[FairfieldLife] Re: MMA fighter Vasquez dies weeks after fight
Let's all blame Off. He's the one who's been bragging about being able to kill a guy with one punch. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sam Vasquez of Houston may have become the first fighter to die from > injuries sustained in mixed martial arts competition in North America. > > A report by The Fight Network cited the Harris County (Texas) medical > examiner's office confirming Vasquez's death at 8:15 p.m. Friday. The > cause of death was not released. > > Vasquez had been battling for his life since taking a hard right to > the chin from 21-year old Vince Libardi on Oct. 20 during a Renegades > Extreme Fighting show at the Toyota Center in Houston. The blow > knocked Vasquez out and he was rushed to St. Joseph Medical Center, > where he stayed until moving to hospice care on Monday. > > Read more: > > http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=dm- > fighterdeath120207&prov=yhoo&type=lgns > > http://tinyurl.com/3d5kyb >
[FairfieldLife] British English or not?
My sister thinks this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tweT57KCgc8 ain't British English. Well, I guess she might be right...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 2:23 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > I have no problem with fantastical elements in > > film or non-linear storytelling. But *as a > > personal preference*, I like storytelling. Lynch > > often, as I hear from people who have worked > > closely with him, doesn't even *have* a story > > in mind; he just throws weird images together > > and hopes that they'll somehow "come together" > > into a story. I heard a recent Lynch interview on NPR. He said that get gets a feeling / a "vision" / an impulse and tries to describe it in film. When he feels that he has captured the feeling weel, he is satisfied with the film. (Some) painters do that, musicians do that. What is unartistic -- in an of it self -- about a filmaker that makes such unartistic. Some seem tied to a linear plot, an if a film doesn't have one, its a bad film. Thats ok, but rather a limited view of film and art. I had similar feels to T3rinity about MD. The theatre scene is great. His characters need to be taken literally. They do invoke a feeling. Which in addition to that which the feeling conveys, it also raises questions as to why one reacts to certain scenes the way they do. And some scenes seem like an inverse. Like the scene is a color negative, and it can get flipped foreground/background and reveal some interesting things. Not every ones cup of tea. But its not crap simply on grounds that it is not a Capraesque plot and full of nice/nice. I find the Vata premise full of air. And while I am no signing onto, or off, the Lynch vata theory/premise -- lets suppose that is correct. Films, novels, music etc are from different points of view. Part of artistry is to convey different points of views accurately, authentically -- or at least interestingly. The artist getting inside another's head and conveying that is a dimension of art. So why would an interesting and accurate portrait of a vata-person not be a reasonable subject to explore in art? So its a premise full of air if it is a premise saying any depiction of vata is not art. > > FWIW, I've heard that's sort of how Casablanca was made--they would > come up with lines and ideas for scenes right before filiming. > Sometimes Woody Allen does that too. The big diff is, when they > throw the whole thing together, there's an actual story there. > > > > > For some viewers and critics, they obviously > > do. I'm not one of them. I just see an incoher- > > ent jumble of images thrown up onscreen by > > someone who knows that he can get away with > > doing this because critics will cut him a break. > > I'm not sure too many people at all can relate to films like MD. > Sal >
[FairfieldLife] MMA fighter Vasquez dies weeks after fight
Sam Vasquez of Houston may have become the first fighter to die from injuries sustained in mixed martial arts competition in North America. A report by The Fight Network cited the Harris County (Texas) medical examiner's office confirming Vasquez's death at 8:15 p.m. Friday. The cause of death was not released. Vasquez had been battling for his life since taking a hard right to the chin from 21-year old Vince Libardi on Oct. 20 during a Renegades Extreme Fighting show at the Toyota Center in Houston. The blow knocked Vasquez out and he was rushed to St. Joseph Medical Center, where he stayed until moving to hospice care on Monday. Read more: http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=dm- fighterdeath120207&prov=yhoo&type=lgns http://tinyurl.com/3d5kyb
[FairfieldLife] MMA fighter Vasquez dies weeks after fight
Sam Vasquez of Houston may have become the first fighter to die from injuries sustained in mixed martial arts competition in North America. A report by The Fight Network cited the Harris County (Texas) medical examiner's office confirming Vasquez's death at 8:15 p.m. Friday. The cause of death was not released. Vasquez had been battling for his life since taking a hard right to the chin from 21-year old Vince Libardi on Oct. 20 during a Renegades Extreme Fighting show at the Toyota Center in Houston. The blow knocked Vasquez out and he was rushed to St. Joseph Medical Center, where he stayed until moving to hospice care on Monday. Read more: http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=dm- fighterdeath120207&prov=yhoo&type=lgns http://tinyurl.com/3d5kyb
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "aztjbailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One important historical point is that what we call Japanese Karate > derived from self protection arts developed on the island of > Okinawa. The Okinawans got it from the people of South China, > because they did business with the Chinese for many years. Each of > those three populations (the Chinese, the Okinawans and the > Japanese) honed and developed the material in their own way, to meet > their needs. This history does interest me. I didn't know about the China connection so thanks for pointing that out. > > With the technology of filming and making CD's so easy nowadays, a > large amount of CD's showing Chinese martial arts are coming out. At > first there was no English language available, but now, CD's might > have some English. If the CD is popular enough, it might be put out > in DVD format, and then almost always and attempt is made to > translate the every statement made in Chinese into English. Even > then poor translation can be prevalent. > > Here Shifu Ted Mancuso of Plum Publications, where hundreds of these > CD's and DVD's are sold, is commenting on the fact that for all > intents and purposes, this group of CD's from a South China master > looks basically like Karate. > > http://www.plumpub.com/sales/vcd3/coll_SLsouth4.htm > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu > > > > > > > > Ouch... > > > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=fqqSmf8qATc > > > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > > > > The karate fighters seemed more realistically trained. >> > > > > I agree, I wouldn't discount Kung Fu, I was just putting it out > > there. The karate guy is pretty good though, and some of the > fastest > > knock-outs in UFC have been from CLASSIC Shotokan karate moves. > > > > Watch this. > > This guy in black commits a CLASSIC move used in Shotokan (also > used > > in other karate techniques such as what he is doing.) The other > guy > > he is fighting may not be very good, but the guy in black is using > > NOWHERE NEAR full force and it could have killed the guy. This is > a > > CLASSIC Shotokan move, and most experts could pull this off if > needed > > against anyone. So you, Dr. Pete, and Turquoise are 'FOS' when you > > say that someone could not be pretty easily killed with one move > if > > the expert is not VERY careful. Therefore Kmiti style competition > was > > developed. > > > > Watch this, then let's see you say someone cannot be killed in one > > strike. This guy does not use ANYWHERE NEAR the full force of a > > karate kick: > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=k0jM1VhqbC0 > > > > However at the lower stages, KungFu does tend to attract people > who > > are more into the glamor of it (at least at the early stages). A > bit > > like TurquoiseB realizing he had to be disciplined and humble to > > train in Shotokan, so he takes off to try some styles that seem > more > > glamorous to him. ;-) He is not even up to the task of discussing > > these points using reasoning, presumably because he really isn't > > very experienced in martial arts. > > > > < I don't count > > > out Kung Fu as a style because it was developed in an era when > it > > was > > > actually used as a martial art like Japanese jiu jitsu. It was > not > > > developed for sport. It was also a good demo at how hard it > is,even > > > as a superior fighter to knock someone out who doesn't want you > to. > > > It demonstrated that none of the karate fighter's single strikes > > ended the fight.>> > > > > You're an idiot. He is not ALLOWED to knock people out. You act > like > > you know something about martial arts, but you know nothing. IT IS > > VERY EASY for an expert to knockout and/or kill someone with kicks > > like that. Your inexperience shows through here, because in > Shotoakna > > EVERY competition, the fighter is trained to HIT with MINIMAL > force, > > and NOT knock people out or injur them. That would be > STUPID ! ! ! > > Only idiots do that, and they can obly get away with it on TV > because > > they are not good at hitting hard and devestatingly like a > Shotokan, > > or a couple of other styles like the guy in the video above (But > he > > might not survive in a real fight against Shotokan, because his > > strike to knock someone so hard, shows a lack of experience of how > > dangerous that is) > > You idiot, you just showed how little you know about this. Every > > single strike , the fight was stopped because with full force you > can > > kill someone. Stick to your stupid TV rating bullshit fantasy > world. > > > > OffWorld > > >
[FairfieldLife] A Good One from Ron Paul
Hits the nail on the head with this one: "We can't even fight the war without borrowing the money from the Chinese," adds the Congressman. "It really doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong; the war's going to end because we're going to have such a political and financial havoc here, with the devaluation of our dollar, because we just can't keep affording--this is usually how empires end..." More here: http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Ron_Paul_Iraq_not_Nazi_Germany_1202.html
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Ha! Eraserhead. The first movie I saw that I wanted, no, needed, to take a shower after viewing. Famous quote, " I think its a baby." One big ass psychotic, psychologically tamasic disgusting movie. Hell, I'd watch John Waters direct Divine eating a sh*t sandwich over Eraserhead any time! --- Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is a personal attack and has nothing to do with > the "intentional fallacy." a > > Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: > > Vaj, I do believe you can tell much from someone's > voice, or footsteps, or face, or pulse, or any part > you care to name since we do live in a holographic > universe. I've spent my life learning how to see > deeply into other people's writing, and you can see > many things. Fear of death, for example, in the way > someone closes his sentences. But to say that > someone suffers from vata derangement and therefore > any work of art he produces also suffers from it, is > an instance of the intentional fallacy. The thing > about artists is that they often function from > levels deeper than their own "small" selves. > > > > Sometimes methinks yer over-edurcation gets in da > way Angela. Having seen your previous performance on > another list (were you asked to leave or did you > just leave in a huff?) where you'd endlessly > anal-yzed others writing(s) and yet would seem to > have completely missed the persons message...well, > it seems to be replaying here. > > > But it didn't take a Ph. D. to see that. (Please, > tell us how many you have, I forgot after you told > me the 20th time). > > > DL's writing and producing may be affected by it, at > times. Sometimes it may not. Seasons change and so > does he. > > > Ever seen Eraserhead? > > > Do we live in a holographic universe Angela or do we > live in a universe that in some ways resembles the > idea of a holographic universe? I always just > thought it was a resemblance. > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Richard J. Williams wrote: > Bhairitu wrote: > >> Is Delia hanging out here? I haven't seen any >> posts from her yet. >> >> > We're all here, Bharat2. And you're here too; after > Delia kicked your but over on Usenet. > > She didn't kick my "but". > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/156084 > And probably buried deep within one of those morphing prolongated threads. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please point out where I asked Angela to find > something for me on the Web (your claim in your > previous post), Correction: You didn't exactly claim this; rather, you wrote, "I'm not going to waste my time on looking up stuff for someone on the net unless I already have at my fingertips"--in context, *as if* that's what I had asked Angela to do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > >> I've been arguing and sometimes agreeing with Judy for years > >> so my POV comes with experience. > >> > > And like Barry, Bhairitu has developed the siddhi > > of being able to determine why I post what I post > > without knowing *what* I've posted. > > "For the record" Judy, I read the thread. Don't think so... > And I was not commenting at all about "why" you post. Yes, you were. You wrote, "Judy is just trying to drag you down and make you waste messages on a reply." I was just commenting on the need some people > have either consciously or subconsciously to carry on > prolongated debates long after the key points have been > made. This is why I say you didn't read the thread. What you describe hasn't got anything at all to do with what we were discussing. I'm putting the whole thing back in below, ending with Angela's post that you were responding to. Please point out where I asked Angela to find something for me on the Web (your claim in your previous post), or what we were "debating," or how anyone was angling to get "the last word." Please show how I was "trying to drag [her] down and make [her] waste messages on a reply." Nor had any "key points been made." You got this all wrong, every bit of it. What this was, was my asking Angela to cite some of her sources for the claim she made, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. As I said, if anyone was "wasting" messages, it was Angela, who apparently felt the need to drag her feet about documenting her claim. I'm really getting tired of your misrepresentations, Bhairitu. Here's the thread: > > > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > > > > historians. > > > > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > > > do you want? > > > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > > > authoritative. > > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > > But not any idiot would know which names from > > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a > bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten > books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, > and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted > by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given > subject. > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European > historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't > think so.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Bhairitu wrote: > Is Delia hanging out here? I haven't seen any > posts from her yet. > We're all here, Bharat2. And you're here too; after Delia kicked your but over on Usenet. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/156084 Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental From: Judy Stein Date: Fri, Mar 24 2006 11:18 pm Subject: Re: Delia on the girly manning http://tinyurl.com/2xcmyg > > > willytex wrote: > > > Delia left after she exposed you as a Jew-hater and a > > > Taliban-lover. For the record, it was Judy that cut > > > and ran after that exchange. > > > > > Judy Stein wrote: > > Wrong as wrong can be. > > You weren't around, so how would you know, Troll? Wrong as wrong can be, as you know, liar, and everybody else who can read knows now. You really, really need to get some help, Willytex. I'm serious.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
