[FairfieldLife] Word-for-word: YS II 54
svaviSayaasaMprayoge citta-svaruupaanukaara ivendriyaaNaaM pratyaahaaraH .. 54.. Sandhi-samaasa-vigraha: sva-viSaya+asaMprayoge; citta-svaruupa+anukaaraH; iva+indriyaaNaam; pratyaahaaraH Withdrawal of the senses is where objects are not allowed to stir the mind at all, and it follows, rather, after its own nature. Word-for-word, based on Taimni's vocabulary: own(sva)object(viSaya)[in]not-coming-into-contact(asaMprayoge: locative singular) mind (citta) own-form (sva-ruupa) functioning-according-to (anukaaraH) as it were(iva) of the senses (indriyaaNaam) [is] pratyaahaara. (Oh shucks!) PS. Taimni's translation goes like this: /Pratyaahaara/ or abstraction is , as it were, the imitation by the senses of the mind by withdrawing themselves from their objects. Just realised pondering on the differences between different translations that perhaps some translators take the genitive attribute /indriyaaNaam/ to modify the word /pratyaahaara/ (indriyaaNaam pratyaahaaraH: withdrawal of the senses). Taimni's translation suggests that he takes /indriyaaNaam/ to modify the compound word /citta-svaruupa-anukaara/. I tend to agree with Taimni because my gut feeling is that Sanskrit prefers genitive attribute *after* it's head word, like for instance /desha-bandhash cittasya/. OTOH, what the heck is imitation by the senses of the mind?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. The Maharishi and the movement have had ample time and opportunity to put me right about any information I might have got askew. In fact I wrote an open letter addressed to the man himself, asking that he do just that. Since I already had a friendship with Bevan Morris, it would have been so easy for him to clear up any misconceptions and these could have been included in the revised edition. Hey ho, Paul --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: Peter, you are asking why I continue speak out about MMY and his teachings. The answer is remarkably simple. Having learned TM I decided to practice it come-what-may, for at least ten years, to see how it measured up to its claims. I decided to let the time run longer, and longer, and longer. (In fact I even vowed to continue its practise even if MMY disavowed the teaching.) I put the together 'The Maharishi: The Man Who Gave Transcendental Meditation to the World', and as Vaj rightly says, it is the only objective biography of the man and his teaching extant. But I didn't stop researching the Maharishi, TM and his master, I kept up the project for much longer, and I have shared much of the Guru Dev translation work free-of-charge on my website http://www.paulmason.info/ . I kept practising the TM technique more many more years after the publication. But after more than three and a half decades it struck me it was about time I actually decided it was time to come to some sort of verdict, about TM and about MMY. Since I am recognised as an authority on the subject (at least by those honest enough to admit it) I thought I'd share my verdict. I posted this on TM-Free Blog a few days ago. But afterwards I realised that there must still be great many people who still don't even have the basic points. I notice you don't attempt to correct me on any point raised in the blog. That is interesting, very interesting Finally, the suggestion that I get on and attend to my own life. Well, as it happens, I most certainly do (which is the main reason I seldom log on to the TM forums. But, as it happens I consider that sharing the enormous amount of research on the MMY is a part of attending to my life. It would be all too convenient for those who just want to hear sweet truths if I were to be quiet. You have your views on MMY, I have never once tried to silence you or anyone else on the subject. I have never suggested that you go and attend to your life. It seems the truth has got you just a tad mad at me, just a tad. But as another responent pointed out to someone else, don't shoot the messenger or in your case encourage the messenger to turn his attention to something else. It sounds just a bit like that bit in the Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy and Toto were told to ignore 'the Man Behind The Curtain'. Paul PS To the so-called supports of the Maharishi and of TM, on FFL, don't convince me much, you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time and energy sparring and being unpleasant to one another, and to those you perceive as threats. Is that what practising TM impels you to do? It never did that to me, that's for sure. Nice statement, Paul. What we saw in the last couple of days, in reaction to the things you've posted, is a far greater condemnation of Maharishi than anything you could have written about him. Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to shoot the messenger and to demonize you. In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. In my opinion this response is cult behavior, and the fact that Maharishi allowed and even cultivated it
[FairfieldLife] Holy Smoke, or The Cultist's Wet Dream
The other day I was tasked with reviewing a film that I didn't like, and as a result I had to sit down and force myself to watch -- for the second time -- one of the worst films ever made, Jane Campion's Holy Smoke. Ms. Campion burst upon the film scene with the admir- able The Piano, and was promptly hailed as the Next Big Thing, New Zealand's new enfant terrible. But then she followed it up with film after film about obsessive women, stinkers all IMO. For the overseriousness of The Portrait of a Lady and In The Cut we can put some of the blame on the authors of the original material, Henry James and Susanna Moore. But Jane Campion *wrote* Holy Smoke, with her sister, so there is no one to blame for this unholy mess but them. The film's flaws are many -- horrible miscasting (the likes of which have not been seen since studio executives almost cast Ronald Reagan instead of Humphrey Bogart as Rick in Casablanca), an almost complete misunderstanding of the cult phenomenon and its antithesis the deprogrammer phenomenon, and bad direction (how, oh how does a director get bad performances from Kate Winslet *and* Harvey Keitel) -- but I'm going to concern myself with one flaw in this review. The basic plot involves a young woman (Winslet) who goes to India and falls under the sway of a charismatic guru. Her family freaks out and hires an exit counsellor (Keitel) to abduct and deprogram her. He takes her to an isolated house in the desert and begins the work of bringing her back to reality. Early on in the film Keitel's character is set up as being ultimately seductive and sexy and persuasive, able to convince any woman of anything. So what happens? The cultist winds up seducing the cult deprogrammer. It's the ultimate spiritual fanatic's wet dream, taking on someone who represents the antithesis of their deeply-held beliefs and first humiliating him, and then bringing him to his knees in submission. THAT is the flaw that makes this film more than just a muddled mess. It's so completely divorced from the reality of both the spiritual process and the deprogramming process, and from reality, period, that it just becomes ludicrous. The entire film presents Winslet's character as a victim, but then segues into the ultimate victim's (not to mention spiritual evangelist's) revenge fantasy. Keitel the control freak deprogrammer is no match for the far greater control of the power of belief and the power of pussy. Someday someone should make a *good* film about the dynamics of a True Believer and the person who is trying to challenge and change those beliefs. But Holy Smoke is not that film. That film would have to deal with real human beings and not caricatures; it would have to deal with the individuals being willing to understand and accept the other's beliefs, not merely trying to play control games and impose their existing beliefs, unchanged by the interaction, on the other person. Anyway, having to watch this film again reminded me a lot of Fairfield Life. There's that same control-freak polarity here -- one the one hand former fanatics trying to challenge the beliefs of people they consider current fanatics and on the other hand True Believers who actually *get off* on trying to humiliate and dominate the critics. Fortunately, there is a balance here that is not present in Holy Smoke and is not present in either of the bipolar factions who play their control-freak games here day in and day out. That balance is seen in the largely silent majority who tolerate the fanatics on either side, understand where they're coming from and have some semblance of compassion for them, but don't really let much of what they say to each other affect them. The balanced individuals are content to just believe what they want and allow others to believe what they want. *They* represent spirituality, in my opinion. The fanatics on both extremes represent only the compulsion to control and dominate.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
Paul, I think I've already said everything I've got to say on this subject, in the posts I made yesterday and in the little film review I just posted parts of. What you wrote didn't set off the fanatics who attacked you in response to it. Their own insecurities about their beliefs and their need to dominate and control those who challenge those beliefs is what set them off. The fascinating thing to me is that all you had to do was post a few conclusions suggesting that Maharishi's teachings were not all they were cracked up to be, and that his followers might not be nearly as happy, fulfilled and enlightened as they pretend to be. And then you just sat back and said nothing more, while a few of those same followers basically made your point *for you* with their actions, and while the saner ones here didn't react *at all*. Good luck in your continuing research, and on your continuing spiritual journey. Unc --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. The Maharishi and the movement have had ample time and opportunity to put me right about any information I might have got askew. In fact I wrote an open letter addressed to the man himself, asking that he do just that. Since I already had a friendship with Bevan Morris, it would have been so easy for him to clear up any misconceptions and these could have been included in the revised edition. Hey ho, Paul --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: Peter, you are asking why I continue speak out about MMY and his teachings. The answer is remarkably simple. Having learned TM I decided to practice it come-what-may, for at least ten years, to see how it measured up to its claims. I decided to let the time run longer, and longer, and longer. (In fact I even vowed to continue its practise even if MMY disavowed the teaching.) I put the together 'The Maharishi: The Man Who Gave Transcendental Meditation to the World', and as Vaj rightly says, it is the only objective biography of the man and his teaching extant. But I didn't stop researching the Maharishi, TM and his master, I kept up the project for much longer, and I have shared much of the Guru Dev translation work free-of-charge on my website http://www.paulmason.info/ . I kept practising the TM technique more many more years after the publication. But after more than three and a half decades it struck me it was about time I actually decided it was time to come to some sort of verdict, about TM and about MMY. Since I am recognised as an authority on the subject (at least by those honest enough to admit it) I thought I'd share my verdict. I posted this on TM-Free Blog a few days ago. But afterwards I realised that there must still be great many people who still don't even have the basic points. I notice you don't attempt to correct me on any point raised in the blog. That is interesting, very interesting Finally, the suggestion that I get on and attend to my own life. Well, as it happens, I most certainly do (which is the main reason I seldom log on to the TM forums. But, as it happens I consider that sharing the enormous amount of research on the MMY is a part of attending to my life. It would be all too convenient for those who just want to hear sweet truths if I were to be quiet. You have your views on MMY, I have never once tried to silence you or anyone else on the subject. I have never suggested that you go and attend to your life. It seems the truth has got you just a tad mad at me, just a tad. But as another responent pointed out to someone else, don't shoot the messenger or in your case encourage the messenger to turn his attention to something else. It sounds just a bit like that bit in the Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy and Toto were told to ignore 'the Man Behind The Curtain'. Paul PS To the so-called supports of the Maharishi and of TM, on FFL, don't convince me much, you seem to spend an inordinate amount of
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
Mr Mason, If you are interested in being taken seriously as a 'reseacher,' you want to consider footnoting all your statements in your writings and at the end of them include a complete and detailed account of all sources you use. Until this is done, it is not possible to cross check them. When you do this you may also want to consider the need for a grasp of the fundamentals of the subject-matter you are writing. By not understanding transcendental reality your claimed 3.5 decades of research remains the attempts of an eight-year old to grasp the meaning of the work of a PhD physiscist. If you don't even have the basic math skills required to understand theories at this level - how can you possibly hope to even assess them? These paras ablso serve as a comment to T*B below. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. The Maharishi and the movement have had ample time and opportunity to put me right about any information I might have got askew. In fact I wrote an open letter addressed to the man himself, asking that he do just that. Since I already had a friendship with Bevan Morris, it would have been so easy for him to clear up any misconceptions and these could have been included in the revised edition. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: Peter, you are asking why I continue speak out about MMY and his teachings. The answer is remarkably simple. Having learned TM I decided to practice it come-what-may, for at least ten years, to see how it measured up to its claims. I decided to let the time run longer, and longer, and longer. (In fact I even vowed to continue its practise even if MMY disavowed the teaching.) I put the together 'The Maharishi: The Man Who Gave Transcendental Meditation to the World', and as Vaj rightly says, it is the only objective biography of the man and his teaching extant. But I didn't stop researching the Maharishi, TM and his master, I kept up the project for much longer, and I have shared much of the Guru Dev translation work free-of-charge on my website http://www.paulmason.info/ . I kept practising the TM technique more many more years after the publication. But after more than three and a half decades it struck me it was about time I actually decided it was time to come to some sort of verdict, about TM and about MMY. Since I am recognised as an authority on the subject (at least by those honest enough to admit it) I thought I'd share my verdict. I posted this on TM-Free Blog a few days ago. But afterwards I realised that there must still be great many people who still don't even have the basic points. I notice you don't attempt to correct me on any point raised in the blog. That is interesting, very interesting Finally, the suggestion that I get on and attend to my own life. Well, as it happens, I most certainly do (which is the main reason I seldom log on to the TM forums. But, as it happens I consider that sharing the enormous amount of research on the MMY is a part of attending to my life. It would be all too convenient for those who just want to hear sweet truths if I were to be quiet. You have your views on MMY, I have never once tried to silence you or anyone else on the subject. I have never suggested that you go and attend to your life. It seems the truth has got you just a tad mad at me, just a tad. But as another responent pointed out to someone else, don't shoot the messenger or in your case encourage the messenger to turn his attention to something else. It sounds just a bit like that bit in the Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy and Toto were told to ignore 'the Man Behind The Curtain'. Paul PS To the so-called supports of the Maharishi and of TM, on FFL, don't convince me much, you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time and energy sparring and being unpleasant to one another, and to those you perceive as threats. Is that what practising TM impels you to do?
