Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 11:05:00 (GMT)
From: Mar 29, 2000 To: Apr 07, 2000 Page: 2 Of: 5


Jean-Michel -:- Dedication to ALL my paranoid exes friends -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 13:29:31 (GMT)
__ Robyn -:- Happy Birthday! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 19:11:29 (GMT)
__ Susan -:- Happy birthday to you JM! (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:45:45 (GMT)
__ cq -:- Dedication to ALL my paranoid exes friends -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:38:37 (GMT)
__ __ Jean-Michel -:- CQ: Please read this !!!!! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 07:18:09 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Great card! All the best (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:08:38 (GMT)
__ Joey -:- Happy Birthday, JM, and all the best! (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:49:19 (GMT)
__ AJW -:- Bon Anniversaire! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:17:30 (GMT)
__ SB -:- Today is JM's BIRTHDAY!! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 14:16:26 (GMT)
__ __ Marianne -:- Today is JM's BIRTHDAY!! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:28:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ SB -:- Today is JM's BIRTHDAY!! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:26:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Thank you, and don't worry -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:36:15 (GMT)
__ __ Happy -:- Happy birthday! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 14:39:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Thank you for your overserious card ! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:14:06 (GMT)

Mark A -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:20:18 (GMT)
__ x#%*! -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 23:21:37 (GMT)
__ __ Mark A -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 08:09:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ x#%*! -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:32:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Mark A -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:41:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ x#%*! -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 18:58:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- The only 'growing' you've done has been shameful -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:51:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ x#%*! -:- Is all you can do is lash out? -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 22:06:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ Way -:- To Mark A and #*%~~*(! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 14:59:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Way -:- Ammendment to my post above -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:48:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ x#%*! -:- Ammendment to my post above -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:00:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- To x#%*! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 20:31:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ x#%*! -:- To x#%*! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:58:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- To x#%*! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 23:37:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ x#%*! -:- To x#%*! -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 02:35:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ x#%*! -:- To x#%*! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 23:53:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- To x#%*! -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 00:16:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Eat Shit -:- millions of flies can't be wrong! nt -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 18:02:25 (GMT)
__ __ bloodboils -:- my experience shows me, x#%*! that you are full -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 00:40:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ Joey -:- my experience shows me, bloodboils... -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:24:47 (GMT)
__ __ JHB -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 00:37:03 (GMT)
__ __ G -:- human beings having a conduit to the SUPREME POWER -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 00:23:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ x#%*! -:- human beings having a conduit to the SUPREME POWER -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 18:04:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Mike -:- Could it be????? -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 19:07:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- human beings having a conduit to the SUPREME POWER -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 22:57:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Well, well, well -- The Voice of Ignorance -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 18:15:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ G -:- Yes, tell us brother -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:20:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Thank you G, for many posts (nt) -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 03:46:49 (GMT)
__ Hal -:- Mark -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:57:43 (GMT)
__ Bo -:- OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 19:54:03 (GMT)
__ __ Booboo -:- Hey, Give Mark a Break -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 20:08:49 (GMT)
__ JW -:- It IS Cult Denial -- That's Exactly What It IS -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 16:57:46 (GMT)
__ __ Susan -:- OJ (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:11:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ JW -:- Hey! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:23:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Susan -:- Bruno Magli's (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:34:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JW -:- Bruno Magli's (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:40:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- Bruno Magli's (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:51:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- Bruno Magli's (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:38:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- Bruno Magli's (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:51:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JW -:- Bruno Magli's (ot) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:56:41 (GMT)
__ Joey -:- Thanks for droppin in Mark, and great post! (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:38:58 (GMT)

la-ex -:- Michael Dettmers interview -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 20:12:16 (GMT)
__ blood boils -:- Michael Dettmers' Tribunal -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:06:21 (GMT)
__ __ ex-slave -:- Joan -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 05:11:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Oh yeah, that's something ELSE I asked her -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 05:59:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Bill Burke -:- M. Dettmers, what about JOAN? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 13:44:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Great work, Jim -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 13:35:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- Yes, very good work -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 14:49:38 (GMT)

aspy -:- Satellite Broadcast - April 9 - admission charges -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 18:18:04 (GMT)
__ Q -:- They're suggested donations; I've paid none. nt -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:40:41 (GMT)
__ __ Raja Ji -:- Neither have I (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 11:44:59 (GMT)
__ __ Premie police -:- I didn't read anything about 'suggested donation'. -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:12:56 (GMT)
__ __ Your contact person -:- shame, shame, naughty, naughty (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:42:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ Q -:- It's a shame if you let yourself be shamed. nt -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:51:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Your contact person -:- Put your money where your mouth is... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:59:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Robbie -:- 'Your contact person' is just another liar -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:06:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Your contact person -:- Re:'Your contact person' is just another liar -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:24:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- Solution: join the magic, but not the group. -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:31:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Reg Premie-Smyth -:- Solution: join the magic, but not the group. -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 01:39:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- You sound like Deputy Dog, are you? -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:07:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- no (nt) -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 19:06:32 (GMT)

Jean-Michel -:- Calling London Latvians! -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 16:41:57 (GMT)
__ cq -:- Calling London Latvians! -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 12:20:38 (GMT)

AJW -:- It's only castles burning... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 14:44:51 (GMT)
__ Deputy Dog -:- Fire cannot burn it... (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 15:37:27 (GMT)
__ __ SB -:- Fire cannot burn it... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 16:10:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ Deputy Dog -:- SB - Inspiration (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:24:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ SB -:- Inspiration? -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 15:33:59 (GMT)

Robbie -:- Are expremies liers? -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 12:35:40 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- No and no and a damned good question (I think) -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:25:48 (GMT)
__ __ Robbie -:- I sent this thread 3 times. It was deleted twice. -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 20:44:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ Are you clicking -:- your 'Submit' button once (to preview) or twice? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:09:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Robbie -:- Webmaster deleted my thread twice -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 16:15:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Webmaster deleted my thread twice -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:33:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Forum Administrator -:- No chance (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 08:14:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Robbie -:- Yes, Webmaster deleted my thread twice -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 20:11:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Yes, Webmaster deleted my thread twice -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 09:49:40 (GMT)
__ Susan -:- mistress story -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 14:23:29 (GMT)
__ Can ANY of -:- you premie flamers spell even the simplest words? -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 12:58:25 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- you premie flamers spell even the simplest words? -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:09:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- Also... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:55:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Harry -:- Also... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:44:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Are you serious? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:11:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Harry -:- Who, me? You'll love this. -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 06:48:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- I'm so pretty, I'm so pretty.... -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 15:16:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Thought you meant the Sex Pistols there! (nt) -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 18:02:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Selene -:- or.... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:39:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Harry -:- or.... -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:47:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- my image is already shot Harry -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:53:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- of course that last typo was intentional -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:57:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ trixie -:- My 'reply' to Robbie was deleted last night. -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 00:10:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- I've had lots of posts deleted -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 03:12:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ trixie -:- I was thinking Robbie geeked into my computer -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:24:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- trixie what planet did you come from? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:32:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Trixie -:- Selene SSShhhh -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 08:16:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- I think Robbie is Pierre -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:15:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- I think I'd like to be Selene ... -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 19:53:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- huh? cq you need a vacation -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:02:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Trixie -:- Fact: Robs posts were deleted OFF OF THE FORUM -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 05:17:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ oh and ps from Selene -:- I am NOT trixie!! nt -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:09:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- ok while I am at it -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:17:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- ok while I am at it -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 03:07:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- Hi Joey -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 04:09:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Hi Selenie -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:12:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ trixie -:- Betcha Robbie smells 'press'.. -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 00:17:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mr D -:- That's my job, Trixie -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:26:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Trixie -:- But Mr D have you seen the pattern in his -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 08:06:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Robbie -:- I cant spell, but how stupid can you guys be? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 08:49:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mr D -:- What's up? The wind get under your kilt? (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 11:17:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Not that stupid -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:17:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ trixie -:- Stupid Rob wore his.. -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:31:00 (GMT)