authfriend wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Duveyoung wrote: >> >>> Bhairitu, I think you're a titch too absolute on your critique of >>> Judy. >>> >>> >> I've been arguing and sometimes agreeing with Judy for years >> so my POV comes with experience. >> > > And like Barry, Bhairitu has developed the siddhi > of being able to determine why I post what I post > without knowing *what* I've posted. "For the record" Judy, I read the thread. And I was not commenting at all about "why" you post. I was just commenting on the need some people have either consciously or subconsciously to carry on prolongated debates long after the key points have been made.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Yes, just the historians. I started to research the history of the 20th century in 1995. I'd ignored history and politics till then, having had enough of it up to my eyeballs by the time I was 18. It was in the back of my mind, though, because of my friendship with the physics teacher who was an ex SS man, because of my mom's activities as a secret agent for the American occupation army, because of my conversations with my brother-in-law, and because I'd heard European, particularly German, historians and political observers predict the current U.S. scene in the late fifties--which I did not believe at the time. But then in 95 when I heard about American concentration camps for the first time, I had time on my hands and thought it would be cool to get an education in a field in which I knew next to nothing. But, like I said, I do not consider myself an expert in history. "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Angela Mailander wrote: > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. > How much of it do you want? > Just the historians? > > A third war was planned all along, according to > > European historians. > > Judy wrote: > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
So, Alex Jones must have a list of the European historians who say that the war was planned. Bhairava wrote: > Sometimes I hear things while I'm driving around > listing to Air America Radio like a guest on Thom > Hartmann or a guest on Alex Jones (who by the way > will often post links to his guest web site or book > which sometimes Thom fails to do).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Angela Mailander wrote: > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. > How much of it do you want? > Just the historians? > > A third war was planned all along, according to > > European historians. > > Judy wrote: > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 5:09 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: Right on, Trinity. Think of van Gogh. Was he nuts? Yeah, maybe. But what a superb artist he was by any standard. And I totally agree about "yogic disorder" and "meditational disorder." "Siddhi disorder" would be good also, wouldn't it? We could prolly break it down into several different kinds. Actually Van Gogh was my choice for an example (rather than blind Beethoven). Although again, he's dead so we can't do a "voice diagnosis" truly, but we do know about the ear, etc. I keep a picture, a print of a hand drawn sketch from when he was in the mental hospital in the countryside. It's a most primitive work, but one of my personal favs. I cannot say the same of Eraserhead, I actually remember renting it and having to stop the video it was so, so heavy -- and watch it the next day at noon. It was the darkness of a hungry-ghost realm distilled into film. Vincent seems downright cheery in comparison. I am a big Twin Peaks fan though. I will continue to hope and provide help for people with meditational disorders, irregardless of whether I'm called names or subjected to online drama when it's merely mentioned. It's the healing that important.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
One important historical point is that what we call Japanese Karate derived from self protection arts developed on the island of Okinawa. The Okinawans got it from the people of South China, because they did business with the Chinese for many years. Each of those three populations (the Chinese, the Okinawans and the Japanese) honed and developed the material in their own way, to meet their needs. With the technology of filming and making CD's so easy nowadays, a large amount of CD's showing Chinese martial arts are coming out. At first there was no English language available, but now, CD's might have some English. If the CD is popular enough, it might be put out in DVD format, and then almost always and attempt is made to translate the every statement made in Chinese into English. Even then poor translation can be prevalent. Here Shifu Ted Mancuso of Plum Publications, where hundreds of these CD's and DVD's are sold, is commenting on the fact that for all intents and purposes, this group of CD's from a South China master looks basically like Karate. http://www.plumpub.com/sales/vcd3/coll_SLsouth4.htm --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > > wrote: > > > > > > Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu > > > > > > Ouch... > > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=fqqSmf8qATc > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > The karate fighters seemed more realistically trained. >> > > I agree, I wouldn't discount Kung Fu, I was just putting it out > there. The karate guy is pretty good though, and some of the fastest > knock-outs in UFC have been from CLASSIC Shotokan karate moves. > > Watch this. > This guy in black commits a CLASSIC move used in Shotokan (also used > in other karate techniques such as what he is doing.) The other guy > he is fighting may not be very good, but the guy in black is using > NOWHERE NEAR full force and it could have killed the guy. This is a > CLASSIC Shotokan move, and most experts could pull this off if needed > against anyone. So you, Dr. Pete, and Turquoise are 'FOS' when you > say that someone could not be pretty easily killed with one move if > the expert is not VERY careful. Therefore Kmiti style competition was > developed. > > Watch this, then let's see you say someone cannot be killed in one > strike. This guy does not use ANYWHERE NEAR the full force of a > karate kick: > http://youtube.com/watch?v=k0jM1VhqbC0 > > However at the lower stages, KungFu does tend to attract people who > are more into the glamor of it (at least at the early stages). A bit > like TurquoiseB realizing he had to be disciplined and humble to > train in Shotokan, so he takes off to try some styles that seem more > glamorous to him. ;-) He is not even up to the task of discussing > these points using reasoning, presumably because he really isn't > very experienced in martial arts. > > < I don't count > > out Kung Fu as a style because it was developed in an era when it > was > > actually used as a martial art like Japanese jiu jitsu. It was not > > developed for sport. It was also a good demo at how hard it is,even > > as a superior fighter to knock someone out who doesn't want you to. > > It demonstrated that none of the karate fighter's single strikes > ended the fight.>> > > You're an idiot. He is not ALLOWED to knock people out. You act like > you know something about martial arts, but you know nothing. IT IS > VERY EASY for an expert to knockout and/or kill someone with kicks > like that. Your inexperience shows through here, because in Shotoakna > EVERY competition, the fighter is trained to HIT with MINIMAL force, > and NOT knock people out or injur them. That would be STUPID ! ! ! > Only idiots do that, and they can obly get away with it on TV because > they are not good at hitting hard and devestatingly like a Shotokan, > or a couple of other styles like the guy in the video above (But he > might not survive in a real fight against Shotokan, because his > strike to knock someone so hard, shows a lack of experience of how > dangerous that is) > You idiot, you just showed how little you know about this. Every > single strike , the fight was stopped because with full force you can > kill someone. Stick to your stupid TV rating bullshit fantasy world. > > OffWorld >
[FairfieldLife] The Wheel of Consciousness
Haven't read this, but it sounds fascinating: "The Head Trip - Adventures on the Wheel of Consciousness" by Jeff Warren http://www.headtrip.ca/thebook.htm >From the introduction, quoted on the site: "Tree planting got me thinking about consciousness because the unvarying sameness of the days provided a perfect backdrop for alterations. I noticed the differences, and they seemed to correspond to shifts more fundamental than those of mood or even alertness. In the previous few paragraphs I've described seven distinct states of consciousness that most of us have likely experienced at some time or another: general alertness, daydreaming, deep absorption, a heightened present, sleep-onset imagery, dreaming, and the very beginnings of a lucid dream. Some of these occur with strict regularity, others are more rare. And although a few of them may sound mystical, one of the main preoccupations of this book is how far science has come in shedding light on their character "This psychological and neuroscientific and experiential story of how consciousness changes over twenty-four hours is the first story I want to tell, and it forms the loose skeleton of this book. But there is a larger, more important story, one that involves some of consciousness's more dramatic variations, because overtop and between these three primary states, the mind is capable of visiting some very strange destinations. Since I can't reliably talk about the shifting experience of consciousness without test-driving some of those changes myself, I have gone on six adventures, six major head trips that ended up challenging everything I thought I knew about the expanse of consciousness and how our minds relate to our brains" Here's his Wheel of Consciousness diagram: http://www.headtrip.ca/index.htm Included are "Trance" and "Pure Consciousness Event" (different stages). Video of a lecture by the author on the topic of the book (20 minutes): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq-045g0trY There are a couple of hints in what he says that *might* suggest he's a TMer, but they aren't overt enough to be sure.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Duveyoung wrote: > > Bhairitu, I think you're a titch too absolute on your critique of > > Judy. > > > I've been arguing and sometimes agreeing with Judy for years > so my POV comes with experience. And like Barry, Bhairitu has developed the siddhi of being able to determine why I post what I post without knowing *what* I've posted.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Duveyoung wrote: > Bhairitu, I think you're a titch too absolute on your critique of > Judy. > I've been arguing and sometimes agreeing with Judy for years so my POV comes with experience.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Concentration Camps Already Built in America -- FOR Americans? Video with Ev
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think anyone who's used the term "BushCo" is already on a list > that this law applies to: this law defines millions of people to > be terrorist-suspects RIGHT NOW. > > Judy, you've tossed cold-anti-conspiratorial water on us here -- > do you think this law is a tell? Well, first of all, it ain't a law yet. It still has to pass the Senate and go through a conference committee. If it gets that far, I doubt it'll come out unscathed. I think it could be used as you suggest; there's been quite a bit of commentary from legal experts, among others, about how broad and vague the wording is. That isn't a "tell" so much as it is something to keep a very close eye on. But I don't think that was the intention, and I certainly don't think anybody's sifting through Web forums and adding anyone who uses the term "BushCo" to a list of terrorist suspects to be rounded up and thrown into concentration camps.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Right on, Trinity. Think of van Gogh. Was he nuts? Yeah, maybe. But what a superb artist he was by any standard. And I totally agree about "yogic disorder" and "meditational disorder." "Siddhi disorder" would be good also, wouldn't it? We could prolly break it down into several different kinds. t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word > tells everything about a person." Sure, but he doesn't publicly judge people according to this. He doesn't condemn people because they have a 'Yogic disorder' or a 'meditational disorder'. I've heard him say this too, that the voice reveals everything (even though I'm not sure now that I believe it.) But I always understood it to be a sort of private knowledge of an enlightened person, rather than a means of diagnosis of illness. Now, even if it was a diagnosis, it would be okay in the hands of a doctor, IF a person comes to you and wants to be diagnosed, that is a person feels he is sick and trusts you you can help him. And then, as a doctor, you wouldn't go around and shout out your 'knowledge', and judge this persons life-work publicly, right? You would be a bad doctor if you did so. So, its not the concept as such, which is bad, nothing wrong with 'vata derangement' as a diagnosis, its rather its application, which is mean and closed-minded. > Why would it surprise if Vaj has a > spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and degrees of > "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but given > his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him being fascistic > in temperament is beyond me. Hmm, he is not always so gentle, but never mind, its not his temperament, or his character, or I wouldn't call him a fascist anyway. I called the particular *mind-set* fascist, that is to take a theory, lets say it, a belief, and take it as an absolute criterion in judging a persons action as making sense or as being 'healthy'. This reminds you of fascism, who regarded art created by unhealthy people as unworthy of existence. (Okay he didn't say this, but he used it as a matter of judgment) > Yeah, if he was running an ashram, he > might deny someone membership based on his "voice's feel," but woe > unto anyone who doesn't go "by his guts" in so many instances in life. Sure, who wouldn't. But I wouldn't at any price want to be in an ashram run by him. > Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the streets > with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was near -- it > probably was the voices of the scammers more than anything else, methinks. > > Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices of > others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be a > profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. I have no problem with that. Thats something you do for yourself. The problem comes if you make your intuitions or gut feelings the criterion of absolute truths and give them a pseudo-scientific touch. > We've got TM guys just feeling a pulse and telling you your past > lifetimes, and everyone in the TMO just didn't even blink at this > "ability," Yes, really? I do blink at this, and I always did. > and so it really is silly for everyone here to be even > thinking Vaj's concepts are "way out there." They maybe way out there or not, for me its the application of these concepts I find disturbing. He doesn't just say, from his voice, that he has a 'Vata derangement', but that rather his whole life and art reflects it, and he implicates that this is the ground on which to judge his art. I find this connection he makes of his art, and his supposed 'derangements' weird to say the least. Whereas Angela and me think that Art should be looked at in its own right. IOW the artist could be sick, even mentally ill, but this wouldn't automatically render his art as worthless. It could be still valid, inspiring and full of meaning. Now in this case of DL there is no proof at all that he is sick, neither mentally nor otherwise, its all just a lay-persons assessment of a medical theory which is for most medical persons a pseudoscience. He throws in some more high sounding words like 'yogic disorders' (WTF is this?) and 'meditational disorders', all just from hearing his voice. What is odd is the way, with a sense of absolute certainty, Dr. Vaj diagnoses his art according to this feeble observations. Honestly it were these two words which made me take off, 'yogic disorders' and 'meditational disorders'. This is such a crap. > Everyone can read the > voices of others with a very high level of expertise, Do as you like, but I appreciate you don't go around shopping with your insights.