[FairfieldLife] Barbarous combination! : D
By a wholly barbarous combination finding no warrant in the earlier and more genuine usages of the [Sanskrit] language, the suffixes of comparison in their adverbial feminine form, -taraam and -tamaam, are later allowed to be added to personal forms of verbs: thus, [...] *siidatetaraam*, /is more despondent/... - Whitney, Sanskrit grammar For the sake of clarity, let's pretend that /-ger/ is the comparative suffix in bigger, or /-ler/ in fuller. Then for instance creates-ger or creates-ler would be, in the meaning 'creates more', somewhat analogous to /siidate-taraam/ above!
[FairfieldLife] Grace Program of Richard Cassidy
Does anyone have any success with Grace Program of former siddha who claims everyone in program will reach Brahmin Consciousness in 18 months? On the phone he calibrates your current level of consciousness based on David Hawkin's scale. From this he tells you how long it will take to reach C.C. You pay a small one time only fee and you are supposedly sent karma busting grace from Higher Dimensions 24/7. Cassidy does not adverstise; he explains program over the phone. He claims 1,100 are already in C.C. from this. If this is true, I would think the amazing results would be talked about and spread like wild fire, and we might see Cassidy nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? I welcome all feedback from those who are in the program. Opinions from those not in the program would be opions only, I am looking for those who have experience with his time table for enlightenment. This is either the greatest new age scam ever divised to date, or it is real. Let me know your results.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Richard Cassidy's Grace Program. Anyone know anything?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know anything about Richard Cassidy and his Grace Program? I think he's a TM governor, and a lot of people in Fairfield seem to have enrolled in this program. It costs $350 and he supposedly channels some enlightened beings (don't know any more than that) and they then help the person along spiritually. Apparently there are over 1,000 people on the program, which means that this fellow has made over one-third of a million dollars chaneling these beings and charging others for passing along the benefits, so-called. I'm wondering whether it's for real or whether it's the perfect scam, since he can apparently take on more and more people, and therefore make more and more money, without creating any more work for himself. Nice work if you can get it. Some people report good results. People find it appealing because they are not asked to actually do anything to get this grace, and the idea of getting something for nothing (apart from paying the fee, that is) is always tempting. Anyone know anything?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Holy Smoke, or The Cultist's Wet Dream
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Anyway, having to watch this film again reminded me a lot of Fairfield Life. There's that same control-freak polarity here -- one the one hand former fanatics trying to challenge the beliefs of people they consider current fanatics and on the other hand True Believers who actually *get off* on trying to humiliate and dominate the critics. Fortunately, there is a balance here that is not present in Holy Smoke and is not present in either of the bipolar factions who play their control-freak games here day in and day out. That balance is seen in the largely silent majority who tolerate the fanatics on either side, understand where they're coming from and have some semblance of compassion for them, but don't really let much of what they say to each other affect them. The balanced individuals are content to just believe what they want and allow others to believe what they want. *They* represent spirituality, in my opinion. The fanatics on both extremes represent only the compulsion to control and dominate. Congratulations on this insight. One looks forward to the time when you decide to leave the fanatic control-freak faction and join the balanced majority.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Grace Program of Richard Cassidy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hudsoncpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone have any success with Grace Program of former siddha who claims everyone in program will reach Brahmin Consciousness in 18 months? On the phone he calibrates your current level of consciousness based on David Hawkin's scale. From this he tells you how long it will take to reach C.C. You pay a small one time only fee and you are supposedly sent karma busting grace from Higher Dimensions 24/7. Cassidy does not adverstise; he explains program over the phone. I knew someone *named* Grace who offered her services only over the telephone, but she charged $4.99 a minute, so it's probably not the same person.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Grace Program of Richard Cassidy
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hudsoncpe no_reply@ wrote: Does anyone have any success with Grace Program of former siddha who claims everyone in program will reach Brahmin Consciousness in 18 months? On the phone he calibrates your current level of consciousness based on David Hawkin's scale. From this he tells you how long it will take to reach C.C. You pay a small one time only fee and you are supposedly sent karma busting grace from Higher Dimensions 24/7. Cassidy does not adverstise; he explains program over the phone. I knew someone *named* Grace who offered her services only over the telephone, but she charged $4.99 a minute, so it's probably not the same person. I appreciate the good humor!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Finally saw 'Apocalypto'
In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:05 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who saw some kind of Christian theme there was projecting it onto the film, along with their existing dislike of Mel Gibson. It's a pretty fine adventure tale, set at the sunset of the Mayan empire. Violent, yes, because that was a violent time, but very well done in my opinion. If the history is not exact, well...that'exact, well...that'WBRs job, is it? Shakespeare fucked up history right and left. The artist's job is similar to that of the shamans you see in this film -- to tell a tale of power that uplifts and entertains. Mel Gibson did both. His critics can go suck eggs. But but but... the Mayans were native Americans who lived in peace and harmony with nature and could never have been violent unless it was nature directing their very Being to do so. There must have been some intuitive force, knowing the white European Christians were coming that lead them to be like that , if they were. Mel should be ashamed of himself for making them look anything other than peaceful happy people getting ready to be suppressed and colonized. That damned,evil, Catholic, Christian, Jew hater! I'd call him a alcoholic but we all know that's just a disease.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to shoot the messenger and to demonize you. Just for the record, the phrase shoot the messenger implies a blameless messenger and an accurate message. As with so many others of your mantras designed to demonize TM supporters, you use shoot the messenger as some kind of absolute condemnation instead of recognizing that there are situations in which the messenger is not blameless and his/her message is not accurate, and therefore he or she deserves to be shot. You, of course, demonize messengers all the time-- for example, you demonized all the scholars who have objected to the historical inaccuracies in Apocalypto. You asserted not only that their message was inaccurate, but that they *knew* it was inaccurate, and you obviously felt they deserved to be shot. You were grossly mistaken, but the point is that whether someone is shooting the messenger or legitimately criticizing the messenger and his/her message is very often a matter at the very least of opinion, and in many cases a matter of plain fact. (In this case it was a matter of fact: you were indisputably shooting blameless messengers with accurate messages.) In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. You seem to take the position that TM critics are by definition always blameless and always accurate, and that therefore any criticism of the critics that suggests they are somehow DAMAGED or have something WRONG with them is automatically just baggage, illegitimate. Another absolute, in other words, that admits of no distinctions. And you use that absolute to shoot those who may be bringing a valid message about the flaws of the critics. In my opinion this response is cult behavior, and the fact that Maharishi allowed and even cultivated it in his students says more about him and his teachings than anything you could possibly have written. The people who went on and on defending him and his teachings, and doing so by trying to trash you, made far more of a statement against Maharishi and his teachings than you did. Here again, you assume that messages criticizing MMY and his teaching are always accurate, and that therefore any criticism of those messsages, or of the messenger, reflects even more badly on Maharishi than the criticism of him itself. As far as you're concerned, the only behavior that would *not* reflect badly on MMY would be for his supporters either to accept the criticisms of him, or to remain silent. I'd suggest that your thinking on this is at least as fanatical and absolutist as, and even less coherent than, that of the truest of TM True Believers.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Finally saw 'Apocalypto'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:05 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who saw some kind of Christian theme there was projecting it onto the film, along with their existing dislike of Mel Gibson. It's a pretty fine adventure tale, set at the sunset of the Mayan empire. Violent, yes, because that was a violent time, but very well done in my opinion. If the history is not exact, well...that'exact, well...that'WBRs job, is it? Shakespeare fucked up history right and left. The artist's job is similar to that of the shamans you see in this film -- to tell a tale of power that uplifts and entertains. Mel Gibson did both. His critics can go suck eggs. But but but... the Mayans were native Americans who lived in peace and harmony with nature and could never have been violent unless it was nature directing their very Being to do so. For the record, if you were to actually read some of the scholarly criticisms of the historical inaccuracies in the film, you would find that the above formulation is your very own straw man. None of the criticisms I've read suggest such a thing.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? Q. In conclusion then, isn't it true to say that the Maharishi is nothing other than an opportunistic, self-promoting maverick, who wilfully misleads his supporters and anyone else who has the time, the inclination and the money to listen to him? This is what you call common knowledge to those posting on FFL?? Really? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. In conclusion then, isn't it true to say that Paul Mason is nothing other than an opportunistic, self-promoting maverick, who wilfully misleads his supporters and anyone else who has the time, the inclination and the money to listen to him? Just out of curiosity, Paul, is it your contention that those whose glasses are clear and untinted will never perceive anyone else as being damaged?