Albert Einstein -:- from my memoirs -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 07:19:19 (GMT)
__ blood boils -:- from my memoirs 'that's a keeper' (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:34:06 (GMT)
__ __ Joey -:- from my memoirs 'that's a keeper' (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:32:16 (GMT)

Hal -:- Something bothers me -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 06:55:41 (GMT)
__ bb -:- Something bothers me -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 05:28:29 (GMT)
__ __ Hal -:- To bb -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:04:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- Hal - What's wrong with being a seeker of truth? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 20:54:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Hal -:- Hal - What's wrong with being a seeker of truth? -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:26:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Read 'The Guru Papers', Hal -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:33:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- and what's wrong with being a meditator? -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 15:43:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- and what's wrong with being a meditator? -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:16:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Hal -:- Excuse me Joey -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 00:29:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Excuse me Hal -:- Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 04:23:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- meditation vs Maharaji -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:25:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ G -:- Hal - there is something good about being a seeker -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 03:36:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Hal - there is something good about being a seeker -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 04:54:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- 'Domineering'? -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 20:25:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- 'Domineering'? -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:40:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- seeking Truth or truth -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:09:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- seeking Truth or truth -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:30:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- you entirely missed my point -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:27:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- you entirely missed my point -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:05:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- those particles -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:52:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- With all due respect, G -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 20:14:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- With all due respect, Jim -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:05:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- comic relief -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:30:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Oops! -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:37:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- the materialist viewpoint -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 15:50:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- something to consider -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 03:04:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ Hal -:- Thanks guys-It all helps (nt) -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:06:51 (GMT)
__ JW -:- Something bothers me -:- Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:26:05 (GMT)
__ cq -:- Seconds away ... - there's no referee!(nt) -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 18:19:46 (GMT)
__ Way -:- Re:Something bothers me -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 15:00:42 (GMT)
__ __ Hal -:- Thanks Way. (nt) -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:52:57 (GMT)
__ Daneane -:- Trust Yourself -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 13:38:48 (GMT)
__ __ blood boils -:- lowest common denominator -:- Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:31:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ Joey -:- lowest common denominator -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:19:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ blood boils -:- wow...your are really a tough guy! (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:12:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Wow to you sucker, you're the bullshit artist!(nt) -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:23:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Clint Eastwood -:- Yep. I reckon so Joey...you're the enforcer (nt) -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:41:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- And you're the chickenshit.... -:- Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:50:26 (GMT)


Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 13:29:31 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Dedication to ALL my paranoid exes friends
Message:
Please go check this !

Rawat Swat Team monitoring exes meeting.....

Still ROFDL!!! Thank you SB!!!!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 19:11:29 (GMT)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Happy Birthday!
Message:
Dear Jean-Michel,
Hope you have a great day! I am glad to see others were on the ball in the b-day department! Hope to get to meet you in person too! :)
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:45:45 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Happy birthday to you JM! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:38:37 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Dedication to ALL my paranoid exes friends
Message:
Have a happy day, JM, (and many more, bien sur)

The card was good. Who's the artist?

Incidentally, what is 'ROFDL'? - Ripped Off From Divine Light?




PS Anth sent an email - but still don't know how to preview those pics of the London Latvian nite. Could you email them (as a JPEG attatchment) to me?

Merci.

I mean,... mercy.



Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 07:18:09 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: CQ: Please read this !!!!!
Message:
I've tried to send you emails, but they bounce back !
There has to be something wrong with the email you gave me.

Would you please email me at

jmkahn@club-internet.fr

Thank you !

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:08:38 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Great card! All the best (nt)
Message:
hh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:49:19 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Happy Birthday, JM, and all the best! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:17:30 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Bon Anniversaire!
Message:
Jean-Michel,

Bon Anniversaire!

Why don't we celebrate tonight. I've found a great bar, just off Rue Beauborg, where the beer is only 150.

We could get pissed, British style (start a fight, throw up, damage some private property, get arrested etc)

Call me at home after 6.

Anth le pisstete

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 14:16:26 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Today is JM's BIRTHDAY!!
Message:
Happy Birthday again!

Love,

S

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:28:20 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: SB and Jean Michel
Subject: Today is JM's BIRTHDAY!!
Message:
Jean Michel: Bon soir and feliz compleanos from Marianne and The Mexican! If you make it west this time, you know how to find me!

SB, I loved the card!

Love, Marianne

PS I think I left The Book at Anth´s!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:26:50 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Today is JM's BIRTHDAY!!
Message:
Did you see what I wrote on the pants of some guys and on the door of the car?
hahaha
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:36:15 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Thank you, and don't worry
Message:
for the book ! I still have it, in a safe place, now that I know what to watch ...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 14:39:26 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: happyheretic@hotmail.com
To: J-M
Subject: Happy birthday!
Message:
Happy birthday Jean-Michel,

and thank you for the marvellous work you are doing in exposing Prem Pal, helping people getting off the hook, and learn to see him for what he really is.

Although we never met in person, it still feels like we know ean other, after all communication over the net. You appear to be a very nice, and also intelligent, person.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:14:06 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Thank you for your overserious card !
Message:
I've just received your mail today!

What a coincidence .... Thanks a lot !

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:20:18 (GMT)
From: Mark A
Email: Apple4256@datastreet.com
To: Everyone
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
Dear All,
I have truly enjoyed Jim's 'depositions' of Joan
and Mike over the few weeks. And for this fabulous lawyerly objectivity he displays. It seems catching. Joan and Mike seem to have it as well.
Why, any observer might ask, are these people skipping the main issue of Maharaji ? Classic cult denial? I don't know about that stuff. To me it seems pretty obvious. Their adult identities were completely formed and nourished in the very public and coveted capacities they performed/served in at DLM/Elan Vital.They are both still running on that mojo,or some derivitive thereof. TO CRITICALLY examine their active co-creational role in the madness of this movement,would force self examination and motive questioning(NOW AND THEN) that these folks are obviously not prepared to take.
OJ gave me some magic moments on the football field, and even seemed to get away with his crime, because the people who identified with him in the jury, just couldn't convict him.It would be convicting themselves! So ,Bloody gloves and all, he walked. But I know he is not what he swears he is,and so did they...
I've had brilliant otherwise lucid premies swear straight face to me that M was never a living diety to them (' You didn't actually belive that,Mark,did you?' - after singing Arti right next to me ,with full pranams, for years). Others disaffected and disenfranchised and dissing M, but still stuck(Feb. 2000) in some strange Twilight Zone because maybe M is some whacked out Amadaus Lord giving them the big test...
I actually agree that judgement or anger on this Maharaji issue as a permanent zipcode is counterproductive and an extension of disempowerment. But bullshit is bullshit. Avoidance
is a dance to avoid.Eichman was guilty. Technicolor Lord Delusional Maniacs are what they say they are, even if their websites reinvent them.
Bloody gloves have been left behind...
One of the most amazing things about Maharaji is that over the last 25 years he has said so many things on so many subjects that conflict themselves, that everybody's take on him can freely differ ( cut and paste Maharaji ), and everyone's exit story ( Mike and Joan included ) can at first glance seem to make sense.Even if it is obvious that the guts of the involvement has been glossed over( even Maharaji tried that on his website!)
It seems, from their depositions, not all can afford to vote to convict. I cannot believe the alternative- that they forgot. Its sad, for until they do vote in some way ( not necessarily on the Forum- that is an obvious public suicide), it is they who remain, on some fundamental level, imprisoned.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 23:21:37 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
Your comments, though lucid are founded on the complete rejection of the notion of human beings having a conduit to a supreme being, and quite probably the possibility of a conscious power like God even existing. For those who discount this possibility, the existence of a Maharaji type individual is fraudulent by default. That is the stance many ex-premies have taken and to them the actions of those who support Maharaji are therefore ridiculous and even abhorrent.

