism and 
sentimentality as well.

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
Robin, replying to these people is no longer important.  
It's what you are going to do in future, that's what is 
important.

All the people in this forum are actually mini-Robins.  None 
of these poeple are enlightened.  But a lot of us are still 
Seekers.  Do you still seek the Truth?  That's what I want 
to know.

If you still do, we can talk on the side.  This forum is 
simply not suited for such advanced interacions.
 
 
 
From: maskedzebra 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 11:03 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula


 
  
Dear Jason,

You understand me so well that I am going to ask you a favour: Would it be 
possible from now on for you, rather than for me, to answer posts that are 
addressed to me?

I think the nursery school classification of Aquinas most apt; for I recognized 
almost immediately upon reading the first 100 pages of The Summa Theologica 
that I was dumbing myself down by reading something this simplistic.

Oh, one thing, Jason: I think of 'my philosophy' to be singular, based upon the 
widest experimental knowledge, and a close reading of the most important texts 
in the Western canon. I would have thought, before reading this ( which took 
the form of a real revelation for me) that the dubiety of my philosophy was 
based on its too extreme originality.

The Monte Cassino paradigm is a complex one, Jason.

That said, I do not retract my proposal to you: that you write my posts for me 
from now on. I shall give you two weeks to do this; after that time, I will 
simply apologize to the poster (who expected a reply from me) with the excuse 
that, after all, you are a busy man.

But I certainly think you have caught me in your cross-hairs with this rather 
astonishing analysis and judgment of me. And for this, of course I am grateful.

Go get 'em, Jason!

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason  wrote:
>
>  
>  
> Is he trying to sell Maharishi or Aquinas?
> 
> I squarely put the blame on Maharishi for all this.  Each 
> man has to settle on a meditation technique that suits him 
> the best.  Maharishi brainwashed a lot of people into this 
> wholesale one-size-fits-all approach.
> 
> IMO, Maharishi did a lot of damage that way.  But Robin 
> unlike others demoted himself back to nursery school.  All 
> Robin had to do is move to some other technique that suited 
> him better.
> 
> Robin seems to be more of a parrot unable to evolve his own 
> philosophy.  This reflects badly only on Maharishi.  IMO 
> Maharishi has failed him.
>  
>  On Dec 19, 2011, at 5:41 PM, zarzari_786 wrote:
> 
> I had love for Maharishi, I had devotion and worked for him, I did what he, 
> or the movement told me at the time. And I think I can rightly say, you don't 
> need to teach me about intense bhakti. But what he is doing is romantizising, 
> that's different. Romantizising means to impose your own fancy ideas on a 
> lover, ideas that aren't true, ideas you will not care to validate. Love is 
> not just a feeling, you have to act upon it, if you have a Guru, you have to 
> see what the guru is actually saying, and not project something onto him. 
> Robin creates a world of his own.
>  
> From: Vaj 
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 4:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
> Chivukula
> 
> 
> 
> You really get it Z. You're asking (IMO) all the right questions and catching 
> the disconnects, you catch every one. Trust me, this is nothing new, the 
> paradoxical/contradicting speech has not changed a wink. The romanticism and 
> sentimentality as well.

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
 
From: emptybill 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 8:44 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula
 
>  
> Well she was a Jewish girl who's beauty was in her intelligence. That's all I 
> dare say.
>
> Oh, you must mean Simone Weil ... "Every sin is an attempt to fly from 
> emptiness. " 
No wonder you ended up Buddhist. Now I know that date of you initiation: 1941.
>
> "The world is the closed door. It is a barrier. And at the same time it is 
> the way through." 
― Simone Weil
>
> "Now, this self is a dike, a divider, to keep these worlds from colliding 
> with each other… Upon passing across this dike, therefore, a blind man turns 
> out not to be blind, a wounded man turns out not to be wounded, and a sick 
> man turns out not to be sick. Upon crossing this dike, therefore, one even 
> passes from night into day, for, indeed, this world of Brahman is lit up once 
> and for all."
> -Chandogya Upanishad, 8.4.1


> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
 
> > 
> > Well she was a Jewish girl who's beauty was in her intelligence. That's all 
> > I dare say.
 
> > >
> > > And please give the exact date of your initiation and all your advanced 
> > > techniques, this is requested by each application form, so you must know 
> > > it by heart now. And how was the weather on these day? Did it rain? How 
> > > old was your teacher, and how many initiations did your teacher have at 
> > > the time? Curious minds want to know.
> 
> 

 
  
Could it be Shy-man Veil?

Maharishi's true blue believers talk about this imaginary 
threat from the CIA because it gives them a false sense of 
importance.  I have a feeling Peeve Feat also exaggerates 
things.

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
 
Robbie boy, if you want to to be a part of the 'Jesus freak 
Show' so be it.

But none of us here in the forum want any part of it.  
Judeo-Christian philosophy is a major deception that has 
conned humanity for centuries.  I don't know weather you are 
an unwitting player in this greatest con-job ever played on 
humanity.  You are just fooling yourself.  
 
