from:"\"sharelong60\""

Ah, one of the few times I forget to put imo and Judy lands on it like a tick 
on a hound dog in Alabamie in July! 

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

 Says Share, doing her Avoidance Dance. Absolute refusal to deal with the 
reality of the viciousness of her post about Ann.

 As to your attempt to change the subject, I do some of what you describe in 
some cases when it appears to apply. Now let's see if you can show the kind of 
integrity Emily did with regard to Obbajeeba and Susan, and amend what you 
wrote so it's not wildly inaccurate. I'm betting you can't.

 Oh, and while you're at it, notice how you presented your opinion as fact, as 
you do all too frequently. Hypocrite.

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

 > Judy if you are against someone, you assert that their faults are the *real" 
 > person. And you 
 > actually revel in seeing those faults. If someone is positive, then you say 
 > they are phoney. 
 > Worse of all, you over and over present your opinions as facts. 

 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 3:20 PM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   Sorry, Share, but no objective person is going to see your post to Ann as 
anything other than exceptionally nasty, especially given that Ann's post was 
just a funny parody.

 No, you haven't "claimed" sainthood, but the way you behave is clearly 
designed to make you appear to be saintly. That is, except when you lose 
control and behave like a vengeful harpy. The only times you're authentic is 
when you're being venomous and hateful. The saintly act is pathetically, 
creepily phony, and you confirm it's phony when the real Share shows through.

 Share excreted:

 > Of course this is your opinion, Judy because you are not objective about me 
 > or Ann. I've 
 > never claimed sainthood. Your projection, your fantasies. 

 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:21 PM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   Ann has never come anywhere near the vicious nastiness of your attack on her.

 Face it, Share, you lost control. You let the mask slip, and we all saw the 
ugliness underneath. It's slipped before and given us glimpses, but now you 
have to live with the knowledge that this time we got a really good look, and 
the faux-sainthood is down the tubes, exposed as a lie.

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

 > Judy, imo Ann has made plenty of nasty comments to and about me over the 
 > past year. 
 > MGC members need a taste of their own medicine occasionally. It seems they 
 > can dish it 
 > out, of course as a gang, but they really can't take it.

RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: Mean Girls -- the research

imo, RWC is the #1 big reason you all keep attacking me. Expecially you, Judy, 
the number 1 grudge holder maybe on the internet if what others say is true. 
Since that seems to be what's needed to be Queen Bee, I'm happy to let you keep 
that job. As for Emily, why exclude Obbajee and Susan? Except that my exchanges 
with them disproves what Emily initially said about me.

 From the beginning I've acknowledged that I have flaws. But Judy, when you 
don't like someone, it's as if you put on black glasses and see the person only 
through them. Worse, you either don't see that you've got the glasses on, or 
you won't admit that you do.

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

 Unlike you, Emily has integrity. So when you claimed that you liked Obbajeeba 
and Susan, she took you at your word and amended what she said about you to 
exclude them. And after she'd done that to accommodate your claim, you accused 
her of saying Obbajeeba and Susan weren't "strong and beautiful" and demanded 
to know how she accounted for your claim not to be threatened by them--when 
she'd just got done accounting for it.

 It's all right here in black and white, Share, but you simply can't 
acknowledge the facts.

 One of the big reasons we keep going after you, Share, is because of your 
inability to be straightforward when there's any kind of conflict--one more 
unmistakeable sign that your saintly pose is just that, a pose, not the real 
Share. You twist and obfuscate and conceal and confound and create massive 
muddles to protect yourself from having to deal with reality.

 And the reality is, as Emily so aptly points out, that your posts are not 
"cute," you are not the Queen Bee of FFL that you'd like to see yourself as.

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

 > I believe Obbajee posted recently and Susan about a month ago. But you both 
 > want to 
 > exclude them from Emily's assessment for an obvious reason.

 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:32 PM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   No, Share, look for the parenthetical in what Emily wrote. (You know what a 
parenthetical is, right?) 

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

 No, Judy, what's interesting and predictable is that Emily and now you, are 
ignoring the women who disprove what Emily's saying about me.

 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:18 PM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   You appear to have overlooked the parenthetical, Share. Isn't that 
interesting!? 

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

 Emily, are you saying that Obbajee and Susan aren't strong and beautiful?! I'm 
not threatened by either of them. How do you account for that? 

 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:01 PM, "emilymaenot@..."  
wrote:

   This might be the *nastiest* thing I've seen her write.  Share, I say this 
based on the face value of your words, ignoring the energy that accompanies 
them.  You are *not* cute, Share.  I wonder if you have the ability to 
apologize for this?  You are threatened by strong and beautiful women Share 
(the ones that are posting); you want to be a Queen Bee.  You simply aren't.  
Get over it.

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Mean Girls -- the research

Richard, thanks for the comic relief. And btw, you started the other thread 
that's generating so much heat today. Go figure! 

 

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

 Just a reminder: Turq started this thread. LoL!
 
 On 11/20/2013 10:51 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
 
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > Ann, imo you have a *gift* for especially nasty ridiculing of people.
 And my sense of humor is fine.
 
 None of the three of you (I'm cutting Emily a break because she isn't
 part of this latest outbreak of Junior High School nonsense) is worth
 pissing on. If you're all intent upon demonstrating how petty and
 idiotic you are, couldn't you possibly do it via email? Doing it here is
 rather discourteous to the rest of the people on this forum, who don't
 really give a shit who is "winning" these imaginary battles going on in
 your silly, vindictive little heads.
 
 Share, you *could* have just ignored anything Ann or Judy said about
 you. But n. You had to start things up again, so that again
 you're the focus of attention. I'm back to my original advice: SHUT THE
 FUCK UP!
 
 > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > awoelflebater@ wrote:
 >
 > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > sharelong60@ wrote:
 >
 > turq, you're wrong. Ann started it by writing a post ridiculing me
 under the thread What I Did Today. She's very good IMO at presenting
 herself nicely after she's been nasty. Neither she nor Judy has the
 integrity to acknowledge this other post.
 >
 >
 >
 > Share, here is the thing. Yes I goof on you, yes it may seem like my
 intention is to ridicule, yes I was making fun of your post to Richard
 about the Whole foods thing. But come on, get a grip. You claim to love
 the smorgasbord that is FFL, you say you like the personal challenges
 you encounter here. Who is exempt from name calling, chastising,
 rudeness, misunderstanding or downright verbal abuse (as opposed to
 psychological rape) here on this forum? NO ONE. I am sorry if you are
 not getting the support you had hoped for your interesting "take" on my
 face in the photo (comprising about 1/100th of the image space BTW) but
 you are certainly welcome to your opinion about my Nazi-like stance and
 demeanor as wrong as I think it may be. However, your hostility was
 evident and that is also fine, as long as you are willing to admit
 ownership of it. I don't blame you for despising me, I get it and I
 probably deserve it but be straight for a change and own up.
 >
 >
 > ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > turquoiseb@ wrote:
 >
 > Share, YOU started this latest round of Mean Girls Dumping On You.
 Not
 > them.
 >
 > You didn't *have* to comment on Ann's photo, let alone try to rope me
 > into it by addressing me directly. I didn't reply 1) because I
 > disagreed, and thought it was a fairly nice photo of Ann enjoying
 > nature, and 2) because I knew what would happen, and WHY it was going
 to
 > happen.
 >
 > YOU started up the fray again. As far as I can tell, you were getting
 > antsy with them NOT dumping on you for a couple of days, after I
 posted
 > the number of times they have done so since August, and them laying
 low
 > as a result. You missed the attention, so you tried to provoke them.
 > And, of course, it worked.
 >
 > So much for my belief that you -- out of the four of you old biddies
 who
 > have nothing to do but subject the rest of us to your petty dislikes
 and
 > grudges -- could be appealed to.
 >
 >
 > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
Share Long wrote:
 > >
 > > Judy in her cunning way has completely ignored the nasty,
 ridiculing
 > post that Ann wrote. Which shows the depth of Judy's dishonesty. Or
 > perhaps at this point she's simply totally self deluded about her
 > alleged honesty.
 > >
 > > Also notice how she attempts to justify the deluge of negativity
 the
 > MGC has directed at me over the past year.
 > >
 > > Also notice that if I'm positive, then according to Judy, I'm
 > pandering. But if I stand up to their ridicule, then according to
 her, I
 > deserved it retroactively!
 > >
 > > This is why I will never see Judy as the paragon of honesty that
 she's
 > so desperate to present herself as.
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:14 AM, "awoelflebater@"
 > awoelflebater@ wrote:
 > >
 > > That is my happy look Share, you sh

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: Re: Mean Girls -- the research

Ann, imo you have a *gift* for especially nasty ridiculing of people. And my 
sense of humor is fine. 

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

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

 turq, you're wrong. Ann started it by writing a post ridiculing me under the 
thread What I Did Today. She's very good IMO at presenting herself nicely after 
she's been nasty. Neither she nor Judy has the integrity to acknowledge this 
other post.

 Share, here is the thing. Yes I goof on you, yes it may seem like my intention 
is to ridicule, yes I was making fun of your post to Richard about the Whole 
foods thing. But come on, get a grip. You claim to love the smorgasbord that is 
FFL, you say you like the personal challenges you encounter here. Who is exempt 
from name calling, chastising, rudeness, misunderstanding or downright verbal 
abuse (as opposed to psychological rape) here on this forum? NO ONE. I am sorry 
if you are not getting the support you had hoped for your interesting "take" on 
my face in the photo (comprising about 1/100th of the image space BTW) but you 
are certainly welcome to your opinion about my Nazi-like stance and demeanor as 
wrong as I think it may be. However, your hostility was evident and that is 
also fine, as long as you are willing to admit ownership of it. I don't blame 
you for despising me, I get it and I probably deserve it but be straight for a 
change and own up.

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

 Share, YOU started this latest round of Mean Girls Dumping On You. Not
 them.

 You didn't *have* to comment on Ann's photo, let alone try to rope me
 into it by addressing me directly. I didn't reply 1) because I
 disagreed, and thought it was a fairly nice photo of Ann enjoying
 nature, and 2) because I knew what would happen, and WHY it was going to
 happen.

 YOU started up the fray again. As far as I can tell, you were getting
 antsy with them NOT dumping on you for a couple of days, after I posted
 the number of times they have done so since August, and them laying low
 as a result. You missed the attention, so you tried to provoke them.
 And, of course, it worked.

 So much for my belief that you -- out of the four of you old biddies who
 have nothing to do but subject the rest of us to your petty dislikes and
 grudges -- could be appealed to.

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
Share Long wrote:
 >
 > Judy in her cunning way has completely ignored the nasty, ridiculing
 post that Ann wrote. Which shows the depth of Judy's dishonesty. Or
 perhaps at this point she's simply totally self deluded about her
 alleged honesty.
 >
 > Also notice how she attempts to justify the deluge of negativity the
 MGC has directed at me over the past year.
 >
 > Also notice that if I'm positive, then according to Judy, I'm
 pandering. But if I stand up to their ridicule, then according to her, I
 deserved it retroactively!
 >
 > This is why I will never see Judy as the paragon of honesty that she's
 so desperate to present herself as.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:14 AM, "awoelflebater@..."
 awoelflebater@... wrote:
 >
 > That is my happy look Share, you should see me when I'm mad! I'm also
 looking at the man I most love in the world at that moment surrounded by
 the pristine beauty of British Columbia in celebration of two birthdays.
 Focus on the scenery, that is what I most wanted to show you. Of course
 it isn't as interesting as pictures of the strip malls in Texas but then
 there's no accounting for taste and perception. Is Knowledge Structured
 in Consciousness do you think?Â
 >
 >
 > ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > authfriend@ wrote:
 >
 >
 > And this post from Share tells us absolutely everything we need to
 know about what kind of human being she is. Of course she hasn't the
 foggiest idea how revealing it is of the accuracy of the criticisms and
 ridicule that have been directed her way.Â
 >
 >
 > Share spewed:
 >
 > turq, coincidentally I read this right after seeing the picture of
 herself that Ann posted. Lightbulb! I had been wondering why someone
 with such a reportedly wonderful life like hers could write such nasty,
 posts ridiculing me. Then I saw that picture of her looking like, IMO,
 an SS commando with tight, smug smile, cocky posture and judgmental
 eyes. I don't wonder anymore. I've heard that by the age of 40 a woman
 has the face she deserves. Judging by her nasty posts towards me, I'd
 say that's quite true of Ann and her face.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:45 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@ wrote:
 >
 > Â
 > Hey, I didn't write it.
 >
 >
 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.htm\ 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.htm\
 l
 >

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: Mean Girls -- the research

No Ann, it wasn't just your photo that I replied to. It was the combo of your 
nice photo with your previous nasty post.  

 

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

  
 

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

 Ann, I saw your photo after I read your post ridiculing me so your Politically 
Correct answers are wasted on me. Like the one you foisted on Ravi about why 
you didn't meet with him in person. He's still simpering after you and calling 
you dear Ann all the time so I guess you were successful in that instance. And 
if you really wanted to send me a photo of the scenery, why didn't you? Are you 
really telling me that your photographer husband didn't take any of just the 
scenery?!
 

 See later post of two pictures for you of just the scenery. If I had any clue 
that this photo of mine would have elicited such a fascinating response from 
you I would have posted an album's worth! Your response spoke volumes to me and 
I couldn't even see your angelic face.
 

 

 

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

 That is my happy look Share, you should see me when I'm mad! I'm also looking 
at the man I most love in the world at that moment surrounded by the pristine 
beauty of British Columbia in celebration of two birthdays. Focus on the 
scenery, that is what I most wanted to show you. Of course it isn't as 
interesting as pictures of the strip malls in Texas but then there's no 
accounting for taste and perception. Is Knowledge Structured in Consciousness 
do you think? 
 

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 And this post from Share tells us absolutely everything we need to know about 
what kind of human being she is. Of course she hasn't the foggiest idea how 
revealing it is of the accuracy of the criticisms and ridicule that have been 
directed her way. 
 

Share spewed:
 turq, coincidentally I read this right after seeing the picture of herself 
that Ann posted. Lightbulb! I had been wondering why someone with such a 
reportedly wonderful life like hers could write such nasty, posts ridiculing 
me. Then I saw that picture of her looking like, IMO, an SS commando with 
tight, smug smile, cocky posture and judgmental eyes. I don't wonder anymore. 
I've heard that by the age of 40 a woman has the face she deserves. Judging by 
her nasty posts towards me, I'd say that's quite true of Ann and her face.
 

 
 
 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:45 AM, TurquoiseB  wrote:
 
   Hey, I didn't write it. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html

[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: Mean Girls -- the research

turq, you're wrong. Ann started it by writing a post ridiculing me under the 
thread What I Did Today. She's very good IMO at presenting herself nicely after 
she's been nasty. Neither she nor Judy has the integrity to acknowledge this 
other post.

 

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

 Share, YOU started this latest round of Mean Girls Dumping On You. Not
 them.
 
 You didn't *have* to comment on Ann's photo, let alone try to rope me
 into it by addressing me directly. I didn't reply 1) because I
 disagreed, and thought it was a fairly nice photo of Ann enjoying
 nature, and 2) because I knew what would happen, and WHY it was going to
 happen.
 
 YOU started up the fray again. As far as I can tell, you were getting
 antsy with them NOT dumping on you for a couple of days, after I posted
 the number of times they have done so since August, and them laying low
 as a result. You missed the attention, so you tried to provoke them.
 And, of course, it worked.
 