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word > tells everything about a person." Sure, but he doesn't publicly judge people according to this. He doesn't condemn people because they have a 'Yogic disorder' or a 'meditational disorder'. I've heard him say this too, that the voice reveals everything (even though I'm not sure now that I believe it.) But I always understood it to be a sort of private knowledge of an enlightened person, rather than a means of diagnosis of illness. Now, even if it was a diagnosis, it would be okay in the hands of a doctor, IF a person comes to you and wants to be diagnosed, that is a person feels he is sick and trusts you you can help him. And then, as a doctor, you wouldn't go around and shout out your 'knowledge', and judge this persons life-work publicly, right? You would be a bad doctor if you did so. So, its not the concept as such, which is bad, nothing wrong with 'vata derangement' as a diagnosis, its rather its application, which is mean and closed-minded. > Why would it surprise if Vaj has a > spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and degrees of > "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but given > his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him being fascistic > in temperament is beyond me. Hmm, he is not always so gentle, but never mind, its not his temperament, or his character, or I wouldn't call him a fascist anyway. I called the particular *mind-set* fascist, that is to take a theory, lets say it, a belief, and take it as an absolute criterion in judging a persons action as making sense or as being 'healthy'. This reminds you of fascism, who regarded art created by unhealthy people as unworthy of existence. (Okay he didn't say this, but he used it as a matter of judgment) > Yeah, if he was running an ashram, he > might deny someone membership based on his "voice's feel," but woe > unto anyone who doesn't go "by his guts" in so many instances in life. Sure, who wouldn't. But I wouldn't at any price want to be in an ashram run by him. > Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the streets > with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was near -- it > probably was the voices of the scammers more than anything else, methinks. > > Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices of > others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be a > profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. I have no problem with that. Thats something you do for yourself. The problem comes if you make your intuitions or gut feelings the criterion of absolute truths and give them a pseudo-scientific touch. > We've got TM guys just feeling a pulse and telling you your past > lifetimes, and everyone in the TMO just didn't even blink at this > "ability," Yes, really? I do blink at this, and I always did. > and so it really is silly for everyone here to be even > thinking Vaj's concepts are "way out there." They maybe way out there or not, for me its the application of these concepts I find disturbing. He doesn't just say, from his voice, that he has a 'Vata derangement', but that rather his whole life and art reflects it, and he implicates that this is the ground on which to judge his art. I find this connection he makes of his art, and his supposed 'derangements' weird to say the least. Whereas Angela and me think that Art should be looked at in its own right. IOW the artist could be sick, even mentally ill, but this wouldn't automatically render his art as worthless. It could be still valid, inspiring and full of meaning. Now in this case of DL there is no proof at all that he is sick, neither mentally nor otherwise, its all just a lay-persons assessment of a medical theory which is for most medical persons a pseudoscience. He throws in some more high sounding words like 'yogic disorders' (WTF is this?) and 'meditational disorders', all just from hearing his voice. What is odd is the way, with a sense of absolute certainty, Dr. Vaj diagnoses his art according to this feeble observations. Honestly it were these two words which made me take off, 'yogic disorders' and 'meditational disorders'. This is such a crap. > Everyone can read the > voices of others with a very high level of expertise, Do as you like, but I appreciate you don't go around shopping with your insights. I would not claim high level of expertise for doing so.I accept that a person bases his own decissons and opinions on such criteria, and why take only the voice, why no photo? In this case I must say that I have seen a photo of him (I mean Vaj) > so, no, Vaj is > not even being a "silly Buddhist whose precepts are only understood by > Vaj." This voice thingy is sheer common sense, and I, for one, like > the challenge of having Vaj's concepts enlarging the sc
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Yes, the schoolmarm in me dies hard. Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Frankly, I find myself bewildered that Angela and Judy aren't best buds. Both love the small print. If these two ever stop the cat fight, and if they both get on the same side, the rest of us are doomed -- we'd all be minding our p's and q's a whole notch more attentively. Despite its stink, bullshit is, like musk, sometimes pleasant if mixed into the post in small enough quantities. Between these two, who'd get away with anything ever again if they start a tag-team match against the rest of us? Angela, I am impressed by your history, but like me, you do like just to say stuff and hope that memory serves enough to not be caught with your facts askew -- I am surprised at how often I have somehow gotten certain facts "changed" by simply not recalling them regularly enough to top off and freshen them. So far, I think you're delivering some scholarship here, but I do think you're invested in many concepts to the point of being hardwired too much to allow nuancing. But that's just a feeling on my part, don't ask me to sift your posts for why I do have that feeling. I gave over 500 TM first lectures, so I'm a practiced bullshitter, and sometimes I can project that on you, mostly not though. Judy, you're a hard case, like that professor in The Paper Chase -- a good hard, but hardassed too. I don't know why I'm trying to be a shadkhan here, but I do deeply wish you two could have lunch together somedayand do that girly bonding thingy. Bhairitu, I think you're a titch too absolute on your critique of Judy. Barry's attitude needs a two-by-four whacking, and she's got the mojo and motivation.too much in fact, cuz, after kapowing him, geeeze, still she has enough left over for me, and that sucks. Thus, I find myself liking that Barry distracts her to some degree from me! Go Barry! Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Angela, Judy is just trying to drag you down and make you waste messages > on a reply. Just walk away. Many of us here have read or heard the > information you cite regarding that WWII was planned (and also a > WWIII). I'm not going to waste my time on looking up stuff for someone > on the net unless I already have at my fingertips. Sometimes I hear > things while I'm driving around listing to Air America Radio like a > guest on Thom Hartmann or a guest on Alex Jones (who by the way will > often post links to his guest web site or book which sometimes Thom > fails to do). Sometimes I get information from books that have to be > read in their full context or their claim can be easily shot down. And > sometimes I read things years ago (40 or more in some cases) and I won't > remember the source but I remember what was said. > > I, over the years have learned to walk away from trollish flame wars > because I feel I have proven my point only going a few replies deep into > the topic and those who have minds can see I've done so just by reading > the thread. It is not at all about having the last word. > > > Angela Mailander wrote: > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. > > > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. > > > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > > > But not any idiot would know which names from > > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > > do you want? > > > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > > authoritative. > > > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > > historians. > > > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My major source is E. R. Carmin. I also like Quina von > Brackenhausen, Gerda Hagenau, and a few others--do you read > German or French? Both, with a good dictionary. Thanks for finally coming up with three of the five names I asked for. I'm a little surprised you didn't give citations to the works in question, though; I should think that would have been understood to be part of my request. Can you supply titles, dates, and publishers? > But here's something everyone might find interesting: > Bill Moyers: The Secret Government > http://nhnecommunity.ning.com/video/video/show?id=650220%3AVideo% 3A13924 Moyers isn't exactly a scholar, but he's a very fine journalist, and this is one of his better pieces. I don't believe he says anything in it about a third war having been planned, though, does he?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thank you, Bhairitu, I think you're right. It is pointless to enter into a disagreement with Judy. It's certainly the case that a few sources do not tell the story of ten years' worth of research into what makes the 20th century tick. Nobody suggested it was, Angela. Try another straw man. And remember, the "disagreement" you entered into was whether you were going to respond to my request that you cite your sources. Very odd, for a scholar.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > TurquoiseB wrote: > > Personally, I think you two gals should suck Delia > > into this discussion. Then *three* of you could play > > "my dick is longer than yours." > > > Is Delia hanging out here? I haven't seen any posts from her yet. > Maybe we should get into a veganism war. :) She left two posts about the Davies article, but sometimes she just hits and runs rather than hanging around for discussion. I hope she does come back. Delia is a *real* scholar, though, so I'd happily step aside and watch if she wanted to take on Angela. If somebody asked Delia to cite sources, we'd be quickly buried in them, complete with lengthy quotes (translated from the original language, if necessary) and detailed analysis. And it's really too darn bad that Delia didn't turn up until after Bronte had left. A meeting of those two minds would have been something to see.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Angela, Judy is just trying to drag you down and make you waste > messages on a reply. ROTFL!! All I did was ask her which historians she was referring to. If anything, *she's* wasting messages trying to wiggle out of fulfilling what should have been a simple request. Just walk away. Many of us here have read or heard the > information you cite regarding that WWII was planned (and also a > WWIII). I'm not going to waste my time on looking up stuff for > someone on the net unless I already have at my fingertips. She already *has* it at her fingertips, Bhairitu. You obviously didn't bother reading the post where she claimed to have a 25-page bibliography. You really ought to read the thread before you take sides if you don't want to look supremely foolish. Sometimes I hear > things while I'm driving around listing to Air America Radio like a > guest on Thom Hartmann or a guest on Alex Jones (who by the way > will often post links to his guest web site or book which sometimes > Thom fails to do). Sometimes I get information from books that > have to be read in their full context or their claim can be easily > shot down. And sometimes I read things years ago (40 or more in > some cases) and I won't remember the source but I remember what was > said. But I don't believe you claim to be a *scholar*, Bhairitu. No scholar would expect a claim to be taken seriously based on such flimsy sourcing. In any case, if this kind of thing is all she's got, she ought to just say so. I think that's probably what you'd do. Instead she waves around her "25- page bibliography" but shillies and shallies about citing anything on it. She's now finally managed to cough up three of the five names I asked for (without citations, however), so we'll take it from there. > I, over the years have learned to walk away from trollish flame > wars because I feel I have proven my point only going a few > replies deep into the topic and those who have minds can see I've > done so just by reading the thread. It is not at all about having > the last word. Again, you just make yourself look foolish. This wasn't that kind of thread (as anyone who had actually read it would know). Really bad showing from you here, Bhairitu. If you want to help Angela out, you need to do a lot better than this.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Frankly, I find myself bewildered that Angela and Judy aren't best buds. Both love the small print. If these two ever stop the cat fight, and if they both get on the same side, the rest of us are doomed -- we'd all be minding our p's and q's a whole notch more attentively. Despite its stink, bullshit is, like musk, sometimes pleasant if mixed into the post in small enough quantities. Between these two, who'd get away with anything ever again if they start a tag-team match against the rest of us? Angela, I am impressed by your history, but like me, you do like just to say stuff and hope that memory serves enough to not be caught with your facts askew -- I am surprised at how often I have somehow gotten certain facts "changed" by simply not recalling them regularly enough to top off and freshen them. So far, I think you're delivering some scholarship here, but I do think you're invested in many concepts to the point of being hardwired too much to allow nuancing. But that's just a feeling on my part, don't ask me to sift your posts for why I do have that feeling. I gave over 500 TM first lectures, so I'm a practiced bullshitter, and sometimes I can project that on you, mostly not though. Judy, you're a hard case, like that professor in The Paper Chase -- a good hard, but hardassed too. I don't know why I'm trying to be a shadkhan here, but I do deeply wish you two could have lunch together somedayand do that girly bonding thingy. Bhairitu, I think you're a titch too absolute on your critique of Judy. Barry's attitude needs a two-by-four whacking, and she's got the mojo and motivation.too much in fact, cuz, after kapowing him, geeeze, still she has enough left over for me, and that sucks. Thus, I find myself liking that Barry distracts her to some degree from me! Go Barry! Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Angela, Judy is just trying to drag you down and make you waste messages > on a reply. Just walk away. Many of us here have read or heard the > information you cite regarding that WWII was planned (and also a > WWIII). I'm not going to waste my time on looking up stuff for someone > on the net unless I already have at my fingertips. Sometimes I hear > things while I'm driving around listing to Air America Radio like a > guest on Thom Hartmann or a guest on Alex Jones (who by the way will > often post links to his guest web site or book which sometimes Thom > fails to do). Sometimes I get information from books that have to be > read in their full context or their claim can be easily shot down. And > sometimes I read things years ago (40 or more in some cases) and I won't > remember the source but I remember what was said. > > I, over the years have learned to walk away from trollish flame wars > because I feel I have proven my point only going a few replies deep into > the topic and those who have minds can see I've done so just by reading > the thread. It is not at all about having the last word. > > > Angela Mailander wrote: > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. > > > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. > > > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > > > But not any idiot would know which names from > > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > > do you want? > > > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > > authoritative. > > > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > > historians. > > > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Pulse diagnosis is now taught at various medical schools, Harvard and the University of Iowa among them. The blind man in China that massaged my feet once a week for two years could tell everything that was going on with me from touching my feet. He used pulse, but other things as well. a Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Vaj wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:49 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: >> > >> > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word >> > > tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has >> > > a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and >> > > degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? >> > >> > It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're >> > so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas >> > pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by >> > hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just >> > wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. >> >> I knew a Chinese Tonic Herbalist who could >> diagnose a patient by hearing them walk. The >> layout of his office was set up so that the >> client enters, and must walk around a few >> barriers, unseen by the herbalist, while he >> listens to the sound of their footsteps. When >> I first met this guy for a consultation, the >> sliding shoji screen to his office was closed, >> and through it he told me about several of the >> problems I'd come to talk to him about before >> he even had ever seen me or taken a pulse >> reading. Go figure. I don't know how he does >> it, but it's pretty impressive. >> >> The herbs he prescribed cleared everything up, too > > > The infamous TM vaidya (who Mahesh got the Amrit Kalash formulation > from), Balraj Maharishi, "takes the pulse" (i.e. assesses imbalances) > from across a room, often dimly lit. He doesn't need to take a pulse. > Vasant Lad has some siddhi that just hearing the person talk, and > tuning into them can diagnose over the phone (unfortunately he's also > booked like a year ahead!). Lad also has (or had) a gentleman who > could see through the body when there was imbalance and locate the > location and cause, kinda like a psychic cat scan. > > It's amazing how we can extend our senses. I've had a pulse diagnosis from Dr. Lad at a weekend workshop he did Berkeley over ten years ago. He was demonstrating how to read the prakriti (constitution) from a deep pulse and went through the audience and took pulses. I came up pitta-kapha which probably the most common constitution in the US. Deep pulses are easy to take whereas the vakriti or the functioning doshas are difficult via pulse plus you can also read the subdoshas with a little training too. Lad wrote an excellent book on the subject. And yes it isn't difficult to identify vakriti by voice. Writing my be a little more difficult as the person may write a piece or email in one state, sit on it and edit in another state. Sometimes overall reading posts we can get an idea of the person's constitution and sometimes if they are way off balanced with their vakriti. And of course if you even take good layman's course in ayurveda, often even a weekend workshop, you can learn to identify prakriti by appearance and even signs of the vakriti. Ayurveda is a tremendous tool and adapted to a world populace (which is a phase it is undergoing) could be a wonderful way to reduce disease and lower the cost of health care. Unfortunately we have a medical profession in the US that doesn't want to be a "profession" any more but a "business." And if you are able to stay out of the doctor's office because you're sidestepped an illness just by using herbs in your kitchen cabinet or altering your diet a little that is bad for the "medical business." The funny thing is that lost in antiquity is probably that some of allopathic medicine has it's roots in ayurveda. If it didn't why did the pharmaceutical companies attempt to patent the Indian herbs used in ayurveda? I think some roots of allopathic medicine could be traced to successful cures British doctors brought back with them from India until the King mandated that they could not do so (or even hang out with ayurvedic practitioners). The same is true with Chinese medicine which as a lot of value and especially if you note the prime over the counter cold cure is the synthetic version of Ma Huang (Ephedra -- which by the way grows wild all over the place). Identifying yin and yang is a very powerful diagnostic tool. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Vaj wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:49 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: >> > >> > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word >> > > tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has >> > > a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and >> > > degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? >> > >> > It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're >> > so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas >> > pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by >> > hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just >> > wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. >> >> I knew a Chinese Tonic Herbalist who could >> diagnose a patient by hearing them walk. The >> layout of his office was set up so that the >> client enters, and must walk around a few >> barriers, unseen by the herbalist, while he >> listens to the sound of their footsteps. When >> I first met this guy for a consultation, the >> sliding shoji screen to his office was closed, >> and through it he told me about several of the >> problems I'd come to talk to him about before >> he even had ever seen me or taken a pulse >> reading. Go figure. I don't know how he does >> it, but it's pretty impressive. >> >> The herbs he prescribed cleared everything up, too > > > The infamous TM vaidya (who Mahesh got the Amrit Kalash formulation > from), Balraj Maharishi, "takes the pulse" (i.e. assesses imbalances) > from across a room, often dimly lit. He doesn't need to take a pulse. > Vasant Lad has some siddhi that just hearing the person talk, and > tuning into them can diagnose over the phone (unfortunately he's also > booked like a year ahead!). Lad also has (or had) a gentleman who > could see through the body when there was imbalance and locate the > location and cause, kinda like a psychic cat scan. > > It's amazing how we can extend our senses. I've had a pulse diagnosis from Dr. Lad at a weekend workshop he did Berkeley over ten years ago. He was demonstrating how to read the prakriti (constitution) from a deep pulse and went through the audience and took pulses. I came up pitta-kapha which probably the most common constitution in the US. Deep pulses are easy to take whereas the vakriti or the functioning doshas are difficult via pulse plus you can also read the subdoshas with a little training too. Lad wrote an excellent book on the subject. And yes it isn't difficult to identify vakriti by voice. Writing my be a little more difficult as the person may write a piece or email in one state, sit on it and edit in another state. Sometimes overall reading posts we can get an idea of the person's constitution and sometimes if they are way off balanced with their vakriti. And of course if you even take good layman's course in ayurveda, often even a weekend workshop, you can learn to identify prakriti by appearance and even signs of the vakriti. Ayurveda is a tremendous tool and adapted to a world populace (which is a phase it is undergoing) could be a wonderful way to reduce disease and lower the cost of health care. Unfortunately we have a medical profession in the US that doesn't want to be a "profession" any more but a "business." And if you are able to stay out of the doctor's office because you're sidestepped an illness just by using herbs in your kitchen cabinet or altering your diet a little that is bad for the "medical business." The funny thing is that lost in antiquity is probably that some of allopathic medicine has it's roots in ayurveda. If it didn't why did the pharmaceutical companies attempt to patent the Indian herbs used in ayurveda? I think some roots of allopathic medicine could be traced to successful cures British doctors brought back with them from India until the King mandated that they could not do so (or even hang out with ayurvedic practitioners). The same is true with Chinese medicine which as a lot of value and especially if you note the prime over the counter cold cure is the synthetic version of Ma Huang (Ephedra -- which by the way grows wild all over the place). Identifying yin and yang is a very powerful diagnostic tool.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Thank you, Bhairitu, I think you're right. It is pointless to enter into a disagreement with Judy. It's certainly the case that a few sources do not tell the story of ten years' worth of research into what makes the 20th century tick. And then, even after ten years of research, I cannot say I'm an expert. My expertise lies (double meaning intended) in literary theory and criticism as forms of epistemology and in philosophy of language. I've developed a language teaching methodology (theory and practice) that's light years ahead of the state of the art. I'm also a dynamite cook and seamstress. And I've made a living (not a great living, mind you, but a living) as a practicing artist. I've got the greenest thumb of anyone I know. Plants talk to me. Beyond that I'm as dumb as the next person, and getting dumber year by year. Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Angela, Judy is just trying to drag you down and make you waste messages on a reply. Just walk away. Many of us here have read or heard the information you cite regarding that WWII was planned (and also a WWIII). I'm not going to waste my time on looking up stuff for someone on the net unless I already have at my fingertips. Sometimes I hear things while I'm driving around listing to Air America Radio like a guest on Thom Hartmann or a guest on Alex Jones (who by the way will often post links to his guest web site or book which sometimes Thom fails to do). Sometimes I get information from books that have to be read in their full context or their claim can be easily shot down. And sometimes I read things years ago (40 or more in some cases) and I won't remember the source but I remember what was said. I, over the years have learned to walk away from trollish flame wars because I feel I have proven my point only going a few replies deep into the topic and those who have minds can see I've done so just by reading the thread. It is not at all about having the last word. Angela Mailander wrote: > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are > the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out > the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted > by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. > Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