 
 
From: emptybill 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 10:57 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi 
Chivukula


 
 
 
 
> 
> Robin sez:
> I knew there would be others who would disagree with you, and I was not 
> disappointed in this (e.g. emptybill). But within how I have understood what 
> you have said about me, I believe emptybill has provided evidence of a 
> misunderstanding of me. But there will be no proof of his failure of 
> sensitivity versus your precision of sensitivity. So I must leave it there.
>
> Oh gosh, the insensitivity is so crushing, how can you continue? However no 
> need for you to demonstrate or exemplify your claims since all truth is 
> self-evident and self-revealing. Isn't it? 
Only god knows our heart, so who cares about veracity? The human faculty of 
knowing (nous/intellectus) is as corrupted in its nature as human will is 
debased by self-love. This is all we need to know, and any other conclusion is 
mere fantasy. Adequation is for the angels, not us.
> This is why Jesus (and Him crucified) walked the earth, isn't it? To show 
> that He is the only Logos and all else is deception.
It is so simple, isn't it?>

> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra  wrote:
> > 
> > Dear whynotnow:
> > 
> > No one that I know is above feeling some happiness in being praised. What 
> > makes your overall review of my posts, though, so gratifying to me, is the 
> > sense that you have really caught my own intention and, if I may say it, 
> > even my own experience in writing at FFL. 
> > 
> > "Then, a while ago I began reading every word of yours, the context you 
> > create, the reality coming through, the innocence, and the world of Robin 
> > became known, with immediacy, not compared to anything else, just you".
> > 
> > This may be—from my own first person ontological perspective—the most 
> > accurate and perspicacious description I have ever read about what is going 
> > on when I write. And I am led on to the conclusion that your own way of 
> > apprehending reality partakes of a certain grace and elegance that affords 
> > you the inner confidence that you have 'seen what is really there'. I think 
> > this quite an exceptional virtue: to catch at what is most real and 
> > individuated, ignoring what would be merely—inadvertently of course—a 
> > derivative and conditioned response.
> > 
> > You see, whynotnow: you are meeting my own innocence [if I may use that 
> > term since you have generously applied it to me] with your own innocence. 
> > This creates some agreement in reality. It is not merely someone saying 
> > something nice or flattering about someone else. For me at least you have 
> > in this post received and then articulated almost perfectly the context 
> > within which I express myself. And I have to admit it: I was a little 
> > floored by this. So, then, whynotnow, it was not so much the fact that you 
> > came out so positively in your review, it was the fact that in all that you 
> > said, you identified the minute particulars of what I attempt—personally—to 
> > do when I post at FFL.
> > 
> > And you also recognized the sense of how much I seek to make a completion 
> > when I write; that is, the way I "delve into awareness in a comprehensible 
> > way, weave a succinct explanation with no loose threads". Again, whynotnow, 
> > it is not the favourability or positivity of what you have said about me; 
> > no, it is something much more satisfying to me: viz. the identification of 
> > seemingly every element in my original ambition; I would have thought at 
> > best certain persons would get the *effect* of all this; but I had not 
> > anticipated someone who would anatomize my intention and my method with 
> > this kind of delicate and acute sensitivity.
> > 
> > I won't quote the rest of your post, since it illustrates the same almost 
> > perfect grasp of my intention and my experience. The "genuineness", the 
> > sense of the "real": these are what constitute what is essential for me. I 
> > must stop here, whynotnow: please know you have—if I may say 
> > it—*objectively* understood what I am all about. And I never dreamed of 
> > someone understanding me in the way that I understand myself. 
> > 
> > I hope that this, what I have written here, does not come off as some 
> > opportunity to indulge in self-centered gratification or ego massaging, 
> > because that is not why I have written back to you. I have written this 
> > response out of my wonder and appreciation that someone has so 
> > intelligently del

[FairfieldLife] Re: The vedic gods (WITZEL)

[Jason]

quot;Vedic Harappan" period, their "Sindhu-Sarasvati 
civilisation." 

Frawley complains that I let the Rgvedic poet Vasishtha lead 
King (chieftain) Bharata out of Eastern Iran into India 
which I have not written. His own American background leads 
him to allege that I am "influenced by the story of how 
biblical Moses led the Jews out of Egypt into Israel, ... 
while the Bible remembers such an exodus, no such Vedic or 
Puranic records exist." He forgets about Central Asian 
reminiscences, worse, and that the biblical account is now 
regarded by archaeologists as pure myth. 

Similar scenarios hold for the Dravidian languages  
especially if indeed related to the Nostratic ones 
(Afroasiatic, Georgian, Uralic, Indo-European, Altaic)  and 
as most of their agricultural vocabulary seems closely 
related to Sumerian (Blazek & Boisson, Archiv Orientalni 60, 
1992, 16-37). To no avail, says Frawley: "(Witzel) regards 
both peoples (Aryans and Dravidians) as equally primitive 
and as not having even developed agriculture much less any 
civilisation of their own." No tribe on this planet is 
"primitive"  a 19th century, colonialist's term strangely 
surviving in this spiritualist's vocabulary: e.g., the Stone 
Age Australians have a complicated social system, mythology 
(dream time) and oral literature, just as the Old 
Indo-Aryans or Dravidians. Therefore, I "equate the 
sophisticated and advanced Vedic literature with the 
compositions of uncivilised, primitive nomadic tribes"  such 
as those of the early Rgveda with that of the earliest 
Indo-European or other tribes. Frawley has indeed repeatedly 
offended Austro-Asiatic peoples such as the Munda or Khasi 
(O.P. Aug. 20), disqualifying them (O.P., Feb. 11). 
 