 So much for my belief that you -- out of the four of you old biddies who
 have nothing to do but subject the rest of us to your petty dislikes and
 grudges -- could be appealed to.
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
Share Long wrote:
 >
 > Judy in her cunning way has completely ignored the nasty, ridiculing
 post that Ann wrote. Which shows the depth of Judy's dishonesty. Or
 perhaps at this point she's simply totally self deluded about her
 alleged honesty.
 >
 > Also notice how she attempts to justify the deluge of negativity the
 MGC has directed at me over the past year.
 >
 > Also notice that if I'm positive, then according to Judy, I'm
 pandering. But if I stand up to their ridicule, then according to her, I
 deserved it retroactively!
 >
 > This is why I will never see Judy as the paragon of honesty that she's
 so desperate to present herself as.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:14 AM, "awoelflebater@..."
 awoelflebater@... wrote:
 >
 > That is my happy look Share, you should see me when I'm mad! I'm also
 looking at the man I most love in the world at that moment surrounded by
 the pristine beauty of British Columbia in celebration of two birthdays.
 Focus on the scenery, that is what I most wanted to show you. Of course
 it isn't as interesting as pictures of the strip malls in Texas but then
 there's no accounting for taste and perception. Is Knowledge Structured
 in Consciousness do you think?Â
 >
 >
 > ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > authfriend@ wrote:
 >
 >
 > And this post from Share tells us absolutely everything we need to
 know about what kind of human being she is. Of course she hasn't the
 foggiest idea how revealing it is of the accuracy of the criticisms and
 ridicule that have been directed her way.Â
 >
 >
 > Share spewed:
 >
 > turq, coincidentally I read this right after seeing the picture of
 herself that Ann posted. Lightbulb! I had been wondering why someone
 with such a reportedly wonderful life like hers could write such nasty,
 posts ridiculing me. Then I saw that picture of her looking like, IMO,
 an SS commando with tight, smug smile, cocky posture and judgmental
 eyes. I don't wonder anymore. I've heard that by the age of 40 a woman
 has the face she deserves. Judging by her nasty posts towards me, I'd
 say that's quite true of Ann and her face.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:45 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@ wrote:
 >
 > Â
 > Hey, I didn't write it.
 >
 >
 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.htm\ 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.htm\
 l
 >

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Mean Girls -- the research

Ann, I saw your photo after I read your post ridiculing me so your Politically 
Correct answers are wasted on me. Like the one you foisted on Ravi about why 
you didn't meet with him in person. He's still simpering after you and calling 
you dear Ann all the time so I guess you were successful in that instance. And 
if you really wanted to send me a photo of the scenery, why didn't you? Are you 
really telling me that your photographer husband didn't take any of just the 
scenery?!
 

 

 

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

 That is my happy look Share, you should see me when I'm mad! I'm also looking 
at the man I most love in the world at that moment surrounded by the pristine 
beauty of British Columbia in celebration of two birthdays. Focus on the 
scenery, that is what I most wanted to show you. Of course it isn't as 
interesting as pictures of the strip malls in Texas but then there's no 
accounting for taste and perception. Is Knowledge Structured in Consciousness 
do you think? 
 

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 And this post from Share tells us absolutely everything we need to know about 
what kind of human being she is. Of course she hasn't the foggiest idea how 
revealing it is of the accuracy of the criticisms and ridicule that have been 
directed her way. 
 

Share spewed:
 turq, coincidentally I read this right after seeing the picture of herself 
that Ann posted. Lightbulb! I had been wondering why someone with such a 
reportedly wonderful life like hers could write such nasty, posts ridiculing 
me. Then I saw that picture of her looking like, IMO, an SS commando with 
tight, smug smile, cocky posture and judgmental eyes. I don't wonder anymore. 
I've heard that by the age of 40 a woman has the face she deserves. Judging by 
her nasty posts towards me, I'd say that's quite true of Ann and her face.
 

 
 
 On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 2:45 AM, TurquoiseB  wrote:
 
   Hey, I didn't write it. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] The Natural Law of Gettysburg

2013-11-19 Thread sharelong60

Sorry, feste, that's all I got on the story. Probably Charlie said a lot more, 
explaining it more fully. 

 

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

 If Charlie really said that, it must rank as one of his more idiotic comments. 
It doesn't really make any sense at all, other than the vague idea that "unity" 
must be a good thing.  

 

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

 What powerful words from a beautiful soul. Thanks for posting, Buck. Years ago 
I heard through the grapevine that Charlie Lutes said the national deva lives 
at the Lincoln Memorial in DC. Because Lincoln preserved the unity of this 
country and unity is its destiny. 
 

 
 
 On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 5:55 AM, "dhamiltony2k5@..."  
wrote:
 
   The Unified Field,
 Extending Equal Rights to All
 November 19, 1863.

 

 The great initiator, 150 years ago:
 

 "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a 
new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men 
are created equal.
 Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any 
nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great 
battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a 
final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might 
live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
 But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not 
hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have 
consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will 
little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what 
they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the 
unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It 
is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before 
us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for 
which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve 
that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall 
have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, 
for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: Holy Hell: A Memoir of Faith, Devotion, and Pure Madness

2013-11-17 Thread sharelong60

Judy, how is Louise's comment about indiff's style being pro Amma?! 

 

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

 Oh, great, now the pro-Amma folks are coming here to carry on their fight. 
Just what we needed. 
 

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

 I don't think people should encourage indifferent. He is quite abusive. I am 
surprised threats are allowed here. 
 Louise
 

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

 Our Mr. 'Empty Bill' is way too fragile for any kind of in-depth conversation 
on cults. He tried this very same tactic on me - claiming I was a troll when I 
posted comments about his cult. Apparently some of these people have been in 
and out of cults for the better part of their entire adult life. Where is Dr. 
Pete when we need him?
 
 'Authfriend' and 'Empty' are constantly calling people trolls. Empty on 
several occasions claimed what I was posting about his cult was "bullshit" - go 
figure.  These two are famous all over the internet for being newsgroup 
bullies. It's about time someone took them down a peg or two and told them the 
truth about their online flame tactics. Go figure.
 
 And, while you're at it, tell the 'TurquoiseB' and the 'Wolf Baiter' that we 
are are supposed to be equals here and where you live or where you were born is 
just being prejudice. Maybe they are just JELLOS - I don't know. One thing is 
fer sure - they are VERY interested in the comings and goings of some cult 
leaders. LoL!
 
 
 
 On 11/16/2013 8:28 PM, indifferent_netizen wrote:
 
   You are too emotionally fragile Mr. Bill, don't want to make you more 
miserable. I don't get much joy beating wimps.
  
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:emptybill@... wrote:
 
 That's it? I gave you an invitation to show us how important and powerful you 
are. I am giving you a chance to demonstrate something other than 
 
 braggadocio. 
 
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 I didn't realize you cry so easily Mr. Bill, how old are you now?

RE: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] The Minion Koan

2013-11-17 Thread sharelong60

Judy, I don't believe I suggested that you did, did I? 

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

 I don't believe I suggested parents were the only source of stress and trauma 
during childhood, did I?

 Share blubbered:

 > That's great Judy. But parents aren't the only sources of stress and trauma 
 > in 
 > childhood.

 On Saturday, November 16, 2013 11:47 AM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   P.S.: You're quite right about my childhood, albeit not in the way you hope. 
I had a happy, stress-free childhood with two parents who loved me deeply and 
steadfastly. They passed on their own devotion to authenticity and loathing of 
phoniness to me.

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

 (snicker) Thanks for proving my point, Share. You're so dependable in that 
regard.

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

 Judy, imo your self righteousness with regards to authenticity is itself proof 
of over compensation. Your alleged devotion to authenticity and your opinions 
of me also imo are both results of your childhood. And that's all I'm going to 
say.

 On Saturday, November 16, 2013 11:10 AM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   Let me just put it this way, Share. I think your actual motivations for the 
way you respond to people are quite different from what you claim. I think most 
of your behavior on FFL is carefully tailored to attempt to make people think 
highly of you. The problem is that when your control slips, you show a 
completely different face.

 That's all I'll say for now, except to note that the quality in people I value 
most highly is authenticity, and the quality I most despise is lack of same. An 
inauthentic pose of virtue, as far as I'm concerned, is far more reprehensible 
than an authentic, let-it-all-hang-out display of vice.

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

 Judy, a way more interesting question imho is why do you even care what I 
think turq thinks. Should I even feed your strange interest by answering you? 
What the heck: I doubt turq thinks about me much. Probably he hasn't changed 
his mind. But so what? See, I think in your mind that means I should be mean to 
him and not say thanks for a post I like, etc. But for me it's important to 
tell people when I like their posts. It's also important for me to disagree 
with people who are ganging up on someone. I'm sure there's a karmic reason but 
I don't need to figure it out for now. It feels right when I do both and that's 
why I do them.

 On Saturday, November 16, 2013 9:26 AM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote:

   Say, Share, another question I asked you yesterday that you didn't respond 
to: Do you think Barry has changed his mind about you since his "SHUT THE FUCK 
UP" post? 

Share fawned:

 > 7 posts this morning! This is one of the qualities I like about turq, his 
 > generosity, and that his 
 > posts are often about fascinating stuff. That's all I got for now (-:

 On Saturday, November 16, 2013 5:42 AM, TurquoiseB  wrote:

   How many minions does it take to change a light bulb? Or into one?

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: Holy Hell: A Memoir of Faith, Devotion, and Pure Madness

2013-11-16 Thread sharelong60

dear not really indifferent, much of my thinking about this topic is based on 
knowing Rick in person. I think he's quite intelligent and impervious to self 
delusion so I choose to trust his input. About Amma and Gail I will never know 
the *facts* via my own direct observations so I rely on the observations of 
others I have found trustworthy. All the while knowing that I might be wrong.
 

 That's the thing I think. At any moment we might be wrong. All we can do is 
our best in any moment. If we're wrong, life will straighten us out one way or 
the other. I can live with that. 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 This is an extremely cultish, delusional thinking.
 

 Here's an interview of Gail Tredwell on this book - open in Google Chrome for 
English translation
 

 
http://spuren.ch/content/magazin/single-ansicht-nachrichten/datumamma-die-kehrseite-einer-heiligen.html
 
http://spuren.ch/content/magazin/single-ansicht-nachrichten/datumamma-die-kehrseite-einer-heiligen.html
 
http://spuren.ch/content/magazin/single-ansicht-nachrichten/datumamma-die-kehrseite-einer-heiligen.html
  
 

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 To be that close to Amma for that long is bound to bring up the biggest, 
fattest stresses, karma from many, many lifetimes. May she somehow find peace 
when all is said and done.
 

 
 
 On Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:49 PM, merudanda  
wrote:
 
   'Amma's shadow'Gail Tredwell last video :River of Love ◦ Mata 
Amritanandamayi could be shot just few months before she left the  ashram-?
 Should be at 46m28s -  http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dz6bFeYUNCU#t=2789 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dz6bFeYUNCU#t=2789
 

 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s -  
http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz6bFeYUNCU&feature=youtu.be&t=46m28s 
http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 The 2011-12 foreign contribution report (from 4/1/2011 through
3/31/2012 and 2010-2011) for the Mata Amritanandamayi Math is up now on the FCRA
website:
 http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2011-2012 
http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2011-2012
 

 

 http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2010-2011 
http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2010-2011
  
 

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

 Pages to read: http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-lies/ 
http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-lies/
 http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-scandal/ 
http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-scandal/
  
  
 From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of Share Long
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:43 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: Holy Hell: A Memoir of Faith, 
Devotion, and Pure Madness


  
   
 I've been to Amma's gatherings a few times and liked getting hugged, liked the 
bhajans and the feeling of being at a market in India. I also liked that it was 
so different than TM gatherings which are drier and more knowledge 
based. Also it was interesting to see the Western devotees garbed in Indian 
clothing and living a more obviously ashram lifestyle. A former boyfriend left 
Purusha and ended up buying a condo at Amma's ashram in India and I got some 
insights from him about that particular path. Bottom line, we live in 
interesting times but maybe everybody in every era thinks that!
  

  
 On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:52 PM, "emilymaenot@... 
mailto:emilymaenot@..."; mailto:emilymaenot@...> wrote:

   
 I only spent 3 days and just one time (although it was enough for me to spend 
hours on the internet to reconcile my reality and that of my children's with 
the experience and the experience of the family I went with and to feel 
compelled to write up my story for a post in the process).  I think Rick or 
Ravi or maybe Share? could take you up on this, but I don't want to start any 
drama.  It is a good story and it represents 20 years of her life and I respect 
it and her fully.  

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
mailto:awoelflebater@...> wrote:
 Hmmm, I would be interested to compare the experience of those who had been 
around Amma with what the author is going to reveal in her book. I would also 
like to know if what the author says resonates in any way or form with what 
someone who approaches Amma openly and sincerely would have to say about their 
experience with/of her. Everyone is different and their filtering/perception 
mechanism is different from those possessed by others. I would love to know how 
I would feel in her presence, r

RE: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Re: OMG: viveka, vivekin?

2013-11-15 Thread sharelong60

Judy, again, you're not making any sense. Where do you get the idea that I 
thought turq's post was positive? I simply think it's over and done.   

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

 So you're saying Barry's "SHUT THE FUCK UP" post to you from August was 
positive and that I'm mistaken to think it was negative?

 Do you think he's changed his mind about you?

 (BTW, I don't believe in the original version of the story that the 
"beautiful, young girl" was drowning. In the original version, she was just 
standing by the river helplessly, unable to cross. If the old monk had saved 
her life, it wouldn't have made much sense for the young monk to feel the old 
monk had done something wrong. Whoever added the drowning bit obviously missed 
the whole point of the story.)

Share persisted nonsensically:

 > Well, Judy I'm not young and I think I'm cute rather than beautiful. And I'm 
 > a pretty good 
 > swimmer. You remind me of the young monk who's still holding on to an event 
 > that's long 
 > passed. Flow on!

 On Friday, November 15, 2013 10:37 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   Are you thinking of yourself as the "beautiful, young girl" who was saved 
from drowning by the old monk? And of Barry as that monk?

 Just trying to understand how I've reminded you of this story that we've all 
heard so often, because I can't quite see the connection. I mean, neither of 
the monks said anything about the "beautiful, young girl" being stupid (at 
least not in the standard version of the story).

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

 LOL, Judy, Judy, Judy, you remind me of the story of 2 brahmacharyas who came 
to a river and saw a beautiful, young girl drowning there. The older of the 
monks jumped in and carried her to the opposite shore. Then he and the young 
monk continued their journey. A little later the young monk got upset with the 
old monk for breaking their vows by touching a woman. The old monk wisely noted 
that he had left her at the river. But the young monk, who had not touched her 
at all, was still carrying her.

 Flow on, Judy, flow on!

 On Friday, November 15, 2013 10:02 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   Share is so fortunate to have a defender like Barry, isn't she?

 An Open Message To Share
 turquoiseb Mon, 12 Aug 2013 22:51:44 -0700

 SHUT THE FUCK UP

 We get it that you don't care how unintelligent you come across, and
 that you're trying to single-handedly prove the contention of anti-TM
 critics that TMers are blissninnies without a brain cell in their thick
 skulls who will believe anything if they're told its Woo Woo enough. But
 do you have to be such a codependent, attention-seeking masochist about
 it?

 Not only have you been making yourself the object of pursuit of your Jr.
 High School-mentality tormentors, you've been doing it *purposefully*.
 For fuck's sake, STOP.

 You're even more boring than they are as they chase you endlessly like a
 dog chases a ball. The "mean girls" trying to "get" you are an
 embarrassment to the notion of humans having compassion, but you're an
 embarrassment to the notion of humans having intelligence.

 They're doing this because they have no choice; they're the dogs in this
 scenario:

 [https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/q71/1002189_1015\
 1783564220211_2025423059_n.jpg]

 You're doing it because you're not terribly smart, or interesting, and
 you crave attention anyway. And you don't fucking care whether you drag
 a whole forum down to your level of idiocy to get it.

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ann 
wrote:
 >
 > > ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > > sharelong60@ wrote:
 > >
 > > Emily, it is and has been a pleasure for me to read posts
 > > from just about all the men on FFL The posts of the
 > > MGC? Not so much. Silly me!.
 >
 > Men! Listen up. You are providing a necessary community
 > service when you 'stimulate' Share with your attention and
 > ideas. Keep up the good work. Mean Girls need not apply.

 Mean Girls need not apply for membership in the human
 race. They don't qualify.

 > Are all the girls here "mean" BTW?