[FairfieldLife] Paul Mason, please refresh my outlook about your damaged credibility
Mainstream says: Please refresh my outlook about why Paul Mason's credibility should not be damaged. His answer to the question of MMY's educational background damages Mr. Mason's credibility tremendously. from FFL #131770: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. . From TM-free blog, 2/16/07 - Maharishi...Separating Fact from Fiction, by Paul Mason: Q. It is claimed that the benefit of the Maharishi's teaching can be proved scientifically? Certainly, he holds a master's degree in physics doesn't he?' A. It has not been established that Mahesh attended a university let alone whether he was awarded a degree, in any subject. from FFL#131761 See the 4th (sic) 7th entry on this page: http://www.allduniv.edu/hostels/gnjha/gnjha_alumni.htm From Allahabad University website: 'Allahabad University has always occupied an esteemed place among the universities of India for over a century now. Established on 23rd September 1887, it is the fourth oldest university of India after Calcutta, Bombay and Madras University.' Distinguished Alumni Sri Gopal Swarup Pathak Former Vice President of India Sri Dharamvir Former Governor of West Bengal and Karnataka Dr. L.M. Singhavi Former High Commissioner of India to Great Britain Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap Former Secretary General, Lok Sabha Sri Ram Nivas Mirdha Former Cabinet Minister, Union of India Sri Jagdish Swarup Pathak Former Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court Sri M.C. Srivastava (Universally known as Maharishi Mahesh Yogi) Mainstream20016 says: Again, Mr. Mason, please refresh my outlook - your credibility is damaged tremendously, in my view.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul, I think I've already said everything I've got to say on this subject, in the posts I made yesterday and in the little film review I just posted parts of. What you wrote didn't set off the fanatics who attacked you in response to it. Their own insecurities about their beliefs and their need to dominate and control those who challenge those beliefs is what set them off. Again the fanatical absolutism: Because all challenges to the beliefs of TMers are, in Barry's mind, entirely valid, any disagreement with such challenges can only be because the TMers are insecure in those beliefs.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to shoot the messenger and to demonize you. snip In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You seem to take the position that TM critics are by definition always blameless and always accurate, and that therefore any criticism of the critics that suggests they are somehow DAMAGED or have something WRONG with them is automatically just baggage, illegitimate. Another absolute, in other words, that admits of no distinctions. snip As far as you're concerned, the only behavior that would *not* reflect badly on MMY would be for his supporters either to accept the criticisms of him, or to remain silent. Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to shoot the messenger and to demonize you. snip In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: You seem to take the position that TM critics are by definition always blameless and always accurate, and that therefore any criticism of the critics that suggests they are somehow DAMAGED or have something WRONG with them is automatically just baggage, illegitimate. Another absolute, in other words, that admits of no distinctions. snip As far as you're concerned, the only behavior that would *not* reflect badly on MMY would be for his supporters either to accept the criticisms of him, or to remain silent. Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. Both responses were intended to demonize Paul for writing what he wrote, and for having an opinion that you don't like. The point is, NO RESPONSE WAS NECESSARY. The things he's saying have been said by many for many years. There are a number of strong believers in Maharishi and TM here on this forum who saw the same URL posted that you did, and who were not bothered by it. They didn't respond. Why did you? And why are you now claiming that your intent was NOT to slam Paul, when it obviously was?
[FairfieldLife] The Blind Men (aka Fairfield Life)
My conclusions (read MY as in Mine... not any one else's) I have spent decades dealing internally with the good and not so good aspects of the TMO amd MMY. After reading numerous posts over the last several months and numerous anti-TM sites and the back and forth on this forum this famous teaching comes to mind (More comments after the story) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_an_Elephant A Buddhist version is told in Jainism and Buddhism. Udana 68-69: Parable of the Blind Men and the Elephant. Buddha tells the story of a raja who had six blind men gathered together to examine the elephant. When the blind men had felt the elephant, the raja went to each of them and said to each, 'Well, blind man, have you seen the elephant? Tell me, what sort of thing is an elephant?'[2] They assert the elephant is like a pot (head), winnowing basket (ear), ploughshare (tusk), plough (trunk), grainery (body), pillar (foot), mortar (back), pestle (tail), or brush (tip of the tail). The men come to blows, which delights the raja. The raja says: O how they cling and wrangle, some who claim For preacher and monk the honored name! For, quarreling, each to his view they cling. Such folk see only one side of a thing.[2] Back to my comments How can there be so many different views of TM... because they are all true, but not complete... even Paul Mason's ;-). There is something to TM and the Initiation that is special. For some of us, it has opened the doors to a more spiritual existence. It's helped a lot of us... but because of over-hyping of possible results, it has made us feel cheated. I really did think I would be enlightened by now The big flaw in Paul's arguments about Maharishi never receiving approval to teach TM or anything else... Sorry, neither did Jesus or most great teachers. Is MMY flawed. Is the TMO flawed. Yes, big time. MMY has a HUGE EGO, that is why everything is named after him but only a huge EGO could have built the TMO... unfortunately, he sold us on his perfection, and he has not been perfect... Flawed like a lot of great Gurus. That is their own Path. He has helped us, but I believe that many of us were willing Sheep It is so much easier to follow than think for oneself. A friend always says...if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it must be a duck And so the TM Movement is a Cult, and many of us will not admit that we belong(ed) to a cult... and that a cult conned us in so many ways ( I am just glad I stopped giving them money decades ago). I am grateful for the Spiritual doors opened to me by TM, whatever the source of the Teaching, and despite MMY's great flaws. A good movie, for those resisting being a follower is Circle of Iron... it's interesting how many think this movie is horrid, as it is my favorite of all time being both a seeker and renegade at the same time. Art
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to shoot the messenger and to demonize you. snip In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: You seem to take the position that TM critics are by definition always blameless and always accurate, and that therefore any criticism of the critics that suggests they are somehow DAMAGED or have something WRONG with them is automatically just baggage, illegitimate. Another absolute, in other words, that admits of no distinctions. snip As far as you're concerned, the only behavior that would *not* reflect badly on MMY would be for his supporters either to accept the criticisms of him, or to remain silent. Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. Both responses were intended to demonize Paul for writing what he wrote, and for having an opinion that you don't like. The point is, NO RESPONSE WAS NECESSARY. The things he's saying have been said by many for many years. There are a number of strong believers in Maharishi and TM here on this forum who saw the same URL posted that you did, and who were not bothered by it. They didn't respond. Why did you? And why are you now claiming that your intent was NOT to slam Paul, when it obviously was? You write above that I was intending to slam and demonize Paul for what he wrote. Pretty strong language. I wasn't particularly bothered by what he wrote- I just commented on it. fyi, I also bought his hardcover book on Maharishi a few years ago and thought it to be a good piece of writing. In addition, I have thanked him on this forum for his research on Guru Dev, which I still think is priceless. Perhaps you need to think about what you have told me to do, in terms of your own rant: NO RESPONSE WAS NECESSARY.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. Jim, this is an *assumption* on your part, and, as it turns out, an *erroneous* assumption. I have NO OPINION on the questions Paul asked, because I don't know the answers. It really doesn't MATTER to me whether Maharishi is a well-meaning but flawed monk or a con man. I don't have any opinion on the subject at all. He's not my teacher; I have nothing invested in him one way or another. But you obviously do. I think that what you're upset about is that Paul is asking the questions that YOU should have asked 'way back when, and never did. These questions should have been asked back in 1959, and by every person who learned TM along the way. But they weren't. Most people just treated everything that Maharishi said as if it were automatically some cosmic truth, and accepted it as Truth. And now, when someone asks the simple questions that they should have asked, and would have asked of anyone who was trying to sell them something other than meditation, they get all upset and try to trash the person who is asking these questions now as if he's some kind of heretic. I think you're angry at YOURSELF for never questioning the stories you bought about Maharishi's background, and the nature of his relationship with Guru Dev, and whether Guru Dev would ever have approved of what Maharishi has done in his name. I don't know the truth of the situation. Neither, as far as I can tell, does Paul. But at least he had the balls to ASK THE QUESTIONS, and you didn't. He had the initiative to TRY TO FIND OUT, and you didn't. You just believed what you were told to believe. I do NOT necessarily agree with the commentary Paul included in his last question. But it doesn't bother me in the least that he included it. That is his right. What he expressed was his *opinion*, formed after years of doing the legwork that no one else was ever willing to do. It really doesn't matter AT ALL to me what Paul or anyone else says about Maharishi. WHY does it bother you? Do you somehow believe that it is impolite or insulting to ask questions of Maharishi that you'd probably ask of any other salesman trying to sell you something? Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Why would asking him whether Guru Dev *really* taught him TM be inappropriate, or asking him ANY other question?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. Jim, this is an *assumption* on your part, and, as it turns out, an *erroneous* assumption. I have NO OPINION on the questions Paul asked, because I don't know the answers. It really doesn't MATTER to me whether Maharishi is a well-meaning but flawed monk or a con man. I don't have any opinion on the subject at all. He's not my teacher; I have nothing invested in him one way or another. But you obviously do. I think that what you're upset about is that Paul is asking the questions that YOU should have asked 'way back when, and never did. These questions should have been asked back in 1959, and by every person who learned TM along the way. But they weren't. Most people just treated everything that Maharishi said as if it were automatically some cosmic truth, and accepted it as Truth. And now, when someone asks the simple questions that they should have asked, and would have asked of anyone who was trying to sell them something other than meditation, they get all upset and try to trash the person who is asking these questions now as if he's some kind of heretic. I think you're angry at YOURSELF for never questioning the stories you bought about Maharishi's background, and the nature of his relationship with Guru Dev, and whether Guru Dev would ever have approved of what Maharishi has done in his name. I don't know the truth of the situation. Neither, as far as I can tell, does Paul. But at least he had the balls to ASK THE QUESTIONS, and you didn't. He had the initiative to TRY TO FIND OUT, and you didn't. You just believed what you were told to believe. I do NOT necessarily agree with the commentary Paul included in his last question. But it doesn't bother me in the least that he included it. That is his right. What he expressed was his *opinion*, formed after years of doing the legwork that no one else was ever willing to do. It really doesn't matter AT ALL to me what Paul or anyone else says about Maharishi. WHY does it bother you? Do you somehow believe that it is impolite or insulting to ask questions of Maharishi that you'd probably ask of any other salesman trying to sell you something? Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Why would asking him whether Guru Dev *really* taught him TM be inappropriate, or asking him ANY other question? Z...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. Jim, this is an *assumption* on your part, and, as it turns out, an *erroneous* assumption. I have NO OPINION on the questions Paul asked, because I don't know the answers. It really doesn't MATTER to me whether Maharishi is a well-meaning but flawed monk or a con man. I don't have any opinion on the subject at all. He's not my teacher; I have nothing invested in him one way or another. But you obviously do. I think that what you're upset about is that Paul is asking the questions that YOU should have asked 'way back when, and never did. These questions should have been asked back in 1959, and by every person who learned TM along the way. But they weren't. Most people just treated everything that Maharishi said as if it were automatically some cosmic truth, and accepted it as Truth. And now, when someone asks the simple questions that they should have asked, and would have asked of anyone who was trying to sell them something other than meditation, they get all upset and try to trash the person who is asking these questions now as if he's some kind of heretic. I think you're angry at YOURSELF for never questioning the stories you bought about Maharishi's background, and the nature of his relationship with Guru Dev, and whether Guru Dev would ever have approved of what Maharishi has done in his name. I don't know the truth of the situation. Neither, as far as I can tell, does Paul. But at least he had the balls to ASK THE QUESTIONS, and you didn't. He had the initiative to TRY TO FIND OUT, and you didn't. You just believed what you were told to believe. I do NOT necessarily agree with the commentary Paul included in his last question. But it doesn't bother me in the least that he included it. That is his right. What he expressed was his *opinion*, formed after years of doing the legwork that no one else was ever willing to do. It really doesn't matter AT ALL to me what Paul or anyone else says about Maharishi. WHY does it bother you? Do you somehow believe that it is impolite or insulting to ask questions of Maharishi that you'd probably ask of any other salesman trying to sell you something? Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Why would asking him whether Guru Dev *really* taught him TM be inappropriate, or asking him ANY other question? Z... I rest my case. True Believers are the worst possible advertisement for any spiritual path.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