TurquoiseB wrote: > Personally, I think you two gals should suck Delia > into this discussion. Then *three* of you could play > "my dick is longer than yours." > > :-) > > Is Delia hanging out here? I haven't seen any posts from her yet. Maybe we should get into a veganism war. :)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Angela, Judy is just trying to drag you down and make you waste messages on a reply. Just walk away. Many of us here have read or heard the information you cite regarding that WWII was planned (and also a WWIII). I'm not going to waste my time on looking up stuff for someone on the net unless I already have at my fingertips. Sometimes I hear things while I'm driving around listing to Air America Radio like a guest on Thom Hartmann or a guest on Alex Jones (who by the way will often post links to his guest web site or book which sometimes Thom fails to do). Sometimes I get information from books that have to be read in their full context or their claim can be easily shot down. And sometimes I read things years ago (40 or more in some cases) and I won't remember the source but I remember what was said. I, over the years have learned to walk away from trollish flame wars because I feel I have proven my point only going a few replies deep into the topic and those who have minds can see I've done so just by reading the thread. It is not at all about having the last word. Angela Mailander wrote: > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the > most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the > bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by > everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. > Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
Watch this. > This guy in black commits a CLASSIC move used in Shotokan (also used > in other karate techniques such as what he is doing.) Pat Smith is a professional kick boxer. He lost to Royce Gracie in the finals of UFC2. It is a perfect demonstration of one of my points. The traditional karate guy got owned by a guy who actually fights full contact, full power. But it also proves my other point. Pat never advanced in UFC because he didn't cross train, so once he was taken to the ground he tapped out quickly. He was another guy who loved to brag about how no one could take him to the ground, till they did. The most humiliating thing about his loss to Royce was that he tapped before he was submitted. Royce just held him down and kept punching his face repeatedly while holding hi with his legs so he couldn't escape. Not to knock him out, but to punish him for all the smack he had talked before the fight. Since Pat had no grappling skills he tapped out because he couldn't stop the blows. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > > wrote: > > > > > > Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu > > > > > > Ouch... > > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=fqqSmf8qATc > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > The karate fighters seemed more realistically trained. >> > > I agree, I wouldn't discount Kung Fu, I was just putting it out > there. The karate guy is pretty good though, and some of the fastest > knock-outs in UFC have been from CLASSIC Shotokan karate moves. > > Watch this. > This guy in black commits a CLASSIC move used in Shotokan (also used > in other karate techniques such as what he is doing.) The other guy > he is fighting may not be very good, but the guy in black is using > NOWHERE NEAR full force and it could have killed the guy. This is a > CLASSIC Shotokan move, and most experts could pull this off if needed > against anyone. So you, Dr. Pete, and Turquoise are 'FOS' when you > say that someone could not be pretty easily killed with one move if > the expert is not VERY careful. Therefore Kmiti style competition was > developed. > > Watch this, then let's see you say someone cannot be killed in one > strike. This guy does not use ANYWHERE NEAR the full force of a > karate kick: > http://youtube.com/watch?v=k0jM1VhqbC0 > > However at the lower stages, KungFu does tend to attract people who > are more into the glamor of it (at least at the early stages). A bit > like TurquoiseB realizing he had to be disciplined and humble to > train in Shotokan, so he takes off to try some styles that seem more > glamorous to him. ;-) He is not even up to the task of discussing > these points using reasoning, presumably because he really isn't > very experienced in martial arts. > > < I don't count > > out Kung Fu as a style because it was developed in an era when it > was > > actually used as a martial art like Japanese jiu jitsu. It was not > > developed for sport. It was also a good demo at how hard it is,even > > as a superior fighter to knock someone out who doesn't want you to. > > It demonstrated that none of the karate fighter's single strikes > ended the fight.>> > > You're an idiot. He is not ALLOWED to knock people out. You act like > you know something about martial arts, but you know nothing. IT IS > VERY EASY for an expert to knockout and/or kill someone with kicks > like that. Your inexperience shows through here, because in Shotoakna > EVERY competition, the fighter is trained to HIT with MINIMAL force, > and NOT knock people out or injur them. That would be STUPID ! ! ! > Only idiots do that, and they can obly get away with it on TV because > they are not good at hitting hard and devestatingly like a Shotokan, > or a couple of other styles like the guy in the video above (But he > might not survive in a real fight against Shotokan, because his > strike to knock someone so hard, shows a lack of experience of how > dangerous that is) > You idiot, you just showed how little you know about this. Every > single strike , the fight was stopped because with full force you can > kill someone. Stick to your stupid TV rating bullshit fantasy world. > > OffWorld >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
> You're an idiot. How about cutting the crap with calling me an idiot for disagreeing with you. I am not an idiot bit I do have another POV. So you have never seen a Shotokan fighter knock someone out? This means you have no evidence for your claim about how powerful it is. So where is the evidence of such a claim being true besides you asserting it? There are plenty of fighting sport where people get knocked out. You don't have to kill someone to prove that a martial art has this ability. You act like > you know something about martial arts, but you know nothing. How about providing some more evidence for your claim instead of insulting absolutist statement like this? I am not "acting like" I know something about martial arts, I do. I just don't assume that your claims are true without evidence. So how about cutting the posturing and providing some? IT IS > VERY EASY for an expert to knockout and/or kill someone with kicks > like that. Your inexperience shows through here, because in Shotoakna > EVERY competition, the fighter is trained to HIT with MINIMAL force, > and NOT knock people out or injur them. That would be STUPID ! ! ! > Only idiots do that, and they can obly get away with it on TV because > they are not good at hitting hard and devestatingly like a Shotokan, > or a couple of other styles like the guy in the video above (But he > might not survive in a real fight against Shotokan, because his > strike to knock someone so hard, shows a lack of experience of how > dangerous that is) > You idiot, you just showed how little you know about this. Every > single strike , the fight was stopped because with full force you can > kill someone. Stick to your stupid TV rating bullshit fantasy world. > > OffWorld > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > > wrote: > > > > > > Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu > > > > > > Ouch... > > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=fqqSmf8qATc > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > The karate fighters seemed more realistically trained. >> > > I agree, I wouldn't discount Kung Fu, I was just putting it out > there. The karate guy is pretty good though, and some of the fastest > knock-outs in UFC have been from CLASSIC Shotokan karate moves. > > Watch this. > This guy in black commits a CLASSIC move used in Shotokan (also used > in other karate techniques such as what he is doing.) The other guy > he is fighting may not be very good, but the guy in black is using > NOWHERE NEAR full force and it could have killed the guy. This is a > CLASSIC Shotokan move, and most experts could pull this off if needed > against anyone. So you, Dr. Pete, and Turquoise are 'FOS' when you > say that someone could not be pretty easily killed with one move if > the expert is not VERY careful. Therefore Kmiti style competition was > developed. > > Watch this, then let's see you say someone cannot be killed in one > strike. This guy does not use ANYWHERE NEAR the full force of a > karate kick: > http://youtube.com/watch?v=k0jM1VhqbC0 > > However at the lower stages, KungFu does tend to attract people who > are more into the glamor of it (at least at the early stages). A bit > like TurquoiseB realizing he had to be disciplined and humble to > train in Shotokan, so he takes off to try some styles that seem more > glamorous to him. ;-) He is not even up to the task of discussing > these points using reasoning, presumably because he really isn't > very experienced in martial arts. > > < I don't count > > out Kung Fu as a style because it was developed in an era when it > was > > actually used as a martial art like Japanese jiu jitsu. It was not > > developed for sport. It was also a good demo at how hard it is,even > > as a superior fighter to knock someone out who doesn't want you to. > > It demonstrated that none of the karate fighter's single strikes > ended the fight.>> > > You're an idiot. He is not ALLOWED to knock people out. You act like > you know something about martial arts, but you know nothing. IT IS > VERY EASY for an expert to knockout and/or kill someone with kicks > like that. Your inexperience shows through here, because in Shotoakna > EVERY competition, the fighter is trained to HIT with MINIMAL force, > and NOT knock people out or injur them. That would be STUPID ! ! ! > Only idiots do that, and they can obly get away with it on TV because > they are not good at hitting hard and devestatingly like a Shotokan, > or a couple of other styles like the guy in the video above (But he > might not survive in a real fight against Shotokan, because his > strike to knock someone so hard, shows a lack of experience of how > dangerous that is) > You idiot, you just showed how little you know about this. Every > single strike , the fight was stoppe
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > wrote: > > > > Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu > > > > Ouch... > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=fqqSmf8qATc > > > > OffWorld > > > > The karate fighters seemed more realistically trained. >> I agree, I wouldn't discount Kung Fu, I was just putting it out there. The karate guy is pretty good though, and some of the fastest knock-outs in UFC have been from CLASSIC Shotokan karate moves. Watch this. This guy in black commits a CLASSIC move used in Shotokan (also used in other karate techniques such as what he is doing.) The other guy he is fighting may not be very good, but the guy in black is using NOWHERE NEAR full force and it could have killed the guy. This is a CLASSIC Shotokan move, and most experts could pull this off if needed against anyone. So you, Dr. Pete, and Turquoise are 'FOS' when you say that someone could not be pretty easily killed with one move if the expert is not VERY careful. Therefore Kmiti style competition was developed. Watch this, then let's see you say someone cannot be killed in one strike. This guy does not use ANYWHERE NEAR the full force of a karate kick: http://youtube.com/watch?v=k0jM1VhqbC0 However at the lower stages, KungFu does tend to attract people who are more into the glamor of it (at least at the early stages). A bit like TurquoiseB realizing he had to be disciplined and humble to train in Shotokan, so he takes off to try some styles that seem more glamorous to him. ;-) He is not even up to the task of discussing these points using reasoning, presumably because he really isn't very experienced in martial arts. < I don't count > out Kung Fu as a style because it was developed in an era when it was > actually used as a martial art like Japanese jiu jitsu. It was not > developed for sport. It was also a good demo at how hard it is,even > as a superior fighter to knock someone out who doesn't want you to. > It demonstrated that none of the karate fighter's single strikes ended the fight.>> You're an idiot. He is not ALLOWED to knock people out. You act like you know something about martial arts, but you know nothing. IT IS VERY EASY for an expert to knockout and/or kill someone with kicks like that. Your inexperience shows through here, because in Shotoakna EVERY competition, the fighter is trained to HIT with MINIMAL force, and NOT knock people out or injur them. That would be STUPID ! ! ! Only idiots do that, and they can obly get away with it on TV because they are not good at hitting hard and devestatingly like a Shotokan, or a couple of other styles like the guy in the video above (But he might not survive in a real fight against Shotokan, because his strike to knock someone so hard, shows a lack of experience of how dangerous that is) You idiot, you just showed how little you know about this. Every single strike , the fight was stopped because with full force you can kill someone. Stick to your stupid TV rating bullshit fantasy world. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells becomes metadiscussion on how we communicate here
Curtis is often able to recalibrate> his emotions when addressing me> This made me think about how I relate to people here Edg. For me it isn't so much re-calibrating emotions, I don't really have an emotion for you as a person. I take each post as a new opportunity to connect. That said, I am reviewing the posts when I am the most snarky and I believe they come after an attempt has been made to give a counter point and the person responds without incorporating any of what my point was in their post. In other words completely blown off my response. I feel that this gives me permission to just goof on their post instead of dealing with them more politely. You have been the target of particularly dickish behavior that I felt justified in because I felt you were projecting some pretty nasty stuff in judgment of Turq and I. This was the whole "predator" series. I'm not saying I am justified, this is just how I view it. I also notice that I can be a dick when I feel that the poster is claiming something I don't believe they could know and using it in a "superior" way. This is highly subjective and I usually let this kind of post sit for a while before firing. There could be some justified criticism for me for these posts. But taking each post with a bit of amnesia about past exchanges has helped me discover that some of the people I have had a history of weird exchanges can come up with some of the coolest stuff for me to use to enter a new perspective. I count Judy, You, Bob B, and Nabby in this category. Thinking of any of these posters filtered by past exchanges would be a big mistake for me. Right now I am in a weird loop with Off and finding my way slowly out of that. Rory and Jim have taken the time to mend fences with me a few times so I see them more as complete people beyond any one post. I am also aware that they have been targets for some of my more questionable choices for my snark missiles. Whatever my rational, I prefer where we have ended up which is more respectful and friendly. Sometimes it takes of bit of offline exchanges to accomplish seeing the person through the doctrine. Spraig was an interesting case for me. I had a string of combative exchanges until I learned a bit more about his personal history. As my compassion grew for his life experience, respect grew till I lost the will to be snarky with him. For a number of posters learning more of their back story helped me see them more completely and that makes it harder to just see one post in isolation with what I know about them as a person. It isn't always enough though as you well know. I have plenty of respect for people struggling with raising kids so that is one detail that I notice effects how I react to you. Of course being vulnerable is a nice snark switch off, but I am not always perceptive enough to notice before I empty both barrels. Most everyone else I communicate with here is smooth sailing. I know enough about them personally to see their posts in context, so even when I disagree with a point it is cushioned by a respect for the person. I tend to focus on the points were I agree with many people here and don't always challenge things I don't. It just doesn't seem to be productive or fun for me with certain people. It is very challenging here to connect in a meaningful way, being true to what I believe and value, and focus more on building bridges than on tearing them down. It is so tricky that I am only successful part of the time. Plus, sometimes I can just be a dick. I gotta have some compassion for that fact cuz I gotta live with the guy! Nice topic Edg and thanks for saying some nice stuff proving that you are able to pull off exactly what I am attempting. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Judy, > > I find myself far less apt at judging tone (where the person is coming > from) in text -- the longer the piece the more I begin to gain > confidence I am getting a good take on the emotional/POV content. I > often misconstrue short posts. > > And the harsh reality is that once I've "made up my mind about > someone" I have to battle that hard-wiring the next time I read > something from that person. Curtis in particular has a wide range of > tones, and since he's pissed me off so many times, I have to grit and > just plow through his stuff to be fair to him and myself -- every > day's a new day, and, thankfully, Curtis is often able to recalibrate > his emotions when addressing me -- I bow to him for these lessons. To > me it is great heartedness. I forced myself to write those words just > now -- felt like lifting weights, but I feels my musckels agrowin' > from't. I mean, come on, how bad can a guitar player be -- the guy's > in love with straight lyrical truth. I envy his ability to talk to > anyone in a language we all have built into our DNA. > > Barry's my hardest chore of the day and, so hey, it's a good exercise > to fo
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
Yeah, I, too say, "Amen" to Trinity's assessment. "Entarted" is especially good. nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Wow, thanks to Vaj I have now learned of a whole new range of > deceases, there are 'Vata derangements' there are 'Yogic disorders' > and 'meditational disorders' and a great system of diagnosis as well: > Art (or should I say 'ent-Art -ed'?) (of course in addition to the > quivering voice). I wonder if the Nazis had a similar scientific > system of determinating (or terminating) 'Völkische Gesundheit', yeah > I think being black or a Jew was thought of as a genetic 'dis- order' ( > as opposed to the right 'order'), and well I don't have to tell you > about 'entartete Kunst' (deviating Art), or the burning of literature. > Once you have a system of determinating what is 'Right' (or balanced) > everything that deviates from it is, well a deviation, or 'out of > balance', or people doing the wrong meditation technique have > 'meditational or yogic disorders'. To me this is truely fascist > thinking, well not in the sense of terminating people, but well in the > sense of condemning them with truely pseudo-spiritual or medical > lingo. This is pseudoscientific junk of the first class. Amen :-) Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Wow, thanks to Vaj I have now learned of a whole new range of > deceases, there are 'Vata derangements' there are 'Yogic disorders' > and 'meditational disorders' and a great system of diagnosis as well: > Art (or should I say 'ent-Art -ed'?) (of course in addition to the > quivering voice). I wonder if the Nazis had a similar scientific > system of determinating (or terminating) 'Völkische Gesundheit', yeah > I think being black or a Jew was thought of as a genetic 'dis- order' ( > as opposed to the right 'order'), and well I don't have to tell you > about 'entartete Kunst' (deviating Art), or the burning of literature. > Once you have a system of determinating what is 'Right' (or balanced) > everything that deviates from it is, well a deviation, or 'out of > balance', or people doing the wrong meditation technique have > 'meditational or yogic disorders'. To me this is truely fascist > thinking, well not in the sense of terminating people, but well in the > sense of condemning them with truely pseudo-spiritual or medical > lingo. This is pseudoscientific junk of the first class. Amen :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You are right. I'm outa this "discussion." Just for the record, Angela, *you* started the "discussion." I just asked for five names from your 25-page bibliography to document your claim about the European historians who said "a third war was planned all along." The "discussion" has been about your reluctance to do so. Which, as far as I'm concerned, tells me everything I need to know about your pretensions to being a scholar. > > TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Personally, I think you two gals should suck Delia > into this discussion. Then *three* of you could play > "my dick is longer than yours." > > :-) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a > bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the > same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are > repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got > something to say on a given subject. > > > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European > historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't > think so. > > > > authfriend wrote: --- In > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > > > But not any idiot would know which names from > > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > > do you want? > > > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > > authoritative. > > > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > > historians. > > > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