 The only ones we can be fairly certain fall into the Mean Girls
 category are the ones who have been piling on to Share ever
 since one of them got called on being a faux feminist. That
 would be Judy, Ann, and Emily.

 This behavior is about as *anti-feminist* as it gets. Personally
 I think Share should just write all three of them off as if they
 don't exist, but she compassionately still interacts with them,
 as she does with the other attention troll, Willytex. Waste 'o
 fuckin' time, if you ask me, but so be it, and better her than me.

RE: RE: Re: RE: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: Holy Hell: A Memoir of Faith, Devotion, and Pure Madness

2013-11-15 Thread sharelong60

Thanks, Emily, I think it's a great gift from life to be devoted, like how 
you're devoted to your daughters. Everyone here is devoted to someone or 
something. As for me, I'm not devoted to Amma nor even to Maharishi. As I get 
older, the object of my devotion has become well, less of an object. Hard to 
put into words without sounding corny, but here goes:

 When life itself has become the Beloved
 one falls in love at every moment
 sometimes even kicking and screaming
 a funny kind of ecstasy
 a fierce kind of embrace.

 

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

 You sound like a devotee.  Read the book Share.  It is a very interesting book 
and includes a lot of detail  on what it was like to live in India re: the 
culture, her journey, etc.  
 

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

 To be that close to Amma for that long is bound to bring up the biggest, 
fattest stresses, karma from many, many lifetimes. May she somehow find peace 
when all is said and done.
 

 
 
 On Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:49 PM, merudanda  
wrote:
 
   'Amma's shadow'Gail Tredwell last video :River of Love ◦ Mata 
Amritanandamayi could be shot just few months before she left the  ashram-?
 Should be at 46m28s -  http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-
 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dz6bFeYUNCU#t=2789 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dz6bFeYUNCU#t=2789
 

 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s -  
http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz6bFeYUNCU&feature=youtu.be&t=46m28s 
http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 http://youtu.be/dz6bFeYUNCU?t=46m28s%20-


 The 2011-12 foreign contribution report (from 4/1/2011 through
3/31/2012 and 2010-2011) for the Mata Amritanandamayi Math is up now on the FCRA
website:
 http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2011-2012 
http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2011-2012
 

 

 http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2010-2011 
http://fcraonline.nic.in/fc3_verify.aspx?RCN=052930183R&by=2010-2011
  
 

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

 Pages to read: http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-lies/ 
http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-lies/
 http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-scandal/ 
http://ammascandal.wordpress.com/category/amma-scandal/
  
  
 From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of Share Long
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:43 AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: Holy Hell: A Memoir of Faith, 
Devotion, and Pure Madness


  
   
 I've been to Amma's gatherings a few times and liked getting hugged, liked the 
bhajans and the feeling of being at a market in India. I also liked that it was 
so different than TM gatherings which are drier and more knowledge 
based. Also it was interesting to see the Western devotees garbed in Indian 
clothing and living a more obviously ashram lifestyle. A former boyfriend left 
Purusha and ended up buying a condo at Amma's ashram in India and I got some 
insights from him about that particular path. Bottom line, we live in 
interesting times but maybe everybody in every era thinks that!
  

  
 On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:52 PM, "emilymaenot@... 
mailto:emilymaenot@..."; mailto:emilymaenot@...> wrote:

   
 I only spent 3 days and just one time (although it was enough for me to spend 
hours on the internet to reconcile my reality and that of my children's with 
the experience and the experience of the family I went with and to feel 
compelled to write up my story for a post in the process).  I think Rick or 
Ravi or maybe Share? could take you up on this, but I don't want to start any 
drama.  It is a good story and it represents 20 years of her life and I respect 
it and her fully.  

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
mailto:awoelflebater@...> wrote:
 Hmmm, I would be interested to compare the experience of those who had been 
around Amma with what the author is going to reveal in her book. I would also 
like to know if what the author says resonates in any way or form with what 
someone who approaches Amma openly and sincerely would have to say about their 
experience with/of her. Everyone is different and their filtering/perception 
mechanism is different from those possessed by others. I would love to know how 
I would feel in her presence, receiving her touch and then compare it with Gail 
Tredwell's story and why and how she decided she wanted to move away from Amma. 
Anyone want to read the book and let me know about this, especially if you have 
spent time with her?

  
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
mailto:emilymaenot@...> wrote:
 She wrote it largely to facilita

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Transcendental Meditation Revolutionary Mission:

2013-11-14 Thread sharelong60

That's a great question, Richard: for whom is one seeking enlightenment? And I 
think it changes over time. Hopefully! 

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

 This is a very weak defense of your beliefs. As a Buddhist you should already 
know that the Buddha's rationale for teaching hinged on the fact that he became 
enlightened  - and the nature of his enlightenment. 

 According to the Buddha himself, at the moment he became enlightened he saw 
all his previous lives and all his future lives and the pain and suffering he 
had already endured for eons and the pain and suffering he was to endure in the 
future. And, he saw in one fell swoop all the suffering that all humans will 
endure, past and present and future. At that moment he realized the truth of 
suffering (samsara), action (karma) and rebirth (reincarnation) and how to end 
suffering following an Eightfold Path.

 The Buddha at that moment realized that everything happens for a reason; 
because of this, that occurs. Just like in a game of billiards depends on cause 
and effect and gravity sucks. It's not complicated. 

 So, we know that causation rules the physical world, but is there a moral 
reciprocity as well? It's always best to err on the side of caution. That's why 
Buddhists are supposed to be compassionate and to do no harm. You left out the 
reason why you were seeking the spiritual life! Is it for you own gain or for 
the benefit of others? That's the real question.

 . And what was the On 11/13/2013 1:17 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:

   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > If you had a flashback that convinced you you were Jack the Ripper in a 
 > previous life should you hand yourself in to the police? 
 > Could you count on the statute of limitations getting you off the hook? 
 > Could you claim in mitigation that you weren't yourself when you committed 
 > the murders? 

 I'm going to comment on this, and leave the musings below to others. No 
offense, but the above stuff is way funny, and creative, and that tickles my 
funny bone. But -- having kinda been there done that with this experience -- 
theorizing about it doesn't really float my boat. 

 I'm like that with many of my most interesting spiritual experiences. I was 
there. I experienced these things, some of them that fall into the Blade Runner 
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe" category. But I can't tell you 
definitively what they were. Heck, I'm still trying to figure many of them out 
myself. 

 Maybe it's a Buddhist thang. They were never all that interested in the "why" 
things are happening, only in *that* they are happening, and how to make the 
best of that. I'm kinda drawn that way myself. 

 > No one picked up on my alternative suggestion that memories of previous 
 > lives could be explained not by any one individual going through a serial 
 > succession of different life stories but rather could be explained as 
 > someone accessing our common, racial memory. 
 > By what mechanism? 
 > 1) Occultists talk about "shells" of the dead left behind in the astral 
 > realm. Really, though, the shells are used to explain what mediums access 
 > when they contact the recently deceased. The shells dissipate over time so 
 > wouldn't explain distant memories. 
 > 2) Memories are passed on through our DNA by some unknown mechanism? (This 
 > wouldn't work for Michael's recall of being a pious hermit in medieval 
 > France - unless he had a relapse into sinful passions - monks don't have 
 > kids.) Of course, the further back in time you peer the more common 
 > ancestors we all have. 
 > 3) All human (and non-human) life experiences are stored in the Akashic 
 > Records. This looks the most promising line to take. 
 > The advantage of this theory - that past-life memories are simply people 
 > accessing the Akashic field - are: 
 > (i) It explains why more than one person can claim to have memories of an 
 > historical figure. 
 > (ii) It fits better Buddhist ideas of anatta. 
 > (iii) It explains why Cleopatra pops up so much; her "thumbprint" on the 
 > Akashic field is bigger than most peoples. 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > sharelong60@ wrote: 
 > 
 > fwiw, I figured we had all been in a previous life together and then a 
 > healer mentioned that out of the blue about a month ago. My intuition says 
 > Atlantis but I've not had any experiences to confirm. Hope we get it right 
 > this time around (-: 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 10:47 AM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@ wrote: 
 > 
 > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Hitler - our part in his rise

2013-11-14 Thread sharelong60

Ok, Richard, sometimes I like to give you a hard time but today, thanks for the 
reminders about netiquette. It's a hole new world out here! 

 

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

 It's not complicated. 
 
 Rule number three should really be rule number one: try to make yourself look 
good on the internet.
 
 If you're interested in Hitler, send your messages to the Nazi group.
 If you're a Nazi and an admirer of Hitler, don't send messages about Hitler to 
a spiritual group.
 Don't send inflammatory messages to a spiritual group extolling the face hair 
of the guy that killed six million Jews.
 
 
 On 11/13/2013 12:22 PM, Share Long wrote:
 
   Jeez, Richard, I feel exhausted to reading all these rules!
 
 
 
 
 On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 11:56 AM, Richard J. Williams  
mailto:punditster@... wrote:
 
   
 Yeah, I'm with Buck on this one. There's probably no need to send anonymous, 
nonsensical posts about Adolph Hitler's face hair to a spiritual discussion 
group. Maybe it's time to review a few netiquette protocols:
 
 1. Don't send inflammatory messages to the discussion group.
 2. Make sure to send your message to the appropriate group.
 3. Try to make yourself look good on the internet.
 
 Notes: Send messages about Hitler to the Nazi group; send messages about 
Hitler's face hair to the Veterans Day thread; don't send messages about planes 
to the locomotive group. Make yourself look good by sending thoughtful or 
insightful messages about the topic at hand and try to stay on topic.  Try to 
be original and informative.
 
 http://www.albion.com/netiquette/rule5.html 
http://www.albion.com/netiquette/rule5.html
 
 On 11/13/2013 9:28 AM, Share Long wrote:
 
   Ahem, Richard, your post seems to be one of those one liners you rant about. 
Go figure!
 
 
 
 
 On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:32 AM, Richard J. Williams  
mailto:punditster@... wrote:
 
   
 Addressing the important issues!
 
 On 11/12/2013 9:39 PM, s3raphita@... mailto:s3raphita@... wrote:
 
   Hitler preferred a curly "Prussian" style moustache but was ordered to clip 
it during WWI so that it would fit under the gas masks introduced to defend 
against British mustard-gas attacks.
 
 
 Didn't save the bastard though: he was blinded in a Brit gas attack in 1918.
 
 
 http://tinyurl.com/bnmsjr http://tinyurl.com/bnmsjr

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: OMG: viveka, vivekin?

2013-11-14 Thread sharelong60

Obviously, emptybill, projection was alive and happening even in those days! 

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

 Now you can understand how the local dravidians ported over the word "ho" to 
apply to their gender opposites. 

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 emptybill, thanks for taking the time to explain this in more detail. I think 
of space, etc. as simple so couldn't connect that to chaos. But maybe to 
primitive peoples the skies seemed very chaotic with changing weather patterns, 
etc. I like to imagine those moments when the first cave person had a different 
association with a sound like kha. I like to wonder about the journey from hole 
to sky/ether/space to chaos. 

 On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:49 PM, "emptybill@..."  wrote:

   Professor Troll couldn't read so here are some Wiki Holes.

 Sukah and Dukha: the good and bad of it (FWIW).

 Contemporary scholar Winthrop Sargeant explains the etymological roots of 
these terms as follows:[45] 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dukkha#cite_note-FOOTNOTESargeant2009303-73 
 The ancient Aryans who brought the Sanskrit language to India were a nomadic, 
horse- and cattle-breeding people who travelled in horse- or ox-drawn vehicles. 
Su and dus are prefixes indicating good or bad. The word kha, in later Sanskrit 
meaning "sky," "ether," or "space," was originally the word for "hole," 
particularly an axle hole of one of the Aryan's vehicles. Thus sukha … meant, 
originally, "having a good axle hole," while duhkha meant "having a poor axle 
hole," leading to discomfort.  

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 So, you don't know any Tibetan - I thought so. 

 This has got to be one of the most misleading and silly answers to a simple 
yoga question I've ever read on FFL or a.m.t. You'd expect a guy that has spent 
almost his entire adult life studying with gurus and rinpoches to at least know 
one single word in Tibetan. Go figure.

 According to the Cologne Sanskrit Lexicon, the term 'dukkha' in Sanskrit, Pali 
and Tibetan is a Buddhist term commonly translated as 'suffering', one of the 
most important concepts in the Buddhist tradition. In the Yoga Sutras the term 
vivek means 'a wise man'. 

 "All is suffering for the wise man" (Y.S. 2.15). 

 The most ancient sustained expression of yogic ideas is found in the early 
discourses of the historical Buddha, thus Patanjali's  conception of freedom is 
related to the ancient Buddhist view that the source of suffering is the 
craving for permanence in a universe of impermanence. 

 Both the 'Four Noble Truths' and the 'Eightfold Path' articulated in the 
Buddha's first discourse are elements that underlie the yoga system. Two 
striking examples of this are Patanjali's use of the word 'nirodha' in the 
opening definition of yoga as 'citta-vrtti-nirodha', that is, 'Yoga is the 
cessation of the turnings of thought' and the statement that "all is suffering, 
dukkha, for the wise man."

 According to Stoler-Miller, dukkha, suffering, and nirodha, cessation, are 
crucial terms in Buddhist vocabulary and the doctrine of suffering is the core 
of what Buddhists believe the Buddha taught after gaining enlightenment. 
Patanjali's ashtang eight-limbed practice is parallel to the eight-limbed path 
of Buddha.

 Work cited:

 'Yoga: Discipline of Freedom'
 by Barbara Stoler-Miller
 Acclaimed translator of the Bhagavad Gita.
 Bantam Wisdom Editions 1998
 p. 5, 52.

 On 11/12/2013 8:48 PM, emptybill@... mailto:emptybill@... wrote:

   Musta meant axle-rod. 

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:turquoiseb@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > Dukha is the opposite of sukha. Kha as in Chaos (khaos).
 > It literally means a bad (du) axle-hole vs good (su) axle-hole.

 Who exactly are you calling an axle-hole? :-)

 > ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > sharelong60@ wrote:
 >
 > Card, I can see at least 2 ways to interpret this quote. One possible
 meaning is that for the person in CC, there is the infinite Self and the
 finite non Self and that duality itself causes misery. OR the person in
 CC realizes that all, meaning the world, is a field of change, misery
 rather than of permanent bliss.
 >
 > In another quote, Maharishi translates dukham as danger: avert the
 danger which has not arisen. Heyam dukham anagatam.
 >
 >
 > On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:31 AM, "cardemaister@" cardemaister@
 wrote:
 >
 > According to YS II 15: [blah blah blah...]...duHkham eva sarvam
 vivekinaH ... everything (

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Transcendental Meditation Revolutionary Mission:

2013-11-13 Thread sharelong60

Seraphita, I've never tried to change a past life event, not wanting to mess 
with karma, etc. But I have a friend who's reportedly in early Brahman 
Consciousness and he reportedly knows how to do that. 

 

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

 Re Barry's "As for the Jack The Ripper thang, how could anyone's past- life 
recollection shed any light on that unless they happened to be there, and in a 
position to have witnessed the events?":
 

 They could indeed have been the perpetrator or one of his victims. 
 

 I was going to say this: If I was to find myself suddenly in a past-life - 
let's say in Elizabethan London - I'd take careful note of what clothes the 
people around me wore, what food they ate, what the houses looked like, etc. 
and then when I returned I'd check against the best-available historical 
evidence. Here's the thing though: if you were to have a past-life recall can 
you alter what you're thinking or doing? If it's a far-memory of "you" in a 
previous life is the you that's "you in the 21st century having the recall" 
able to change anything?

 

 Actually, I *am* living in Elizabethan London (Liz No 2 though) so perhaps I 
should take careful note of what's around me right now; then if my future self 
ever recalls this one I'll bring back useful info.
 

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Thanks for your reply, Empty. For the record, that's exactly how my
 "flashbacks" have occurred as well. One moment I'm in the present,
 anticipating nothing out of the ordinary and expecting nothing, and the
 next moment I'm "in the moment" of another time and place, as a "first
 person participant," able to move around and interact with others in the
 scene.
 