To take the opposite view, IF there is such a power as a God then there HAS TO BE a way to know this power. That is just common sense. For those of us who take this position, the possibility of a Maharaji coming to show the way makes complete sense philosophically. Whether he is in fact “the one” becomes another issue, one of proof, which as has been said is found in faith, devotion and the practice of Knowledge.

You should recognise Mark that people like yourself have a tendency to personalise your attack on the Master when really your objection is more against the philosophy of his existence. The resultant venom that gets mustered is enormously disproportional to his apparent “misdeeds”. For you everything Maharaji does is skewed through the eyes of doubt such that he comes out a demonic character in a play to enslave the souls of the good people of this world. If you look at it, you are no different than Christians claiming everyone other than Jesus is the anti-christ. That you would compare Maharaji to OJ is an example of the bias you consciously inject into your argument.

I admit that having beliefs means one is subject to the possibility of not seeing things objectively, based upon our belief or lack thereof. That being the case we must recognise that in this case we both have beliefs. Our disagreement on Maharaji is really another chapter in the age-old argument of whether or not there is a God and if so how do we approach him/she/it.

So the bottom line for me is I believe in the existence of a conscious supreme being, and there is therefore a way to know this being above and beyond my belief system. The role of Maharaji therefore is clear. He shows me the way to know that being. In the process he as the guide becomes an inherent component of the discovery. Many have tried to discount the importance of the guide but my experience has shown me he is crucial. And this is something I arrived at without coercion or duress.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 08:09:12 (GMT)
From: Mark A
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
Mr x#%*!(x3581,in capitals)

I will try to respond to your post within the spirit
that I recieved it,intelligent and sincere. And I will attempt to keep my metaphors in line.
We are working on the same wavelength,you and I,though we are examining different data, have different belief systems, and different conclusions.
I am going to assume that like me, you both WANT IT ALL, and believe in the Power of Love. in other words,that you are not parked in some belief system,but feel it serves as an active medium for you to experience true growth and true love.

A few things here. You have me pegged wrong on the no God,
no personal differences w/Maharaji,age-old argument thing.Actually,I found Maharaji a DETERRENT to experiencing myself or the superior power( you can check my Journey,or e-mail me as well, if you are ready to unscramble your name.I can refer you to some avenues that I have found actually Facilitate experience )

1.'The God thing' ; Supreme power yes. Am I part of it. Yes.
Is this conversation part of it. of course. Can I expand and amplify my experience of it. yes. Are there measurable thresholds for inner experience .Yes . are there prexisting systems that boost experience.Yes. are there new and evolving systems that boost experience to even greater levels.Yes. Did i get blissed out in the Maharaji belief system. Yes. Do I feel he is the conduit to god. No. Can I believe him into being my conduit to god, feel it is true,defend it,and assume others don't get it. of course.I did so for a few decades.are there better and more effective levels of experience than the knowledge system.Absolutely!
Look, the experience of yoga techniques-M or otherwise-(faith,devotion,practice),surrender,and bakti definitely do something for the earnest practitioner.In fact my next door neighbor is a 20 year old girl, full of love and light, and off to see HER conduit, Sai Baba, in India in May.(the purpose of this is not to judge Sai baba) She is blissed out!And her experience is Real. May, I can safely prophecize,will be the greatest month of her life.
However sensing her ardor to not only knock on heaven's door but become a true living part of heaven on Earth and All that Is , & her intense yearning for the True fullfillment, I will also prophecize that there will come a time that that guru conduit thing will have served its purpose for her. ESPECIALLY IF THE GURU REFRAMES A NONORDINARY EXPERIENCE INTO A THINLY VEILED VERY MUNDANE CONTROL TRIP,as to me M does.This is very central.It is the framing ,the cutting off of the default divinity of Us, that hampers the enlightenment system Maharaji markets. Self love,allowance of an experience beyond the Master's,evolution beyond the conduit thing,SELF acceptance,are not allowed.
If I accept Maharaji as the (in his own terms) The Superior Power in Person,believe in him as the WAY TO KNOW THE POWER, or 'the one' and allow the experience of bliss which I have ALLOWED myself to experience , make me his spiritual or psychological property, I am effectively cutting myself off from direct experience access of what I term God.
When one is involved in a debate on whether or not M is it,
for all intents and purposes, the big God and a Universeor Universes filled with the Big Love, go wanting.There is a god-us and more- and there are lots of ways to experience ourself.Let me be so bold as to say that it is your INTENTION to experience whatever you think God or the Big Love is,that is the the most direct and powerful Conduit you have or EVER will have! Using the Power of Now. And truly believing it /allowing it to Happen for you. These are the direct tools of the time.Your Higher Self exists completely outside/beyond the dualistic universe of Master/not,and would love to hang out with you,if you are ready to meet the master within...

2. Differences with Maharaji- while I do believe that the general age of Master's,Popes,etc. is on the way out,I was extremely dissapointed with Maharaji as a human being and a leader.Even if one feels to invest one's soul into someone else's hand,this is not the guy I'd want to babysit me,or my kids.Outside of other attrition factors,this is why Dettmers ( I gather)and many people I know 'walked'

3 'Age Old Argument' - 'approach god.crucial guide. belief systems.' Hmm . . .lets try a different angle.
If I told you that there was a way for you to experience a greater level of yourself, joy and bliss than you have to this point EVER EXPERIENCED in your life and Maintain it,without external psychological dependancy- Would you go for it? without coercion and duress ? an Ocean to the Pond of knowledge? Being a Master instead of seeing a Master ? Playing a 'non-Default' Active part in the embracing multidimensional universe of the Big Love,that you are fully enfranchised part of?
Would you go for it ? And yet be free to return to Maharaji's World( the door is always open), or this strange sandbox where everybody keeps kicking sand in Maharaji's face ?( though both options will severely condense your bandwidth)
I hope so. For that is the option open to you.And anyone else wounded,disillusioned. That we ARE that Conscious power.
Yes like everything else discussed,this could also be labelled a belief system.Just like being a Western Guy and bam- being fed some Cockamamie belief system that reframes all human experience as though this long succession of magic Perfect Masters have come to foster hierarchial master relationships ...
Here's another belief. That we ARE it.And have collectively
and individually been conned into accepting ourselves as less than ourselves.By great storytellers and established hierarchies. And that this time in our history will see the awakening and emergence of True sovereign autonomous individuals and civilizations. Beings that hitchike belief systems until they no longer support growth.A race of beings that finally love themselves and each other enough to 'Pop'

Obviously as we continue to grow,continue to say yes to the
love that is within us,find techniques,fresh fires ,technologies ,communities of heart/thought/intention that allow Love to flow through us,we will outgrow each and every belief system.As individuals,and I expect,as a species. Including the ones you and I currently hold.