MICHAEL WITZEL 

(www.fas.harvard.edu/{cedil}witzel/mwpage.htm) 
 
 
 
From: richardatrwilliamsdotus 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 7:29 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The vedic gods

 
  
> Frawley thinks the Aryans came OUT OF INDIA and then
> invented all the Indo-European languages, up to and
> including Finnish!
>
> > Jason:
> > this Frawley is too vedic-centric and looks at other
> > evidence only if it fits the vedas. Scientific 
> > evidence that does not fit the vedic world-view are 
> > swept under the carpet.
>
> So, you're thinking that the Sanskrit speakers came 
INTO India, and brought with them their religion, 
language and their social systems. Not the other way 
around, like Bill and Barry2 claim.
>
> > I guess not too different from the TM-org. 
>
> There's no "TM-org", Jason.
> 
> We don't exactly know what the beliefs were of the 
Iranians who composed the Avesta. Apparently, they 
believed in the comsumption of a decoction refered to 
as 'Hoama', which was imbibed much like the Vedic Soma 
and that they believed in the powers of the supernal 
dieties of nature such as the sun, storm, dawn, etc. 
> 
> The Avesta and the Avestan religion was reformed by 
Zoroaster and the beliefs of that system may have 
drasticaly altered the original Avestan beliefs. The 
system of Zoroaster has some striking parallels with 
the Indian system of Sankhya dualism. It may be that 
the Indian Sankhya system influenced Zoroaster to 
alter his system to fit the Indian model!
> 
> Read more:
> 
> Out of India?
> http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/indians.htm

[FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

[Jason]

 
Don't get upset Robin.  Vaj is talking from the state of 
Nirvana.

Buddha too would be extremely proud of what he did today.
 
 
 
> maskedzebra 
> FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Friday, December 23, 2011 9:42 PM
> [FairfieldLife] Re: SECOND Open [non-performance] Letter to Ravi Chivukula

> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > Vajradhatu: The funny thing is Judy's been on the irony board so many times 
> > that she no longer requires starch. She doesn't seem to even notice. I've 
> > always likened it to someone with an ugly boogar on their face bragging of 
> > their good looks - only one side gets the joke! :-)
>
> RESPONSE: It's a strange thing, Vaj, but just when I thought I have figured 
> you out, you burst forth with a prayer of noble-heartedness like this. I 
> think most FFL readers might just miss the classiness of this remark, for it 
> surely is the proof—if we ever needed any—of your beautiful aristocratic 
> manners.
>
> I should just say, by the way, until I read this, I had never really 
> understood Judy; but with this analogy of the unrecognized boogar on the 
> face, there for all to see, I feel you have entirely caught hold of Judy's 
> problem. I wonder how I could have so underestimated Vajradhatu's patrician 
> habit of being.
> 
> So apposite is this image applied to Judy that I am thinking of just 
> including it as a quote inside all my Christmas cards.—That is to say if I 
> have your permission.
> 
> Graffiti for the soul, Vaj: this really has Merry Christmas all over it.
>
> Jesus, he is proud of you today.
> 

[FairfieldLife] The Sun of Mankind, rules in Eternity.!

[Jason]

 
 
 
By Tom Chivers    WorldLast updated: December 19th, 2011
 372 CommentsComment on this article
 

When the Sun of Mankind was born, in a humble log cabin on 
his nation's holiest mountain, a new bright star shone in 
the heavens, and a double rainbow appeared. The birds sang 
songs of praise in human voice. The Sun of Mankind's father, 
though his mortal body is dead, rules in eternity, and his 
spirit is reincarnated in the Sun of Mankind. The Sun of 
Mankind is also known as the Great Man Who Descended From 
Heaven.

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to atheist North Korea.

The Sun of Mankind, in case you're wondering, was the late 
Kim Jong-il, who died over the weekend following a heart 
attack. His father, the eternal leader who was reincarnated 
in his son, was Kim il Sung, who died in 1994 at the age of 
82 but is still the official president. Christopher 
Hitchens, who sadly did not live to see Kim's death, thus 
described North Korea as the only "necrocracy" in the world.

Kim Jong-il, the Shining Star of Mount Paekdu, was not, of 
course, born in a log cabin on the mountain at all, but in 
exile in Siberia. (I am also unable to confirm the reports 
of talking birds and celestial miracles.) But the birth of a 
great Son to a great Father in humble-yet-holy 
circumstances, accompanied by heavenly signs, is very 
familiar, as is death and reincarnation. Mithras, a pagan 
sun-god, was apparently born of a virgin to great miracles, 
and died and was reincarnated. That story has many obvious 
parallels to that of Jesus Christ. In Greek mythology, 
Dionysius, the son of the great god Zeus, was killed and 
resurrected.