 It's weird, but fun.
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > Indeed, among New Agers there are some who believe they were xyz
 o'-so-important person. This is often cited as "proof" it is all
 phantasy.
 >
 > Tell that to Buddha and Patanjali, who musta been deluded by the Old
 Agers. If fact there are Westerners who see that as "proof" that Buddha
 and Patanjali were just indoctrinated Asians. Thus they say "I don't
 believe the bullshit of those old bastards 'cause I ain't no fawning
 yoga-phant."
 >
 > As a case in point to Turq and Share, when I was 12 years old I was
 sitting at the kitchen table eating something. Suddenly I was a man
 sitting at an outdoor table drinking coffee in a smaller cup and reading
 a news paper. It was printed in gothic script. I especially remember the
 feeling of self-assurance along with the actual optical view of the
 street and the cars. Then suddenly I was sitting back at the kitchen
 table, feeling how good it was but unable to place that into an
 experiential framework. I never told my Southern Baptist parents because
 such things could "never be real".
 >
 > Musta been "the devil had a bulls-eye on my back" 'cause as a 12 year
 old I was so important that he had to "pre-condition" me to receive the
 Hindu devils. But now I know the truth ... Seraph has liberated me from
 my illusion with good ol' Western psychologistic rationality.
 >
 > No need for experience when you've actually know the rational truth
 ... now that we have finally jettisoned neolithic myths. Eureka!
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 > turquoiseb@ wrote:
 >
 > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 > >
 > > > Re [empty's statement that]: "The residual effect was that I
 taught
 > myself how to conduct my conscious mind to see into past lives.":
 > >
 > > Look - if you and others could really access past-life information
 > you could tell the rest of us stuff that wouldn't otherwise be
 > explicable. The fact that you can't demonstrate such knowledge shows
 > that your supposed "recollection" is a construction. I mean, think
 about
 > it: if you could tell us (say) the true identity of Jack the Ripper
 you
 > would get the Nobel Prize for Physics for overturning the current
 > scientific paradigm.
 >
 > I think you're letting your Western sensibilities lead you astray.
 > There *are* techniques for accessing memories of past lives,
 > but don't confuse them with New Age Bullshit and I-Wish-I-
 > Had-Been-Cleopatra-So-I'll-Claim-I-Was fantasies. Such real
 > techniques tend to be taught only privately to students who
 > can be trusted with them, and are usually preceded by a
 > warning similar to "Whatever you find out is likely to be
 > interesting, but essentially a waste of your time, because
 > it's all about the past. It's what you do Here And Now that
 > is important, and counts."
 >
 > I have been exposed to such teachings, but didn't pursue them
 > because frankly I wasn't interested. My personal past-life
 > recollections always "came upon me" rather than me search-
 > ing

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Transcendental Meditation Revolutionary Mission:

2013-11-12 Thread sharelong60

You're welcome, Judy and I wrote the email as soon as I realized what I had 
been missing. It did not feel at all hard to do. Go figure! 

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

 Good for you, Share. I don't think this was easy for you to acknowledge. Thank 
you. 

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

 Oy! I just got it Judy! Duh! Well I've always thought of myself as an early 
morning person and imho, that explains a lot. sigh...I'm never gonna be the 
sharpest tack in the FFL box but that's ok with me. How boring it would be if 
we were all the same.

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

 Right, I'm threatened because you stupidly got something I said wrong and 
can't bring yourself to admit it.

 Share, I know you're trying your best, but really...

 Think, honey, think. Don't just blather.

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

 Next step, Judy resorts to ridicule. But why? Why does she feel so threatened? 
And so often? 

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

 (giggle) Poor baby.

Share boo-hooed:
 > I haven't figured it out. I didn't reply to you before because you resorted 
 > to name calling.

 On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:25 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   So, Share, have you figured out where you made your mistake with "OTOH" in 
response to what I said? No? Or do you just not want to admit it? 

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

 Xeno, fyi, I have Hellman's REAL Mayonnaise in my frig, wouldn't use anything 
else for tuna fish salad! As for the quote, MUM Sanskrit professor Dr. Tom 
Egenes shared it with our class during the 91-92 school year when I was taking 
the MA in SCI. It's one of those phrases that stuck with me because it's so 
unexpected, paradoxical, koany, etc.

Some say that maya ruled by tamas guna is a covering, ruled by rajo guma is a 
veil. But maya ruled by sat guna, it actually said to be a ladder to ultimate 
reality. Go figure (-:

 On Monday, November 11, 2013 12:45 PM, "anartaxius@..."  wrote:

   Does anyone here know the source of the quote "My indestructible Maya"? On 
the Internet I find just a small collection of websites, FFL principally, 
mentioning the phrase, but no precise source. Since Share quoted it, I assume 
that she is picking it out of her memory rather than from a source text. I 
recall the phrase, but my feeble aging brain, cannot recall where I read or 
otherwise heard it.

 Is this translated phrase from the Vedas (and which one? Rig, etc.), the 
Upanishads, or the Bhagavad-Gita? (in particular the MMY translation of the 
latter)

 Whether Maya is real or not, it is certainly present here on FFL.

 I have seen this product in refrigerators of meditators, "Vegenaise", a non 
animal derived product purporting to replace mayonnaise. Maybe itshould be 
called Mayannaise instead, except people would probably confuse it with the 
Mayan civilisation of Central America. But then, confusion is the whole purpose 
of Maya. Gotta love this universe for beating us up this way.

RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Transcendental Meditation Revolutionary Mission:

2013-11-12 Thread sharelong60

Oy! I just got it Judy! Duh! Well I've always thought of myself as an early 
morning person and imho, that explains a lot. sigh...I'm never gonna be the 
sharpest tack in the FFL box but that's ok with me. How boring it would be if 
we were all the same.

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

 Right, I'm threatened because you stupidly got something I said wrong and 
can't bring yourself to admit it.

 Share, I know you're trying your best, but really...

 Think, honey, think. Don't just blather.

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

 Next step, Judy resorts to ridicule. But why? Why does she feel so threatened? 
And so often? 

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

 (giggle) Poor baby.

Share boo-hooed:
 > I haven't figured it out. I didn't reply to you before because you resorted 
 > to name calling.

 On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:25 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   So, Share, have you figured out where you made your mistake with "OTOH" in 
response to what I said? No? Or do you just not want to admit it? 

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

 Xeno, fyi, I have Hellman's REAL Mayonnaise in my frig, wouldn't use anything 
else for tuna fish salad! As for the quote, MUM Sanskrit professor Dr. Tom 
Egenes shared it with our class during the 91-92 school year when I was taking 
the MA in SCI. It's one of those phrases that stuck with me because it's so 
unexpected, paradoxical, koany, etc.

Some say that maya ruled by tamas guna is a covering, ruled by rajo guma is a 
veil. But maya ruled by sat guna, it actually said to be a ladder to ultimate 
reality. Go figure (-:

 On Monday, November 11, 2013 12:45 PM, "anartaxius@..."  wrote:

   Does anyone here know the source of the quote "My indestructible Maya"? On 
the Internet I find just a small collection of websites, FFL principally, 
mentioning the phrase, but no precise source. Since Share quoted it, I assume 
that she is picking it out of her memory rather than from a source text. I 
recall the phrase, but my feeble aging brain, cannot recall where I read or 
otherwise heard it.

 Is this translated phrase from the Vedas (and which one? Rig, etc.), the 
Upanishads, or the Bhagavad-Gita? (in particular the MMY translation of the 
latter)

 Whether Maya is real or not, it is certainly present here on FFL.

 I have seen this product in refrigerators of meditators, "Vegenaise", a non 
animal derived product purporting to replace mayonnaise. Maybe itshould be 
called Mayannaise instead, except people would probably confuse it with the 
Mayan civilisation of Central America. But then, confusion is the whole purpose 
of Maya. Gotta love this universe for beating us up this way.

RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Transcendental Meditation Revolutionary Mission:

2013-11-11 Thread sharelong60

Next step, Judy resorts to ridicule. But why? Why does she feel so threatened? 
And so often? 

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

 (giggle) Poor baby.

Share boo-hooed:
 > I haven't figured it out. I didn't reply to you before because you resorted 
 > to name calling.

 On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:25 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   So, Share, have you figured out where you made your mistake with "OTOH" in 
response to what I said? No? Or do you just not want to admit it? 

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

 Xeno, fyi, I have Hellman's REAL Mayonnaise in my frig, wouldn't use anything 
else for tuna fish salad! As for the quote, MUM Sanskrit professor Dr. Tom 
Egenes shared it with our class during the 91-92 school year when I was taking 
the MA in SCI. It's one of those phrases that stuck with me because it's so 
unexpected, paradoxical, koany, etc.

Some say that maya ruled by tamas guna is a covering, ruled by rajo guma is a 
veil. But maya ruled by sat guna, it actually said to be a ladder to ultimate 
reality. Go figure (-:

 On Monday, November 11, 2013 12:45 PM, "anartaxius@..."  wrote:

   Does anyone here know the source of the quote "My indestructible Maya"? On 
the Internet I find just a small collection of websites, FFL principally, 
mentioning the phrase, but no precise source. Since Share quoted it, I assume 
that she is picking it out of her memory rather than from a source text. I 
recall the phrase, but my feeble aging brain, cannot recall where I read or 
otherwise heard it.

 Is this translated phrase from the Vedas (and which one? Rig, etc.), the 
Upanishads, or the Bhagavad-Gita? (in particular the MMY translation of the 
latter)

 Whether Maya is real or not, it is certainly present here on FFL.

 I have seen this product in refrigerators of meditators, "Vegenaise", a non 
animal derived product purporting to replace mayonnaise. Maybe itshould be 
called Mayannaise instead, except people would probably confuse it with the 
Mayan civilisation of Central America. But then, confusion is the whole purpose 
of Maya. Gotta love this universe for beating us up this way.

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Who's Going to Win the Miss Universe 2013 Contest?

2013-11-10 Thread sharelong60

John, when you posted the Miss USA photo I thought, she'll never win, she's not 
exotic looking enough. Exotic seems to be the current preference. Just like 
other aspects of visual beauty that go in and out of style, like skirt lengths 
and car colors and architecture, so too does the ideal of human beauty. 

 

 Men are hard wired to be attracted by physical beauty. In cave times flawless 
skin etc. were unconsciously grokked signs that a potential mate would bear 
healthy children. You've mentioned wanting to get married and have children so 
it's natural that you would pay attention to these attributes. 

 

 PS Maybe you have Venus in the 7th? (-:  

 

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

  Ann,
 

 How do you define a real woman using your criteria?  By the way, there are 
many people who watch the Miss Universe contest.  I happen to be interested in 
it for reasons that you can probably guess.  But I didn't watch the show 
tonight.  I just read the news on the internet and passed it along to the group 
in case anyone is interested in this kind of activity.
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Thanks for the update but this specimen still doesn't quite look like a real 
woman to me. I wouldn't have pegged you for a watcher of the Miss Universe 
contest Jr.
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Buck and Ann,
 

 The winner this year is Miss Venezuela.  Doesn't she look like Raquel Welch?
 

 
http://tv.yahoo.com/news/venezuelan-crowned-miss-universe-moscow-ceremony-202053448.html
 
http://tv.yahoo.com/news/venezuelan-crowned-miss-universe-moscow-ceremony-202053448.html

 

 I personally feel that this is a news worthy event.  Why would anyone think 
otherwise? 
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 So it would be good, to have better writing and more self-editing on FFL. 
 
 -Buck   
 

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

 Miss USA has a good chance.  It all depends on what she says in the Q and A 
portion of the contest.  But the competition will be tough this year. 

 
http://content2.catalog.photos.msn.com/ds/ee58ec8f-2275-4bd0-92e2-65a73bab924d.jpg
 
http://content2.catalog.photos.msn.com/ds/ee58ec8f-2275-4bd0-92e2-65a73bab924d.jpg

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: MANICHAEAN VIEWS OF BUDDHISM

2013-11-08 Thread sharelong60

Xeno, I actually think there's a seesaw connection between devotion and what 
turq calls ego. I don't think either is a matter of all or nothing. At any 
given moment, I'm some percentage of each. And actually the conundrum is that 
it's only ego that's concerned about how egoic we are! Tricky. IMHO (-:
 In my experience the best I can do is focus on and go towards what I love or 
like and let ego spontaneously fall away in the process. Life has a way of 
taking care of ego schmego! And I agree with whichever poster said that we can 
be devoted towards anything or anyone. But since we're embodied being, forms 
seem to be a good choice for the nonce.

 

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

 authfriend wrote:
 

 'My parents sent me to Sunday School at a nearby nondenominational Christian 
church a couple of times when I was around 10 or so, feeling they should at 
least give me some exposure to religion. I didn't like it, and they didn't make 
me go again. I had a brief flirtation with Unitarianism in my teens, but it 
didn't last. Then after starting TM I began to feel a need for a worship 
context and joined the church where I'd attended Sunday School, stayed a couple 
of years but wasn't inspired enough to continue, since I really wasn't into the 
Personal God aspect of the belief system (or Christ as savior). God as Unified 
Field, the ultimate (and unworshipable) abstraction, is about as far as I can 
go.'
 

 My exposure to religion was rather slight, and by high school I was 
essentially agnostic although at times early influences would kick in on the 
emotional level. What you said here is pretty much what is available to 
agnostics, atheists, and non-theistic religions or philosophies (such as Zen 
Buddhism; Tao). One pretty much has to bypass that conception of a personal 
level of 'creation' (assuming there really is creation). It is possible other 
conceptual states might take the place of the personal god concept. What I 
found as time went on was I would make the attempt not to visualise the goal, I 
would easily try to deflect the tendency to give it a form. This worked for me. 
But a lot of people have trouble without some kind of concrete image in the 
mind, I find it interesting that TM takes the mind away from concrete imaging, 
yet when people come out of the meditation, it does not seem to register that 
that experience of formlessness has something to do with what one experiences 
through the senses. Ultimately that empty blank is what is experienced as being 
all the forms.
 

 The Bhagavad-Gita says that those bent on the unmanifest may have a tough time 
of it - a few translations follow, Chapter 12 Verse 5:
 

 'For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of 
the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that 
discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.'
 

 'Those whose minds are attached to the unmanifest aspect have much greater 
tribulations, because devoid of any perceptible form and attributes, success is 
achieved with great difficulty due to the beings identifying with the body.'
 

 'There is greater trouble for those whose minds are attached to the 
unmanifest. For, the path of the unmanifest is difficult to attain by the 
embodied.'
 

 As a kind of space case, perhaps I was attracted to a less concrete view of 
the universe. For example, without wanting to be a Buddhist, I was attracted to 
its Zen lineage because of the lack of conceptualisation and emphasis on direct 
experience. I found the emphasis on devotion to the guru in the TM movement 
always disconcerting as it did not seem to have any relevance to my so-called 
path. Others, of course, found devotion quite amenable to them, if it was 
natural; but faking devotion because one sees others doing it that way probably 
would be a disaster. I have seen people in the movement live and on tape 
seemingly straining to appear devoted when it seemed (as it appeared to me) 
they were just doing it out of peer pressure. Devotion is a property of what 
you like the most, whatever is most likable to you, that is your devotion, what 
you pursue, and that pursuit continues until it is fulfilled, or completely 
thwarted.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: The academic fields with the least discipline...

2013-11-07 Thread sharelong60

turq, about formulaic series, I'm old enough to have seen several in the crime 
team genre: Blue Moon, Remington Steele come to mind. What I enjoy is seeing 
how the formula itself has evolved. It's as if with each new artist or group of 
artists, the formula itself gets transformed in some essential way. Subsequent 
series must at least meet the new level or get axed. Just my opinion but I like 
it!  

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
Share Long wrote:
 >
 > Ok, turq, here's a question for you: what goes to battle
 > with ego?

 There is rarely a *need* for "battle" if there are no egos
 involved.