We have no 'age old' argument.You are in the ring alone on that one.Life is too real, the now too powerful,existence too fluid, to defend and maintain positions.
Whether they be explanations of past behaviors ( that's what promped my original post ) or assumptions of each other's bias.
To Your & all our growth,joy and freedom...

Mark

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:32:15 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
Mark I appreciated the time you took to respond. I do not have the time to respond to the level of detail that gives your post justice but there are a couple of things.

First, let me respond to the following: If I told you that there was a way for you to experience a greater level of yourself, joy and bliss than you have to this point EVER EXPERIENCED in your life and Maintain it,without external psychological dependancy- Would you go for it?

Of course I would. But I have to say, the experience I have had of bliss would be damned hard to beat. The growth I have experienced has been non-stop. The love within that encompasses my fellow earthlings has been kept fresh and alive. So what are you suggesting?

The question about external psychological dependency is interesting. The formula for happiness is really quite simple: Devote your life to your life. You should not slide over this statement too quickly as there are some pretty important concepts that it contains. First the word “devote”. How many of us know the depth of commitment it takes to truly devote to something? Second, life is meant for life………..nothing else! How easy is it to give it to something else? Well, we all know the answer to that question. And do you even realise it when you do? No. So here we are desperately needing--not wanting--true happiness and we are supposed to first, realise we need to devote, second learn how to devote, and third don’t direct that devotion to anything other than life itself (what-ever that is). Shit Mark that is fucking difficult.

So let’s talk about where a Master comes in. First he knows that devotion is essential to happiness, and he sets about to teach it to his student. And he uses everything and anything that touches the student to poke, prod, and coerce him into learning. And so the student MUST have faith in his teacher.

Second, he shows you precisely what the life is, i.e. the Knowledge, and he provides clarity on their use.

Third he constantly reminds the student that life is meant for life. He does it through his words and his actions. He is committed to being in the student’s face as much as possible to be that reminder.

And lastly, he is the embodiment of devotion to life. Without that example we are left in a sea of questions and self-doubt. “Yes, it can be done. If he can do it so can I.”

So yes there is a dependency on Maharaji. He has proven to me time and time again to care about my happiness and the happiness of those around him. He does stretch the envelope as many ex-premies can attest to, but underlying his actions are lessons that when faith is exercised are profound and liberating. But that dependency is not co-dependent…..it is not psychological. It is on the other hand symbiotic and practical.

Anyway Mark, so what are you into?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:41:50 (GMT)
From: Mark A
Email: Apple4256@datastreet.com
To: x#%*!
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
I assure you it can be beat.Though your internal master will allow no external ones ,genuine or not.
A genuine name and email will however move us foward, to batter ways of devoting oneself to life

Mark

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 18:58:48 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
Let’s see. I should want to beat the fact that I’m happy? That I’ve never been let down by my source of happiness? That I’ve never grown so much as since I’ve had Knowledge, and I enjoy very much my relationship with my Master. Hmmm, not sure I’m desperate enough to send you my e-mail address.

Guess my explanation of my view of the Master’s role didn’t have any impact on a die-hard ex-premie such as you.

So what are you into?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:51:50 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: The only 'growing' you've done has been shameful
Message:
That I’ve never grown so much as since I’ve had Knowledge....

#$%&,

You're just another example, to me anyways, of how disastrous the long-term effects of this cult are. If you'd been left to live your own life you might, by now, have some interesting thoughts about the world, some valid experiences and meaningful realtionships. Sure, I don't know you (or do I? This isn't Jack Tuff again, is it?) but you strike me as someone with none of that.

But then don't forget Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha. I'm sure they had their problems too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 22:06:20 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Is all you can do is lash out?
Message:
If you'd been left to live your own life you might, by now, have some interesting thoughts about the world, some valid experiences and meaningful realtionships.

You're clutching at straws Jim. I think most would agree from reading my posts that I have a creative intellectual life. As for meaningful relationships, I don't have a problem there either. So are you supposed to be the example we all would emulate? Heaven help us!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 14:59:25 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Mark A and @@#:%^*
Subject: To Mark A and #*%~~*(!
Message:
To Mark A and #$*!*%$^#+,

I've enjoyed your exchange of ideas here. If you continue along these lines, you might get down to the nitty gritty, which would be a first for this Forum. Usually the premie will disappear at this juncture either in complete silence or in a swirl of four-letter parting shots.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:48:29 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Ammendment to my post above
Message:
Earlier today, I said above that whenever a premie/ex-premie debate gets interesting and directly to the point, the premie will usually either simply quit or resort to obscenity. After reading #$%%^^&**%#'s latest response, I have to add another choice: resort to absolutely meaningless platitudes.

#@#$#36;(*^@$ - do you really have to say stuff like 'devote your life to life'? Such tripe is absolutely impossible to argue with. I'm not trying to insult you here, I just wish you would express yourself in a humanly understandable fashion.

p.s. please forgive me for spelling your pen-name incorrectly. I hate to hunt and peck.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:00:53 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Ammendment to my post above
Message:
Look way, this is not just a platitude to me. It is something that keeps me alive. Seriously! But you could have no idea about that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 20:31:45 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: To x#%*!
Message:
To x#%*!,

OK, I'm taking the time, first-off, to spell your name right.

Secondly, in your post to me there seems to be some sort of implied request for respect, and even maybe a request to tread lightly, so I will assure you of my respect for any feelings you have in regard to approaching the greater realities of life. And if you are feeling fragile in any way, I can relate and would not condemn you for it. And I personally once devoted myself to Rawat and his Knowledge just as much as you do, so I certainly understand how deeply you might feel about it.

If you really honor Knowledge so much, and cling to it so much, that your very life depends on it, seriously, then I don't understand why you would engage so many ex-premies in arguments here, since we are obviously going to trash Rawat and his Knowledge, without being polite about it. We are going to insult it in no uncertain terms and you are not going to change our minds no matter how many intelligent arguments you come up with, or how many insults you exchange with us.

If you are convinced of its value in your life, then practice it, and sing its praises on ELK or wherever, and go see Rawat whenever you can. (Are you going to attend the satellite feed this weekend? Are you going to attend one of the small intimate gatherings in April and May that are happening in the States?)

Believe me, it's futile to expect to change anybody's opinion here. I have a suspicion that it might actually be yourself that you are trying to convince. If, indeed, as you say, it is so very, very difficult to devote yourself to 'life' as you say Rawat does, then I must take it that the bliss you talk about is often tempered with periods of doubt and struggle. Perhaps you are aiming too high, and it would be better to relax into being a human being during the time that you have on the planet. That's the feeling of many ex-premies, anyway. I personally have not given up my idealism or pursuit of truth with a capital T, but I view it now as something inherent in everyday human kindness and not some sort of perfectness gained through years of meditation.