On Feb 18, 2007, at 10:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Because you're not giving him a chance to answer, for one thing. Paul's blog is simply a smear job, it doesn't appear to be intended to cast light anywhere or to be something that MMY would even answer, as the questions appear to have a clear agenda in mind, especially the last but I would also say most of the others as well. That *would* be highly insulting to most people. Nobody likes being browbeaten or put on the defensive. And how many of us can document our degrees, Barry? What kind of documentation would that be, especially for a degree earned some 60+ years ago? I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 10:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Because you're not giving him a chance to answer, for one thing. As we've discussed before, there is no possibility that the questions could ever be posed directly to Maharishi at this point. His handlers would never allow it, and he wouldn't answer if they did. So I don't think it's inappropriate to ask the ques- tions in an open forum and possibly inspire others to do the legwork necessary to determine the truth of them one way or another. Paul's blog is simply a smear job, it doesn't appear to be intended to cast light anywhere or to be something that MMY would even answer, as the questions appear to have a clear agenda in mind, especially the last but I would also say most of the others as well. That *would* be highly insulting to most people. Nobody likes being browbeaten or put on the defensive. And how many of us can document our degrees, Barry? What kind of documentation would that be, especially for a degree earned some 60+ years ago? I could get you documentation on my degrees, from the universities I attended, in less than a week. I could get you similar documentation on my father's degrees, and my grandfather's and his grandfather's, in the same period of time. That's the most easily answered of all of Paul's questions -- all it should take is the right type of questions posed to Allahabad University's registrar. Me, I don't know and I don't care. What the fuck does a degree in Physics have to do with teaching meditation anyway? But if it's possible that no such degree was ever earned, that might indicate something about the character of the person who has allowed tens of thous- ands of people to believe for decades that it was. I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? Do you include me in that group? If so, the question is irrelevant. I don't particularly dislike or like him. He's just another guy who taught me some things 'way back when. *MY* interest, as I've said many times before, is in comparative spirituality, and the ways in which seekers in *any* environment consistently seem to deceive themselves. A common reaction, when one of them finds out that they *have* been deceiving them- selves, is to find someone else to blame for the deception. I think that's what's going on with some of the more strident TM critics. Me, I don't really have much of an interest in Maharishi at all. I'm interested in his *students*, and where they take all of this in the next few years. THAT is interesting; Maharishi himself is not.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Shortchanging 9/11
In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Word-for-word: YS II 54
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: svaviSayaasaMprayoge citta-svaruupaanukaara ivendriyaaNaaM pratyaahaaraH .. 54.. Sandhi-samaasa-vigraha: sva-viSaya+asaMprayoge; citta-svaruupa+anukaaraH; iva+indriyaaNaam; pratyaahaaraH Withdrawal of the senses is where objects are not allowed to stir the mind at all, and it follows, rather, after its own nature. Word-for-word, based on Taimni's vocabulary: own(sva)object(viSaya)[in]not-coming-into-contact(asaMprayoge: locative singular) mind (citta) own-form (sva-ruupa) functioning-according-to (anukaaraH) as it were(iva) of the senses (indriyaaNaam) [is] pratyaahaara. (Oh shucks!) PS. Taimni's translation goes like this: /Pratyaahaara/ or abstraction is , as it were, the imitation by the senses of the mind by withdrawing themselves from their objects. Just realised pondering on the differences between different translations that perhaps some translators take the genitive attribute /indriyaaNaam/ to modify the word /pratyaahaara/ (indriyaaNaam pratyaahaaraH: withdrawal of the senses). Taimni's translation suggests that he takes /indriyaaNaam/ to modify the compound word /citta-svaruupa-anukaara/. I tend to agree with Taimni because my gut feeling is that Sanskrit prefers genitive attribute *after* it's head word, like for instance /desha-bandhash cittasya/. OTOH, what the heck is imitation by the senses of the mind? Taimini's got it wrong... When the senses are withdrawn [reduction of the activity of the thalamus to disallow sense-perception from outside OR sensory feedback loops from inside], the mind [brain] follows its own nature, which is Turiya.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. The Maharishi and the movement have had ample time and opportunity to put me right about any information I might have got askew. In fact I wrote an open letter addressed to the man himself, asking that he do just that. Since I already had a friendship with Bevan Morris, it would have been so easy for him to clear up any misconceptions and these could have been included in the revised edition. Hey ho, Paul Kudos to Bevan if he was able to read your QA about MMY without feeling annoyed at you.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Finally saw 'Apocalypto'
In a message dated 2/17/07 4:07:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That said, yes, by his costuming of the arriving Westerners (who you only get to see from afar, in their boats as they arrive -- a touch I found very nice, artistically)nice, artistically)WBR, he Spanish. That sets the film during the era when the first Spanish explorers were arriving. But that's not the issue. Supposed scholars quoted here claimed that this was an anchronism, or worse, historical inaccuracy, because the film is set at the beginning of the degradation of the Mayan culture (rather than the end) were PROJECTING, dude. There is no timeline given in the film except the arriving Westerners. The Mayan culture may have shot its wad back at the millennium, but it was still in there humpin' away well into the 16th century. So their claim that the film was set earlier, at the *beginning* of the fall of Mayan society, was PROJECTED. It's not there in the film. They brought it with them to the banquet, and sneaked it onto the plate when no one was looking, and then later wrote a shitty review of the restaurant based on the item they'd sneaked onto their plate. They claimed -- in PRINT, no less -- that the film was historically inaccurate because they IMAGINED that it was set in an earlier time. But they made that up, erected a straw man in its honor, and then wrote articles about how uncool the film was, based on what they MADE UP. There is a larger issue here, dude. Some on this forum are willing to take what they hear from other people, or what they read about somewhere, as synon- ymous with Truth. It doesn't matter that they haven't seen the film. They trust what so-and-and-so-They trust what so film strongly enough to actively trash that film on Fairfield Life. It doesn't matter that they have never met the man they have spent decades compulsively protecting. They are completely CERTAIN about the nature of the film they never saw and the man they never met. I find that fascinating. Very well said!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL! After blasting all the conspiracy theories to smithereens, here's his conclusion: The film's greatest flaw is this: the men who made it are still alive. If the US government is running an all-knowing, all-encompassing conspiracy, why did it not snuff them out long ago? There is only one possible explanation. They are in fact agents of the Bush regime, employed to distract people from its real abuses of power. This, if you are inclined to believe such stories, is surely a more plausible theory than the one proposed in Loose Change. Don't you get it? Read it again. If you're still missing it, look up the meaning of the word if in Mr. Dictionary.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Barbarous combination! : D
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By a wholly barbarous combination finding no warrant in the earlier and more genuine usages of the [Sanskrit] language, the suffixes of comparison in their adverbial feminine form, -taraam and -tamaam, are later allowed to be added to personal forms of verbs: thus, [...] *siidatetaraam*, /is more despondent/... - Whitney, Sanskrit grammar For the sake of clarity, let's pretend that /-ger/ is the comparative suffix in bigger, or /-ler/ in fuller. Then for instance creates-ger or creates-ler would be, in the meaning 'creates more', somewhat analogous to /siidate-taraam/ above! The guy gots to get out more. The nature of language is change. I'm reading an interesting book right now, _The Language Instcint_ by Steven Pinker. Languages *evolve*. Even the most primitive language will evolve once kids start using it. Only a literary language like classical Latin, Sanskrit or Hebrew, won't evolve. My guess is that spoken Iraeli is not very much the Hebrew of the Torah any more, whch probably drives the conservatives nuts.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Grace Program of Richard Cassidy
In a message dated 2/18/07 7:56:43 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: anyone have any success with Grace Program of former siddha who claims everyone in program will reach Brahmin Consciousness in 18 months? On the phone he calibrates your current level of consciousness based on David Hawkin's scale. From this he tells you how long it will take to reach C.C. You pay a small one time only fee and you are supposedly sent karma busting grace from Higher Dimensions 24/7. Cassidy does not adverstise; he explains program over the phone. He claims 1,100 are already in C.C. from this. If this is true, I would think the amazing results would be talked about and spread like wild fire, and we might see Cassidy nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? I welcome all feedback from those who are in the program. Opinions from those not in the program would be opions only, I am looking for those who have experience with his time table for enlightenment. This is either the greatest new age scam ever divised to date, or it is real. Let me know your results. Sounds like somebody has come along to take advantage of the many suckers out there. A fool and his money are quickly seperated.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Finally saw 'Apocalypto'
TurquoiseB wrote: Because it's grown controversial, I'm watching 'Apocalypto' a second time. It's just fascinating to me that people managed to make this film controversial, just because the actions of its director were controversial. Duh. Don't these twits know *anything* about Mel Gibson, and the movies he makes? Mel is a ROMANTIC. 'Apocalypto' is a LOVE STORY. It's not about the fall of an earlier culture. It's not about the arrival of Christianity on the shores of that culture. It's not about Mel getting drunk and saying shit that he shouldn't have said. It's about Jaguar Paw and Seven being in love with each other, and holding onto that love in times of adversity. I mean, duh. In my opinion, anyone who takes a lovingly-made story of courage and, yes, love, and twists that into a forum for their hatreds is more than a little twisted themselves. Have you seen The Singing Detective? Mel Gibson was a producer and is in the film if you can tell who he is. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Paul Mason, please refresh my outlook about your damaged credibility
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mainstream20016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mainstream says: Please refresh my outlook about why Paul Mason's credibility should not be damaged. His answer to the question of MMY's educational background damages Mr. Mason's credibility tremendously. from FFL #131770: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Paul Mason premanandpaul@ wrote: Turquoise, I thought I'd pop back to get a rain check on my posting yesterday and the first post I saw was yours. The odd thing is that I haven't really said anything at http://tmfree.blogspot.com/ that should upset anyone. After three and a half decades of research on the topic, I just distilled a few points, that must be common knowledge to those posting on FFL. Surely? I was surprised anyone responded to it actually. As for the idea of me being damaged. Well I can only use Maharishi's excellent analogy, that one's vision is determined by the tint of the glasses one wears. If I am being perceived as damaged, then perhaps they need to refresh their outlook. . From TM-free blog, 2/16/07 - Maharishi...Separating Fact from Fiction, by Paul Mason: Q. It is claimed that the benefit of the Maharishi's teaching can be proved scientifically? Certainly, he holds a master's degree in physics doesn't he?' A. It has not been established that Mahesh attended a university let alone whether he was awarded a degree, in any subject. from FFL#131761 See the 4th (sic) 7th entry on this page: http://www.allduniv.edu/hostels/gnjha/gnjha_alumni.htm From Allahabad University website: 'Allahabad University has always occupied an esteemed place among the universities of India for over a century now. Established on 23rd September 1887, it is the fourth oldest university of India after Calcutta, Bombay and Madras University.' Distinguished Alumni Sri Gopal Swarup Pathak Former Vice President of India Sri Dharamvir Former Governor of West Bengal and Karnataka Dr. L.M. Singhavi Former High Commissioner of India to Great Britain Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap Former Secretary General, Lok Sabha Sri Ram Nivas Mirdha Former Cabinet Minister, Union of India Sri Jagdish Swarup Pathak Former Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court Sri M.C. Srivastava (Universally known as Maharishi Mahesh Yogi) Mainstream20016 says: Again, Mr. Mason, please refresh my outlook - your credibility is damaged tremendously, in my view. Ah, but it only establishes that he lived in the GnJha DORMITORY for a time not that he actually attended classes...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Both responses were intended to demonize Paul for writing what he wrote, and for having an opinion that you don't like. The point is, NO RESPONSE WAS NECESSARY. The things he's saying have been said by many for many years. There are a number of strong believers in Maharishi and TM here on this forum who saw the same URL posted that you did, and who were not bothered by it. They didn't respond. Why did you? And why are you now claiming that your intent was NOT to slam Paul, when it obviously was? Slam = demonize? Now who is showing black and white thinking?