 > Being? Truth? Love? I don't think so. Other egos? Hmmm...
 > I'd guess yes. But that's just my opinion.
 >
 > Once again I don't understand why you get so het up
 > about people having and sharing opinions. It's what we
 > all do. Especially after we've survived our midlife crisis!

 I have no issue at all with people having opinions. It's
 when they try to present them as something *other than*
 opinion -- as "truth," or worse, as some kind of cosmic
 "Truth" -- that I cry bullshit.

 > I think most people share opinions for the purpose of
 > benefiting others.

 And *that* is ego. Believing that your opinion is so cool
 or so "right" or so "Truth-y" that sharing it will "benefit"
 others.

 > If they're misguided in that, well, there's obviously a
 > learning curve involved. And maybe wanting to benefit
 > others is the last stronghold of the ego. Hmmm...

 Certainly believing that their opinion has the *ability*
 to "benefit" others is one of the last strongholds of ego.

 > And really, if you added up all your writing online, I
 > bet you'd get close to 500 pages (-:

 But -- unlike some here -- I neither expect people to read
 what I post, or throw hissy-fits when others don't. Some
 here actually throw tantrums when people don't *respond*
 to what they've written. :-)

 > About character development, I'm making my way
 > through the 5 previous seasons of Castle and it's so
 > gratifying to watch the unfolding of all the different
 > characters. But of course especially Castle and Beckett
 > as they realize their love for each other more and more.

 It's a completely formulaic series, but its strength is in
 the actors, and the way they "fill out" the characters as
 written. Nathan is a tour de force in this regard, no
 matter what he's in, but Stana Katic is pretty good
 at being interesting, too.

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: MANICHAEAN VIEWS OF BUDDHISM

2013-11-07 Thread sharelong60

Richard! Did you even look at the clip?! It's beautiful, not outhousy at all! 
Go figure! 

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

 This thread is looking like it's headed for the outhouse.

 On 11/6/2013 10:10 PM, emptybill@... mailto:emptybill@... wrote:

   You're all sounding like desiccated corpses drying in the desert. 
 There is another type of Christian life here in America.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0M94z3Pev4 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0M94z3Pev4

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:authfriend@... wrote:

 Seraphita wrote: 

 > Re "Then after starting TM I began to feel a need for a worship context and 
 > joined the 
 > church where I'd attended Sunday School, stayed a couple of years but wasn't 
 > inspired 
 > enough to continue, since I really wasn't into the Personal God aspect of 
 > the belief system 
 > (or Christ as savior). God as Unified Field, the ultimate (and 
 > unworshipable) abstraction, is 
 > about as far as I can go. ":
 >
 > Again very close to my view. Here in the UK, the Anglican Church is 
 > essentially a wishy- 
 > washy nostalgia circus for reminding grown-ups of their childhood. (With 
 > bits of Arthurian 
 > romance added to the mix.) So all pretty harmless. Even arch-atheist Richard 
 > Dawkins has 
 > confessed to occasionally popping into a church just to enjoy the aesthetic 
 > experience!

 Heehee. Be fun to see that guy Spufford look up from his prayers and clap eyes 
on Dawkins.

 > Having always been intrigued by the occult fringe, I've also seen some 
 > attraction in the 

 > Catholic position: the Mass as a magical ritual and the unembarrassed 
 > veneration of those 
 > medieval mystics. Even such unregenerates as Oscar Wilde, Baudelaire  and 
 > Huysmans 
 > finally turned to Rome as they sensed it was the more poetical religion.

 Huh, I'm attracted by the poetry/music/incense/art/theatrical aspects as well. 
Goes way back with me to the (wonderful) Audrey Hepburn film "The Nun's Story." 
I think I'd need a Peter Finch equivalent, though.

 To this day I have no idea whether my late father had any religious 
sensibility whatsoever, but he adored churches and religious music and 
painting. I guess it's in the genes.

 I might be tempted to pop into a Catholic church at some point if they were 
doing a mass in Latin. There's something really magical about Latin. Like 
Sanskrit, I suppose, but the music is a lot better. ;-) I once memorized the 
Hail Mary in Latin just because I loved the sound of it. My Presbyterian 
ancestors (Huguenots, no less) must have spun themselves nearly out of their 
graves.

[FairfieldLife] RE: Re: The academic fields with the least discipline...

2013-11-07 Thread sharelong60

turq, imho, ego-panties deserves an award for the FFL phrase of the year! If I 
use it in my dissertation about online communities, I promise to give you a 
footnote (-: 
 

 

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

 See Share, *this* is what I mean about the difference between
 simply presenting one's opinion, and getting one's ego-panties
 in a twist, and trying to turn it into a "battle" that's all going
 on inside the egomaniac's head.
 
 All I did is present an opinion. I even said at the end that
 that was *all* it was.
 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
wrote:
 >
 > Barry wrote:
 > (snip)
 > > This said, I disagree with whoever suggested that Stephen King
 "needs editing."
 >
 >
 > As if Barry didn't know who that person was. What a coward.
 >
 >
 > > I find reading his latest work a refreshing throwback to the days
 in which writers didn't pander to attention
 > > spans shortened by a lifetime's exposure to "sound bites" and
 artificially shortened exposition.
 >
 >
 >
 > Bullshit. That isn't what editing is, and it isn't what King needed.
 As he so often does, Barry simply made a stopid assumption that
 would give him a reason to take a shot at me for making a point he
 didn't understand in the first place. Such a phony.
 >
 >
 > I dare him to read "Duma Key" and tell us he thought its second half
 didn't need to be heavily pruned and shaped. (Remember, I said the first
 half--where the exposition takes place--was brilliant.)
 >
 >
 > I don't, frankly, know (and neither does Barry) whether in his heyday
 King himself had an infallible sense of how much was enough, or whether
 it was a savvy editor. But if it was his own sense, for sure he had lost
 it in some of his recent books and lacked an editor with the guts to
 keep him on track. If he has regained it (or has realized he needed an
 editor), good for him.
 >

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: MANICHAEAN VIEWS OF BUDDHISM

2013-11-06 Thread sharelong60

hey, emptybill, too late! Moon in Pisces, which makes me not only a fish, but a 
fish facing in each direction!
 btw, thanks for Kelly article. Was horrified by it and article turq posted. 
Admit that such makes me grateful to be in FF. Could be deluded. But won't 
change til I'm sure I am! See, still looking in two directions...

 

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

 Share,
 Professor Troll is throwing out a fishing line to troll-in anyone who will 
bite. Don’t be a fish.
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Ok, Richard, nobody else is gonna challenge you on this. Actually I'm not 
either. But it would be great if you could say more about it. Seems 
revolutionary (-:  

 

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

 Anyone who meditates with the aim of samadhi is a Buddhist. 
 
 On 11/3/2013 4:42 PM, s3raphita@... mailto:s3raphita@... wrote:
 
   Is it possible to be a Buddhist and practice meditation effortlessly?
 
 
 Yes, according to MMY. 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
  Should TM'er Buddhists even be allowed to have a Dome badge? Is it possible 
to be a buddhist and practice meditation effortlessly?
 -Buck
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:s3raphita@... wrote:
 
 Re "The Gnostic prophet Mani taught radical dualist cosmology; a struggle 
between the opposing forces of good and evil, spiritual light versus the 
material world darkness. Humans are composed of two opposing elements in a 
battle for power. There is a soul, but it is influenced by elements of both 
good and evil. Manichaeism is similar to the dualistic Bogomils, Paulicians, 
and Cathars. It's not complicated. Adepts in China and the Far East would 
probably relate to this with their own notions of Yin and Yang.": 
 
 The Yin and Yang "concepts" point to a Tao that includes the opposites. 
Imagining that one side of a pair of opposites could gain the upper hand over 
the other would be a vulgar error.
 As the little we know about Manichaeism and similar "dualist" 
religions/philosophies comes to us from hostile sources isn't it possible that 
these beliefs weren't as dualist as they've been painted but perhaps also had 
the idea of a Transcendence that reconciled the positive and negative aspects 
of life?
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:punditster@... wrote:
 
 So, let's review what we know about the prophet Mani. 
 
 The Gnostic prophet Mani taught radical dualist cosmology; a struggle between 
the opposing forces of good and evil, spiritual light versus the material world 
darkness. Humans are composed of two opposing elements in a battle for power. 
There is a soul, but it is influenced by elements of both good and evil. 
Manichaeism is similar to the dualistic Bogomils, Paulicians, and Cathars. It's 
not complicated.
 
 Adepts in China and the Far East would probably relate to this with their own 
notions of Yin and Yang, which is probably derived from the Indian Sankhya, a 
radical dualism, and later tantra- a theory of polarity which posits male and 
female energies. 
 
 The name 'Mani' is Sanskrit. Mani traveled and lived in India for several 
years, visiting  Buddhist lands such as Bamiyan in Afghanistan, so it is not 
surprising that Buddhist influences would be apparent. Mani apparently adopted 
his theory of the reincarnation (transmigration of souls) from the Buddhists. 
Mani's sect structure was apparently based on the Buddhist Sangha, that is, 
Arhants and the lay follower community. 
 
 
 On 11/2/2013 11:31 AM, emptybill@... mailto:emptybill@... wrote:
 
   
  
 No wonder the Near-Eastern realm got so mixed up.   
 It seems that as Manichean ideology spread to the East it incorporated 
Buddhist concepts along the way in a effort to show the superiority of the 
"Religion of Light." Mani lived during the third century of the current era. 
Mani used the epitaph "Buddha of Light" and identified himself as Maitreya. He 
and his followers specifically borrowed from early Pure Land Sutras and 
Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka philosophy. As it entered the region of Gandhara and 
spread to China it used the Buddhist Hinayana tradition to support its views of 
"matter, the body and the world."
 MANICHAEAN VIEWS OF BUDDHISM
 
 
 David A. Scott 
 
 Christ Church College of Higher Education

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: MANICHAEAN VIEWS OF BUDDHISM

2013-11-06 Thread sharelong60

Ok, Richard, nobody else is gonna challenge you on this. Actually I'm not 
either. But it would be great if you could say more about it. Seems 
revolutionary (-:  

 

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

 Anyone who meditates with the aim of samadhi is a Buddhist. 
 
 On 11/3/2013 4:42 PM, s3raphita@... mailto:s3raphita@... wrote:
 
   Is it possible to be a Buddhist and practice meditation effortlessly?
 
 
 Yes, according to MMY. 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
  Should TM'er Buddhists even be allowed to have a Dome badge? Is it possible 
to be a buddhist and practice meditation effortlessly?
 -Buck
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:s3raphita@... wrote:
 
 Re "The Gnostic prophet Mani taught radical dualist cosmology; a struggle 
between the opposing forces of good and evil, spiritual light versus the 
material world darkness. Humans are composed of two opposing elements in a 
battle for power. There is a soul, but it is influenced by elements of both 
good and evil. Manichaeism is similar to the dualistic Bogomils, Paulicians, 
and Cathars. It's not complicated. Adepts in China and the Far East would 
probably relate to this with their own notions of Yin and Yang.": 
 
 The Yin and Yang "concepts" point to a Tao that includes the opposites. 
Imagining that one side of a pair of opposites could gain the upper hand over 
the other would be a vulgar error.
 As the little we know about Manichaeism and similar "dualist" 
religions/philosophies comes to us from hostile sources isn't it possible that 
these beliefs weren't as dualist as they've been painted but perhaps also had 
the idea of a Transcendence that reconciled the positive and negative aspects 
of life?
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:punditster@... wrote:
 
 So, let's review what we know about the prophet Mani. 
 
 The Gnostic prophet Mani taught radical dualist cosmology; a struggle between 
the opposing forces of good and evil, spiritual light versus the material world 
darkness. Humans are composed of two opposing elements in a battle for power. 
There is a soul, but it is influenced by elements of both good and evil. 
Manichaeism is similar to the dualistic Bogomils, Paulicians, and Cathars. It's 
not complicated.
 
 Adepts in China and the Far East would probably relate to this with their own 
notions of Yin and Yang, which is probably derived from the Indian Sankhya, a 
radical dualism, and later tantra- a theory of polarity which posits male and 
female energies. 
 
 The name 'Mani' is Sanskrit. Mani traveled and lived in India for several 
years, visiting  Buddhist lands such as Bamiyan in Afghanistan, so it is not 
surprising that Buddhist influences would be apparent. Mani apparently adopted 
his theory of the reincarnation (transmigration of souls) from the Buddhists. 
Mani's sect structure was apparently based on the Buddhist Sangha, that is, 
Arhants and the lay follower community. 
 
 
 On 11/2/2013 11:31 AM, emptybill@... mailto:emptybill@... wrote:
 
   
  
 No wonder the Near-Eastern realm got so mixed up.   
 It seems that as Manichean ideology spread to the East it incorporated 
Buddhist concepts along the way in a effort to show the superiority of the 
"Religion of Light." Mani lived during the third century of the current era. 
Mani used the epitaph "Buddha of Light" and identified himself as Maitreya. He 
and his followers specifically borrowed from early Pure Land Sutras and 
Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka philosophy. As it entered the region of Gandhara and 
spread to China it used the Buddhist Hinayana tradition to support its views of 
"matter, the body and the world."
 MANICHAEAN VIEWS OF BUDDHISM
 
 
 David A. Scott 
 
 Christ Church College of Higher Education

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Before the British Invasion

2013-11-05 Thread sharelong60

And how about California dreamin music scene: Mamas and Papas, Beach Boys, etc. 

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

 Before for the Beatles it was regional rock groups that were the scene in the 
US.  There was Northwest Rock which included the Kingsmen, Sonics and way back 
the Ventures (playing their cover of a jazz tune "Walk Don't Run").  Then the 
northwest do-wap groups like the Fleetwoods (I played on a revival album they 
did).  There was also an east coast scene, a Chicago area scene and New Orleans 
scene.  These were often regional because the labels were regional without 
national distribution.

 Also before the Beatles let's not forget folk period which includes The 
Kingston Trio, Lamplighters (I backed them up once) and other spin offs. Those 
morphed into folk rock groups in the later 60s.

 Regional music scenes in the US would be a lot like European country's and 
their own scenes.

 Romance languages didn't translate well into rock so you have the soft muzak 
rock those countries created.

 On 11/05/2013 10:37 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:

   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
s3raphita wrote:
 >
 > Yep, but we were talking about British imitation rock so
 > Vince Taylor and Cliff Richard are two important pioneers
 > in the UK. I'm guessing one reason they never made a name
 > for themselves in the States is because Americans didn't
 > need second-rate copies of their own stars.

 Couldn't have said it better. :-)

 Plus, the music industry mechanism really wasn't in place
 to allow for mass distribution of non-US acts at that time.
 There was no market perceived for it, so it didn't really
 exist.

 BTW, you find the same thing in France, but for another
 reason -- the language difference. Plus the fact that rock
 sounds *terrible* in French. Rap, it can handle, but rock,
 fuggedaboudit. In France, old pop stars like Francoise
 Hardy are still minor goddesses, but old rockers like
 Johnny Hallyday are major Gods, right up there with
 Thor. :-)

 > The Beatles probably made it because they came along
 > after rock 'n' roll's heyday and added enough original
 > touches of their own to make it more appealing than
 > the saccharine-sweet pop that had by then become the
 > norm.

 Tell it, sista. The US pop music scene was really in its
 doldrums before the Beatles. Many of the people who
 had grown up on it had gravitated to folk music because
 there was *energy* there, and there t'weren't none in
 pop.

 Then the Beatles arrived, preceded by a wave of near-
 hysterical media hype. I'm honestly not sure which con-
 tributed more to the Beatles' success in the US -- their
 talent, or the hype. I lean to the latter. See enough TV
 stories (or, in those days, movie News trailers before
 your movie) of star-struck Beatles fans and your young
 impressionable mind has already been pre-programmed
 to love them when you see them live.