Whatever you can call the Kim Jong-il premiership, and the 
whole sad, sorry North Korean experience since the Second 
World War, it is not an atheist dictatorship. A better 
parallel would be a theocracy. Hitchens reported, in a 
heartrending account of his time in the failed state, that 
$2.68 billion (£1.7 billion) was spent on memorial events 
and constructions in the wake of Kim il Sung's death 17 
years ago. It's a modern-day Pharoanic kingdom, with similar 
Sun-God mythology: Kim il Sung and Kim Jong-il were 
worshipped (see the video above to see what I mean). 
Sticking with Hitchens, he says that the closest parallel is 
to the Confucian ancestor-worship which had held sway in 
Korean society for generations before the rise of Maoism.
(On the subject of worship: there's a tragicomic quality to 
some of Kim's "miracles". We are told that he could control 
the weather; that he had no need to use toilets, since he 
never defecated; he invented hamburgers, which probably 
counts as a miracle since they existed before he was born; 
and, my own personal favourite, on his first-ever round of 
golf, he shot 38 under par, including 11 holes in one. It's 
his restraint, almost a modesty, in not claiming to have got 
a perfect score of 18, which I find oddly touching. See the 
Huffington Post for more.)
 
None of this is intended to mean that religious societies 
are all going to be like North Korea, or that religion 
implies dictatorship, or that all atheists are lovely 
people. But to suggest that North Korea is what happens when 
atheism holds sway in a country is equally ridiculous. 
Saying Kim Jong-il was a Lefty atheist is like saying that 
Hitler was a conservative Catholic, and we all know that 
that is very silly indeed.
 
 
Add a comment
Comment with a Telegraph account

[FairfieldLife] Re: Everybody's Christmas Decorations

[Jason]

 
In the pre-christian era it was a winter solstice festival. 
The sun touched the lowest point in the south and started 
coming back to the north.

The festival of the Sun-God became the festival of the Son 
of God.

Happy christmas and a happy & prosperous new year to you and 
everybody else here.
 
    
 
 

From: raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2011 9:26 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Everybody's Christmas Decorations


  
I look forward to seeing Everybody's Whole Foods Christmas decorations every 
year. Their fabulous trains wind their way around a miniature town of tiny 
houses and lights. Enjoy. Merry Christmas!

http://youtu.be/BQZ38Af_PAI

[FairfieldLife] Re: Arctic Home in the Vedas!

[Jason]

 
In afghanistan there is a plant called Som.  It is 
an ephedra that produces a greenish docotion.

pbs.org/thestoryofindia/ask/answers_1.html
 
 

From: richardatrwilliamsdotus 
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, January 1, 2012 10:03 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Arctic Home in the Vedas!


  


cardemaister:
> That might be an "additional proof", that Bal 
> Gangadhar Tilak was right when he conjectured 
> that the Vedic culture as described in the 
> Rgveda (especially hymns to uSas [dawn]) 
> originates from quite far North...
>
This makes a lot of sense. The Sanskrit speaking 
composers of the the Rig Veda must have 
originated where the Soma was abundant. It is a 
fact that the Soma ingredients don't grow in 
the Himalayas. 

In contrast, Terence McKenna says that there are 
many observed instances of the use of 
hallucinogenic plants in places like Siberia and 
Finland. Soma was of course, was a decoction made 
from among other ingredients, mushroom of the 
Stroperia cubensis variety. 

So, when we find in the Rig Veda whole mantras 
devoted to Soma, we must assume that Soma was at 
the top of the list of forces to be propitiated. 

If you've ever eaten a so-called 'magic' mushroom, 
you would know what I mean. It's just awesome! 

So much more so for the Rig Veda composers, 
apparently, since they memorized and recited 
liturgies to Soma for over 3,000 years over a 
long distance from Siberia, to the Caucasus, to 
the steppes of Eurasia and hence into South Asia.

According to what I've read, the composers of 
the Rig Veda DID NOT come out of India with the 
secret mantras to form the Indo-European group of 
languages as claimed by David Frawley.

Read more:

'Soma in Indian Religion'
Etheogens as Religious Sacrament
http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/Etheogens.pdf

Work cited:

'Food of the Gods'
The search for 
the original tree of knowledge, a radical history 
of plants, drugs, and human evolution.
By Terence McKenna
Bantam, 1992

[FairfieldLife] Re: Robin's Complete Five Part Post to Curtis

[Jason]

>
>
> On Jan 1, 2012, at 1:09 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
>
> > OK Robin,I tried. I took about two hours and re-read the whole thing
and worked my way through the first 3 posts again with comments. You
would not like any of them. I became increasingly frustrated that we do
not share the same values in how we judge people and how we define
friendship. It only inspired the kind of defensive soul deadening
writing that I despise. (Plus I had to create a soul for it to die so it
was no small thing.) You said some niece things at the end to regain
rapport, but it was just too little too late for me to embrace the
spirit of your words. I do appreciate them but feel too weary from all
that went before to have it make much difference. On their own, outside
the dissection of my faults, they might have turned the tide, I don't
know.



> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:

>
> What is Enlightenment?
>
> Sutra eighty-eight
>
> It is knowing that one's boldness and Promethean
> prophecies are inspired from the Ego of God.
>
>
> -Robin W. Carlsen
>
>
>
> /in-flated/ 1. puffed out;
> swollen, pompous; 2. bombas-
> tic; high-flown; 3. increased or
> raised beyond what is normal
> or valid.
>
>
>
> The Masks of Inflation
>
> Inflation wears many different masks: a sense of superiority, vanity,
> self-satisfaction, a feeling of being special, an overestimation of
one's
> spiritual development and capacities, pride in ones spiritual
accomplish-
> ments and stature, aloofness, the feeling that no one is able to
> understand one's experience. Each of these is a mask of ego inflation,
> worn in delusion, with each wearer believing that his or her mask
> represents the true face.
>
> -Mariana Caplan
>


Saffy, I don't think Robin has any sense of
superiority and neither he is aloof.