I can only say that I respect your efforts, I commiserate with you on the inherent suffering of life, and I wish you success in finding the real truth, or Truth. But I have to tell you that, similar to what Mark A. says, the effort to gain salvation from a guru figure, is doomed to failure. The very act of bestowing part of your own power to some other human being will end up hurting you. The universe is not set up this way. If it were, it would be perverse, (as Scott said, I believe).

It's not you personally that people here are fighting. It's Rawat, and his fake claims of being the path to anybody's salvation.

Best wishes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:58:07 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: To x#%*!
Message:
First, thanks for spelling my name right. Not to worry, it’s really my mother that gets upset when people get it wrong.

Second, I thank you for the respect bestowed and hear you in your advice regarding my health and the forum. I am here because I like a good argument, especially on topics I feel strongly about. I’m sure there are a few of you who understand.

As for Scott’s reflection on the nature of the universe, funny how so many people can occupy the same space (ie; universe) and come to completely different conclusions. And it’s really funny how we all think our view is the correct one……even to the point of going to war to prove it. Of course, war doesn’t prove anything other than who is either the most technologically advanced, has the best leadership, is the wealthiest, or the most brutal……but I digress.

So getting back to the universe, let’s have a look at it. The fact is we have bestowed our power on others since we were born. We do this out of necessity and that IS the way the universe is set up. Inasmuch as the others we bestow our power into has our best interests at heart, we benefit. If the person were are investing our wellbeing in truly does care for us they will divest their responsibility at the appropriate time. We do not benefit from those who are in it for themselves. Obviously there are many examples of parents who hold on too long for their own selfish reasons.

Now, you guys either do not trust that Maharaji has your best interests at heart, or your egos just can’t handle being in another’s safe-keeping. Myself, I’ll be the first to admit that in matters of existence I am at the mercy of the universe. So I don’t have an ego problem about someone like Maharaji showing me the way.

As for whether or not I can trust him after all that gone down? Well, he’s never steered me wrong once in all the 25 years or so I’ve known him. And I’ve been through the Lord of the Universe stage, ashram, service, nightly satsang, Arti, the whole sheebang. Yes there have been changes over the years but I’ve rolled with it and fared well because I just can’t get away from the truth he showed to me. And the resultant growth, love, and wisdom shows.……..don’t you think?

So tell me, why can’t most of you guys exchange ideas without attacking the person with the opposing view?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 23:37:36 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: To x#%*!
Message:
So tell me, why can’t most of you guys exchange ideas without attacking the person with the opposing view?

Well I guess it's human nature to attack those who defend people who have hurt and abused you. Don't you think?

But you don't seem able to debate the issues rationally. Many here have said that the meditation techniques have a positive effect without paying any respect to Maharaji. In fact some say that their experience improves after rejecting him. If their testimony is to be respected, then an obvious inference is that Maharaji's claim that he is essential for the experience is plain wrong.

OK, some people like you claim that by giving Maharaji respect, your experience improves. You gain inspiration from him. But isn't it the case that you already believe he is inspirational before he inspires you? So it is any wonder you get inspiration from him?

No, x#%*!, you are irrational, and trapped in your cult. Your rationalisation is quite impressive, but as Jim suggested earlier, no intelligent, non-premie, friend of yours would take your side in this debate if you invited them here.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 02:35:27 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: To x#%*!
Message:
Many here have said that the meditation techniques have a positive effect without paying any respect to Maharaji.

Who's to say John? Historical 'fact' is only as good as your ability to remember. Measuring experiences from the past against that of the present gets dodgey. Regarding the concept of 'essential', essential for what? Essential to have the same experience you had for the last five years of sitting and masturbating with your mind? Or essential to actually going somewhere? How do you spell relief? Besides it just ends up being my word against theirs. Why bother?

But isn't it the case that you already believe he is inspirational before he inspires you?

No, definitely not. I have come to him full of doubt and suspicion and it vaporised in minutes. I am so oftem completely taken aback when I get inspired.

Your rationalisation is quite impressive, but as Jim suggested earlier, no intelligent, non-premie, friend of yours would take your side in this debate if you invited them here.

So you and Jim ascribe to the herd-based criteria for measuring rationality, do you? 'If everyone agrees with me I must be right.' Sorry, John, I look at an argument based upon it own merit. If I'm the only one in the world who gets it, I'm ok with that. How else could one profess to be an true individual.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 23:53:19 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: To x#%*!
Message:
Yeah, yeah, yeah. More I said/you said. How much responsibility are you going to take for the “hurt” you refer to? If in your heart of hearts you absolve yourself from ultimate responsibility, then you are the kind of person who will never be free. There, I may have just predicted the future. If you take this tac you are completely different than CHR whose locus of control appears to be in the right place.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 00:16:40 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: To x#%*!
Message:
x#%*!,

I take full responsibility for my actions, but that does not mean that Maharaji has not caused hurt and abuse. But why didn't you respond to any of the substantive points in my post? Come on, you seem to want respect. Earn it by debating rationally.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 18:02:25 (GMT)
From: Eat Shit
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: millions of flies can't be wrong! nt
Message:
q
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 00:40:53 (GMT)
From: bloodboils
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: my experience shows me, x#%*! that you are full
Message:
of so much shit it is hard to believe. Why don't you go stand in the corner and talk to yourself for the next thousand years and spare us from your bull shit.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:24:47 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: bloodboils
Subject: my experience shows me, bloodboils...
Message:
How very eloquent!
So nice to see how far above that 'lowest common denominator' you really are. (sarcasm of course)
Like I said, you're a hypocrite man!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 00:37:03 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
But even in your philosophy don't you admit the possibility of frauds adopting the role of the 'conduit' to God?

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 00:23:40 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: human beings having a conduit to the SUPREME POWER
Message:
human beings having a conduit to a supreme being

Are you saying that the Supreme Being, even though supreme, is somehow impotent and needs the help of a conduit? That even though God is within me, there is a piece missing, namely the voodoo power ('grace' or 'talent') that Prem Rawat somehow stole from God? That God, even though all-powerful, is somehow subservient to Rawat? You know the concept, said by Rawat himself, 'God is great, but Guru is greater than God, because Guru reveals God.' Guru says to God, 'Come on boy, come out, stop hiding, come out, ahhh, that's a good boy.' God at the beck and call of Rawat? God is Rawat's dog? That's a bit backwards, don't you think?

conduit: 1) A pipe or channel for conveying fluids, such as water. ... 3) A means by which something is transmitted.

How could it be that God would have to be transmitted to you? God is already within you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 18:04:10 (GMT)
From: x#%*!
Email: None
To: G
Subject: human beings having a conduit to the SUPREME POWER
Message:
I don't know G. Look at Jesus, at Mohammed, at Buddha. What do you think the hooferaw about them was all about? Seems to me God being within you can also be a huge concept that doesn't do you any good at all.

Concept

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 19:07:20 (GMT)
From: Mike
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: Could it be?????
Message:
x3581 of borg: Could it be that YOUR CONCEPT is wrong? Hmmm????? Could it???? Maybe?????