 Still, it *was* a phenomenon in the US, Beatlemania.
 By the time it struck, I was a full-fledged folkie, both
 listening to and performing the "real music," folk
 music performed by upscale white artists. :-) So they
 had to drag me away from my Dylan and Baez and
 the like to listen to a Beatles album. And to be honest,
 I wasn't knocked out at first by the sound. Even then,
 I was more fascinated by the *trend*, the fact that
 so many were so gaga over them.

 It took the Rolling Stones to knock my socks off. :-)

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Astrology in the New Testament

2013-11-04 Thread sharelong60

wgm, I've heard or read several jyotishis say that Moon signifies mind. Maybe 
they mean manos and Mercury is buddhi, intellect?
  
 

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

 I don't think John meant the moon signified the mind, rather the moon in 
Pieces affects the mind (like all of the other signs affect each other as a 
composite whole) in an emotional, imaginative way depending on the aspects and 
other indicators.
  
 Moon in Pieces makes one very sensitive, perhaps too much depending on the 
other aspects. FWIW
 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:


 John, I still a bit perplexed about why jyotish calls the Moon the 
significator of the mind, rather than Mercury.
 

 
 
 On Sunday, November 3, 2013 1:10 PM, "jr_esq@..."  wrote:
 
   Share,
 

 Pisces is a dual sign and is watery by astrological definition.  If the Moon 
is placed here, the Moon becomes more sensitive since the Moon is already 
wavering and watery by nature.
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Why was it written that Jesus was born in a manger?  Because he was born on 
December 25 which astrologically lies between the signs of Sagittarius, a 
horse, and Capricorn, the goat.  Interesting?  Bill Donohue explains more of 
his observations as follows: 

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M6j6DwBWBg&list=PL4HZ228v9duPReHJuT6prrAUc9BzFEo_t
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M6j6DwBWBg&list=PL4HZ228v9duPReHJuT6prrAUc9BzFEo_t

RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Michelle Pfeiffer escaped from a cult

2013-11-04 Thread sharelong60

Judy of course assumes incorrectly that she knows what's going on in my mind. 
Plus she projects that I will decide that she is wrong, which is what she does! 
Actually I skimmed her post on this topic and took it as more input about the 
topic rather than as right or wrong. This points to a fundamental difference 
between us and why IMO she just about always is inaccurate in her opinions 
about me. 

 

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

 Share will, of course, take this single article as conclusive proof of "type 3 
diabetes" and decide that I was wrong. Yet what I said was that there is as yet 
no scientific consensus as to its existence.
 

 She and Xeno might want to have a look at this study (published two years 
after the one Xeno cited), just for one example:
 

 Curr Neuropharmacol. 2011 December; 9(4): 693–705.
 Consequences of Aberrant Insulin Regulation in the Brain: Can Treating 
Diabetes be Effective for Alzheimer’s Disease

 




 This study does mention "type 3 diabetes" in passing:
 

 "It has even been suggested that AD could be considered as 'type 3 diabetes' 
since insulin can be produced in brain."

 

 Obviously "has even been suggested" indicates these authors do not consider 
this as much more than speculation at this point.
 

 

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

 J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008 November; 2(6): 1101–1113.
 Published online 2008 November.
 

 Alzheimer's Disease Is Type 3 Diabetes–Evidence Reviewed
 

 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769828/

RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: Growing up transgendered or, confused?

2013-11-04 Thread sharelong60

As I've mentioned before, Judy, I have 2 versions of email inboxes. One is 
Basic and one is Neo. Neo inbox only shows the most recent post of a thread. 
This morning I found a way to access and reply to previous posts.  

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

 Again, you make no sense, Share. What's on the Web site, of course, is Neo, so 
that excuse holds no water, sorry.

 Share bleated:

 > Yes, Judy I was replying to BillyG but Neo was no longer showing his post 
 > and I didn't 
 > want to take the time to go to the website to reply from there. 

 On Saturday, November 2, 2013 8:57 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   Did you mean to respond to BilllyG's post, Share, rather than this one? 

Share wrote:

 > William, I wasn't referring to Judy in terms of posters scolding about 
 > people not 
 > snipping. She wasn't the one who was doing that.

 On Saturday, November 2, 2013 4:58 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   Oh, did you think you were making a snappy, relevant comment here, Share?

 Share flubbed:

 > OTOH, some posters have scolded some other posters for NOT snipping! Go 
 > figure!

 You really just don't seem to be getting it about not posting any old thing 
that comes to your mind without giving it a bit of a think first.

 On Saturday, November 2, 2013 3:06 PM, wgm4u  wrote:

   Thanks for the tip 

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

 The post a person is responding to (and sometimes a whole string of posts in 
an exchange) always appears when you click on the three dots in the bottom left 
of the Reply box--unless the person who wrote the post has deleted everything, 
which is what BillyG does. Apparently he doesn't like to feel that he's part of 
a discussion, so he gets rid of it all before posting.

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

 It all depends on what software you're using. I've been monitoring FFL 
messages in IE and Firefox and I've noticed that some posts don't include what 
the person is responding to. However, when you hit reply sometimes the messages 
appear when you scroll down.

 And, I've also noticed that hardly anyone follows the netiquette protocols for 
formatting messages anymore. It sure would be helpful if people would do some 
formatting using the old style right angle bracket, but now I realize that's 
really asking to much of people, since mainly they are just shooting from the 
hip with one-liner snickers. There seem to be only about two serious 
respondents left here anyway.

 So, I'm using Thunderbird to send and reply to text only posts, but when I 
want to include an image I use Chrome, which has a nice feature to key in the 
location of the image URL. I haven't figured out what happened to the 'source 
view' in Neo to include an image URL. I've also noticed that several people 
have not figured out how to make an active URL link in any program. Go figure.

 P.S. At this point, I'm not even posting with the expectation that anyone but 
lurkers would read this stuff, so it's mostly for them to be amused with.

 On 11/2/2013 10:40 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:

   BillyG, you know, it's courteous to quote a bit of what you're responding 
to, or at least to identify the writer you're responding to. You don't do that, 
and it makes it look as though you don't want to actually have a discussion but 
rather only to make proclamations.

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Astrology and Daylight Savings

2013-11-03 Thread sharelong60

yes, emptybill, 1948, Year of the Earth Rat in Chinese astrolgy (-: Just in 
case people were getting bored with posts about jyotish and astrolgy!

 

 

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

 1948? Yep, I'm also officially an old bastard now too.
 Thus, you learn a few things along the way. 

 That's why I only believe in not believing. 

 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 
 Astrologers have methods for determining if the TOB recorded on the birth 
certificate is accurate. For example, by one's gender. Also by details of one's 
life. For example, a jyotishi looked at my birth time and asked if I had known 
my Dad's mother. I said yes and by using details of her life, he was able to 
determine my accurate birth time. Which was a few minutes before the time on my 
birth certificate so that made sense to me. I've been told that nurses back 
then, 1948, stepped out of the delivery room to record the time.
 

 I do not believe this has ever been tested, so it is a supposition that an 
astrologer, usinging whatever methods they use, can discover an actual birth 
time that is recorded inaccurately. My hypothesis is that rectification of 
times is a dodge developed to counteract the discrepancies that arise when 
astrology fails to predict events. By adjusting the time, the chart then 'works 
better'.
 

 If we had documented evidence of births with accurately recored times, then a 
double-blind study of astrologers trying to find those times when that 
information is withheld in various ways would be possible to see if they can 
really do that. My bet is they cannot because astrology is largely a matter of 
delusional thinking.
 

 Notice that the TMO has never published any study showing the scientific 
validity of astrology. There have been very few double-blind tests of any 
astrological system that have been well designed. There was one done at UC 
Berkeley some 25 years ago with Western astrology, and all the work was done by 
professional astrologers, and the result came out no better than chance. That 
study dealt with personality characteristics, which are difficult to define. 
The astrologers in that test were matching horoscopes with a standardised 
personality inventory. Documented evidence of birth times was required for the 
participants. The result was published in Science.
 

 Jyotish, which seems more event driven, would be easier to test. But because 
it has the same delusional underpinnings as Western astrology, I do not see how 
the results would be any better.
 

 There are questions here which seem impossible to parse. Why, for example, 
would the sex of a child have an effect on the birth time? What laws of nature 
would be invoked and how do they function?

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Michelle Pfeiffer escaped from a cult

2013-11-03 Thread sharelong60

Well, Bhairitu, it's always a good day when I learn something new and in this 
case it's 2 new bits of info. Have not heard of either of these kinds of 
diabetes and admit am horrified by the Type 3. I still think, and am hoping I'm 
right, that diet can go far in controlling it. 

 

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

 My mother's twin sister was an RN and worked for several doctors.  She told me 
once that she thought my mother was a "brittle diabetic." I thought it was a 
term she made up and then looked it up.  That diagnosis fits me too.  Brittle 
diabetes never go full blown type one but have similar symptoms throughout life.
 
 There is also the relatively recently discovered type three diabetes which is 
seen to be prevalent in folks who sit on their butts and use computers a lot.  
The research on that suggests that the pancreas is not the only organ which 
secretes insulin but our brain as well.
 
 
 On 11/03/2013 08:33 AM, Share Long wrote:
 
   My Mom's doc is sending her to a nutritionist because her blood sugar is so 
high even though she injects insulin every day. She went from being normal to 
borderline to Type 2 and now, daily injections. A big problem is that she 
doesn't like traditional breakfast food. And I think she doesn't quite get that 
carbs contribute to high blood sugar. Anyway, I've got high hopes about this 
consult on Tuesday. 
 
 
 
 
 On Sunday, November 3, 2013 10:27 AM, Bhairitu  
mailto:noozguru@... wrote:
 
   
 Isn't that why they call it "break fast"?
 
 People who have experienced hypoglycemia get very paranoid about missing 
meals.   In the 1970s among TM'er hypoglycemia was rampant mainly due to eating 
bad vegetarian diets.  Many went back to eating meat and felt better.  Maybe 
some truth in MMY's "eat what your mother puts before you?"  We are essentially 
what our ancestors ate.
 
 If one is paranoid about hypoglycemia the tendency is to overeat rather than 
do the anal and inconvenient small meals throughout the day.
 
 On 11/03/2013 03:49 AM, Michael Jackson wrote:
 
   what in the world are you all talking about? Who doesn't go for four or five 
hours without food or water?? People including me do that all the time. 
 
 On Sun, 11/3/13, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@...  mailto:jr_esq@... 
wrote:
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Michelle Pfeiffer escaped from a cult
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Sunday, November 3, 2013, 4:17 AM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Doc.
 What
 did you experience after four hours without food or water?
  Were you also meditating during the fast?
 
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,
  mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 I did it, once, for *four*
 solid hours. Two years ago, around Columbus Day. 
 
 Nothing - not even a peanut,
 or half cup of tap water - zip. You probably don't
 believe me, but its true. I think my years of TM helped, a
 lot. I must have been in a trance or something, to withstand
 it. I seriously thought I was going to pass out. Almost like
 Richard Harris, in that scene, from, "A Man Called
 Horse".
 
 Even so, I am working with a
 teacher, now, who says I can achieve *five hours*, of
 non-food, non-water - no problem. He's expensive, but
 worth it. I think he's Indian. Total cost is ~$1,000
 (not including the non-food and non-water, of course). 
 
 This is a tough crowd, here on
 FFL, so I'll say up front: This guy is no cult leader.
 After all, I've been around the block. Don't
 knock it, 'til you've tried it.
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
  mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 Michelle Pfeiffer,
 the actress, has disclosed that she was once part of a
 “cult” which believed humans can exist without food or
 water.http://tinyurl.com/odb3y4c

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Michelle Pfeiffer escaped from a cult

2013-11-03 Thread sharelong60

MJ, thank you so much for your good wishes. Right now I'm resisting giving you 
tons of advice but I'll just say one thing anyway: I think a big key is being 
careful to avoid carbs and favor protein early in the day.

 

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

 I wish her good fortune - I hope the nutritionist gives better advice than 
most MD's (and that doesn't mean Mother Divines) - I thought diabetes was a cut 
and dried deal medically before I had to deal with it - a lot of docs have 
their heads where the sun don't shine where diabetes is concerned
 
 On Sun, 11/3/13, Share Long mailto:sharelong60@...> wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Michelle Pfeiffer escaped from a cult
 To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com"; 
mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
 Date: Sunday, November 3, 2013, 4:33 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 My
 Mom's doc is sending her to a nutritionist because her
 blood sugar is so high even though she injects insulin every
 day. She went from being normal to borderline to Type 2 and
 now, daily injections. A big problem is that she doesn't
 like traditional breakfast food. And I think she doesn't
 quite get that carbs contribute to high blood sugar. Anyway,
 I've got high hopes about this consult on Tuesday. 
 
 
 
 On Sunday, November
 3, 2013 10:27 AM, Bhairitu mailto:noozguru@...>
 wrote:
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Isn't
 that why they call it "break
 fast"?
 
 
 
 People who have experienced hypoglycemia get very
 paranoid about
 missing meals.   In the 1970s among
 TM'er hypoglycemia was rampant
 mainly due to eating bad vegetarian diets.  Many
 went back to
 eating meat and felt better.  Maybe some truth in
 MMY's "eat what
 your mother puts before you?"  We are
 essentially what our
 ancestors ate.
 
 
 
 If one is paranoid about hypoglycemia the tendency is
 to overeat
 rather than do the anal and inconvenient small meals
 throughout
 the day.
 
 
 
 On 11/03/2013 03:49 AM, Michael Jackson wrote:
 
 
 
  
 
 
 what in the world are you all talking
 about? Who doesn't
 go for four or five hours without food or
 water?? People
 including me do that all the time. 
 
 
 
 
 On Sun, 11/3/13, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@...>
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: Michelle Pfeiffer
 escaped
 from a cult
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Sunday, November 3, 2013, 4:17 AM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Doc.
 
 What
 
 did you experience after four hours without
 food or water?
 
  Were you also meditating during the
 fast?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 mailto:no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 
 
 
 I did it, once, for *four*
 
 solid hours. Two years ago, around Columbus
 Day. 
 
 
 
 Nothing - not even a peanut,
 
 or half cup of tap water - zip. You probably
 don't
 
 believe me, but its true. I think my years of
 TM helped, a
 
 lot. I must have been in a trance or
 something, to
 withstand
 
 it. I seriously thought I was going to pass
 out. Almost
 like
 
 Richard Harris, in that scene, from, "A
 Man Called
 
 Horse".
 
 
 
 Even so, I am working with a
 
 teacher, now, who says I can achieve *five
 hours*, of
 
 non-food, non-water - no problem. He's
 expensive, but
 
 worth it. I think he's Indian. Total cost
 is ~$1,000
 
 (not including the non-food and non-water, of
 course). 
 
 
 
 This is a tough crowd, here on
 
 FFL, so I'll say up front: This guy is no
 cult leader.
 
 After all, I've been around the block.
 Don't
 
 knock it, 'til you've tried it.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Michelle Pfeiffer,
 
 the actress, has disclosed that she was once
 part of a
 
 “cult” which believed humans can exist
 without food or
 
 water.http://tinyurl.com/odb3y4c http://tinyurl.com/odb3y4c

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Growing up transgendered or, confused?

2013-11-02 Thread sharelong60

William, I've been catching up with my Mom this morning so haven't been able to 
reply until now. Also I've got that knowledge meeting this afternoon. Anyway, 
thanks for your reply and I'll say more later but for now: who knows what 
really happened in Atlantis? Why, those of us who were there and remember! 

 

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

 What the Universe gives birth to (Mother Nature) is different than what 'man' 
gives birth to often times, unless you think man has no freewill.
 

 CLutes expressed that opinion/view of the 3/3 lifetimes Man/Woman, it may be 
true, doesn't justify homosexuality or the view, "I was just born gay", there 
is nothing inherently wrong with an effeminate man, per se. As we sow, so shall 
we reap.
 

 Apparently the Atlantians were using Black Magic to create all forms of 
perversions, who really knows? :-)
 

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

 William, a few responses to this. First of all, I think infinite Being gives 
birth to infinite universe, which means a heck of a lot of variety. I don't 
think there's any way to box infinity, either of Being or of its expression, 
the universe. 