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: snip Most of the responses here on Fairfield Life to what you wrote had a clear and unmistakable intent. They were intended to shoot the messenger and to demonize you. snip In three cases (the ravings of Frank Lotz and Peter Klutz and Nablusos), they did this *literally*, saying explicitly that you were in league with demonic forces. The rest who railed against you here did *exactly* what I suggested a few days ago that TMers With Baggage *would* do in a situation like this, and tried to portray you as somehow DAMAGED, and having something WRONG with you because of what you said. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: You seem to take the position that TM critics are by definition always blameless and always accurate, and that therefore any criticism of the critics that suggests they are somehow DAMAGED or have something WRONG with them is automatically just baggage, illegitimate. Another absolute, in other words, that admits of no distinctions. snip As far as you're concerned, the only behavior that would *not* reflect badly on MMY would be for his supporters either to accept the criticisms of him, or to remain silent. Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. Both responses were intended to demonize Paul for writing what he wrote, and for having an opinion that you don't like. (Actually, Paul's post is not titled My Opinion About MMY, it's titled Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction.) The point is, NO RESPONSE WAS NECESSARY. The things he's saying have been said by many for many years. There are a number of strong believers in Maharishi and TM here on this forum who saw the same URL posted that you did, and who were not bothered by it. They didn't respond. Why did you? Thanks, Barry. Couldn't ask for a better demonstration of the spot-on accuracy of what I said above: As far as you're concerned, the only behavior that would *not* reflect badly on MMY would be for his supporters either to accept the criticisms of him, or to remain silent. And why are you now claiming that your intent was NOT to slam Paul, when it obviously was? That isn't what Jim said, Barry. Read it again.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Blind Men (aka Fairfield Life)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Art [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] A good movie, for those resisting being a follower is Circle of Iron... it's interesting how many think this movie is horrid, as it is my favorite of all time being both a seeker and renegade at the same time. I would have preferred that Bruce Lee was in the starring role as he intended when he wrote it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 10:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Because you're not giving him a chance to answer, for one thing. Paul's blog is simply a smear job, it doesn't appear to be intended to cast light anywhere or to be something that MMY would even answer, as the questions appear to have a clear agenda in mind, especially the last but I would also say most of the others as well. That *would* be highly insulting to most people. Nobody likes being browbeaten or put on the defensive. And how many of us can document our degrees, Barry? What kind of documentation would that be, especially for a degree earned some 60+ years ago? I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? They didn't get enlightened in less than 7.01 years.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL! Well, it IS an interesting variation of a false flag operation, and in fact, isn't unheard of. There are pretty obvious examples of this on the internet, where someone posing as a liberal or a conservative, will say things toeing the party line that are so extreme that others who DO have a given belief, wince.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Finally saw 'Apocalypto'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you seen The Singing Detective? Mel Gibson was a producer and is in the film if you can tell who he is. :) Somehow I missed this entirely. I was a big fan of the original 1986 series with Michael Gambon, but I never heard of this remake. Nice cast. Thanks for the tip...I'm downloading it already.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. Jim, this is an *assumption* on your part, and, as it turns out, an *erroneous* assumption. I have NO OPINION on the questions Paul asked Even if this were true, you've misstated Jim's assumption. Read what he wrote again. snip I think that what you're upset about is that Paul is asking the questions that YOU should have asked 'way back when, and never did. These questions should have been asked back in 1959, and by every person who learned TM along the way. But they weren't. Most people just treated everything that Maharishi said as if it were automatically some cosmic truth, and accepted it as Truth. Or, Barry, THEY DIDN'T CARE. What they cared about was the meditation and what it did for them. snip I do NOT necessarily agree with the commentary Paul included in his last question. But it doesn't bother me in the least that he included it. That is his right. What he expressed was his *opinion*, formed after years of doing the legwork that no one else was ever willing to do. Actually, the post wasn't titled My Opinion of MMY. It was titled, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact from Fiction. And nobody said he didn't have the *right* to include it in any case; that's your big fat straw man. He has a perfect right to post whatever the hell he wants. But by the same token, others have the right to comment on it without being hassled and insulted and demonized *merely for responding to it*. You're trying to intimidate those who disagree with Paul into SHUTTING UP. You've been trying for 12 years now to keep the critics of TM's critics quiet. It isn't working. Give it up. It really doesn't matter AT ALL to me what Paul or anyone else says about Maharishi. WHY does it bother you? Do you somehow believe that it is impolite or insulting to ask questions of Maharishi that you'd probably ask of any other salesman trying to sell you something? The only *important* question is whether TM works for those who practice it. Like you, Paul is trying to keep people from even giving it a try by casting aspersions on MMY's honesty. You wail and bitch and moan about TM supporters questioning the credibility of the TM critics, but it's perfectly OK with you when the critics question MMY's credibility (and label their own answers Separating Fact from Fiction).
RE: [FairfieldLife] Grace Program of Richard Cassidy
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of hudsoncpe Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 7:51 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Grace Program of Richard Cassidy Does anyone have any success with Grace Program of former siddha who claims everyone in program will reach Brahmin Consciousness in 18 months? On the phone he calibrates your current level of consciousness based on David Hawkin's scale. From this he tells you how long it will take to reach C.C. You pay a small one time only fee and you are supposedly sent karma busting grace from Higher Dimensions 24/7. Cassidy does not adverstise; he explains program over the phone. He claims 1,100 are already in C.C. from this. If this is true, I would think the amazing results would be talked about and spread like wild fire, and we might see Cassidy nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? I welcome all feedback from those who are in the program. Opinions from those not in the program would be opions only, I am looking for those who have experience with his time table for enlightenment. This is either the greatest new age scam ever divised to date, or it is real. Let me know your results. All I know about it is: 1. His brother Jim is a good friend of mine, but he doesn't talk about it much, at least not to me. 2. There are over 300 people in Fairfield doing it. 3. One of them really twisted my arm trying to get me into it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 10:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Because you're not giving him a chance to answer, for one thing. Paul's blog is simply a smear job, it doesn't appear to be intended to cast light anywhere or to be something that MMY would even answer, as the questions appear to have a clear agenda in mind, especially the last but I would also say most of the others as well. That *would* be highly insulting to most people. Nobody likes being browbeaten or put on the defensive. And how many of us can document our degrees, Barry? What kind of documentation would that be, especially for a degree earned some 60+ years ago? I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? They didn't get enlightened in less than 7.01 years. It took me 15.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? Sal Me: I'll bet anyone who worked full time for the guy could come up with a list of being screwed financially or otherwise directly deceived by MMY. I know I sure could. But I can't get my knickers in a knot about that stuff because it was too long ago and it was the life lesson I needed to become cynical and jaded, which has served me well since. If and when I goof on MMY personally it is the same as I do with that other billionaire, The Donald. Pompous fools are a legitimate targets IMO. The Pope in his dress and phallic hat, the Rajs with their silly Queen-of-the-May crowns, and yes, MMY with his sycophant entourage all speaking like they are effusing over their own Off Broadway production of Cher, the Musical. Part of me will always be the 10 year old reader of Mad Magazine (does that mean I molested a kid this morning?) and I will alway delight in poking fun at guys like MMY. I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. He was a defender of the caste system who wouldn't allow women in his presence. I know that this is a traditional thing for these guys, but it seems to me that hanging on to this type of tradition is not doing the world any good. Same for the Pope of Christianity, they both uphold values that most modern people find repugnant. And they both hide behind the assumptive dignity of their positions and their silly outfits to attempt to keep mankind in the same dark ages the ideas their religions represent. I don't believe that either Guru Dev or the Pope had a special channel to any version of the creator of the universe and I resent them both for acting like they do. Meanwhile some kid in Africa is growing up with AIDS, an epidemic assisted in part by religious fools promoting ideas dangerous to public health, and other kids in India are repressed by the same Sanatana Dharma's support of the Caste system that Guru Dev devoted his later years to promote. IMO the problem is not people making fun of these guys, it is that not enough people who oppose their actual positions on things that do matter feel free to throw a rotten tomato at their silk evening gowns. (My response had nothing to do with your point Sal, but thanks for the ramp to get my skateboard over the half-pipe lip! That was fun. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 10:34 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Would you shirk at asking John Gray about how the 'Ph.D.' suddenly started appearing at the end of his name on his promotional materials? IF you asked, you might learn that the degree came from the University of P.O. Box 2000, and that the course of study involved in earning that degree consisted of putting a check in the mail. Would asking about *that* be impolite or insulting? If not, why would questioning Maharishi's claim to a degree he seems unable to document be impolite or insulting? Because you're not giving him a chance to answer, for one thing. Paul's blog is simply a smear job, it doesn't appear to be intended to cast light anywhere or to be something that MMY would even answer, as the questions appear to have a clear agenda in mind, especially the last but I would also say most of the others as well. That *would* be highly insulting to most people. Nobody likes being browbeaten or put on the defensive. And how many of us can document our degrees, Barry? What kind of documentation would that be, especially for a degree earned some 60+ years ago? I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
On Feb 18, 2007, at 12:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I guess I would ask all of the people who seem to go out of their ways to attack MMY on a personal level--what has he ever done to you that you guys dislike him so much? Sal Me: I'll bet anyone who worked full time for the guy could come up with a list of being screwed financially or otherwise directly deceived by MMY. I never even worked full-time for the TMO but I could come up with a pretty good list myself. I know I sure could. But I can't get my knickers in a knot about that stuff because it was too long ago and it was the life lesson I needed to become cynical and jaded, which has served me well since. Exactly. You learned what you could and moved on. If and when I goof on MMY personally it is the same as I do with that other billionaire, The Donald. Pompous fools are a legitimate targets IMO. The Pope in his dress and phallic hat, the Rajs with their silly Queen-of-the-May crowns, and yes, MMY with his sycophant entourage all speaking like they are effusing over their own Off Broadway production of Cher, the Musical. Part of me will always be the 10 year old reader of Mad Magazine (does that mean I molested a kid this morning?) and I will alway delight in poking fun at guys like MMY. I guess I could see the Pope as a more legitimate target because he has so much more influence (supposedly). Part of me recoils from this constant trashing of MMY (IMO) on account of the fact that I do have some--very limited--personal dealings with and knowledge of him, which for me renders him more human and thus more prone to human failings. I'm sure the Pope does too, but hardly anybody is permitted to get close enough to see. It's probably not anywhere near as logical as your conclusions, Curtis, but that's just the way I feel. I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I don't either, and have never felt particularly reverential towards him. He was a defender of the caste system who wouldn't allow women in his presence. I know that this is a traditional thing for these guys, but it seems to me that hanging on to this type of tradition is not doing the world any good. Which is one reason IMO why India is such a mess and has been for so long. Same for the Pope of Christianity, they both uphold values that most modern people find repugnant. But a lot of people still follow what he says, or at least go through the motions. At least India is making some effort to distance themselves from many of their worst traditions. And they both hide behind the assumptive dignity of their positions and their silly outfits to attempt to keep mankind in the same dark ages the ideas their religions represent. I don't believe that either Guru Dev or the Pope had a special channel to any version of the creator of the universe and I resent them both for acting like they do. People can act in any way they choose, and as long as its just them it usually doesn't make a whole lot of difference. It's what their followers do that messes things up so much. Meanwhile some kid in Africa is growing up with AIDS, Millions of kids. an epidemic assisted in part by religious fools promoting ideas dangerous to public health, and other kids in India are repressed by the same Sanatana Dharma's support of the Caste system that Guru Dev devoted his later years to promote. IMO the problem is not people making fun of these guys, it is that not enough people who oppose their actual positions on things that do matter feel free to throw a rotten tomato at their silk evening gowns. (My response had nothing to do with your point Sal, but thanks for the ramp to get my skateboard over the half-pipe lip! That was fun. Glad to be of help. :) Your statement was an excellent, well thought-out response. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? So you trust the judgement of meditating engineers over non-meditating engineers?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 12:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: [...] Meanwhile some kid in Africa is growing up with AIDS, Millions of kids. The primary issue with AIDS in Africa isn't sexual practices, but malaria. People who have been exposed to malaria and then to the HIV virus are many (MANY?) more times likely to become infected and manifest AIDS than those who have not been exposed to malaria.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? If they don't have to be meditators, you might want to read these three reports in the radical leftwing magazine Counterpunch by Manuel Garcia, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore with a PhD in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering: http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html http://www.counterpunch.org/thermo11282006.html http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 12:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: [...] Meanwhile some kid in Africa is growing up with AIDS, Millions of kids. The primary issue with AIDS in Africa isn't sexual practices, but malaria. People who have been exposed to malaria and then to the HIV virus are many (MANY?) more times likely to become infected and manifest AIDS than those who have not been exposed to malaria. Well, maybe not THE primary issue, but most scientists agree that there is a definite interaction between the two infections: they make each other worse.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? If they don't have to be meditators, you might want to read these three reports in the radical leftwing magazine Counterpunch by Manuel Garcia, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore with a PhD in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering: http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html http://www.counterpunch.org/thermo11282006.html http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.html Having an engineer write a report from Lawrence Livermore is a little like having a scientist from a tobacco company writing a report on cigarettes. Lawrence Livermore is a weapons lab in case you didn't know. But keep taking the blue pill.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL! After blasting all the conspiracy theories to smithereens, here's his conclusion: The film's greatest flaw is this: the men who made it are still alive. If the US government is running an all-knowing, all-encompassing conspiracy, why did it not snuff them out long ago? There is only one possible explanation. They are in fact agents of the Bush regime, employed to distract people from its real abuses of power. This, if you are inclined to believe such stories, is surely a more plausible theory than the one proposed in Loose Change. It's a lame conclusion too. And BTW the guy makes a lot of statements that show even he has not much of a grasp of science. Dylan, who made Loose Change is a Sanford student or grad (by now) if I am not mistaken. This conclusion has been mentioned many times by people but one plausible explanation *is* of course if Dylan were to disappear or be killed it would cast suspicion that he was right on track. Instead the real culprits just try to discredit people in the 9/11 truth movement. Two or three years ago if I had said that the Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag incident I would have been laughed off of discussion groups. Last year it was disclosed by the government that it was *indeed* a false flag incident. Such events have occurred throughout history and are part of the modus operandi of those in power to manipulate the masses.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Shortchanging 9/11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL! You're wrong, it wasn't Bush's fault. He may indeed be a victim especially if you look into the Angel is Next scenario. The real culprits will probably be found on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_defense_contractors
Re: [FairfieldLife] Grace Program of Richard Cassidy
In a message dated 2/18/2007 1:40:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: FairfieldLife@ FairfieldLi FairfieldLife@WBRyahoogr FairfieldLife@ FairOn Behalf Of hudsoncpe Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 7:51 AM To: FairfieldLife@ Fairfie Subject: [FairfieldLife] Grace Program of Richard Cassidy Does anyone have any success with Grace Program of former siddha who claims everyone in program will reach Brahmin Consciousness in 18 months? On the phone he calibrates your current level of consciousness based on David Hawkin's scale. From this he tells you how long it will take to reach C.C. You pay a small one time only fee and you are supposedly sent karma busting grace from Higher Dimensions 24/7. Cassidy does not adverstise; he explains program over the phone. He claims 1,100 are already in C.C. from this. If this is true, I would think the amazing results would be talked about and spread like wild fire, and we might see Cassidy nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? I welcome all feedback from those who are in the program. Opinions from those not in the program would be opions only, I am looking for those who have experience with his time table for enlightenment. This is either the greatest new age scam ever divised to date, or it is real. Let me know your results. All I know about it is: 1.His brother Jim is a good friend of mine, but he doesn’t talk about it much, at least not to me. 2.There are over 300 people in Fairfield doing it. 3.One of them really twisted my arm trying to get me into it. Promises of enlightenment are coming form fools who have lost the ability to enjoy the present moment. They are still reaching for something that cannot be reached for. Everyone wants some magic formula that lets them bypass the conscious service that is required at each level of advancement. I would not trust any teacher from India or elsewhere who promises higher states of consciousness to their audience within a specific time frame. It is clearly a violation of the students growth to make promises to them regarding their spiritual advancement. I have seen so many teachers fall from grace with this kind of motive. Be careful of those who profess to know about your level of enlightenment. No one can know you as well as you know yourself. Love and Light. Lou Valentino
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
Agreed that mosquito nets are even more important than condoms in Africa. I think that is what the Gate's foundation is addressing isn't it? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 12:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: [...] Meanwhile some kid in Africa is growing up with AIDS, Millions of kids. The primary issue with AIDS in Africa isn't sexual practices, but malaria. People who have been exposed to malaria and then to the HIV virus are many (MANY?) more times likely to become infected and manifest AIDS than those who have not been exposed to malaria.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. The carved lion throne.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Prayag - The programme was presided over by Shankaracharya Swami Vasudevanand Saraswati. VHP's International Secretary General Pravin Togadia, Pandit Jiveshwar Mishra, Shri Vishnu Hari Dalmia, Sadhvi Ritambhara, Kanchi Shankaracharya Swami Jayendra Saraswati, Shri Madan Das, Shri Suresh Soni, Acharya Dharmendra, Sadhvi Siva Saraswati, Swami Bhanmadev, Swami Laxmananand also shared the dais among other dignitaries. sparaig wrote: Interesting. So the 2nd generation Shankaracharya (Swami Vasudevananda, a student of Swami Shatananda) gets the limelight while the first generatio Shankaracharaya (Swami Shatananda) gets denounced by another Shankaracharya (Swami Swaroopananda) as being a fake. Swami Swaroopanand doesn't get invited to any VHP functions. Is the Kanchi Shankaracharya head of one of the 4 (or is it 5?) maths, or is he one of the lesser-knowns? From what I've read, he's the top Shankaracharya in all of India, for the past twenty or thirty years - he gets invited to all the VHP functions. He's head of the 5th Math, which isn't recognized by any of the four Shankaracharyas save Vasudevananda, probably because he can't get the others to recognize him. HEre's the wiki entry on him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayendra_Saraswati
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? snip +++ This needs an engineer? I would think the average person, after seeing the third building go down in the same manner even tho not being hit by a plane, would observe that the planes had nothing to do with it. N.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed that mosquito nets are even more important than condoms in Africa. I think that is what the Gate's foundation is addressing isn't it? Good for them, if it is. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 12:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: [...] Meanwhile some kid in Africa is growing up with AIDS, Millions of kids. The primary issue with AIDS in Africa isn't sexual practices, but malaria. People who have been exposed to malaria and then to the HIV virus are many (MANY?) more times likely to become infected and manifest AIDS than those who have not been exposed to malaria.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL! You're wrong, it wasn't Bush's fault. He may indeed be a victim especially if you look into the Angel is Next scenario. The real culprits will probably be found on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_defense_contractors Eh, more likely people who are part of THIS group, which likely includes many of the above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_grove
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
Bhairitu wrote: Last year it was disclosed by the government that it was *indeed* a false flag incident. False flag? From what I've read, there were two incidents in the Gulf of Tonkin, one of which has not been disputed. On 2 August the Maddox was attacked by three North Vietnamese P-4 patrol boats 28 miles away from the North Vietnamese coast in international waters.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. It worked for me for years! One of the oddest mind benders I got when I was leaving the movement was seeing a picture of Haile Selassie on a divan that was a dead ringer for Guru Dev's and on a similar throne that was being used as a picture of worship by the pot smoking Rastafarians. It was like a PhotoShop joke picture and it really had an odd effect on me. I can't look at the Guru Dev picture without laughing, it totally broke the spell. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Shortchanging 9/11
But wait! There's more: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3074561005024763960hl=en :) authfriend wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/
[FairfieldLife] the fate of trash like Paul Mason
Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. I have no strong opinion on Heaven or Hell. Perhaps those states of Bliss and Tamas excist, perhaps not. But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time at least is a guarantee for not having to deal with this lowlife fellow in our next incarnation.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
On Feb 18, 2007, at 3:16 PM, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. The carved lion throne. I gotta admit, I've always wanted one. Esp. with the umbrella. It'd really turn heads at the beach!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: In a message dated 2/17/07 10:04:08 A.M. Central Standard Time, jstein@ writes: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: _http://www.alternethttp://www.http:/_ (http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/) Oh palease! Now we have a new conspiracy. All of the old conspiracies, spread by the Bush haters, were actually concocted by Bush/Rove to make the Bush haters that believed them look like idiots! It's still Bush's fault! LOL! After blasting all the conspiracy theories to smithereens, here's his conclusion: The film's greatest flaw is this: the men who made it are still alive. If the US government is running an all-knowing, all-encompassing conspiracy, why did it not snuff them out long ago? There is only one possible explanation. They are in fact agents of the Bush regime, employed to distract people from its real abuses of power. This, if you are inclined to believe such stories, is surely a more plausible theory than the one proposed in Loose Change. It's a lame conclusion too. RIGHT!!! You got it! That, of course, is his point. And BTW the guy makes a lot of statements that show even he has not much of a grasp of science. Dylan, who made Loose Change is a Sanford student or grad (by now) if I am not mistaken. This conclusion has been mentioned many times by people but one plausible explanation *is* of course if Dylan were to disappear or be killed it would cast suspicion that he was right on track. Instead the real culprits just try to discredit people in the 9/11 truth movement. Two or three years ago if I had said that the Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag incident I would have been laughed off of discussion groups. Last year it was disclosed by the government that it was *indeed* a false flag incident. Such events have occurred throughout history and are part of the modus operandi of those in power to manipulate the masses.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. Interestingly, you might be right on that one. NO ONE knows him except through those photos, and in them he looks exotic, and wise, and from a whole different world than the people who idolize him come from. And so they project onto him all of their fantasies of enlightenment, and what that word means or doesn't mean to them. And it was the same thing with Maharishi. He arrived on our shores as this exotic little dark- haired monk in white robes, and everyone swooned and just assumed that everything he said was the Truth, with a capital T. Me, too. I didn't ask any of these OBVIOUS questions at the time, either. And I probably projected my own fair share of fantasies onto Maharishi, although enlightenment was never one of them. Unlike many here, I always took him at his word when he never claimed to be enlight- ened, and when he avoided the issue like the plague every time it came up. But I long ago got used to laughing at myself for just believing shit that was told to me, and for checking my critical faculties at the door because I *wanted* to believe it all. That was *my* issue; he (and others) just took advantage of it. I learned much from all of them ANYWAY. So now my interest is NOT in the guru guys, Maharishi or anyone. It's the *students*. I have a lingering fascination for those who check their critical faculties at the door, and who then realize what they did, laugh, and get over it and move on to laugh at themselves in new situ- ations. And I have an equal fascination for the ones who never get to that point, and who die with the claim check for their critical faculties still in their pocket. It's NOT just the TM move- ment that one sees this in; to believe that is just self importance on the part of TMers. This stuff shows up in almost ALL spiritual trips. And that's what makes it fascinating...