He is just vain.  Vainity taken to the very
extreme.  His stupid declaration the the west is
more real than the east is puzzling.


What makes him conclude the west is any more real
than the east?


>
> The soul that is attached to
> anything, however much good
> there may be in it, will not
> arrive at the liberty of the
> divine.
>
> -St. John of the Cross
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The problem Atheists have

[Jason]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"  
wrote:
>
> I think I figured out something important concerning the dialog between 
> theists and atheists.  When theists argue against atheists, it usually 
> concerns the actual existence of a God.  The arguments are often at the most 
> abstract range of philosophical discussion where metaphysics and ontology 
> (the study of what exists in philosophy) wander into a local Starbucks, and 
> after ordering bloatedly caloric peppermint and gingerbread lattes,sit 
> together eating cake balls off sticks (actual Starbucks overpriced 
> confectionery)like a couple of dorks.  

Basicaly, there are two types of Gods.  The personal god of
Abraham, Issac and Jacob.  And the god of the Spinoza,
absolutely impersonal having no special people and no active
interst in causation.

Do you think a babbling moron like Robin can make
distinctions between the two?

> 
> If I hear one more theist announce that you "can't prove that God does NOT 
> exist" as if proving a negative is even logically possible for anything, I 
> might just have to replace all those Starbucks' cake balls with C4 plastic 
> explosives, order my $1.53 coffee-of-the-day, and sit down to enjoy the 
> fireworks. (Surprisingly little brain matter gets splattered from the 
> cake-ball-on-a-stick eaters.)
> 
> Wow, sorry about that. I didn't realize my homicidal rage at this faux 
> Tootsie-pop  till I started writing.  But in my defense, I sat through the 
> whole mini cupcake fad without a single peep.  It was only when they covered 
> the little bastards in chocolate and put them on a stick that I had to say my 
> piece. So where was I...so easily distracted by food...
> 
> Oh yeah, the problem atheists have has nothing to do with the existence or 
> non existence of any of the various god ideas that people enjoy.  And the 
> move by theists to frame the discussion in those terms can now officially 
> cease with this post.
> 
> I have never heard any atheist (and I've read a few) make a case for the non 
> existence of God.  The actual existence of God is not an up topic.  It 
> literally doesn't come up much. It is completely eclipsed by the actual 
> problem atheist's have is the theist's claim that anyone knows what God wants.
> 
> That is the problem atheists have with theism.  They don't believe that any 
> of the self-appointed managers for the big guy, are actually receiving W-9s 
> (Yeah, God never gives health insurance benefits of fulltime employment just 
> like Maharishi.  We are all independent contractors to save on taxes.) with 
> heaven listed as the address of the employer and the employment ID number 
> being Pi. 
> 
> So if someone holds up say, a Bible, and says, "this is the word of God and 
> we are going to follow everything in it except the part where we need to kill 
> people for working on the sabbath because we might run out of Bud-lite during 
> the football game and might need a 7-11 run including but not limited to pork 
> rinds and Yahoo. And we can't openly support slavery or beating women with a 
> rod the thickness of your thumb, but when you try to bring these cases in 
> front of a judge, don't worry we will work something out for you.  But that 
> thing that says that gay people are an abomination is the word of God, and we 
> are the right ones to be making these distinctions..."
> 
> the atheist puts up one of his fingers and says, "I don't mean you are number 
> one".
> 
> It has nothing to do with the possibility that there might be some kind of 
> super being out there, or in here or wherever, it has to do with whether or 
> not it is credible that this particular book can be distinguished from any 
> other wonderful examples of people making shit up and repeating the stories 
> again and again until other people forgot that someone made it up.  And back 
> in the day before celebrity publishing dominated, the catch phrase for 
> anything someone wanted to promote as the next best seller was that God wrote 
> it, or dictated it, or had it ghost written for him or her or him dressed 
> like a her.(Yes I mean you cross-dressing Krishna.  The Christian Bible says 
> you are an abomination with your blue Jersey Shore spray tan.)
> 
> So this is my cause for the New Year. Bringing up this critical distinction 
> between what atheists actually are saying, and what many theists want them to 
> be saying because it would be much more convenient if the burden of proof 
> could be shifted away from the person claiming to speak for God.
> 
> I want to start the New Year off right by stating unequivocally that I have 
> never met any human being who I believe is so different from the rest of us 
> that this specialness can only be explained by actual contact with the 
> creator of the universe.  What I do see are one out of a million of us, 
> audacious enough to claim to have this connection, and whole bunches of the 
> rest of us deferring to this claim withou

[FairfieldLife] Re: The problem Atheists have

[Jason]

> >
> >
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
 wrote:
> > >
> > > I think I figured out something important concerning the dialog
between theists and atheists. When theists argue against atheists, it
usually concerns the actual existence of a God. The arguments are often
at the most abstract range of philosophical discussion where metaphysics
and ontology (the study of what exists in philosophy) wander into a
local Starbucks, and after ordering bloatedly caloric peppermint and
gingerbread lattes,sit together eating cake balls off sticks (actual
Starbucks overpriced confectionery)like a couple of dorks.