My major source is E. R. Carmin. I also like Quina von Brackenhausen, Gerda Hagenau, and a few others--do you read German or French? But here's something everyone might find interesting: Bill Moyers: The Secret Government http://nhnecommunity.ning.com/video/video/show?id=650220%3AVideo%3A13924 authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. Well, if an idiot can do it, surely you can as well. > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European > historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I > don't think so. I could certainly find out of you had told the truth about there being European historians who claim "a third war was planned all along." You're stalling, Angela. Let's have the names, please. Asking a scholar for documentation of claims is pretty standard, and any legitimate scholar would be more than happy to provide it. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is a personal attack and has nothing to do with the "intentional fallacy." a SOP from Vaj whenever he's challenged. > > Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: > > Vaj, I do believe you can tell much from someone's voice, or footsteps, or face, or pulse, or any part you care to name since we do live in a holographic universe. I've spent my life learning how to see deeply into other people's writing, and you can see many things. Fear of death, for example, in the way someone closes his sentences. But to say that someone suffers from vata derangement and therefore any work of art he produces also suffers from it, is an instance of the intentional fallacy. The thing about artists is that they often function from levels deeper than their own "small" selves. > > > > Sometimes methinks yer over-edurcation gets in da way Angela. Having seen your previous performance on another list (were you asked to leave or did you just leave in a huff?) where you'd endlessly anal- yzed others writing(s) and yet would seem to have completely missed the persons message...well, it seems to be replaying here. > > > But it didn't take a Ph. D. to see that. (Please, tell us how many you have, I forgot after you told me the 20th time). > > > DL's writing and producing may be affected by it, at times. Sometimes it may not. Seasons change and so does he. > > > Ever seen Eraserhead? > > > Do we live in a holographic universe Angela or do we live in a universe that in some ways resembles the idea of a holographic universe? I always just thought it was a resemblance. > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Personally, I think you two gals should suck Delia > into this discussion. Then *three* of you could play > "my dick is longer than yours." You're a little confused. I haven't claimed to be a scholar. > > :-) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a > bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the > same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are > repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got > something to say on a given subject. > > > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European > historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't > think so. > > > > authfriend wrote: --- In > FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > > > But not any idiot would know which names from > > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > > do you want? > > > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > > authoritative. > > > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > > historians. > > > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. Well, if an idiot can do it, surely you can as well. > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European > historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I > don't think so. I could certainly find out of you had told the truth about there being European historians who claim "a third war was planned all along." You're stalling, Angela. Let's have the names, please. Asking a scholar for documentation of claims is pretty standard, and any legitimate scholar would be more than happy to provide it. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela?
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Judy, > > I find myself far less apt at judging tone (where the person is > coming from) in text -- the longer the piece the more I begin to > gain confidence I am getting a good take on the emotional/POV > content. I often misconstrue short posts. Thing about words on a page/monitor is that they *stay* there in front of you, unlike the sound of somebody's voice, so it gives the old intuition more time to refine itself, and even to incorporate intellectual analysis. > Barry's my hardest chore of the day and, so hey, it's a good > exercise to force myself to see him being logical, informed, > wise, loving, etc., but he often shows these very dynamics FWIW, after having read his posts for over a dozen years, my take is that while he's occasionally informed, the other qualities you list are almost exclusively phony. (Once in a long while there'll be a flash of something authentic.) > This is the challenge: sorting out "my shit" from "his shit." Everybody's challenge...
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Let's not forget the blind guy who clicks with his mouth and can tell what's around him -- fire hydrant, pole, car, etc. I think he "hears in 3D." Owls fly towards prey with their ears acting as radar guidance. Wolves listen to mice in tunnels under the snow, and Vak is the beginning of all things. But, hmmm, smell seems to be a very strong indicator too: there were these guys who snuck into heaven and were only "outted" cuz they were not able to disguise their odors. Faint English sounds like faint Sanskrit, so maybe faint smell of a rose is just as good as seeing it. LSD trippers often talk about hearing colors, etc. That math savant who was featured in that video we discussed here "saw" math as evolving shapes that he could read. Then there's that guy who can tell you what the song is by looking at the grooves on the record. I personally can tell if mayonnaise has gone bad, so I'm no slouch either. Wanna a bite of my egg-salad sandwich? Aye, there's the rub -- who to trust. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:49 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > > > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word > > > > tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has > > > > a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and > > > > degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > > > > > > It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're > > > so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas > > > pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by > > > hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just > > > wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. > > > > I knew a Chinese Tonic Herbalist who could > > diagnose a patient by hearing them walk. The > > layout of his office was set up so that the > > client enters, and must walk around a few > > barriers, unseen by the herbalist, while he > > listens to the sound of their footsteps. When > > I first met this guy for a consultation, the > > sliding shoji screen to his office was closed, > > and through it he told me about several of the > > problems I'd come to talk to him about before > > he even had ever seen me or taken a pulse > > reading. Go figure. I don't know how he does > > it, but it's pretty impressive. > > > > The herbs he prescribed cleared everything up, too > > > The infamous TM vaidya (who Mahesh got the Amrit Kalash formulation > from), Balraj Maharishi, "takes the pulse" (i.e. assesses imbalances) > from across a room, often dimly lit. He doesn't need to take a pulse. > Vasant Lad has some siddhi that just hearing the person talk, and > tuning into them can diagnose over the phone (unfortunately he's also > booked like a year ahead!). Lad also has (or had) a gentleman who > could see through the body when there was imbalance and locate the > location and cause, kinda like a psychic cat scan. > > It's amazing how we can extend our senses. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
You are right. I'm outa this "discussion." TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Personally, I think you two gals should suck Delia into this discussion. Then *three* of you could play "my dick is longer than yours." :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
This is a personal attack and has nothing to do with the "intentional fallacy." a Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Dec 2, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: Vaj, I do believe you can tell much from someone's voice, or footsteps, or face, or pulse, or any part you care to name since we do live in a holographic universe. I've spent my life learning how to see deeply into other people's writing, and you can see many things. Fear of death, for example, in the way someone closes his sentences. But to say that someone suffers from vata derangement and therefore any work of art he produces also suffers from it, is an instance of the intentional fallacy. The thing about artists is that they often function from levels deeper than their own "small" selves. Sometimes methinks yer over-edurcation gets in da way Angela. Having seen your previous performance on another list (were you asked to leave or did you just leave in a huff?) where you'd endlessly anal-yzed others writing(s) and yet would seem to have completely missed the persons message...well, it seems to be replaying here. But it didn't take a Ph. D. to see that. (Please, tell us how many you have, I forgot after you told me the 20th time). DL's writing and producing may be affected by it, at times. Sometimes it may not. Seasons change and so does he. Ever seen Eraserhead? Do we live in a holographic universe Angela or do we live in a universe that in some ways resembles the idea of a holographic universe? I always just thought it was a resemblance. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Personally, I think you two gals should suck Delia into this discussion. Then *three* of you could play "my dick is longer than yours." :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. > > And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. > > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
[FairfieldLife] Re: When the dollar falls
If you take domestic and international debt combined, the actual debt is 100 trillion. There are three sets of books the government keeps and depending on which one they use puts us at 9 trillion. It doesn't matter how far the dollar falls as long as the dollar is the basic rate from which all other currencies are set. If you live in another country as I have, you'll appreciate this when you have to convert everything you purchase by dollar rates. Unless your like the Chinese who simply devalue the yen so they can get more dollars. When the British empire ruled the world, the sterling was the basic world currency. When the dollar took over as the basic currency, the sterling became almost worthless for those holding it so when the time comes when the Euro should become a primary currency, those holding dollar reserves will be holding worthless currency. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "The governments are not in charge of their economies because they > are not in charge of their currencies. The value of any currency, or > the mode of action for or against a particular currency, is in the > hands of a group of about 200 men and women in every > country."(Benjamin Creme, The Great Approach) > The United States is heading for bankruptcy, and the leaders are not > making any serious attempt to prevent it. The USA is constantly > printing money in order to fund the American standard of living and > to finance the Iraq war. At present US debt amounts to $9,000 > billion. Although everyone understands that the debt will never be > paid off, it continues to mount, says financial correspondent Willem > Middelkoop. > Middelkoop writes in his recently published book Als de dollar valt > (When the dollar falls): "At some point the US dollar will no longer > be accepted and then the American currency will take a huge tumble. > The United States will slide into a serious recession with enormous > consequences for the world economy." > The United States is showing all the signs of a declining empire: the > Credit Wave of the past two years, the addictive and corrupting habit > of throwing good money after bad, deceit in the financial world "are > the classic characteristics of the end of an era", he concludes . > (Source: de Volkskrant, the Netherlands; Taipei Times, Taiwan) >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
Actually, Judy, any idiot can determine which names in a bibliography are the most "authoritative." Pick up ten books on the same subject, check out the bibliography, and note which names are repeated, which names are quoted by everyone who thinks he's got something to say on a given subject. And what would it do for you if I named five or six European historians. Would you then know that I told the truth? I don't think so. authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? But not any idiot would know which names from that bibliography are the most authoritative. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > do you want? > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > historians. > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Judy, I find myself far less apt at judging tone (where the person is coming from) in text -- the longer the piece the more I begin to gain confidence I am getting a good take on the emotional/POV content. I often misconstrue short posts. And the harsh reality is that once I've "made up my mind about someone" I have to battle that hard-wiring the next time I read something from that person. Curtis in particular has a wide range of tones, and since he's pissed me off so many times, I have to grit and just plow through his stuff to be fair to him and myself -- every day's a new day, and, thankfully, Curtis is often able to recalibrate his emotions when addressing me -- I bow to him for these lessons. To me it is great heartedness. I forced myself to write those words just now -- felt like lifting weights, but I feels my musckels agrowin' from't. I mean, come on, how bad can a guitar player be -- the guy's in love with straight lyrical truth. I envy his ability to talk to anyone in a language we all have built into our DNA. Barry's my hardest chore of the day and, so hey, it's a good exercise to force myself to see him being logical, informed, wise, loving, etc., but he often shows these very dynamics, and geeze then it's all me if I'm railing about him during my reading of his words, so it is humbling to read his non-bashing-Edg posts. Much of Barry's stuff, if someone else posted it, wouldn't trigger me at all. This is the challenge: sorting out "my shit" from "his shit." Sigh Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken > > word tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if > > Vaj has a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds > > and degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > > > > Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but > > given his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him > > being fascistic in temperament is beyond me. Yeah, if he was > > running an ashram, he might deny someone membership based on > > his "voice's feel," but woe unto anyone who doesn't go "by his > > guts" in so many instances in life. > > > > Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the > > streets with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was > > near -- it probably was the voices of the scammers more than > > anything else, methinks. > > > > Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices > > of others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be > > a profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. > > And do you not think that it's possible to do the > same thing with the "voice" of someone's written words? >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In whose judgment? I'm asking you to provide the names of five European historians from your 25-page bibliography who, in *your* judgment, are the most authoritative with regard to the claim that "a third war was planned all along." What is confusing to you about that request? > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? > > But not any idiot would know which names from > that bibliography are the most authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > > do you want? > > > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > > authoritative. > > > > > authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > > historians. > > > > > > Which historians were these, Angela?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: Vaj, I do believe you can tell much from someone's voice, or footsteps, or face, or pulse, or any part you care to name since we do live in a holographic universe. I've spent my life learning how to see deeply into other people's writing, and you can see many things. Fear of death, for example, in the way someone closes his sentences. But to say that someone suffers from vata derangement and therefore any work of art he produces also suffers from it, is an instance of the intentional fallacy. The thing about artists is that they often function from levels deeper than their own "small" selves. Sometimes methinks yer over-edurcation gets in da way Angela. Having seen your previous performance on another list (were you asked to leave or did you just leave in a huff?) where you'd endlessly anal- yzed others writing(s) and yet would seem to have completely missed the persons message...well, it seems to be replaying here. But it didn't take a Ph. D. to see that. (Please, tell us how many you have, I forgot after you told me the 20th time). DL's writing and producing may be affected by it, at times. Sometimes it may not. Seasons change and so does he. Ever seen Eraserhead? Do we live in a holographic universe Angela or do we live in a universe that in some ways resembles the idea of a holographic universe? I always just thought it was a resemblance.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
In whose judgment? authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? But not any idiot would know which names from that bibliography are the most authoritative. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > do you want? > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > historians. > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Vaj, I do believe you can tell much from someone's voice, or footsteps, or face, or pulse, or any part you care to name since we do live in a holographic universe. I've spent my life learning how to see deeply into other people's writing, and you can see many things. Fear of death, for example, in the way someone closes his sentences. But to say that someone suffers from vata derangement and therefore any work of art he produces also suffers from it, is an instance of the intentional fallacy. The thing about artists is that they often function from levels deeper than their own "small" selves. Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. At the experiential level, one can notice this in oneself as well. For example in the Taoist Inner Chi-kung practice of harmonizing the five elements and their corresponding organs, etc. one can not only notice the change in energy as it comes into balance, but the change in the quality of ones voice. One will also note how negative aspects of the personality, like negative or poisonous emotions, nudge towards virtue as the elements relax and balance. Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but given his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him being fascistic in temperament is beyond me. LOL, yeah I know. But keep in mind, these aren't merely precepts scrawled on some old dusty texts, but clinical skills anyone can acquire and therefore observe. Yeah, if he was running an ashram, he might deny someone membership based on his "voice's feel," but woe unto anyone who doesn't go "by his guts" in so many instances in life. Naw. I'd be more inclined to instruct them in Inner Chi Kung and give them the keys of balance. That would be my approach. Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the streets with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was near -- it probably was the voices of the scammers more than anything else, methinks. Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices of others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be a profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. Indeed it does. It's also the result of inner cultivation, not stereotyping or pigeonholing. We've got TM guys just feeling a pulse and telling you your past lifetimes, and everyone in the TMO just didn't even blink at this "ability," and so it really is silly for everyone here to be even thinking Vaj's concepts are "way out there." Exactly. In fact in the TMO version of pulse reading, they do 3 levels (prakrithi, vakrithi and the sub-doshas), but in some types of practice there are 7 levels of "pulse" where you do learn to grok the chakras and the inner voice (or vac). Knowing this, you apply remedies to reestablish balance. Everyone can read the voices of others with a very high level of expertise, so, no, Vaj is not even being a "silly Buddhist whose precepts are only understood by Vaj." This voice thingy is sheer common sense, and I, for one, like the challenge of having Vaj's concepts enlarging the scope of my clarity. I was originally talking from the POV of Ayurveda (Hindu) but I see the same level of sensitivity in Taoist practices and Buddhist Ayurveda and Tibetan Medicine as well. A great modern proponent of a bioenergetic basis of mental health was Wilhelm Reich (who interestingly had his books burnt by the US govt. for proposing a non-materialistic theory in medical diagnosis!). Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Concentration Camps Already Built in America -- FOR A...