 

 Secondly, Mike D has offered the explanation that we all spend 3 lives as a 
man, then as a woman, alternating like that over and over. That the life after 
three lives as one gender can contain some remnant of those previous three 
lives as the opposite gender. What do you think?
 

 Lastly, I've heard that Atlantis was creating horrible weapons and that's why 
it was destroyed.

 
 
 On Saturday, November 2, 2013 8:08 AM, wgm4u  wrote:
 
   I found this story to be rather disturbing in that the 'parents' were acting 
more as 'enablers' (as well as the doctors). It reminded me of the fabled story 
of the Lost Continent of Atlantis where they were creating men that were half 
animal and half man. Ultimately nature (the Gods, or the laws of nature) 
destroyed Atlantis in an effort to maintain balance in the World.
 

 Transgendered Humans are 'mans' creation, not God's, as such it throws off the 
balance and equilibrium of what MMY called the "Divine Plan", these *hormone 
modified humans* are an invention of Man, can you imagine what will happen when 
we are able to make *genetically modified humans*, all kinds of freaks will 
appear unless we cooperate with natural law to the best of our ability to 
understand that law.
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Thanks for posting.  
 

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

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epDPui27QZQ 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epDPui27QZQ

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!

2013-11-02 Thread sharelong60

Richard, why isn't Elizabeth Warren on your list? 

 

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

 Let's see, the Democrats have Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden as possible 
candidates for the next presidential election.
 
 The Republicans have Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Marco Rubio, Nikki 
Haley, Chris Christie, Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Rick 
Santorum, and Jeb Bush. Go figure. 
 
 Here are a six reasons I won't be supporting Hillary Clinton:
 
 1. She was in favor of invading Afghanistan.
 2. She was opposed to a  surge in Afghanistan.
 3. She was in favor of invading Iraq.
 4. She was opposed to the surge in Iraq.
 5. She failed to protect the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
 6. She lied about the Benghazi attack and tried to cover it up, blaming it on 
a video.
 
 You probably won't be this on MSNBC any time soon:
 
 'Why is Hillary Clinton's popularity sliding?'
 The Week:
 http://theweek.com/hillary-clintons-popularity-sliding 
http://theweek.com/article/index/252160/why-is-hillary-clintons-popularity-sliding
 
 'New Poll Shows Democratic Incumbents in Big Trouble'
 Newsbusters:
 http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mother-jones-shocker 
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/11/01/mother-jones-shocker-new-poll-shows-democratic-incumbents-big-trouble#ixzz2jPrsL4lG
 
 On 11/1/2013 2:08 PM, Share Long wrote:
 
   Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote 
for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill 
after the Monica affair.
 
 On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@...  
mailto:emilymaenot@... wrote:
 
 Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 
10 years!
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM

RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!

I still don't understand how Clinton could have been so well, dumb. Was she 
really that attractive?! Ok, maybe he cracked under the pressure of the job. 
But really, so much about it is unfathomable. Must be karma (-: 

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

 Who knows the truth of it? I kinda agree with Judy on this one, about the 
public view of private lives, up to a point. For example, that former head of 
the IMF, who turned out to be a rapist, should be publicly castrated, imo. As 
far as Bill and Hillary, though, and all of their drama, all I can muster, is a 
shrug. Wouldn't affect my vote at all.

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

 Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what 
was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over 
during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand 
against it.

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

 Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to 
cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was 
exposed, I think is short-sighted. 

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

 I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one 
willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private 
life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the 
observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. 

 On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to 
understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two 
people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to 
tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good 
for them; it's none of our damn business.)

 We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, 
promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's 
one we see only from a distance through the media).

 It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or 
they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a 
marital problem.

 It's fine to say, "If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so." 
(Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that 
you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.)

 But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this 
situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, 
you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings.

 (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS 
the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other 
things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.)

Share spewed:

 > MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his 
 > womanizing. I mean, that affair 
 > occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that 
 > Hillary really loves Bill. Even 
 > more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO.  

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

 Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs 
after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of 
such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than 
a faithful one who is a nobody.

RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!

Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what 
was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over 
during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand 
against it.

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

 Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to 
cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was 
exposed, I think is short-sighted. 

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

 I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one 
willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private 
life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the 
observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. 

 On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to 
understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two 
people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to 
tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good 
for them; it's none of our damn business.)

 We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, 
promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's 
one we see only from a distance through the media).

 It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or 
they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a 
marital problem.

 It's fine to say, "If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so." 
(Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that 
you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.)

 But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this 
situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, 
you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings.

 (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS 
the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other 
things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.)

Share spewed:

 > MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his 
 > womanizing. I mean, that affair 
 > occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that 
 > Hillary really loves Bill. Even 
 > more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO.  

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

 Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs 
after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of 
such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than 
a faithful one who is a nobody.

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: Austerity for Americans begins today

I would bet that not one person on FFL is snickering at Bhairitu. But admit 
that I'm still amazed at how much nastiness Judy can pack into one short post.  

 

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

 Er, Bhairitu...
 

 No, never mind, I'll just let this sit here for people to snicker at: 
 

 Bhairitu bumbled:

 
 > Judy, the conspiracy theorist.
 
 On 11/01/2013 12:30 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
   Yes, clearly the shooting incident was carefully planned to distract 
attention from the food stamp cuts. 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 Well the TSA shooting at LAX which was between a couple of TSA agents 
 seems to have knocked off what should have been the lead article on the 
 news: the food stamp cuts that went into effect today (how convenient).
 
 
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/01/food-stamps-snap-cuts-farm-bill/3346341/
 
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/01/food-stamps-snap-cuts-farm-bill/3346341/
 
 The war on the poor by the rich ramps up. Time to organize and go 
 after the rich. Let's party like it's Greece and Spain.

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!

MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his 
womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was 
so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should 
have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO.  

 

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

 Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs 
after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of 
such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than 
a faithful one who is a nobody.
 
 On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@...> wrote:
 
 Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- 
minus 10 years!
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 7:21 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Share, I am forced to retract my statement of
 your "intelligence", at least for today.
  I'm sorry.  Don't hold it against me,
 O.K.? 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 
 Ha! Just proves
 that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never
 vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when
 she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair.
 
 
 
 On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@...
 
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of
 H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I know...I was just teasing her because she is
 
 so transparent about it!  LOL  
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Because
 
 she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As
 
 if...! 
 
 emilymaenot wrote:
 
 
 
 >
 
 Why don't you think the American people would elect
 her?
 

 
 
 
 ---In
 
 FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Well,
 
 speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is
 
 not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the
 
 American people would ever elect her!  
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com>
 wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 It
 
 is really strange behavior to say
 
 the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the
 
 first person to
 
 note that she can be very disagreeable.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton
 
 is not a fit
 
 candidate to be the next U.S. President!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to
 
 a.m.t. on
 
 Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted
 to
 
 FFL), over a
 
 period of about five years starting in 1999, without
 
 getting a
 
 single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a
 few
 
 days after I
 
 posted a message calling into question Judy's
 
 claim that Bush lied
 
 about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started
 
 getting all
 
 kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just
 about
 
 ape-shit,
 
 calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She
 
 encouraged
 
 everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing
 so
 
 almost every
 
 week since then - for over ten years! Apparently
 Judy
 
 has some
 
 influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on
 FFL
 
 but she
 
 doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep
 
 up the good work
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm 
http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is
 
 picking on
 
 Share? While my beef with Judy may have some
 
 substance, Share
 
 seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to
 
 talk with
 
 people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I
 
 find her
 
 antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited.
 Judy
 
 really has
 
 taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go
 
 figure.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 But, even more strange is the silence from some of
 the
 
 other
 
 informants posting here. Where I come from, silence
 
 usually
 
 indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 Yeah,
 
 Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had
 
 always been
 
 so friendly before that!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On
 
 Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM,
 
 Richard J.
 
 Williams 
 
 wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Yeah,
 
 I think we had this
 
 conversat

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!

Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit
candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect
her!

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

It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm
not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable.

WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be
the next U.S. President!

So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of
which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years
starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about
2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim
that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all
kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a
troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me
and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years!
Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL
but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work

http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm
http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm

Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my
beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person
who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me,
I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has
taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure.

But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants
posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks
for speaking out.

On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote:

Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly
before that!

On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams
mailto:punditster@... wrote:

Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments
were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure.

"...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for
my body to function at its best."

On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Helplessly Hoping

2013-10-31 Thread sharelong60

turq, I think you're right about He's A Rebel not being true Motown. How about 
Sam and Dave?
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnzLc_iwQDk

 

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote:
 >
> He's A Rebel! Because my First Love was a rebel who attended Joan Baez' 
> school for non violence in and became a true CO, doing his *military* time in 
> a VA hospital. Amazing soul was he...

 No offense intended, but I don't think that "He's A Rebel" qualifies
as Motown.  It's more of a Phil Spector thang.  :-)

As Pure Motown goes, it's hard to top Smokey.

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2kxlZDOHeQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2kxlZDOHeQ
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2kxlZDOHeQ 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgp5QOqwH-s 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgp5QOqwH-shttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgp5QOqwH-s
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgp5QOqwH-s 



 > On Thursday, October 31, 2013 4:32 PM, "emilymaenot@..." emilymaenot@... 
 > wrote:
> 
> Share, what were your favorite Motown songs? 
> 
> ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> 
> I feel so lucky to have grown up in such an amazing time for music.Â  I can 
> still remember the first time I heard I Wanna Hold Your Hand. Goose bumps! 
> But Motown was also wonderful during my teen years as well as the protest 
> music.Â  
> 
> On Thursday, October 31, 2013 2:29 PM, TurquoiseB turquoiseb@ wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "TurquoiseB" wrote:
> >
> > This song changed my life fifty years ago.
> > 
> > I guess I'm not the only old fart who feels that way about it:
> > 
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I4pIULFGLIÂ 
> 
> Still tripping on Crosby, Stills and Nash after discovering
> this treasure, I thought I'd post the song that started it all.
> 
> As I remember the story, Steven wrote the song and taught
> it to David. They worked on harmonies for it, but David 
> always thought that it needed a third voice. 
> 
> So they go over to Joni Mitchell's house, and there they 
> meet for the first
> time this guy from England who they 
> really only know as the voice of The Hollies. And things
> progress and get wild and wooly the way things got back
> in those days of Laurel Canyon house parties, and at 
> some point Steven and David start to sing "Helplessly
> Hoping," which of course no one has heard before. 
> 
> On the second verse, David heard Graham Nash join
> in, singing the *exact* third harmony part he had 
> written in his head. And the rest is history. 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGtFRsCXRccÂ 
>

RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Where Are The Boomers Headed?

2013-10-31 Thread sharelong60

Emily, you and Ann were discussing your birthdays last year. Hers is Nov 4. You 
told FFL you were turning 50 and I remember it was at the end of Oct. Lots of 
my relatives have birthdays then, maybe that's why I remember.   

 

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

 Do you remember why you thought my birthday was close to Ann's?  I don't 
remember or know when hers is, but I haven't been taking Ginkgo Biloba or 
curcumin or anything else to assist my slowly failing memory.   
 

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

 Emily, did I remember correctly? Ann's is coming up soon too and I thought 
they were close together.
 

 
 
 On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 8:54 PM, "emilymaenot@..."  
wrote:
 
Hey Share, will you remind me how it is that you thought this?  
 

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

 Emily, Happy Birthday coming up, if I remember correctly...

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

2013-10-30 Thread sharelong60

Judy, I look at it like how the Navajos leave a mistake in the weaving of a 
blanket to honor the Great Spirit, the only one who creates perfection.  

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

 That really upset you, did it? I mean, with your Advanced Expert Grammar Class 
and all that. Because it wasn't just any old ordinary dime-a-dozen typo. When 
it's a proper noun, the name of a place, which has been in print zillions of 
times in the last year, it just amazes me that anybody could get the last 
letter wrong, giving the name a whole different syllable at the end. I guess 
maybe you don't read much in the way of news, huh?

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

 > Yeah, Richard but I think my best cheering up of Judy occurred when I 
 > misspelled 
 > Fukushima. One wrong letter and she was happily correcting. Did someone say: 
 > do less and 
 > accomplish more (-:

 Ha ha ha.

RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

2013-10-30 Thread sharelong60

Thanks, wgm, maybe there's hope for me yet with regards to authfriend! Hey I 
liked what you posted about Rick's latest Batgap interview. I guess you're 
doing pretty good even if you don't know about the gap (-:

 Will read again and try to give a more serious response...

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

 She (Judy) has pulled that card on me too, more than once. It's OK if it's 
done politely, but not as a rebut in and of itself, which I think she likes to 
use it as. It's more or less nothing but a red herring used that way.

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

 That really upset you, did it? I mean, with your Advanced Expert Grammar Class 
and all that. Because it wasn't just any old ordinary dime-a-dozen typo. When 
it's a proper noun, the name of a place, which has been in print zillions of 
times in the last year, it just amazes me that anybody could get the last 
letter wrong, giving the name a whole different syllable at the end. I guess 
maybe you don't read much in the way of news, huh?

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

 > Yeah, Richard but I think my best cheering up of Judy occurred when I 
 > misspelled 
 > Fukushima. One wrong letter and she was happily correcting. Did someone say: 
 > do less and 
 > accomplish more (-:

 Ha ha ha.

RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

In Which Judy Empathizes With An Orange Traffic Cone. There's hope for her yet!

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

 And this is in the category of knocking over all the orange cones and 
pretending they were never there in the first place, all the while mouthing 
empty platitudes that she thinks are deep insights.

Share mouthed:
 > Judy, imitating me! The highest form of flattery (-: 

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

 Share, your opinion of my opinions about you are wrong, but you are entitled 
to them anyway.

 Share wrote: 

 > Judy, your opinions about me are wrong and you are entitled to them anyway.

 With reference to my earlier post, this response from Share falls under the 
heading of "whether it even makes any sense to go there in the first place." Of 
course she isn't going to agree with my opinions of her, and of course I'm 
entitled to them anyway. Was anyone in any doubt about this, or was it an 
utterly useless remark on her part?

 On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 11:42 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   SMASH. Didn't signal the turn, didn't pay any attention to oncoming traffic.

 Share, the bottom line is that you don't take the opportunity to learn. You 
knock over all the orange cones and pretend they were never there in the first 
place, all the while mouthing empty platitudes that you think are deep insights.

 Share wrote:
 Bottom line, traffic jams or not, it's all grist for the mill. Meaning, it's 
all an opportunity for learning.

 On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:57 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   Actually it makes traffic jams more likely because of the much greater 
number of accidents when folks rolling in different directions smash into each 
other. It's especially problematic when some people aren't paying any attention 
to where they're going and don't think through how they're going to get there, 
or whether it even makes any sense to go there in the first place.

Share wrote:
> Doc, that's what I love about FFL, so many people rolling all different ways. 
> Less chance of traffic jams that 
 > way!

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

turq, I'm grateful that I don't mind fu er, messing up. And now that Judy's 
imitating me, I have hope that she'll allow herself and everyone else to mess 
up now and then. Just for the fun of it.
 Speaking of fun, I got Castle out of the library, am officially smitten by 
Nathan Fallion. Yeah, he's cute. But mainly he's a nice guy who's also light 
hearted. Now I definitely have to see Serenity. 

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
 >
> Share, your opinion of my opinions about you are wrong, 
 > but you are entitled to them anyway. 

 Ah, pretty much the ultimate statement. Be thankful
you're still "entitled" to your opinion, Share. Some 
of us are not. :-)

Judy "knows" best. Or, as she put it once before:

"I have a lot more faith in my sense of why you behave as 
you do than I do in what you tell me of why you behave 
as you do."
- Judy Stein, 13 July 2013

It's a matter of faith, y'see. 

Judy's faith is real, and always right. Yours is wrong.

:-)

RE: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

Judy, imitating me! The highest form of flattery (-: 

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

 Share, your opinion of my opinions about you are wrong, but you are entitled 
to them anyway.