Re: [FairfieldLife] the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. I have no strong opinion on Heaven or Hell. Perhaps those states of Bliss and Tamas excist, perhaps not. But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time at least is a guarantee for not having to deal with this lowlife fellow in our next incarnation. Stop being so silly. Paul should go to hell because you don't like what he writes. Ridiculous! To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time You have a teenage hitchhiker in your basement wearing a ball gag right now don't you? Your revenge fantasy about Paul is spooky, spooky, spooky. Buffalo Bill, Silence of the Lambs: It puts the lotion on its body or it gets the hose again --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. I have no strong opinion on Heaven or Hell. Perhaps those states of Bliss and Tamas excist, perhaps not. But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time at least is a guarantee for not having to deal with this lowlife fellow in our next incarnation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. I have no strong opinion on Heaven or Hell. Perhaps those states of Bliss and Tamas excist, perhaps not. But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time at least is a guarantee for not having to deal with this lowlife fellow in our next incarnation. Stop being so silly. Paul should go to hell because you don't like what he writes. Ridiculous! That's a charitable way to put. Frank was hinting at more immediate, more personal responses, of course.
Re: [FairfieldLife] the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? Would it be better if he spread it for free? Would that qualify him at least for purgatory? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time You have a teenage hitchhiker in your basement wearing a ball gag right now don't you? Your revenge fantasy about Paul is spooky, spooky, spooky. Buffalo Bill, Silence of the Lambs: It puts the lotion on its body or it gets the hose again Mmmm... I don't think he quite said that. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 nablusos108@ wrote: Agreed. Each of the criticisms of Maharishi and each of the praises of him, or responses to the criticisms should be judged on their own merits. I agree that Barry looks pretty one-sided sometimes, as if he has already made up his mind regarding any responses to a criticism of Maharishi and what that represents to him. I personally responded to Paul's stuff twice. Once to say his phony question and answer format was what is commonly known as a 'hatchet job', in other words selectively picking Q A, designed to reveal the subject in the worst possible light, and the second time as a response to the final question and answer posed by Paul, suggesting that he should perhaps change his name to Perry Mason, a TV lawyer who always got his man. Neither response could be characterized as un-sane or extreme. I have no strong opinion on Heaven or Hell. Perhaps those states of Bliss and Tamas excist, perhaps not. But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time at least is a guarantee for not having to deal with this lowlife fellow in our next incarnation.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time You have a teenage hitchhiker in your basement wearing a ball gag right now don't you? Your revenge fantasy about Paul is spooky, spooky, spooky. Buffalo Bill, Silence of the Lambs: It puts the lotion on its body or it gets the hose again Mmmm... I don't think he quite said that. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102926/quotes Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: It rubs the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it is told. Catherine Martin: Mister... my family will pay cash. Whatever ransom you're askin' for, they pay it. Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. [to his dog, Precious] Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: Yes, it will, Precious, won't it? It will get the hose! Catherine Martin: Okay... okay... okay. Mister, if you let me go, I won't - I won't press charges I promise. See, my mom is a real important woman... I guess you already know that. Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: Now it places the lotion in the basket. Catherine Martin: Please! Please I wanna go home! I wanna go home please! Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: It places the lotion in the basket. Catherine Martin: I wanna see my mommy! Please I wanna see my... Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: Put the fucking lotion in the basket!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But wait! There's more: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3074561005024763960hl=en :) Very unconvincing. The first clip is a fake, staged by the filmmakers after the fact, with the Fox News logo and so on stripped in. There's nothing in the picture when the witness is on screen that pegs the clip to shortly after the buildings' collapse. The filmmakers then use the obvious phoniness of the guy's spiel (Who talks like that?) to assert that he was a plant--which is correct, but he was *their* plant. Very clever, but no cigar. Having set that up as sinister, they follow with two perfectly plausible clips of experts bloviating, which, of course, is what experts do. The filmmakers' comments attempt to portray the experts as sinister, but they don't have much to work with. And the filmmakers assure us these experts were on the air less than an hour after the attacks, but given their fakery with the first clip, I have no reason to trust their version of the timing on the next two; they could easily have faked the time bug on the MSNBC clip, and the ABC clip doesn't have one.) Furthermore, if all these guys were government plants, how come they could only find three (actually only two) of them? Why weren't there plants on CNN, NBC, CBS as well? Gonna have to do better than that. You're awfully gullible, Barry.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. Interestingly, you might be right on that one. NO ONE knows him except through those photos, and in them he looks exotic, and wise, and from a whole different world than the people who idolize him come from. And so they project onto him all of their fantasies of enlightenment, and what that word means or doesn't mean to them. And it was the same thing with Maharishi. He arrived on our shores as this exotic little dark- haired monk in white robes, and everyone swooned and just assumed that everything he said was the Truth, with a capital T. Well, er, not everyone. I would have much preferred a guy in a lab coat with letters after his name. It was only because there *were* guys with letters after their names touting TM that I came anywhere near it. MMY didn't impress me at all; he was a bug, not a feature, as far as I was concerned. snip So now my interest is NOT in the guru guys, Maharishi or anyone. It's the *students*. I have a lingering fascination for those who check their critical faculties at the door, and who then realize what they did, laugh, and get over it and move on to laugh at themselves in new situ- ations. The question is whether you're *learning* anything from these people. So far, the answer appears to be no.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. The carved lion throne. Naah, it's the yellow glop smeared on his forehead. Guy was into some really good drugs. (You'll notice Paul hasn't told us about those.)
[FairfieldLife] FF meets with Bevan
Well,evidently some un-repentant non-re-certified badge-less Fairfield meditators were not invited. However, here's what they miss: FW: We are happy to pass along this message from M.U.M. Jai Guru Dev. 8000 NOW Dr. Bevan Morris is now here in Maharishi Vedic City and would like to meet with everyone on the Invincible America Assembly - all the Yogic Flyers in the Golden Domes. Time: Sunday, February 18, 1:30 p.m. Place: Maharishi Patanjali Golden Dome Please bring your valid Golden Dome badge. Jai Guru Dev Would he come off campus and talk with yogic flyers not on the course? A focus group of interested FF meditators?
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time You have a teenage hitchhiker in your basement wearing a ball gag right now don't you? Your revenge fantasy about Paul is spooky, spooky, spooky. Buffalo Bill, Silence of the Lambs: It puts the lotion on its body or it gets the hose again Mmmm... I don't think he quite said that. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102926/quotes I meant what the original poster said.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusos108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have no strong opinion on Heaven or Hell. Perhaps those states of Bliss and Tamas excist, perhaps not. But if Hell excists I think this Paul Mason fellow is a strong candidate for a prolonged stay in one of those premises. I mean, spreading slander about an outstanding Saint for money ?? It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time at least is a guarantee for not having to deal with this lowlife fellow in our next incarnation. *** Yeah, Mason is a jerk, but jerks/demons are part of creation, and in fact, creation COULD NOT EXIST without demons. Why? Because the jig would be up if life were too sattvic (transparent) -- it would be trying to play hide-and-so-seek with no trees to hide behind. So although the dull-witted and demonic level is dominant now, and will naturally be reduced in the natural course of time, there will always be some demonic activity, even in the Sat Yuga. From Vasistha's Yoga p. 201 http://tinyurl.com/6xndt : This seemingly unending world-appearance is sustained by impure (rajasa) and dull (tamasa) beings, even as a superstructure is sustained by pillars. But it is playfully and easily abandoned by those who are of a pure nature, even as the slough is effortlessly abandoned by a snake.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the fate of trash like Paul Mason
Thanks for that link, so many gems there! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: It's like a plea for a stay in an unpleasant place. IMO. To be subdued and treated by Tamas for a long period of time You have a teenage hitchhiker in your basement wearing a ball gag right now don't you? Your revenge fantasy about Paul is spooky, spooky, spooky. Buffalo Bill, Silence of the Lambs: It puts the lotion on its body or it gets the hose again Mmmm... I don't think he quite said that. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102926/quotes Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: It rubs the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it is told. Catherine Martin: Mister... my family will pay cash. Whatever ransom you're askin' for, they pay it. Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. [to his dog, Precious] Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: Yes, it will, Precious, won't it? It will get the hose! Catherine Martin: Okay... okay... okay. Mister, if you let me go, I won't - I won't press charges I promise. See, my mom is a real important woman... I guess you already know that. Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: Now it places the lotion in the basket. Catherine Martin: Please! Please I wanna go home! I wanna go home please! Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: It places the lotion in the basket. Catherine Martin: I wanna see my mommy! Please I wanna see my... Jame Buffalo Bill Gumb: Put the fucking lotion in the basket!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But wait! There's more: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3074561005024763960hl=en :) Very unconvincing. The first clip is a fake, staged by the filmmakers after the fact, with the Fox News logo and so on stripped in. There's nothing in the picture when the witness is on screen that pegs the clip to shortly after the buildings' collapse. I'll look into that being a video editor for some time. It has the Oakland FOX news stadio KTVU at the beginning. That's a lot of work just for that. The filmmakers then use the obvious phoniness of the guy's spiel (Who talks like that?) to assert that he was a plant--which is correct, but he was *their* plant. Very clever, but no cigar. Having set that up as sinister, they follow with two perfectly plausible clips of experts bloviating, which, of course, is what experts do. The filmmakers' comments attempt to portray the experts as sinister, but they don't have much to work with. And the filmmakers assure us these experts were on the air less than an hour after the attacks, but given their fakery with the first clip, I have no reason to trust their version of the timing on the next two; they could easily have faked the time bug on the MSNBC clip, and the ABC clip doesn't have one.) Furthermore, if all these guys were government plants, how come they could only find three (actually only two) of them? Why weren't there plants on CNN, NBC, CBS as well? Dan Rather is in one of the clips so that would have been CBS. Another was Brian Williams on NBC. Pay attention. Apparently a lot of folks made tapes that day as they did during other catastrophic events. Some people are just news junkies when things like this happen and make archives. Gonna have to do better than that. You're awfully gullible, Barry. I never said these are the truth but posted them as something more to think about which is what the film makers said too. I want to maintain an open mind on the issue and not buy the government's. I never have bought much of their stuff anyway even as a kid. I was taught that they lie.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? So you trust the judgement of meditating engineers over non-meditating engineers? No. I just assumed that any sound engineer that is not a meditator wouldn't go near a list like FFL.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? So you trust the judgement of meditating engineers over non-meditating engineers? No. I just assumed that any sound engineer that is not a meditator wouldn't go near a list like FFL. Only nuts post on FFL anyway...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, peterklutz peterklutz@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ Any meditating structural engineers out there who can offer a view on the probability of the twin towers collapsing in the freefall hollywodesquelly neat way they did simply by crashing two airplanes into them? If they don't have to be meditators, you might want to read these three reports in the radical leftwing magazine Counterpunch by Manuel Garcia, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore with a PhD in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering: http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html http://www.counterpunch.org/thermo11282006.html http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.html I am no structural engineer but my gut-feeling when reading this was that it sounded like a debunking job: bits of selective techie speculation based on inaccurate assumptions, embedded in a generally descriptive muzak of a touchi-feelie nature of the event. Finding sources that supports your pov (whatever it is) is not a problem on the Internet :-) http://www.911review.com/reviews/counterpunch/markup/physic11282006.html