In a message dated 12/2/07 9:12:51 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I were BushCo, I wouldn't use this law until after I'd blown up another American symbol and killed a few thousand people. I think this says it all. **Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop000301)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:49 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: > > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word > > tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has > > a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and > > degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > > It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're > so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas > pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by > hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just > wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. I knew a Chinese Tonic Herbalist who could diagnose a patient by hearing them walk. The layout of his office was set up so that the client enters, and must walk around a few barriers, unseen by the herbalist, while he listens to the sound of their footsteps. When I first met this guy for a consultation, the sliding shoji screen to his office was closed, and through it he told me about several of the problems I'd come to talk to him about before he even had ever seen me or taken a pulse reading. Go figure. I don't know how he does it, but it's pretty impressive. The herbs he prescribed cleared everything up, too The infamous TM vaidya (who Mahesh got the Amrit Kalash formulation from), Balraj Maharishi, "takes the pulse" (i.e. assesses imbalances) from across a room, often dimly lit. He doesn't need to take a pulse. Vasant Lad has some siddhi that just hearing the person talk, and tuning into them can diagnose over the phone (unfortunately he's also booked like a year ahead!). Lad also has (or had) a gentleman who could see through the body when there was imbalance and locate the location and cause, kinda like a psychic cat scan. It's amazing how we can extend our senses.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, > since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? But not any idiot would know which names from that bibliography are the most authoritative. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > > do you want? > > Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most > authoritative. > > > authfriend wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > > wrote: > > > > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > > historians. > > > > Which historians were these, Angela? > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
And what would such a list do for you, or for my credibility, since any idiot can copy someone else's bibliography? authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > do you want? Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most authoritative. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > historians. > > Which historians were these, Angela? Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it > do you want? Oh, let's say five of those you consider the most authoritative. > authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander > wrote: > > > > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > > historians. > > Which historians were these, Angela?
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken > word tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if > Vaj has a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds > and degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > > Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but > given his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him > being fascistic in temperament is beyond me. Yeah, if he was > running an ashram, he might deny someone membership based on > his "voice's feel," but woe unto anyone who doesn't go "by his > guts" in so many instances in life. > > Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the > streets with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was > near -- it probably was the voices of the scammers more than > anything else, methinks. > > Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices > of others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be > a profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. And do you not think that it's possible to do the same thing with the "voice" of someone's written words?
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: > > > Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word > > tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has > > a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and > > degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? > > It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're > so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas > pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by > hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just > wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. I knew a Chinese Tonic Herbalist who could diagnose a patient by hearing them walk. The layout of his office was set up so that the client enters, and must walk around a few barriers, unseen by the herbalist, while he listens to the sound of their footsteps. When I first met this guy for a consultation, the sliding shoji screen to his office was closed, and through it he told me about several of the problems I'd come to talk to him about before he even had ever seen me or taken a pulse reading. Go figure. I don't know how he does it, but it's pretty impressive. The herbs he prescribed cleared everything up, too.
[FairfieldLife] "Read it and weep" (was Re: Jim announces new role for himself)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > > > > > Barry wrote: "I find this attitude of "setting people > > > > straight" about the "reality" of enlightenment not only > > > > creepy, but dangerous." > > > > > > > > Edg: > > > > > > > > I'll deal with each point of Barry's below -- only cuz > > > > it'll be a good therapy for me. I'm not setting anyone > > > > "else" straight. I have no power over anyone's mind -- > > > > especially not here at FFL. I'm preaching, but only to > > > > myself. > > > > > > I'm happy to hear you've realized that many of us > > > never bother reading any further than the first > > > sentence in any of your posts. It's difficult to > > > influence *anyone* in that short a time. :-) > > > > I'm not exactly one of Edg's biggest fans, but the > > post Barry dismisses so patronizingly is, IMHO, the > > most insightful and authentic Edg has written yet. > > > > I guess you can't blame Barry for not wanting to > > read it, because Barry is so far from able to write > > anything remotely as honest and profound and clear > > that it would be acutely painful, like the contrast > > between a Mickey Mouse cartoon and "Hamlet." > > I'll riff on this -- not on what Judy or Edg > have to say, of course, because that's almost > never worth riffing on -- but on speculation > about *why* they say it. Barry's problem is his fantasy that he doesn't have to know *what* we're saying to determine *why* we're saying it. That fantasy means that the "why" he comes up with is also nothing but his own fantasy, as in this case. He'll never go back and read *what* Edg said, so he'll never realize what an utter fool he's made of himself with his fantasy "why." But Edg and anyone who read Edg's post will know, and they'll be laughing at Barry behind his back (or in my case, right in front of him). > Blessedly, at this point Judy seems to have > figured out that I'm never going to read any- > thing she writes except the first sentence that > appears in the Yahoo Message View, so she rarely > tries to write long, preachy rants any more. Uh, no, I'll continue to write "long, preachy rants" whenever I feel they're appropriate, *whether I think Barry will read them or not*. And the same is true, I'm sure, of Edg. That's another fantasy of Barry's: that if he declares he's not going to read someone's critical posts, it'll discourage that person from making them. Which tells you something about how important it is to Barry that the people he criticizes read *his* critical posts. Not that Barry is an attention vampire or anything... > Here's the thing, from my point of view. I said > it once to Edg back the *first* time he got all > involved in a self-created fantasy about me and > tried to lecture me -- he has neither the right > to lecture me nor the wisdom to do so. Speaking of self-created fantasies! Again, if Barry *had* read Edg's latest, he wouldn't be making such a fool of himself. > These "lectures" are meant to *inflict punishment*, > not to help. The two sad people who write them > want to think of themselves as having the ability > to force others to listen to them (or read their > writing), and to make the people who listen (or > read) feel bad about themselves, and thus change. And, of course, it's not as if *Barry* ever does anything like this. > Part of my point in not bothering to read their > posts (besides the obvious -- it's a waste of > the most precious resource I have, time) But it's not a waste of Barry's most precious resource to write his *own* lengthy rants, like this one, explaining why it would be a waste of time for him to read those of others. is to > make them realize that they don't have the power > to make someone "sit there and listen." Where on *earth* do you suppose Barry got the idea that *anybody* thinks they can "force" someone to sit there and endure a rant on an electronic forum? That's truly peculiar. But it's the only way Barry can think of to pretend to be able to exercise any power in this situation: to "make them realize" something they knew from the beginning. > Me, I got up and left the room the minute > that the "old man" started ranting again and > went off to have some fun. Chances are he never > even noticed, and ranted on for some time with- > out even noticing he didn't have an audience. And here's the punchline that Barry doesn't even realize he's delivered, the quote from Edg's post at the top: > > > > I'll deal with each point of Barry's below -- only cuz > > > > it'll be a good therapy for me. I'm not setting anyone > > > > "else" straight. I have no power over anyone's mind -- > > > > especially not here at FFL. I'm preaching, but only to > > > > myself. Even funnier, Bar
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fun with Amazon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you have absolutely nothing better to do, as
> I did this afternoon, there's a section on Amazon
> containing a list, with links, of Amazon products
> that users have identified as "oddities":
I have lots of better things to do an I'm putting them all on hold to
hang out here! Link of the week Judy.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/tag/amazon%20oddities/ref=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t
>
> Among them:
>
> Pierced Attachable Nipples
> Magic Answer Me Jesus
> Wolf Urine Lure
> Trichogramma Pretiosum: 12,000 eggs (currently
> unavailable, alas)
> Gorilla Snot ("developed by and for professionals")
> Rechargable Horse Trimmer (in case your horse is too big)
> Stink-Free Stink-Finder Ultra-Violet Light and Flashlight
> Inflatable Party Sheep
> Heinz Spotted Dick Pudding
> Chicken Poop Lip Balm
> Olives in Pain
> Pet Tornado
>
> And so forth. In some cases, users have left very
> funny reviews of these products. Other products cry
> out for such reviews.
>
> The classic collection of Amazon user reviews--good for
> wasting another perfectly good several hours--is found
> for the product Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz
> (currently unavailable). There are currently 962 reviews.
>
> Examples (many are much longer; some are actually
> short stories):
>
> You glutenous Americans take the nourishment from starving calves'
> mouths just so you can live the Britney Spears high life.
>
> I rate this product one star with the hope that it will deter just
> one person from buying it. That will be one more extra gallon
> available for a deserving, helpless calf.
>
> In summary, please, think of the calves and do not buy this product.
>
> And:
>
> I conducted some research on this product, and I am sad to report
> that no user manual is included, customer support is nonexistent at
> best, there is no warranty, and you have to buy the most basic
> accessories such as a fridge and the cookies. And don't get me
> started on the battery...
>
> And:
>
> U.S. media continues to focus on the price of gas to distract us all
> from the REAL issue: rising prices of MILK!
>
> A gallon of milk (from our own country) continues to be more
> expensive than a gallon of gas from the Middle East.
>
> Coincidence? I think not.
>
> And:
>
> This stuff is amazing! I ordered some the other day and selected
> express shipping so the total was like $35.00 for a gallon of milk,
> but it has changed my life. My once bald head is now covered in
> thick, Fabio-like hair, my impotence is cured, I no longer have
> vertigo, dementia, incontinence, ringing ears, depression, psychosis,
> post-nasal drip, explosive diarrhea, herpes, or the plague. Thank you
> Tuscan Milk!! I am totally getting this for my wife for Christmas.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/25mzu8
>
Re: [FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Duveyoung wrote: Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? It's actually something that can be observed clinically, if you're so trained or if you're so sensitive. For example, I've seen Vaidyas pinpoint disorders of vata (there are 5 or more varieties) just by hearing the first sentences out of someone's mouth. And this just wasn't some new-age BS, it was something that helped the patient. At the experiential level, one can notice this in oneself as well. For example in the Taoist Inner Chi-kung practice of harmonizing the five elements and their corresponding organs, etc. one can not only notice the change in energy as it comes into balance, but the change in the quality of ones voice. One will also note how negative aspects of the personality, like negative or poisonous emotions, nudge towards virtue as the elements relax and balance. Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but given his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him being fascistic in temperament is beyond me. LOL, yeah I know. But keep in mind, these aren't merely precepts scrawled on some old dusty texts, but clinical skills anyone can acquire and therefore observe. Yeah, if he was running an ashram, he might deny someone membership based on his "voice's feel," but woe unto anyone who doesn't go "by his guts" in so many instances in life. Naw. I'd be more inclined to instruct them in Inner Chi Kung and give them the keys of balance. That would be my approach. Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the streets with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was near -- it probably was the voices of the scammers more than anything else, methinks. Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices of others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be a profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. Indeed it does. It's also the result of inner cultivation, not stereotyping or pigeonholing. We've got TM guys just feeling a pulse and telling you your past lifetimes, and everyone in the TMO just didn't even blink at this "ability," and so it really is silly for everyone here to be even thinking Vaj's concepts are "way out there." Exactly. In fact in the TMO version of pulse reading, they do 3 levels (prakrithi, vakrithi and the sub-doshas), but in some types of practice there are 7 levels of "pulse" where you do learn to grok the chakras and the inner voice (or vac). Knowing this, you apply remedies to reestablish balance. Everyone can read the voices of others with a very high level of expertise, so, no, Vaj is not even being a "silly Buddhist whose precepts are only understood by Vaj." This voice thingy is sheer common sense, and I, for one, like the challenge of having Vaj's concepts enlarging the scope of my clarity. I was originally talking from the POV of Ayurveda (Hindu) but I see the same level of sensitivity in Taoist practices and Buddhist Ayurveda and Tibetan Medicine as well. A great modern proponent of a bioenergetic basis of mental health was Wilhelm Reich (who interestingly had his books burnt by the US govt. for proposing a non- materialistic theory in medical diagnosis!).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fun with Amazon
Whatever you do, do not sign up at stumbleupon.com -- what an
addictionyou won't have any moments of "nothing better to do."