Judging from the extremely large numbers of enlightened souls out there.... after ALL of the intevention in the name of god.... that maybe, just maybe THEY (the conduit worshippers) have it WRONG? Hmmm????? Maybe?????

I agree with G on this one and have said so before..... IF there is a god, he/she/it doesn't need any help to get through to us! No conduit would be required for a SUPREME being. To think otherwise is an afront to the very idea of an all-powerful, all-knowing, omnipresent (that means EVERYWHERE) god, don't you think? Of course, if there isn't a god, then the point is moot as well, no? Either way, a conduit is a superfluous add-on that isn't required.

The 'conduit' role was invented to make bucks, that's all! Tell me, WHO SAYS you need a conduit? WHO???? The conduits themselves maybe?????? Now you're getting the idea!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 22:57:08 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: human beings having a conduit to the SUPREME POWER
Message:
You've given away your power, you with the strange name. Maybe you just never grew up and see Maharaji as a skirt to hide behind, or a big brother to protect you from the bullies in the world. What's the matter, X#... whatever your name is, are you afraid of the boogie man, are you afraid he's gonna get you without the big strong master to keep him away at night?

Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Maharaji, they're all the same, skirts to hide behind for frightened little children. Come on out from behind there, X#. Maybe you don't need Big M so much as you think you do. Maybe it's time to grow up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 18:15:43 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: x#%*!
Subject: Well, well, well -- The Voice of Ignorance
Message:
#$%&,

Tell us all about Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha. I think it's about time we all learned the real story.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:20:43 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: x3581 of 53217
Subject: Yes, tell us brother
Message:
Yes, tell us brother, tell us about Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha, tell us what you remember from your previous lives as a devotee. While you are at it, explain what is meant by the following quotes and how they fit with the concept of Maharaji being greater than God.

Jesus:
Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.
Mark 10:17-18

Mohammed:
Prostrate not to the sun nor to the moon, but prostrate to Allah Who created them, if you really worship Him.
Holy Qur'an, 41:37

Let's throw in the first two of the Ten Commandmants, since both Jesus and Mohammed were of that tradition:
1.Thou Shall Have No Other Gods Before Me.
2.Thou Shall Not Make Unto Thee Any Graven Image.

And for good measure the Buddhist concept of 'the Void'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 03:46:49 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Thank you G, for many posts (nt)
Message:
Thank you G, for many posts (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:57:43 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: Mark
Message:
I'm going off topic here but I've just reread your journey and it was just what I need at the moment.Thanks so much for expressing in such eloquent detail your process of waking up.

I'm a recent ex and somewhat confused right now. I find that there is a void in my life. It feels as if I had a cancer which I'd become attached to and missed when it was removed!!

Best wishes . Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 19:54:03 (GMT)
From: Bo
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: OJ Simpson and the Bloody Gloves/Joan A and Mike D
Message:
Eichmann?

Delusional maniacs?

Bloody gloves?

Convict or forget (the only alternative)?

What on earth are you talking about? And who on earth are you talking to? Not that your images of Nazis and murderers aren't entertaining but how far out on a very thin limb do you have to be to compare them with Maharaji?

' it is they who remain, on some fundamental level, imprisoned.'

I'd read your own sentence again, if I were you. You've lost even the barest shred of a sense of who and what you're discussing. It's good to check your bearings every now and then to make sure you're still sighting land.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 20:08:49 (GMT)
From: Booboo
Email: None
To: Bo
Subject: Hey, Give Mark a Break
Message:
Mark has some trouble with his metaphors, I will grant you that. I can't always follow them either, but the content is basically there, you just have to kind of decipher it, you know?

I think the 'bloody gloves' are a reference to the OJ Simpson case and is about the 'evidence' that was left behind and how one has to deal with that.

Delusional maniac is Maharaji. 'Maniac' might be a bit harsh, but how would you describe someone who apparently believed/believes he is god and/or tried to carry off that deception. Certainly 'delusional.'

'Convict or forget' refers to the situation many premies, who are no longer into being premies anymore, just try to forget the whole thing, because if they remember, and discuss it, it would be like 'convicting' Maharaji and the cult for numerous transgressions, like claiming to be god, for a decade and then claiming not to be god some time later, without any explanation as to why he stopped being god, and what that 'god period' was about.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 16:57:46 (GMT)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: It IS Cult Denial -- That's Exactly What It IS
Message:
Mark,

I think it IS cult denial. That's exactly what it is. Notice we haven't heard from Dettmers regarding the very reasonable, and very basic questions about Maharaji and his relationship to him that have been asked on the thread below. The silence is deafening. There isn't any need to soak those questions in and figure out what to say. Either Michael is willing to look at it and discuss it, or he's not and I think he's not, I'm afraid. In this regard, he isn't much different that a lot of people who are still in, and sort of slid out of, the Maharaji cult. True, Michael's identity is tied up in it all in a way mine never was, but with that identity goes greater responsibility. I mean if your allegiance is to integrity and humanity, rather than to a millinaire 'master' and to keeping some kind of fairy tale image of that together. And, frankly, the fact that Michael doesn't even mention Maharaji in his bio, while at the same time taking credit for running a $100 million 'Swiss Foundation' which was really Divine Light Mission and later Elan Vital, (not to mention the Office of Guru Maharaj Ji, which I believe Michael also headed, but doesn't mention), also speaks volumes.

Sure, I believe Maharaji is partly delusional, and partly quite well-planned and crafted. That's why people who are willing to talk about that are important and until the internet came along, there wasn't any way to bring together those people who left Maharaji and his cult in isolation, into a community of people who can share notes and smooth the process of taking one's life back.

The amazing thing about Maharaji is that he has NO accountability to anyone. Questioning of him is not allowed, if one is to remain a follower, and he takes every action to avoid ever even being in the position of being questioned, or even providing a format where his followers can even talk to each other publicly. It's no coincidence that NONE of the Maharaji sites allow any form of open discussion. It's a rigged game from the beginning. All the more reason people like Michael have an obligation to tell us what he knows to help aleviate the damage Maharaji has done, and to, hopefully, help people avoid getting involved with Maharaji, or at least be able to do so with both sides of the story -- with more complete information.

I can't agree that Joan's or Michaels' 'exit stories' make any sense, at least to anyone who looks at them objectively. Also, Joan hasn't left. She doesn't even want to HEAR contradictory information. That's how out of it she is. I fear Michael is the same way, but with and aura of reasonableness that he is trying to present. I kind of feel for the guy. I don't think he realizes how kind of ridiculous, and full of holes, he sounds. But I am hopeful he might prove me wrong. I am not very confident of that, however. I have seen too much of how deep the denial really is.

Mark, I gotta disagree with you about Simpson, though. He wasn't convicted because the prosecution did a lousy job, but more because the people on the jury, with good reason, don't have any faith in the criminal justice system, because it clearly isn't fair. If you are black and male, the system is stacked against you. The jury knew that, and hence the holes in the bad prosecution got magnified. The jury wouldn't have been convicting themselves if they had found Simpson guilty. They weren't murderers. They just weren't about to give 'the system' the benefit of the doubt.

Nice to hear from you again. I hope you and yours are well.

JW

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:11:18 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: OJ (ot)
Message:
Joe, I think you are being WAY too easy on that jury.

The evidence was there, they had to know he did it. They let a murderer off and they had to know that was what they were doing.