[FairfieldLife] Suppressed report shows cancer link to GM potatoes
Suppressed report shows cancer link to GM potatoes By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor Published: 17 February 2007 Campaigners against genetically modified crops in Britain last are calling for trials of GM potatoes this spring to be halted after releasing more evidence of links with cancers in laboratory rats. UK Greenpeace activists said the findings, obtained from Russian trials after an eight-year court battle with the biotech industry, vindicated research by Dr Arpad Pusztai, whose work was criticised by the Royal Society and the Netherlands State Institute for Quality Control. The disclosure last night of the Russian study on the GM Watch website led to calls for David Miliband, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, to withdraw permission for new trials on GM potatoes to go ahead at secret sites in the UK this spring. Alan Simpson, a Labour MP and green campaigner, said: These trials should be stopped. The research backs up the work of Arpad Pusztai and it shows that he was the victim of a smear campaign by the biotech industry. There has been a cover-up over these findings and the Government should not be a party to that. Mr Simpson said the findings, which showed that lab rats developed tumours, were released by anti-GM campaigners in Wales. Dr Pusztai and a colleague used potatoes that had been genetically modified to produce a protein, lectin. They found cell damage in the rats' stomachs, and in parts of their intestines. The research is likely to spark a fresh row about GM crops in Britain. Graham Thompson, a Greenpeace campaigner, said: It is important because it backs up the research by Pusztai, which was smeared at the time by the industry. Brian John of GM Free Cymru, who released the findings, said the research was conducted in 1998 by the Institute of Nutrition of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences and has been suppressed for eight years. It showed that the potatoes did considerable damage to the rats' organs. Those in the control groups that were fed non-GM potatoes suffered ill-effects, but those fed GM potatoes suffered more serious organ and tissue damage. The potatoes contained an antibiotic resistance marker gene. The institute that carried out the studies refused to release all the information. However, Greenpeace and other consumer groups mounted a protracted legal battle campaign to obtain the report. In May 2004 the Nikulinski District Court in Russia ruled that information relating to the safety of GM food should be open to the public. The institute, however, refused to release the report. Greenpeace and Russian activist groups again took the institute to court, and won a ruling that the report must be released. Irina Ermakova, a consultant for Greenpeace, said she had conducted her own animal feeding experiments with GM materials. The GM potatoes were the most dangerous of the feeds used in the trials ... and on the basis of this evidence they cannot be used in the nourishment of people. Greenpeace said the Russian trials were also badly flawed. Half of the rats in the trial died, and results were taken from those that survived, in breach of normal scientific practice. http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2278044.ece
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Devastating indictment of the 9/11 government- conspiracy film Loose Change from, of all places, AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/story/47986/ I don't think so.. http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html http://www.911review.com/articles/ryan/garcia.html
[FairfieldLife] Fwd: Re: [CliffordPickover] TheGod Fish
-The God Fish... That's neater than the cinnamon bun shaped like Mother Theresa! ___ http://www.damnthe.com/oddities_of_the_banal/animal.html -
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: But wait! There's more: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=- 3074561005024763960hl=en :) Very unconvincing. The first clip is a fake, staged by the filmmakers after the fact, with the Fox News logo and so on stripped in. There's nothing in the picture when the witness is on screen that pegs the clip to shortly after the buildings' collapse. I'll look into that being a video editor for some time. It has the Oakland FOX news stadio KTVU at the beginning. That's a lot of work just for that. But the first clip sets the whole thing up. The guy is so obviously fake, if you fall for its being a real clip of a plant, you're primed to be suspicious of the other two. That clip is key. Did you notice that the cutaways to the towers don't have the Fox logo and chyron? The filmmakers then use the obvious phoniness of the guy's spiel (Who talks like that?) to assert that he was a plant--which is correct, but he was *their* plant. Very clever, but no cigar. Having set that up as sinister, they follow with two perfectly plausible clips of experts bloviating, which, of course, is what experts do. The filmmakers' comments attempt to portray the experts as sinister, but they don't have much to work with. And the filmmakers assure us these experts were on the air less than an hour after the attacks, but given their fakery with the first clip, I have no reason to trust their version of the timing on the next two; they could easily have faked the time bug on the MSNBC clip, and the ABC clip doesn't have one.) Furthermore, if all these guys were government plants, how come they could only find three (actually only two) of them? Why weren't there plants on CNN, NBC, CBS as well? Dan Rather is in one of the clips so that would have been CBS. Yes, that's CBS, my mistake. I had thought it was ABC. But I'm not saying the second and third clips are necessarily fake. There's just no reason to think the guys talking are plants. You've been *set up* to think they are, just like the first guy. And of course you never see either Rather or the expert. Same with the third clip. Another was Brian Williams on NBC. It was MSNBC using a feed from WNBC in New York City. But the speaker wasn't Brian Williams, sorry. That isn't his voice (and of course you never see him, and he isn't identified at all). They could have used audio from a later time; there's nothing to connect it with the video. That they didn't have clips for ABC or CNN is very telling. Pay attention. Apparently a lot of folks made tapes that day as they did during other catastrophic events. Some people are just news junkies when things like this happen and make archives. Of course. All the conspiracy videos I've seen use clips from the networks and cable. Gonna have to do better than that. You're awfully gullible, Barry. I never said these are the truth but posted them as something more to think about which is what the film makers said too. Fine, but they're using fake examples of what they want you to think about. That's the sort of thing purveyors of *disinformation* would do. I don't know whether these guys are disinformation agents or just hoaxters having fun, or what, but that video doesn't give any credibility to the conspiracy theories, it *detracts* from their credibility. I want to maintain an open mind on the issue Don't let your mind be so open your brains fall out! and not buy the government's. I never have bought much of their stuff anyway even as a kid. I was taught that they lie. Of course they lie. But that doesn't mean *everything* they say is a lie. In this case, there's no really good evidence they were lying about what happened on 9/11, at least about the main events. It just doesn't hold up under examination.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: But wait! There's more: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=- 3074561005024763960hl=en :) Very unconvincing. The first clip is a fake, staged by the filmmakers after the fact, with the Fox News logo and so on stripped in. There's nothing in the picture when the witness is on screen that pegs the clip to shortly after the buildings' collapse. I'll look into that being a video editor for some time. It has the Oakland FOX news stadio KTVU at the beginning. That's a lot of work just for that. snip (here and there) Dan Rather is in one of the clips so that would have been CBS. I want to maintain an open mind on the issue and not buy the government's. I never have bought much of their stuff anyway even as a kid. I was taught that they lie. Of course they lie. But that doesn't mean *everything* they say is a lie. In this case, there's no really good evidence they were lying about what happened on 9/11, at least about the main events. It just doesn't hold up under examination. +++ The similarity has been noticed between this event and the Reichstag fire in the thirties - they ended up with the Gestapo and we have homeland security and ever increasing executive branch powers. N.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: But wait! There's more: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=- 3074561005024763960hl=en :) Very unconvincing. The first clip is a fake, staged by the filmmakers after the fact, with the Fox News logo and so on stripped in. There's nothing in the picture when the witness is on screen that pegs the clip to shortly after the buildings' collapse. I'll look into that being a video editor for some time. It has the Oakland FOX news stadio KTVU at the beginning. That's a lot of work just for that. snip (here and there) Dan Rather is in one of the clips so that would have been CBS. I want to maintain an open mind on the issue and not buy the government's. I never have bought much of their stuff anyway even as a kid. I was taught that they lie. Of course they lie. But that doesn't mean *everything* they say is a lie. In this case, there's no really good evidence they were lying about what happened on 9/11, at least about the main events. It just doesn't hold up under examination. +++ The similarity has been noticed between this event and the Reichstag fire in the thirties - they ended up with the Gestapo and we have homeland security and ever increasing executive branch powers. N. Office of Homeland Security proves that someone in the Bush Administration is literate enough to have read _Animal Farm_ and is arrogant enough to think that the American People wouldn't catch the reference. And they were RIGHT!!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
I trust the judgment of people such as Paul Schilpp and Sarvepalli Radhadkrishnan Guru Dev is about as good as it gets. Of course, he was an orthodox Hindu (which means he had plenty of gender bias). But having said that . . . curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. It worked for me for years! One of the oddest mind benders I got when I was leaving the movement was seeing a picture of Haile Selassie on a divan that was a dead ringer for Guru Dev's and on a similar throne that was being used as a picture of worship by the pot smoking Rastafarians. It was like a PhotoShop joke picture and it really had an odd effect on me. I can't look at the Guru Dev picture without laughing, it totally broke the spell. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. - Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Of course they lie. But that doesn't mean *everything* they say is a lie. In this case, there's no really good evidence they were lying about what happened on 9/11, at least about the main events. It just doesn't hold up under examination. +++ The similarity has been noticed between this event and the Reichstag fire in the thirties - they ended up with the Gestapo and we have homeland security and ever increasing executive branch powers. N. Sure. But bear in mind, that's a model Osama bin Laden would have had motivation to use just as well as the U.S. government. OBL's no dummy. He's played Bush and the neocons like a violin. The terrorist types aren't the existential threat they're made out to be. The real existential threat is the way we've been responding to them.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Office of Homeland Security proves that someone in the Bush Administration is literate enough to have read _Animal Farm_ and is arrogant enough to think that the American People wouldn't catch the reference. And they were RIGHT!! ++ Quite, I recall someone observing that eighty five percent of people in this country don't think. A small number of those that do are concerned and I wonder if they will have any impact on the situation or will be declared terrorists and locked up. N.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi Mahesh Yogi - Separating Fact From Fiction
Those are two heavyweight references, thanks for the names. My search came up with some cool stuff from both of them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jonathan Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I trust the judgment of people such as Paul Schilpp and Sarvepalli Radhadkrishnan Guru Dev is about as good as it gets. Of course, he was an orthodox Hindu (which means he had plenty of gender bias). But having said that . . . curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. It worked for me for years! One of the oddest mind benders I got when I was leaving the movement was seeing a picture of Haile Selassie on a divan that was a dead ringer for Guru Dev's and on a similar throne that was being used as a picture of worship by the pot smoking Rastafarians. It was like a PhotoShop joke picture and it really had an odd effect on me. I can't look at the Guru Dev picture without laughing, it totally broke the spell. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajranatha@ wrote: On Feb 18, 2007, at 1:48 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I also don't get the Guru Dev worship. I'm pretty sure it's the chair and umbrella. - Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Sure. But bear in mind, that's a model Osama bin Laden would have had motivation to use just as well as the U.S. government. OBL's no dummy. He's played Bush and the neocons like a violin. The terrorist types aren't the existential threat they're made out to be. The real existential threat is the way we've been responding to them. ++ It looks like the biggest threat is from Washington and, those behind the scene that run it. War is big business- it won't be going away any time soon. N.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shortchanging 9/11
Nelson wrote: It looks like the biggest threat is from Washington and, those behind the scene that run it. So, Osama bin Laden murdered 3,000 innocent people and Saddam was responsible for the death of over a million, but the elected congressional leaders in Washington are YOUR enemy. Go figure.
[FairfieldLife] Fairfield's swim Gestapo
http://tinyurl.com/3bajdg