 Share wrote: 

 > Judy, your opinions about me are wrong and you are entitled to them anyway.

 With reference to my earlier post, this response from Share falls under the 
heading of "whether it even makes any sense to go there in the first place." Of 
course she isn't going to agree with my opinions of her, and of course I'm 
entitled to them anyway. Was anyone in any doubt about this, or was it an 
utterly useless remark on her part?

 On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 11:42 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   SMASH. Didn't signal the turn, didn't pay any attention to oncoming traffic.

 Share, the bottom line is that you don't take the opportunity to learn. You 
knock over all the orange cones and pretend they were never there in the first 
place, all the while mouthing empty platitudes that you think are deep insights.

 Share wrote:
 Bottom line, traffic jams or not, it's all grist for the mill. Meaning, it's 
all an opportunity for learning.

 On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:57 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:

   Actually it makes traffic jams more likely because of the much greater 
number of accidents when folks rolling in different directions smash into each 
other. It's especially problematic when some people aren't paying any attention 
to where they're going and don't think through how they're going to get there, 
or whether it even makes any sense to go there in the first place.

Share wrote:
> Doc, that's what I love about FFL, so many people rolling all different ways. 
> Less chance of traffic jams that 
 > way!

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

Doc, that's what I love about FFL, so many people rolling all different ways. 
Less chance of traffic jams that way! 

 

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

 Hi Share, no doubt it works for you. I am not calling into question the 
benefits of these teachers and healers - just not the way I roll, at all.  

 

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

 Doc, Brother David's gratitude practice, imho, goes way beyond affirmations 
because it positively affects the energy body, not just the mental or emotional 
bodies. As for healing childhood traumas, yes that can take some time, but in 
my experience, healing happens on its own schedule. That timeline too can be 
surrendered to. 

 

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

 Its a good challenge, Ann. I never much cared for affirmations of the day, or 
any of that. You show a lot more gratitude for Share, through your response to 
her, than she does, through the unfocused expression of gratitude she has made. 

 

 Oftentimes, when people are blocked from seeing themselves completely, due to 
past trauma, they attempt to reconnect with themselves, by seeing teachers, who 
make them feel good, or adopting any strategy, like "mindfulness", or 
affirmation, to try to increase their range of feeling. 

 

 Until that trauma is recognized, and healed, the expressions of that limited 
range of feeling, can come across, to others, as vague, dry, and empty, despite 
the actual words and ideas professed (even 'gratitude'). Or, as much of Barry's 
stuff does, it comes across as too well rehearsed; detailed, but like a house 
that has been vacant for a long time. 

 

 

 

 

 

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

  
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 I'm into gratitude these days. I just find one little thing to feel grateful 
for and then a whole bunch of other stuff pops into my mind.
 

 How does one get "into gratitude"? Isn't it something spontaneous and 
unexpected? Isn't it something that can occur at any moment, unannounced and 
heartfelt? Or maybe you just decide it is the day to feel grateful because you 
haven't felt that for a while and it is probably time -sort of like deciding 
you better take that multi vitamin because you haven't done so for a week now.
 

 Feeling grateful for things in your life, in the world around you isn't some 
prescriptive necessity. It's either present or it isn't. What, in particular, 
are you grateful for today Share? And did you feel that right out of the wild 
blue yonder? Or did you have to conciously put your attention on the fact that 
it was Monday and so you had to experience some aspect of gratefulness  - like 
wearing that pair of underwear that corresponds to the appropriate day of the 
week because it says "Monday".
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/a-good-day.htm 
http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/a-good-day.htm I've even been grateful 
for gratitude (-:

 
 
 On Saturday, October 26, 2013 9:11 AM, Richard J. Williams  
wrote:
 
   
 Hope - yeah, that's the ticket!
 
 A detailed depiction of a certain taboo male fantasy: the uninhibited poor 
American anti-social bachelor, alone and self-absorbed, wearing a goatee and a 
black T-shirt, typing into an iPhone - utterly free. That's our Uncle Tantra - 
full of hope that someone, anyone, will love him for what he is - a great and 
wise spiritual teacher. Go figure.
 
 There's_Gonna_Be_a_God_Damn_Riot_in_Here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2175989/
 
 On 10/26/2013 8:27 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
 
   That's what it says on the steet sign across the road from where I'm
 sitting. The Street Of Hope. Cool. And the password for the free Wifi at
 this cafe is 'cafe'. That's cool, too. And they have Westmalle Tripel.
 That's just WAY cool. What can I say? I am easily amused by little
 things.
 
 But still, doesn't sitting down in a new cafe to write in and
 discovering that you're literally sitting on the Street Of Hope sound
 like a *sign*? Maybe what I should write about, in this new writing
 cafe, is HOPE.
 
 OK, here goes.
 
 Hope. I still have it, in spades.
 
 Despite what has been said about me on this forum and others in the
 past, I am *not* at heart a cynic. I know few people *more* hopeful than
 I am. And I see ample reason in the world I see around me to *be*
 hopeful.
 
 It's really not such a bad place.
 
 Get over it, if you believe it is.
 
 This world is full of great beauty and great art and great love. And
 these things are there even in the darkest corners of supposed
 hopelessness. And what you focus on, you become.
 
 When I find someone who's invented a new artform, as has Elena Divina
 with her Cyr wheel in the videos I posted earlier, I focus on that, and
 I feel more hopeful. A world that can produce that is FAR from hopeless.
 
 It's like the ending to Woody Allen's "The Purple Rose Of Cairo."
 Cecilia (Mia Farrow) has had a bad day. She's on the street, homeless
 after

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

Doc, Brother David's gratitude practice, imho, goes way beyond affirmations 
because it positively affects the energy body, not just the mental or emotional 
bodies. As for healing childhood traumas, yes that can take some time, but in 
my experience, healing happens on its own schedule. That timeline too can be 
surrendered to. 

 

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

 Its a good challenge, Ann. I never much cared for affirmations of the day, or 
any of that. You show a lot more gratitude for Share, through your response to 
her, than she does, through the unfocused expression of gratitude she has made. 

 

 Oftentimes, when people are blocked from seeing themselves completely, due to 
past trauma, they attempt to reconnect with themselves, by seeing teachers, who 
make them feel good, or adopting any strategy, like "mindfulness", or 
affirmation, to try to increase their range of feeling. 

 

 Until that trauma is recognized, and healed, the expressions of that limited 
range of feeling, can come across, to others, as vague, dry, and empty, despite 
the actual words and ideas professed (even 'gratitude'). Or, as much of Barry's 
stuff does, it comes across as too well rehearsed; detailed, but like a house 
that has been vacant for a long time. 

 

 

 

 

 

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

  
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 I'm into gratitude these days. I just find one little thing to feel grateful 
for and then a whole bunch of other stuff pops into my mind.
 

 How does one get "into gratitude"? Isn't it something spontaneous and 
unexpected? Isn't it something that can occur at any moment, unannounced and 
heartfelt? Or maybe you just decide it is the day to feel grateful because you 
haven't felt that for a while and it is probably time -sort of like deciding 
you better take that multi vitamin because you haven't done so for a week now.
 

 Feeling grateful for things in your life, in the world around you isn't some 
prescriptive necessity. It's either present or it isn't. What, in particular, 
are you grateful for today Share? And did you feel that right out of the wild 
blue yonder? Or did you have to conciously put your attention on the fact that 
it was Monday and so you had to experience some aspect of gratefulness  - like 
wearing that pair of underwear that corresponds to the appropriate day of the 
week because it says "Monday".
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/a-good-day.htm 
http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/a-good-day.htm I've even been grateful 
for gratitude (-:

 
 
 On Saturday, October 26, 2013 9:11 AM, Richard J. Williams  
wrote:
 
   
 Hope - yeah, that's the ticket!
 
 A detailed depiction of a certain taboo male fantasy: the uninhibited poor 
American anti-social bachelor, alone and self-absorbed, wearing a goatee and a 
black T-shirt, typing into an iPhone - utterly free. That's our Uncle Tantra - 
full of hope that someone, anyone, will love him for what he is - a great and 
wise spiritual teacher. Go figure.
 
 There's_Gonna_Be_a_God_Damn_Riot_in_Here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2175989/
 
 On 10/26/2013 8:27 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
 
   That's what it says on the steet sign across the road from where I'm
 sitting. The Street Of Hope. Cool. And the password for the free Wifi at
 this cafe is 'cafe'. That's cool, too. And they have Westmalle Tripel.
 That's just WAY cool. What can I say? I am easily amused by little
 things.
 
 But still, doesn't sitting down in a new cafe to write in and
 discovering that you're literally sitting on the Street Of Hope sound
 like a *sign*? Maybe what I should write about, in this new writing
 cafe, is HOPE.
 
 OK, here goes.
 
 Hope. I still have it, in spades.
 
 Despite what has been said about me on this forum and others in the
 past, I am *not* at heart a cynic. I know few people *more* hopeful than
 I am. And I see ample reason in the world I see around me to *be*
 hopeful.
 
 It's really not such a bad place.
 
 Get over it, if you believe it is.
 
 This world is full of great beauty and great art and great love. And
 these things are there even in the darkest corners of supposed
 hopelessness. And what you focus on, you become.
 
 When I find someone who's invented a new artform, as has Elena Divina
 with her Cyr wheel in the videos I posted earlier, I focus on that, and
 I feel more hopeful. A world that can produce that is FAR from hopeless.
 
 It's like the ending to Woody Allen's "The Purple Rose Of Cairo."
 Cecilia (Mia Farrow) has had a bad day. She's on the street, homeless
 after telling her abusive husband to fuck off, and finding out that the
 other man she'd fallen in love with is fictional. She has nowhere to
 stay, and nowhere to go, and has very little money in her pockets. But
 she finds herself standing in front of a movie theater, and spends one
 of her last coins to go in and watch the movie.
 
 And up on the screen is Fred Astaire.

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Rue de l'Esperance

Ann, Brother David's gratefulness suggestion has been wonderful for me during 
challenging times. He reminds me of Father Keating, both having a simple piety 
that deeply moves me. The thing I realize is, gratitude is always present, just 
like love and truth and grace, but sometimes it's helpful to have a reminder of 
that. Then it just flows by itself. I love this analogy: God's grace is always 
present like the wind in a windy place. But we have to put up our sail to 
*catch it.*  

 

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

  
 

---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 I'm into gratitude these days. I just find one little thing to feel grateful 
for and then a whole bunch of other stuff pops into my mind.
 

 How does one get "into gratitude"? Isn't it something spontaneous and 
unexpected? Isn't it something that can occur at any moment, unannounced and 
heartfelt? Or maybe you just decide it is the day to feel grateful because you 
haven't felt that for a while and it is probably time -sort of like deciding 
you better take that multi vitamin because you haven't done so for a week now.
 

 Feeling grateful for things in your life, in the world around you isn't some 
prescriptive necessity. It's either present or it isn't. What, in particular, 
are you grateful for today Share? And did you feel that right out of the wild 
blue yonder? Or did you have to conciously put your attention on the fact that 
it was Monday and so you had to experience some aspect of gratefulness  - like 
wearing that pair of underwear that corresponds to the appropriate day of the 
week because it says "Monday".
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/a-good-day.htm 
http://www.gratefulness.org/brotherdavid/a-good-day.htm I've even been grateful 
for gratitude (-:

 
 
 On Saturday, October 26, 2013 9:11 AM, Richard J. Williams  
wrote:
 
   
 Hope - yeah, that's the ticket!
 
 A detailed depiction of a certain taboo male fantasy: the uninhibited poor 
American anti-social bachelor, alone and self-absorbed, wearing a goatee and a 
black T-shirt, typing into an iPhone - utterly free. That's our Uncle Tantra - 
full of hope that someone, anyone, will love him for what he is - a great and 
wise spiritual teacher. Go figure.
 
 There's_Gonna_Be_a_God_Damn_Riot_in_Here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2175989/
 
 On 10/26/2013 8:27 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:
 
   That's what it says on the steet sign across the road from where I'm
 sitting. The Street Of Hope. Cool. And the password for the free Wifi at
 this cafe is 'cafe'. That's cool, too. And they have Westmalle Tripel.
 That's just WAY cool. What can I say? I am easily amused by little
 things.
 
 But still, doesn't sitting down in a new cafe to write in and
 discovering that you're literally sitting on the Street Of Hope sound
 like a *sign*? Maybe what I should write about, in this new writing
 cafe, is HOPE.
 
 OK, here goes.
 
 Hope. I still have it, in spades.
 
 Despite what has been said about me on this forum and others in the
 past, I am *not* at heart a cynic. I know few people *more* hopeful than
 I am. And I see ample reason in the world I see around me to *be*
 hopeful.
 
 It's really not such a bad place.
 
 Get over it, if you believe it is.
 
 This world is full of great beauty and great art and great love. And
 these things are there even in the darkest corners of supposed
 hopelessness. And what you focus on, you become.
 
 When I find someone who's invented a new artform, as has Elena Divina
 with her Cyr wheel in the videos I posted earlier, I focus on that, and
 I feel more hopeful. A world that can produce that is FAR from hopeless.
 
 It's like the ending to Woody Allen's "The Purple Rose Of Cairo."
 Cecilia (Mia Farrow) has had a bad day. She's on the street, homeless
 after telling her abusive husband to fuck off, and finding out that the
 other man she'd fallen in love with is fictional. She has nowhere to
 stay, and nowhere to go, and has very little money in her pockets. But
 she finds herself standing in front of a movie theater, and spends one
 of her last coins to go in and watch the movie.
 
 And up on the screen is Fred Astaire. And suddenly there is hope.
 Because no world that has Fred Astaire in it could possibly be hopeless.

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Where Are The Boomers Headed?

Emily, Happy Birthday coming up, if I remember correctly... 

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

 What is on your bucket list, Share?   

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

 turq, I'm light all right. Gave up eating salmon, for one thing!

 On Friday, October 25, 2013 12:57 PM, TurquoiseB  wrote:

   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long wrote:
>
> Anyone who doesn't think that the whole planet is being adversely 
> affected by radiation from Fukushima are IMO in denial. Better 
> to face it without fear and figure out how to handle it. 

Lighten up, Share. It's not as if radiation creates awful monsters
or anything. And even if it does, how bad can they be if they have
the word 'God' in their name?

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Godzilla_8b8f1e_509655.jpg 
http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Godzilla_8b8f1e_509655.jpg

[FairfieldLife] RE: RE: Re: Gettin' off on the wheel

Steve, not so fast! Tell us what's happening down St. Louis way. How's the 
family, the business, etc? 

 

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

 Great way to start the morning! Thanks for that. 
 

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

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "TurquoiseB" wrote:
 >
> I've never really understood those seekers who want to "get off the
> wheel," meaning the endless cycle of life, death, rebirth, and karma.
> I've always thought that people who have this as their goal in life just
> never learned how much fun you can have with a wheel. This video is for
> them.
> 
 > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4eBw4wxzzA 
 > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4eBw4wxzzA 

 OMG, another one:

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIthWLdF3sEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIthWLdF3sE
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIthWLdF3sE 


 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIthWLdF3sE

[FairfieldLife] RE: The curse of 'Dracula"......

So I guess wgm, we got a case of it takes a thorn to remove a thorn in that 
during the Roman Catholic Mass, the wine is changed into the blood of Christ 
and all are invited to partake! Of course Maharishi had a very different take 
on desire, seeing it as what leads us to more and more bliss, to ultimate 
bliss. These days I'd say that if desire is a demon or a mistake of the 
intellect or a delusion it's because we already are that which we desire. What 
do you think? 

 

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

 The curse of Dracula! Is, the very *damnation* Christ warned about! The 
*blood* of *desire*!!! Drinking the blood of sensuality dooms those, who go so 
forth, to the wheel of eternal *in-satiability* and the wheel of birth and 
death (Samsara or eternal damnation to reincarnation because of desire) until 
the *demon* of desire is quelled and the peace of soul realization is gained 
through meditation and God realization.  ( Hey,  a little Halloween here, 
enjoy!)

RE: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Where Are The Boomers Headed?