I agree that black men are generally treated badly. But this black man, being a celebrity, was treated with deference no usual defendant would have.

It sure looked like that jury was taking revenge on all the injustice black people have suffered by letting a murderer off. Warped if you ask me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:23:20 (GMT)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Hey!
Message:
Hey, Susan. I agree the evidence was there. I mean, I think it was overwhelming. That's partly why I think the prosecution did a lousy job.

But don't you think there was plenty of reasons for the jury to doubt the veracity and ethics of the LA Police Department? I mean, the fact that they had a white supremecist investigator on the case, and that the police department has been framing people on a regular basis (note the Ramparts scandal that is now showing that publicly, but which I think was known well in the minority communities in LA for many years), would make a jury of African Americans doubt anything they said/did, and certainly the evidence the police gathered?

But I also agree, that had the found the pictures of Simpson wearing those shoes, which he denied ever owning, before the trial was over, then I think he would have been convicted, even by that jury.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:34:22 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Bruno Magli's (ot)
Message:
I don't. I think if there has been a videotape they would have let him off. I think the shoes would not have convicted him with the first jury.

When you look at the planting theory it is not just unlikely, but impossible. If they had wanted to see that, they would have.

Do I agree that their life experiences tell them to be suspicious of police, yes. But I think there was more too it than that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:40:48 (GMT)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Bruno Magli's (ot)
Message:
It's more than 'life experiences' Susan. It's actual experiences with the police department. The LA Police Department was a bunch of unregulated cowboys who think they are at war with the inner city population, and still is. They might be better off dissolving it and starting over. It doesn't have any credibility anymore, even with the white population, but it hasn't had any credibility with the minority population for years.

That alone might create 'reasonable doubt.' The other jury was a civil trial. Only money was at stake and the standard of proof was a lot lower. The prosecution in the criminal trial also did a lousy job explaining the DNA evidence and it didn't hurt that Simpson had the best defense lawyers money could buy, including THE expert on DNA evidence.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 17:51:40 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Bruno Magli's (ot)
Message:
I meant life experiences with being treated badly by police. I read a lot about this and I do know that what you are saying is true.

I just can't excuse them for letting him off. I am suprised you see it differently. Unless they were intellectually incapable of examining the consiracy theory piece by piece and seeing that it just wasn't possible. And it did not seem that they wanted to do that kind of examination. Mark Furman being a rascist just doesn't add up to 'OJ's innocent'. OJ was guilty and Furman was a rascist. Why does that mean you let a murderer go free?

Sadly, perhaps it was the years and years of our history in which black people had no chance of justice if a white man assaulted them. I am sure such places exist today. Of course they do there are many cases in the news. But that doesn't excuse it. We just can't let our society turn into a place in which murderers are not judged on their own crimes but are let off to prove a point and exact revenge, or give someone a taste of their own medicine. It is just wrong.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:38:17 (GMT)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Bruno Magli's (ot)
Message:
Susan, I did hear an interview with one of the jurors who said that if she had known about he shoes, that would have changed her mind.

I agree it was a travesty, but I think the LA police department has a lot of responsbility for the fact that the travesty happened.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:51:52 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Bruno Magli's (ot)
Message:
Wow. She could have at least hung the jury. But I wonder too, if it really would have changed it or if she just sincerely thinks it would have now but really it would not have. Hard to say.

I agree too that yes, the LAPD does have some, even lots of responsibility, as did many people including the prosecutors.

I am sure there are all sorts of killers out there that did just as bad or worse and got away we with. There is something though, about having followed the whole story, that makes it so unsettling.

My father, who I hardly knew, told me life was not fair. I have been battling the truth of that statement ever since.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:56:41 (GMT)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Bruno Magli's (ot)
Message:
Right. It also appears that the LA Police Department has convicted maybe hundreds or thousands of people who are INNOCENT. For me, that's worse. I think 50 so far have had their convictions overturned because some of the police finally got caught. At least Simpson had a 'fair trial.'

Yeah, life isn't fair. Look at Maharaji. He lives like a king by pretending to be 'the lord.' No, it isn't fair.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:38:58 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Mark A
Subject: Thanks for droppin in Mark, and great post! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 20:12:16 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Michael Dettmers interview
Message:
Jim- thank you so much for your interview with Michael Dettmers and Joan Apter. You had the courage, or chutzpah, to contact them and ask the questions that so many of us have had for years.
I really hope that Mr. Dettmers will openly and honestly respond to many of the questions that we have all had for so long.
Many times I have enjoyed reading what's on this site, but have also wished that some clear talk about many of these issues would emerge and some real, honest answers would come out of that dialogue. YOu mentioned one time that m promoting a meditation that gives one a good feeling is fine, but what bothered you was how he could lead us all on with the 'lord' trip one day, and discard it the next day. Some explanation is clearly needed, some apology is in order from m to us, and although many people believe that will never happen, I think it could, esp. if m realizes that a lot of people have not forgotten, and are willing to stand up and question him about his obvious hypocrisies. Many people have said, and I have had the same experience, that once we saw what was on the ex-premie site, we were never really the same again, and we are very greatful for the site, and the insight it has given us.

I have a lot more to say, and many questions for Mr. Dettmers as well, but I will say once again, thanks for your efforts, because they could very well be instrumental in getting some honest answers to some honest questions. This would go a long way towards healing many peoples lives, which I would assume is one of mr. rawats goals in life.(?)

I will pose more questions in the next few days, and would encourage others to do so in a civil manner. Perhaps they could all be collected and presented to Mr. Dettmers and other people who are around m in a fair and open manner and we could all grow a little bit.

Thanks Jim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:06:21 (GMT)
From: blood boils
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: Michael Dettmers' Tribunal
Message:
Now that the Michael Dettmers' Tribunal is underway on these pages it seems that it would be a nice idea for all of us to invite him. Send and invitation. Michael Dettmers

His genuine efforts to clarify his position on a number of issues may help his current promotions.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 05:11:15 (GMT)
From: ex-slave
Email: None
To: blood boils
Subject: Joan
Message:
I just read the Joan thread. What a horror. Joan is in the position of having to somehow avoid looking at her life because she was robbed so totally for so long and she is left with no self respect and nothing that she wanted from life.
She would have done better in life doing ANYTHING else. Going to india was a total disaster for her. A total waste of a life.

Do you know that rawat went to Joans hometown once and joan invited ALL her relatives to see the LORD that she had been talking about all these years. It was in about 84 and he was doing the question and answer bit. She introduced him and he criticised her introduction. Then, he talked about the bear going after honey and how the master loved devotion and made these lip smacking sounds and made faces that one freind I know that was there was embarrased and asked me if I saw that. I hadnt gone but I remember how it wierded out the premie.
Well, Joan's family was convinced that 'guru was greater than god' of course and I am sure they were all happy for Joan.

Denied a husband, kids, a home, a life of her own, her inheritance, her heart was decieved, and........................she is left in the classic abused child syndrome state............loving and protecting the abuser.

sad and disgusting.
If joan is a tattered wreck, what ELSE would an apologist need to see to realize the harmful fraud.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 05:59:04 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: ex-slave
Subject: Oh yeah, that's something ELSE I asked her
Message:
Denied a husband, kids...