>  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason" jedi_spock@ wrote:
> >
> > Basicaly, there are two types of Gods. The personal god of
> > Abraham, Issac and Jacob. And the god of the Spinoza,
> > absolutely impersonal having no special people and no active
> > interst in causation.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
 wrote:
>
> That is the God of the deists I think. I don't see how any atheist
could have a problem with such ideas as a theory about how this all
began. I certainly don't. But there is a gray area where people claim
special mental states that align them with say abstract natural laws so
they can claim as was claimed about Maharishi, that they are nature
speaking English or have spontaneous "right" action. The claims line
gets kind of fuzzy with the claims of what "higher" or "altered" states
mean. Abstract philosophers don't cross into this gray zone but most
yogic claims do.
>

Actually, there is now some scientific hints that even the
actual act of commencing the big bang itself does not need
God.  Heard of the 11 dimensional M theory?

Both data from particle accelerators and far reaching
telescopes give first tantalising glimpses of the existence
of parallel universes and other dimensions.  Which means
this so called "god" could be far more impersonal than even
Deists advocate.!


> >
> > Do you think a babbling moron like Robin can make
> > distinctions between the two?
>
> Robin hasn't really clarified or expanded on his theological views. I
believe he does make this distinction, but has given priority to the
personal as being more real in some unexplained sense.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > If I hear one more theist announce that you "can't prove that God
does NOT exist" as if proving a negative is even logically possible for
anything, I might just have to replace all those Starbucks' cake balls
with C4 plastic explosives, order my $1.53 coffee-of-the-day, and sit
down to enjoy the fireworks. (Surprisingly little brain matter gets
splattered from the cake-ball-on-a-stick eaters.)
> > >
> > > Wow, sorry about that. I didn't realize my homicidal rage at this
faux Tootsie-pop till I started writing. But in my defense, I sat
through the whole mini cupcake fad without a single peep. It was only
when they covered the little bastards in chocolate and put them on a
stick that I had to say my piece. So where was I...so easily distracted
by food...
> > >
> > > Oh yeah, the problem atheists have has nothing to do with the
existence or non existence of any of the various god ideas that people
enjoy. And the move by theists to frame the discussion in those terms
can now officially cease with this post.
> > >
> > > I have never heard any atheist (and I've read a few) make a case
for the non existence of God. The actual existence of God is not an up
topic. It literally doesn't come up much. It is completely eclipsed by
the actual problem atheist's have is the theist's claim that anyone
knows what God wants.
> > >
> > > That is the problem atheists have with theism. They don't believe
that any of the self-appointed managers for the big guy, are actually
receiving W-9s (Yeah, God never gives health insurance benefits of
fulltime employment just like Maharishi. We are all independent
contractors to save on taxes.) with heaven listed as the address of the
employer and the employment ID number being Pi.
> > >
> > > So if someone holds up say, a Bible, and says, "this is the word
of God and we are going to follow everything in it except the part where
we need to kill people for working on the sabbath because we might run
out of Bud-lite during the football game and might need a 7-11 run
including but not limited to pork rinds and Yahoo. And we can't openly
support slavery or beating women with a rod the thickness of your thumb,
but when you try to bring these cases in front of a judge, don't worry
we will work something out for you. But that thing that says that gay
people

[FairfieldLife] Re: Happy new year to everyone !!! (And more love bombing..)

[Jason]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Good grief, Curtis, has Ravi so unsettled you that you've
> *completely* lost the ability to detect when you're being
> tweaked?
> 
You hold a grudge against him just because he didn't rein in 
Vaj and Barry?

How objective is that?

> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Chivukula" 
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dear Curtis baby,
> > > > > > > Everyone knows here who was a leader in a cult, who preyed
> > > > > > > on younger blondes in cults, who got kicked out of cults
> > > > > > > for preying on younger women and who then spent time
> > > > > > > maligning his cult and his Guru.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > Kinda losing it huh?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Says Curtis, projecting.
> > > > 
> > > > Turned out to be prescient.  But nice to see where you stand
> > > > on the issues of lying and malicious attacks here Judy.  I
> > > > was confused about how you would walk considering all your talk.
> > > 
> > > I pick my battles, Curtis.
> > 
> > That is forbidden.
> > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Besides, how would I know whether Ravi was lying or not?
> > > 
> > > I mean, can you prove you *didn't* prey on younger blonde
> > > TMers and got kicked out for it?
> > 
> > My history in the movement was an open book.  Do you think with all the 
> > teachers who weighed in on ALT TM someone would have missed that I had not 
> > left the movement voluntarily?  It would never have been mentioned in 
> > articles quoting TM officials rebutting me?
> > 
> > Yeah, you knew.
> > 
> > As an impoverished fulltimer, any deals I put together with the opposite 
> > sex could hardly be regarded as preying.  It was more like an act of 
> > charity on their part.  
> > 
> > > 
> > > ;-^ (That's me sticking my tongue out.)
> > >
> > 
> > Cute but retar...oh wait, that is only OK for Ravi to say.  The rest of us 
> > are held accountable for propriety.
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: The problem Atheists have

[Jason]

> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason"  wrote:
> 
> > > Basicaly, there are two types of Gods.  The personal god of
> > > Abraham, Issac and Jacob.  And the god of the Spinoza,
> > > absolutely impersonal having no special people and no active
> > > interst in causation.
>  
> > > Do you think a babbling moron like Robin can make
> > > distinctions between the two?

> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> >  wrote:
> >
> > Robin hasn't really clarified or expanded on his theological
> > views.  I believe he does make this distinction, but has
> > given priority to the personal as being more real in some 
> > unexplained sense.

> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
>
> Actually he's done quite a bit of explaining of this very
> point. It may not be clear to you--and it's not all that
> clear to me either--but he's taken a number of stabs at it.
> 
> One of the most detailed, in fact, was in a discussion he
> and I began about a quote from MMY. I got bogged down in
> the complexities and had to promise him I'd get back to
> it eventually, which I haven't managed to do yet. His 
> last contribution to the discussion was post #295624, if
> anybody's interested. He put particular importance on a
> quote from Gerard Manley Hopkins that appears about two-
> thirds of the way down the post. It doesn't necessarily
> cover all the bases, but it does provide a rationale for
> the priority Robin gives to "the personal as being more
> real."
>

It's not clear to you because what he posts is a huge pile 
of shit.

It's only a fuckin moron like Robin can learn so much from 
Maharishi and yet go back to a religion that is slowly dying 
and will soon become extinct in a couple of decades.

[FairfieldLife] Robin's female counterpart

[Jason]

 
 
Here is Robin's female counterpart.  Maybe he can take her 
for a date?

http://brontebaxter.wordpress.com/blowing-the-whistle-on-enl
ightenment-confessions-of-a-new-age-heretic/

[FairfieldLife] The Caveman who dosen't like Money

[Jason]

 
 

The caveman who doesn’t like money of any kind

A Sarwar Borah
 
Forty eight-year-old American Daniel Suelo is the ultimate 
economic rebel. He is also the subject of an interesting 
case study on how to live without money; a single coin, in 
this debt-ridden day of mortgage foreclosures and looming 
recession.
 
Since 2000, Suelo has been living in a cave in the Utah 
mountains, eating grasshoppers and foraging the meagre land. 
He sleeps next to a nest of scorpions who seem to ignore 
him. Suelo has watched mountain lions come to drink from a 
brook that flows below. But he isn’t afraid or insecure. He 
is the man who decided to stop using money.
 
In 1999, Suelo traveled from a Buddhist monastery in 
Thailand to India, where he sought the company of sadhus. 
>From them, he learned the freedom of being poor, yet 
unfettered. “I wanted to be a sadhu,” Suelo told Details 
magazine in an interview. “But what good would it do to be a 
sadhu in India? A true test of faith would be to return to 
one of the most materialistic, money-worshipping nations on 
earth and be a sadhu there. To be a vagabond in America, a 
bum, and make an art of it — the idea enchanted me.”
 
The exile’s home is hidden high in a canyon thundering with 
the sound of waterfalls, and an hour’s walk from the desert 
town of Moab, Utah. “From the outside, the place looks like 
a hollowed teardrop, about the size of an Amtrak bathroom, 
with enough space for a few pots that hang from the ceiling, 
a stove under a stone eave, big buckets full of beans and 
rice, a bed of blankets in the dirt, and not much else. 
Suelo’s been here for three years, and it smells like it,” 
Christopher Ketcham describes Suelo’s dwelling in Details 
magazine.
 
It's not as if he doesn’t like his home. Recently, the 
suntanned lanky exile built a new staircase using huge 
boulders. “His hands are black with dirt, and his hair, 
which is going gray, looks like a bird’s nest, full of dust 
and twigs, from scrambling in the underbrush on the canyon 
floor,” Ketcham describes his first meeting with the modern 
day cave dweller.
 
Suelo uses an old cookie tin as a stove, and has devised a 
string of empty soup cans fitted to a hole in the rock 
that’s serves as a chimney. His food comes from the land, 
his drink from the cool creek below his cave, which is also 
his swimming pool.
 
“When I lived with money, I was always lacking,” Suelo 
writes. “Money represents lack. Money represents things in 
the past (debt) and things in the future (credit), but money 
never represents what is present.”
 
Suelo’s distaste for money and modern economics was the 
result of a life-changing experience in an Ecuadorian 
mountain village. The anthropology graduate from University 
of Colorado wanted to be a doctor. But in 1987, he joined 
the Peace Corps and was sent to a village high in the Andes 
mountains.
 
His task was to monitor the health of tribal villagers, 
teaching them first aid and the benefits of nutrition, and 
giving them medicine when they fell ill. He even played 
midwife, delivering three babies. The inexorable march of 
modernity was coming to the village too.
 
Suelo discovered that the money the villagers got from 
selling produce from their fields — quinoa, potatoes, corn 
and lentils — was used to buy things they had never needed: 
soda, white flour, refined sugar, noodles and artificial 
flavors. Soon they acquired television. Strangely, all this 
increased expenditure was telling on their health. He used 
charts to correlate their spending and well-being.
 