Edg
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you have absolutely nothing better to do, as
> I did this afternoon, there's a section on Amazon
> containing a list, with links, of Amazon products
> that users have identified as "oddities":
>
> http://www.amazon.com/tag/amazon%20oddities/ref=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t
>
> Among them:
>
> Pierced Attachable Nipples
> Magic Answer Me Jesus
> Wolf Urine Lure
> Trichogramma Pretiosum: 12,000 eggs (currently
> unavailable, alas)
> Gorilla Snot ("developed by and for professionals")
> Rechargable Horse Trimmer (in case your horse is too big)
> Stink-Free Stink-Finder Ultra-Violet Light and Flashlight
> Inflatable Party Sheep
> Heinz Spotted Dick Pudding
> Chicken Poop Lip Balm
> Olives in Pain
> Pet Tornado
>
> And so forth. In some cases, users have left very
> funny reviews of these products. Other products cry
> out for such reviews.
>
> The classic collection of Amazon user reviews--good for
> wasting another perfectly good several hours--is found
> for the product Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz
> (currently unavailable). There are currently 962 reviews.
>
> Examples (many are much longer; some are actually
> short stories):
>
> You glutenous Americans take the nourishment from starving calves'
> mouths just so you can live the Britney Spears high life.
>
> I rate this product one star with the hope that it will deter just
> one person from buying it. That will be one more extra gallon
> available for a deserving, helpless calf.
>
> In summary, please, think of the calves and do not buy this product.
>
> And:
>
> I conducted some research on this product, and I am sad to report
> that no user manual is included, customer support is nonexistent at
> best, there is no warranty, and you have to buy the most basic
> accessories such as a fridge and the cookies. And don't get me
> started on the battery...
>
> And:
>
> U.S. media continues to focus on the price of gas to distract us all
> from the REAL issue: rising prices of MILK!
>
> A gallon of milk (from our own country) continues to be more
> expensive than a gallon of gas from the Middle East.
>
> Coincidence? I think not.
>
> And:
>
> This stuff is amazing! I ordered some the other day and selected
> express shipping so the total was like $35.00 for a gallon of milk,
> but it has changed my life. My once bald head is now covered in
> thick, Fabio-like hair, my impotence is cured, I no longer have
> vertigo, dementia, incontinence, ringing ears, depression, psychosis,
> post-nasal drip, explosive diarrhea, herpes, or the plague. Thank you
> Tuscan Milk!! I am totally getting this for my wife for Christmas.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/25mzu8
>
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The less rules the better for evaluating styles. Otherwise you can > gain a false sense of power like the guy in this hilarious video: > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=gEDaCIDvj6I&feature=related Easiest five grand in the history of sport. :-) I've seen a few examples of this sort of thing, the ignominious defeat of "Jaw Jitsu" (thanks for that term, BTW) by someone who isn't baffled by bullshit. At one of the karate contests I participated in (although not terribly successfully) as a college student, Bruce Lee showed up. Not to compete, but to challenge the heads of each of the schools to duke it out with him in the alley behind the auditorium to see which style was *really* the best. No one took him up on it that day, but I hear a few did over the years, usually to their distress. As you say, Bruce was used to real fighting and getting hit, and they weren't. I particularly liked the part of the video where the "master" is repelling one of his own students by hurling blasts of ki at him. The Rama guy used to do that with his students who had black belts as well. It always looked fake to me, so one day I asked him to hit me with a blast of this myster- ious energy. He did, and still being a partaker of the Kool-Aid at the time I pretended it had some effect, but in reality I felt nothing. I suspect that's what's going on with the student in the video; he's protecting his *belief* that his teacher is the Biggest Badass by moodmaking that he has the ability to zap him without even touching him. For those who wonder what all this stuff has to do with spiritual development, I honestly think that my experience in the martial arts helped me later on when evaluating spiritual teachers who tried to run the "Jaw Jivan Mukti" number. It's one thing to talk the talk, but quite another to walk the walk.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stand up and be counted (George Carlin - Who Really Controls America)
My bibliography is about twenty-five pages. How much of it do you want? authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A third war was planned all along, according to European > historians. Which historians were these, Angela? Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Shotokan Karate vs Kung Fu > > Ouch... > http://youtube.com/watch?v=fqqSmf8qATc > > OffWorld > The karate fighters seemed more realistically trained. I don't count out Kung Fu as a style because it was developed in an era when it was actually used as a martial art like Japanese jiu jitsu. It was not developed for sport. It was also a good demo at how hard it is,even as a superior fighter to knock someone out who doesn't want you to. It demonstrated that none of the karate fighter's single strikes ended the fight. I don't think the Kung Fu guy was used to taking punches. This is why boxer irregularly wail on guys from dojos who don't train getting hit. The less rules the better for evaluating styles. Otherwise you can gain a false sense of power like the guy in this hilarious video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=gEDaCIDvj6I&feature=related
[FairfieldLife] Voice tells (Re: Mulholland Drive)
Maharishi has said many times in my presence that "one spoken word tells everything about a person." Why would it surprise if Vaj has a spectrum of concepts that delineate the various kinds and degrees of "tell" that a voice's sound can reveal? Vaj has an opinion, a theory, a scripturally based "take," but given his generally gentle vibe here, how anyone can see him being fascistic in temperament is beyond me. Yeah, if he was running an ashram, he might deny someone membership based on his "voice's feel," but woe unto anyone who doesn't go "by his guts" in so many instances in life. Recently here, we've had tales of folks being accosted on the streets with a scam, and "something" told them that danger was near -- it probably was the voices of the scammers more than anything else, methinks. Intuition, it's what we all want, right? Listening to the voices of others and then seeing our subtle emotional responses could be a profound method of culturing one's ability to attend. We've got TM guys just feeling a pulse and telling you your past lifetimes, and everyone in the TMO just didn't even blink at this "ability," and so it really is silly for everyone here to be even thinking Vaj's concepts are "way out there." Everyone can read the voices of others with a very high level of expertise, so, no, Vaj is not even being a "silly Buddhist whose precepts are only understood by Vaj." This voice thingy is sheer common sense, and I, for one, like the challenge of having Vaj's concepts enlarging the scope of my clarity. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Wow, thanks to Vaj I have now learned of a whole new range of > deceases, there are 'Vata derangements' there are 'Yogic disorders' > and 'meditational disorders' and a great system of diagnosis as well: > Art (or should I say 'ent-Art -ed'?) (of course in addition to the > quivering voice). I wonder if the Nazis had a similar scientific > system of determinating (or terminating) 'Völkische Gesundheit', yeah > I think being black or a Jew was thought of as a genetic 'dis-order' ( > as opposed to the right 'order'), and well I don't have to tell you > about 'entartete Kunst' (deviating Art), or the burning of literature. > Once you have a system of determinating what is 'Right' (or balanced) > everything that deviates from it is, well a deviation, or 'out of > balance', or people doing the wrong meditation technique have > 'meditational or yogic disorders'. To me this is truely fascist > thinking, well not in the sense of terminating people, but well in the > sense of condemning them with truely pseudo-spiritual or medical > lingo. This is pseudoscientific junk of the first class. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj wrote: > > > Here's what I said: > > > ".. In Lynch there are clear signs of vata derangement and > > IMO, very likely, an underlying yogic disorder. > > > ..The quaver in Lynch's voice IMO is a meditational disorder. > > > ..I can see how his creative process seems slanted > > by a parallel derangement." > > > It's just a comment of the vaca, kaya and chitta: voice as reflecting > > energy, side-by-side with "body" and mind. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
Wow, thanks to Vaj I have now learned of a whole new range of deceases, there are 'Vata derangements' there are 'Yogic disorders' and 'meditational disorders' and a great system of diagnosis as well: Art (or should I say 'ent-Art -ed'?) (of course in addition to the quivering voice). I wonder if the Nazis had a similar scientific system of determinating (or terminating) 'Völkische Gesundheit', yeah I think being black or a Jew was thought of as a genetic 'dis-order' ( as opposed to the right 'order'), and well I don't have to tell you about 'entartete Kunst' (deviating Art), or the burning of literature. Once you have a system of determinating what is 'Right' (or balanced) everything that deviates from it is, well a deviation, or 'out of balance', or people doing the wrong meditation technique have 'meditational or yogic disorders'. To me this is truely fascist thinking, well not in the sense of terminating people, but well in the sense of condemning them with truely pseudo-spiritual or medical lingo. This is pseudoscientific junk of the first class. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's what I said: > ".. In Lynch there are clear signs of vata derangement and > IMO, very likely, an underlying yogic disorder. > ..The quaver in Lynch's voice IMO is a meditational disorder. > ..I can see how his creative process seems slanted > by a parallel derangement." > It's just a comment of the vaca, kaya and chitta: voice as reflecting > energy, side-by-side with "body" and mind.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 2, 2007, at 2:23 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > Those who find the poor, tortured souls in "Mul- > > holland Drive" fascinating and worthy of their > > interest and/or their compassion should rent a > > copy of "The Story of Adele H." > > I agree, just saw that last year, believe it or not. Great > storytelling does not have to involve bizarro weirdness, and if it > does, it better be interesting weirdness, otherwise it falls flat. > IMO. > > Ever seen a Sunday in the Country? Another great French film. Yep. Betrand Tavernier, one of the greats of French cinema. Tonight I'm going to re-watch an olde favorite French film (although not one of Tavernier's) called "Tous les matins du monde" (All the Mornings of the World). It's a great story about the teacher-student relationship, in the context of music. The film was inspired by the discovery of a great but previously not-well-known 17th-century viola player and composer named Sainte Colombe by modern- day viola/cello maestro and composer Jordi Savall. Sainte Colombe is played masterfully by Jean-Pierre Marielle, and there is an interesting set of per- formances by Gérard Depardieu as Sainte Colombe's student, later in life, and Guillaume Depardieu (Gérard's son) as the same student in his youth. Wonderful story, with great acting, but the star of the movie is really the music. If you see it and enjoy it, you'll want the soundtrack.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Concentration Camps Already Built in America -- FOR Americans? Video with Ev
Uns, I'm under eight inches of snow with a one inch crust of ice here -- what kind of mood do you think I'm already in that you think I needed this piece of news this morning? Yep. It's chilling indeed. Unfortunately, laws already on the books like executive orders, emergency plans, martial law -- all these have made the President of the USA able to be a dictator instantly if a national emergency arises of "significance." So this is nothing really new, but the fact that they have done yet another law for these kinds of situations seems to indicate that they're anticipating that they'll really need a law with teeth in it -- namely, "if someone looks like a terrorist to anyone, they're a terrorist -- especially Muslims." Like that. As I read this law, if a good Muslim goes to listen to a religious leader, then they're a terrorist if that leader is saying ANYTHING negative about the government of the USAjust for listening to a sermon. Malcolm X's group, heads-up. I think anyone who's used the term "BushCo" is already on a list that this law applies to: this law defines millions of people to be terrorist-suspects RIGHT NOW. Judy, you've tossed cold-anti-conspiratorial water on us here -- do you think this law is a tell? Sober us up if you can, but you have a big job ahead methinks. If I were BushCo, I wouldn't use this law until after I'd blown up another American symbol and killed a few thousand people. Then, down comes the Internet, everyone with an accent holes up, whole communities disappear overnight, and BigMedia rah-rahs the powers for saving us. Get out your kneepads. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "uns_tressor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: > > > > We also need to stop the Senate from passing HR 1955 > >(which I think is renumbered 1959 in the Senate). > > > I think it is this: > http://tinyurl.com/3yy7fq > and a very uncomfortable piece of weork indeed. > Uns. >
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
On Dec 2, 2007, at 2:23 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: Those who find the poor, tortured souls in "Mul- holland Drive" fascinating and worthy of their interest and/or their compassion should rent a copy of "The Story of Adele H." I agree, just saw that last year, believe it or not. Great storytelling does not have to involve bizarro weirdness, and if it does, it better be interesting weirdness, otherwise it falls flat. IMO. Ever seen a Sunday in the Country? Another great French film. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Concentration Camps Already Built in America -- FOR Americans? Video with Evidence
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We also need to stop the Senate from passing HR 1955 >(which I think is renumbered 1959 in the Senate). > I think it is this: http://tinyurl.com/3yy7fq and a very uncomfortable piece of weork indeed. Uns.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
On Dec 2, 2007, at 2:23 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: I have no problem with fantastical elements in film or non-linear storytelling. But *as a personal preference*, I like storytelling. Lynch often, as I hear from people who have worked closely with him, doesn't even *have* a story in mind; he just throws weird images together and hopes that they'll somehow "come together" into a story. FWIW, I've heard that's sort of how Casablanca was made--they would come up with lines and ideas for scenes right before filiming. Sometimes Woody Allen does that too. The big diff is, when they throw the whole thing together, there's an actual story there. For some viewers and critics, they obviously do. I'm not one of them. I just see an incoher- ent jumble of images thrown up onscreen by someone who knows that he can get away with doing this because critics will cut him a break. I'm not sure too many people at all can relate to films like MD. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Mulholland Drive
On Dec 1, 2007, at 10:59 PM, Peter wrote: David Boardwell is a very engaging and prolific film professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. I think he retired recently. After MIU I went to the University of Wisconsin for an MA in Communication Arts and had the pleasure of taking a few courses with him. He even knew about MIU, TM etc. I've heard that's a great place to go to school, or just to live. Did the degree in Clinical Psych come after that? Sal
[FairfieldLife] When the dollar falls
"The governments are not in charge of their economies because they are not in charge of their currencies. The value of any currency, or the mode of action for or against a particular currency, is in the hands of a group of about 200 men and women in every country."(Benjamin Creme, The Great Approach) The United States is heading for bankruptcy, and the leaders are not making any serious attempt to prevent it. The USA is constantly printing money in order to fund the American standard of living and to finance the Iraq war. At present US debt amounts to $9,000 billion. Although everyone understands that the debt will never be paid off, it continues to mount, says financial correspondent Willem Middelkoop. Middelkoop writes in his recently published book Als de dollar valt (When the dollar falls): "At some point the US dollar will no longer be accepted and then the American currency will take a huge tumble. The United States will slide into a serious recession with enormous consequences for the world economy." The United States is showing all the signs of a declining empire: the Credit Wave of the past two years, the addictive and corrupting habit of throwing good money after bad, deceit in the financial world "are the classic characteristics of the end of an era", he concludes . (Source: de Volkskrant, the Netherlands; Taipei Times, Taiwan)