“It looked like money was impoverishing them,” Suelo told 
Ketcham.
 
The experience shook Suelo. He worked at a women’s shelter 
in Moab for five years. He felt, being paid for helping 
people seemed dishonest, somehow. Help had to be free. 
“Giving up possessions, living beyond credit and debt,” 
Suelo writes on his blog, “freely giving and freely taking, 
forgiving all debts, owing nobody a thing, living and 
walking without guilt... grudge [or] judgment.” If grace was 
the goal, Suelo told himself, then it had to be grace in the 
classical sense, from the Latin gratia, meaning favour, and 
also free.
 
Suelo lives like a prince of the wilderness: his morning tea 
is brewed from piñon and juniper needles. His meals are made 
with mustard plants that grow among the rocks, watercress 
from the creek and wild onions. When the weather is 
unfriendly, Suelo lives on ants, grubs, termites and 
lizards, probably the result of having previously lived in 
South East Asia.
 
“Hardship is a good thing. We need the challenge. Our bodies 
need it. Our immune systems need it. My hardships are 
simple, right at hand — they’re manageable,” he told 
Ketcham. Suelo learnt an invaluable lesson from an alcoholic 
panhandler who used to live in a neighbouring cave. When he 
would get enough gold from the stream, he would sell it and 
get drunk with the proceeds. “What if we saw gold for what 
it is?” Suelo wonders. “Gol

[FairfieldLife] Re: Wow

[Jason]

>
> 
> 
> awoelflebater:
> > I have to admit the whole thing is pretty fascinating 
> > and I'd be happy to give you a better description but 
> > maybe you could tell me about yourself.
> > 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "richardatrwilliamsdotus"  
> wrote:
>
> From what I've read, "Robin Woodsworth Carlsen is the 
> first alleged enlightened being of the TM movement." 
> 
> Some people think that Robin went insane after a blast 
> of 'kundalini' energy almost unhinged him. No doubt it 
> was a very powerful experience, but Robin's writings on 
> FFL don't seem to be the work of a crazy person.
> 
> Excerpt:
> 
> "Carlsen was to return to Switzerland one more time for 
> yet another course before his final dissolution into Unity 
> Consciousness, and to sit at the feet of his master, the 
> Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. While Carlsen's autobiographical 
> work From Ignorance to Enlightenment covers the outline of 
> this final course, it does not go into the details of his 
> actual enlightenment..."

Willy, UC is too deep an experience to be a 'deception' as 
Robin later claims.

I don't think Robin was ever in UC.

> 
> Work cited:
> 
> 'The Sunnyside Drama: The First Three Years of 
> Enlightenment' 
> By Robin Woodsworth Carlsen
> Snow Man Press, 1979 
> 
> Other titles of interest:
> 
> 'On First Meeting Werner Erhard and Est: A Memoir of 
> Deliberate Affirmation' 
> By Robin Woodsworth Carlsen 
> Snow Man Press, 1980
>

[FairfieldLife] Re: A lot of science here, unified field to chakras

[Jason]

> 
> ---  Share Long  wrote:
> >
> > John Hagelin found a correlation between the 5 mahabhutas and the 5 spin 
> > types.  

---  "salyavin808"  wrote:
> 
> Huh? The mahabhutas are the elements earth, air, fire, water and
> the aether/akasha. Why would there be a connection between that
> and the angular momentum of subatomic particles? It makes no sense, it has no 
> meaning. Why do they do this stuff? 
> 
> I guess every religion tries to make out it's writings are heaven
> sent in some way but the TMO are taking it a step further with 
> this surreal physical/spiritual fundamentalism stuff. I reckon
> anyone could go through bookshelf and find "correlations" What
> about Enid Blyton's Famous Five? Makes no more or less sense.
> 
> John Hagelin should know they aren't elements either, elements
> are substances which can't be broken down further with chemical
> methods. Earth, air and water are compounds and fire is a plasma.
> So it can't be anything fundamental being implied as there's no 
> actual connection with the spin properties they are being asked
> to emulate. they might have seemed fundamental to the Indians but
> why would the subatomic world agree with that?
> 
> It's just the ideas of ancient India being bigged up to impress
> the already converted and give them a sense that their chosen
> teaching is the one true path, how could it be otherwise when 
> the ancient literature is part of our bodies and the whirly bits 
> that make up our bodies?
> 
> But they should be careful because these elements originated in Greece. 
> Alexander brought them over along with all his Greek
> building, artistic techniques and philosophy that found so 
> much favour in India.
> 
> 

Element means a 'fundamental unit'.

>From a primitive pre-industrial point of view, Solids, 
Liquids, Gases, Fire and Ether can be considered to be 
"Elements" that make up the world.

I agree in the post-industrial chemical world, Element is 
seen from a more scientific POV.

Hagelin "assumes" that every thing written in the Vedas are 
true literaly or figuratively and tries to "fit" it into 
modern science.  In fact all religionists "assume" that 
everything written in their scriptures are true and correct.

If you prove them wrong, they go crazy.

Hyper-religiosity is a mental disorder like myriad 
psychological disorders that exist on this planet.



 
>  
> > 
> >  From: shainm307 
> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:16 AM
> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] A lot of science here, unified field to chakras
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > http://www.ascensionq3.20fr.com/
> >
>