[FairfieldLife] The Master's article for Share International magazine, December 2007
Preparing the future by the Master , through Benjamin Creme, 11 November 2007 Towards the end of an Age and the beginning of a new Cosmic cycle, everything begins to fall apart. The old and tried ways of living no longer work, or meet the needs of an advancing humanity. Certainty gives way to uncertainty, the known has lost its power to convince, and men feel bewildered, lost and filled with fear. Thus is it today as we stand, baffled, in this transitional phase between the old Age of Pisces and the new Aquarian dispensation. The Aquarian Age will last approximately 2,350 years and will bring much benefit to men as its energies mount in potency over the centuries. However, at present, the old ways of Pisces, outworn but not as yet outgrown, still hold sway and determine the thoughts and actions of the majority of men. This being so, countless millions are held in thrall by the actions of those leaders whose nations are powerful and dominant at the present time. Thus is this a time of upheaval and stress, disharmony and strife. Change That this troubled time will not last much longer you may be assured. Already, the signs of change are evident to Us, your Elder Brothers. We see clearly the outlines of conditions altogether different from those that now prevail. We see a world at peace, a world where justice reigns, where freedom adorns the lives of men and women everywhere. We know that the present ills are transient and passing, that the time is not far off for the light of the New Dawn to illumine men's lives and challenge them to action. We know also that men in their hearts are ready and longing for change, and will rise to the challenge with eagerness and will; they await only inspiration and guidance. That inspiration and guidance Maitreya is eager to bestow, in full measure and more, as He awaits the appointed hour which, by karmic law, allows Him to proceed. Challenge Then will the Great Lord enter, openly, the domain of men. Then will He challenge the assumptions of the men of power and wealth. Maitreya will speak for the millions without a voice; for the destitute and hungry who live in anguish from day to day; for those who languish in the prisons of the world for daring to challenge the edicts of their `betters'. He will speak for all men who love justice and liberty and will raise His voice aloud in their cause. He will temper the wrath of those who govern by war; He will seal for ever the door through which war enters and defiles the realm of man. All this, through men, He will accomplish, and so restore sanity and peace to Earth. Calmly, and with purpose, He prepares the golden future, the inheritance of men, and gathers together the `shining lights', the men and women who will fashion that future. http://www.shareintl.org
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
On Dec 1, 2007, at 5:15 PM, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > not really part of the western mainstream practice (i.e. as in Dr. > Pete's practice) it would not even be acknowledged by most of his > peers. But make no mistake, Ayurveda waxes quite eloquently on > meditational disorders, which is still a part of training in that > science. The quaver in Lynch's voice IMO is a meditational disorder. LMAO!! (BTW, it's "waxes eloquent," not "eloquently." "Waxes" is synonymous with "becomes," not "speaks.") Thanks editor Stein. I'll keep that in mind when I consider publishing my emails in the New Yorker!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
On Dec 1, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Angela Mailander wrote: No, you did not say he was sick. You said he was vata imbalanced (much more specific than "sick," which I used as a "ballpark" term). You also said that you can see this imbalance in his work. Correct me if this is not what you said. No I did not say that. Here's what I said: "One of the first things I observe or listen to in determining whether someone's psychophysiology and bioenergy are balanced or unbalanced is their voice. In Lynch there are clear signs of vata derangement and IMO, very likely, an underlying yogic disorder. This probably precedes his involvement in TM, but would certainly be exacerbated by anything that tweaks or increases vata-dosha. Since this style of diagnosis is not really part of the western mainstream practice (i.e. as in Dr. Pete's practice) it would not even be acknowledged by most of his peers. But make no mistake, Ayurveda waxes quite eloquently on meditational disorders, which is still a part of training in that science. The quaver in Lynch's voice IMO is a meditational disorder. I will say one thing, it does seem to have improved somewhat over the years. He's probably doing ongoing PK thru the movement, which provides an excellent level of care and service (although exorbitantly expensive). But his voice even still is like nails on a chalkboard if I listen too closely. I can see how his creative process seems slanted by a parallel derangement. But one does hope he continues to heal." It's just a comment of the vaca, kaya and chitta: voice as reflecting energy, side-by-side with "body" and mind.
[FairfieldLife] "Read it and weep" (was Re: Jim announces new role for himself)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung wrote: > > > > > > Barry wrote: "I find this attitude of "setting people straight" > > > about the "reality" of enlightenment not only creepy, but > > > dangerous." > > > > > > Edg: > > > > > > I'll deal with each point of Barry's below -- only cuz it'll be > > > a good therapy for me. I'm not setting anyone "else" straight. > > > I have no power over anyone's mind -- especially not here at > > > FFL. I'm preaching, but only to myself. > > > > I'm happy to hear you've realized that many of us > > never bother reading any further than the first > > sentence in any of your posts. It's difficult to > > influence *anyone* in that short a time. :-) > > I'm not exactly one of Edg's biggest fans, but the > post Barry dismisses so patronizingly is, IMHO, the > most insightful and authentic Edg has written yet. > > I guess you can't blame Barry for not wanting to > read it, because Barry is so far from able to write > anything remotely as honest and profound and clear > that it would be acutely painful, like the contrast > between a Mickey Mouse cartoon and "Hamlet." I'll riff on this -- not on what Judy or Edg have to say, of course, because that's almost never worth riffing on -- but on speculation about *why* they say it. The vibe I get from their rants sometimes is that they should start with, "Now sit you down, young man, and I'm going to tell you what's what. And you should *listen*, because I'm the voice of age and wisdom, and because I'm smarter than you are, and because you're a fuckup. I'm trying to *save* you from being a fuckup." It's the vibe of a parent who believes he knows what is best for his kid, and is going to impose it on him no matter what. The "kid" is expected to sit there and read every word of it, *just* as if he had been "sat down" in front of a parent who is delivering a stern lecture. Edg even refers to his style of doing this as "dragging him into morality court." Whenever I encounter this 'tude in a writer, whether it be on FFL or in the media, I tend to click Next or turn the page. Why? Because these assholes who want to preach to me or "fix" me, "for my own good," have no RIGHT to do so. They're *not* judges in some Morality Court." IMO, they *aren't* the voices of wisdom or reason or age; they're just some petty ego trying to impose itself on another human being by *forcing* it to listen to (or, on FFL, read every word of) some long egorant. Blessedly, at this point Judy seems to have figured out that I'm never going to read any- thing she writes except the first sentence that appears in the Yahoo Message View, so she rarely tries to write long, preachy rants any more. Edg is not that smart -- his latest was pages and pages of "Sit you down, young man, because I'm going to lecture you" stuff. (I assume that's what was in it -- I didn't read it, but I did scroll down to get a feel for how long it was.) Here's the thing, from my point of view. I said it once to Edg back the *first* time he got all involved in a self-created fantasy about me and tried to lecture me -- he has neither the right to lecture me nor the wisdom to do so. Hell, at that time he'd just finished ranting about what a fuckup he was in *his* relationship, and then he goes crazy over some imagined infraction on my part and presumes to lecture *me*, as if I should listen? I told him then, and I tell him again -- get real. These "lectures" are meant to *inflict punishment*, not to help. The two sad people who write them want to think of themselves as having the ability to force others to listen to them (or read their writing), and to make the people who listen (or read) feel bad about themselves, and thus change. They don't. They have only the ability to come across like impotent parents trying to do the same thing with kids they think they have power over. The whole idea of these rants is to force the other person to sit there and *endure* the rant, just as a lousy parent forces his kids to sit there and endure his lectures. The kids aren't listening, and the parents probably know that, but they get their satisfaction from the display of power -- "I made him sit there and listen; I'm a success as a parent." Part of my point in not bothering to read their posts (besides the obvious -- it's a waste of the most precious resource I have, time) is to make them realize that they don't have the power to make someone "sit there and listen." They're pissing into the wind, talking (or writing) to someone who walked out of the room after the first sentence. I find it a much better use of my time to not bother with them. Let them rant all they want, and let those who like to read such things read them. Me, I got up and left the room the minute that the "old man" started ranting again a
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 1, 2007, at 5:46 PM, Peter wrote: > > > "Psychic limbo" is a good phrase. Jimmy Stewart's > > character in "Its a Wonderful Life" is a > > psychologically healthy person struggling. Lynch's > > main characters seem to be wading through some sort of > > emotional hell that they never leave. Where's David > > Boardwell when you need him? > > If I knew who he was maybe I could tell you. :) Agreed about the > Jimmy Stewart character. Barry put it about as well as you can, I > think--MD is boring, plain and simple. (Haven't seen any of his > others so can't comment.) If I have to struggle to make sense of > something and to try and figure out what's going on, I'm not likely > to want to watch it. But I also agree the film is eerily > disturbing. Just to clarify, I didn't find MD disturbing. Lynch never managed to get me interested enough in any of the characters to be disturbed by them. I found myself fascinated by Naomi Watts as I watched the movie, but I noticed even at the time that I was sitting there thinking, "Wow...this woman can *act*." In other words, I was seeing her the whole time *as* an actress, not as the character(s) she was playing. Not a good sign, for me. I actually *like* films in which I get to (as opposed to "have to") struggle to figure things out. A good example is "Memento." The ballsy storytelling style (telling a mystery backwards, from the end to the beginning) fits in perfectly with the hero's disabil- ity (inability to form short-term memories), and added a wonderful WTF-ness to what might otherwise have been a pretty straightforward (and thus boring) whodunnit. One of the best "figure it out" movies of recent years IMO was "The Usual Suspects." The answer to the mystery of Kaiser Soeze is right in front of you at all times -- hell, it's even on the *poster* for the film -- but very few people get it until the end. That film inspired in me the highest tribute I can personally pay to a movie -- I watched it once in the theater, then walked out, paid for a second admission, and watched it again. I guess my feeling about the filmmaker forcing me to "figure out what is going on" is that it's worth the ride to me if something really *is* going on. :-) In many of Lynch's films, I really don't get the feeling that anything is. Other great "gotta figure out what's going on" films that I thought were worth the ride include: * Blow-up (a classic by Antonioni) * Swimming Pool (fairly recent French film) * Dead Man (Jim Jarmusch/Johnny Depp) * House Of Games (film about cons that is itself a con) * Immortal Beloved (another film I saw twice in a row) * Rashomon (of course) * Spy Game (surprisingly good film by Tony Scott) * Y Tu Mama Tambien (great film by Alfonso Cuarón) * One Deadly Summer (one of Isabelle Adjani's best) * The Ninth Configuration (Blatty's own film, even more Catholic than The Exorcist)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Mulholland Drive
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Peter wrote:
> > "Psychic limbo" is a good phrase. Jimmy Stewart's
> > character in "Its a Wonderful Life" is a
> > psychologically healthy person struggling. Lynch's
> > main characters seem to be wading through some sort of
> > emotional hell that they never leave. Where's David
> > Boardwell when you need him?
>
> Have you seen Lynch's "The Straight Story"?
> http://imdb.com/title/tt0166896/
>
> Sounds more your speed.
More my speed as well. Good storytelling with
a minimum of directorial self-indulgence, a
quality which was also present, strangely
enough, in "Blue Velvet." Those two Lynch
films I liked; the others...uh...not so much.
What he lacks, in my opinion, is interestingly
one of the buzzwords of the TMO -- coherence.
I have no problem with fantastical elements in
film or non-linear storytelling. But *as a
personal preference*, I like storytelling. Lynch
often, as I hear from people who have worked
closely with him, doesn't even *have* a story
in mind; he just throws weird images together
and hopes that they'll somehow "come together"
into a story.
For some viewers and critics, they obviously
do. I'm not one of them. I just see an incoher-
ent jumble of images thrown up onscreen by
someone who knows that he can get away with
doing this because critics will cut him a break.
Same with Godard. Back when he was the enfant
terrible of Nouvelle Vague cinema, everyone
cut him a break and thought that his images
must "mean something," at least to him. It was
the Sixties, so drugs helped perpetuate that
illusion. :-) But try watching any of his films
these days; it's a painful experience.
As long as we're dumping on famous directors :-),
another one I consider *highly* overrated is
Stanley Kubrick. Never has lived an artist more
clueless as to human beings and how they really
interact in real life. It was said by some wags
about his last film ("Eyes Wide Shut") that he
died before it came out so that he wouldn't have
to read the reviews; there could be some sad
truth in this. IMO, the Kubrick film that shows
his deficiencies more than any other wasn't even
directed by him; it was shot by Spielberg from
Kubrick's script as a kind of homage. "A.I." was
Kubrick squared. You know you're in trouble as
a director and a storyteller when your robot
characters have more personality than your human
ones.
Visually, Kubrick was a bit of an innovator, but
as a storyteller and as a viewer of the human
condition, I wouldn't even rank him in the top
100 best filmmakers, much less the top ten.
But then my favorite director growing up was
Francois Truffaut, so what can you expect? He
started as a critic, but then did what almost no
critic ever does and segued into being a creator
in the medium he wrote about, and one of its best.
Great heart, great storytelling, and somehow a
sense of light and lightness, even in his darkest
films (and boy! did he make some dark films).
Those who find the poor, tortured souls in "Mul-
holland Drive" fascinating and worthy of their
interest and/or their compassion should rent a
copy of "The Story of Adele H." One of the more
tortured souls in history, with hardly an "up"
moment in her life and in the film, but somehow
I emerged from that film with a feeling of
transcendence and upliftment, because of what
Truffaut had managed to somehow "infuse" into
this tortured character. I feel none of that
from Lynch or from Kubrick. It's like (for me)
Truffaut *felt* and *empathized* with his
tortured souls, whereas Lynch and Kubrick only
take pictures of them, without any feeling or
empathy or even sympathy.
Adele Hugo comes across onscreen as a human being
filmed by another human being, whereas Betty/Diane
in MD and Bill and Alice Harford in EWS come across
as robots, filmed by another robot.
Just my opinion, of course.