When I was trying to make the point that no, I wasn't just falling into 'victim consciousness' and that maybe, just maybe, Maharaji had 'diverted' a few lives in his lifetime, I raised the issue of longtime ashram sisters missing the baby parade. Delicately, politely, I asked her if perhaps she herself had ever wondered if she hadn't somehow missed out. It was the one time she laughed at me. What a stupid question, huh? Well, that's 'victim consciousness' for you. One dumb question after another.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 13:44:09 (GMT)
From: Bill Burke
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: M. Dettmers, what about JOAN?
Message:
That she laughed when you mentioned loss is revealing I think.
How many times has she squelched her desires and propelled herself along the path of passionate lover of the living lord.
She obviously had drive and passion in her and she would have gone far in life if she had not been imprisoned in the confines of gopidom. She was lied to by the 'holy family' and she was lied to by prem rawat and he didnt let her off the hook for decades. When he DID discard her it was clearly with the understanding that SHE DID IT TO HERSELF and that it was a lesson by the master of life that all is illusion. HE of course had all that time to follow all HIS desires. SHE was just a pawn in his dream of divine right ultimate ruler.
All she was allowed to do with her passion and brain was think of him and long for him and think what he said to think and view life and family like he demanded and put up with all his abusive
'lilas'.

Mike, what is the spiritual purpose in that?

If you think she has not cried over this you are wrong. She is stung so deeply. She deserved the chance to have a passionate relationship with husband, (or life partner), kids, or her families kids, her siblings, parents, friends and nieghbors.
ALL were denied and rawat DEMANDED total and sole relationship.
Not fair Michael.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 13:35:52 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: MarianneDB@aol.com
To: Jim
Subject: Great work, Jim
Message:
I´m very impressed by your efforts. No time to write -- send me your email address.

Love, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 14:49:38 (GMT)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yes, very good work
Message:
... the Joan Apter and Michael Dettmers threads have been the most revealing in a long time.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 18:18:04 (GMT)
From: aspy
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Satellite Broadcast - April 9 - admission charges
Message:
For viewing in a community setting, the admission price is $40.00. This fee is called 'the cost, based on costs and estimated attendance'.

For home viewing the price is $25, see Special Broadcast

Note: they call this pay-per-view fee 'The cost of providing this broadcast, based on estimated attendance'.

At the Elan Vital web site, it is claimed:

Maharaji receives no compensation from Elan Vital. Voluntary contributions and sales of its materials support Elan Vital in the US. Admission to events is free of charge.

Would any premies like to try to explain this away? Please, I would like to see what you come up with.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:40:41 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: aspy
Subject: They're suggested donations; I've paid none. nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 11:44:59 (GMT)
From: Raja Ji
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: Neither have I (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:12:56 (GMT)
From: Premie police
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: I didn't read anything about 'suggested donation'.
Message:
Whats this shit about 'suggested donation'? It says cost. And you translate that to 'suggested donation'? What kind of premie are you? When they say the cost of viewing is $40.00/$25.00, they expect you to pay.

In your case, did you view, without paying, a broadcast in a community setting or at home? I don't see how it is possible to view at home without paying unless you viewed at someone's home without paying. Is that what you did? You're not supposed to do that you know, each viewer is supposed to pay.

Are you unemployed? Are you in any kind of privileged position? Or did you just sneak in like some kind of ingrateful slime?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:42:57 (GMT)
From: Your contact person
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: shame, shame, naughty, naughty (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:51:27 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: NOT MY contact person
Subject: It's a shame if you let yourself be shamed. nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:59:37 (GMT)
From: Your contact person
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: Put your money where your mouth is...
Message:
...or should I say 'where your heart is.'

You mean to tell me that you go to the location where the satellite feed is playing, you watch the Master and get all inspired, and you don't do anything at all to help pay for the substantial costs that all the rest of us are helping to pay for?

Are you always such a freeloader, you miserable excuse for a premie?

Are you handicapped, or what?

You better not be in my community or I'm telling!

p.s. happy new breath!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:06:54 (GMT)
From: Robbie
Email: None
To: Your contact person
Subject: 'Your contact person' is just another liar
Message:
MY BE YOU SHOULD WASH YOUR MOUTH?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:24:01 (GMT)
From: Your contact person
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: Re:'Your contact person' is just another liar
Message:
Well, Robbie, what was your first clue?

(Glad to see you corrected your spelling).

But, come on, guys, admit it. In my little masquerade on this thread, I do make a fairly legitimate point that there exists a certain group pressure in premieland. Eh? Always has, always will. It's human nature. In any group. And if you claim to have risen above human nature and are now immune to shame, then the word 'liar' comes to mind.

It's ironic, but it is amazingly more easy to speak the truth as an ex than it ever is for premies. For premies, what wears the mask of truth is often wishful thinking and misplaced idealism. Oh seeker of Truth, let me tell you, don't be hoodwinked by the appearance and words of the Great One. As long as you defend the person who you don't even know, you will be singing false praises. Know thyself, and dump the guru. He's a third party, and always will be.

Anyway, gotta go, so I'll let somebody else take over this delightful thread.

p.s. I'm not really your contact person, so breath easy, brother.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:31:58 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: YCP
Subject: Solution: join the magic, but not the group.
Message:
You don't have to be a hippie to enjoy the love-in.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 01:39:49 (GMT)
From: Reg Premie-Smyth
Email: padded.cell@asylum.com
To: Q
Subject: Solution: join the magic, but not the group.
Message:
What's all this nonsense about love? Premies hate each other and so they should do. I don't leave my padded cell with my nurse to go and meet some premies! I hate premies and they hate me and we all hate each other and that's because we have the one true master who teaches us about THAT love and THAT place and who is the only one we should love (but our minds hate him and wish he would go back to India and stay there).
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:07:42 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: You sound like Deputy Dog, are you?
Message:
You sound like Deputy Dog, are you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 19:06:32 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: G
Subject: no (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 16:41:57 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: jmkahn@club-internet.fr
To: Everyone
Subject: Calling London Latvians!
Message:
Please Anth and Marianne, check your email.

CQG and JHB, would you email me, I've something for you !

JM

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 12:20:38 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: quartus@postmaster.co.uk
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Calling London Latvians!
Message:
Calling London Latvians!

email address above, JM

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 14:44:51 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: It's only castles burning...
Message:
Jerry started a thread below, where he asked, “When did you first doubt Maharaji?”

It set me thinking, and what came up was quite scary. I really don’t think I doubted that he was the ‘Lord’, until I discovered Ex-Premie.org and the Forum. That makes over 25 years of faithful, one pointed devotion.

Doubt is the enemy of the devotee. It’s the door in the castle wall where the besieging army can sneak in and kill the king. Doubt is bad. Faith is good.

Doubting Maharaji is the same as doubting God- because for a premie, ‘God’ and ‘Maharaji’ mean the same thing. I remember several times examining the possibility of ‘doubt’. I’d consider it the same way I’d consider getting into a wrap of smack. It was the entrance to a scary world where everything is liable to go out of control and end up a mess.

Even when it became clear that his ‘mission’ wasn’t working out as planned, and the lion wasn’t going to get laid by the lamb, we weren’t all enlightened, and, even after practising hard for 25 years, Kali Yuga was stronger than ever and premies were just as crazy as ever, still I didn’t doubt, because it was all a ‘lila’, the Lord’s cosmic game, set up for me personally.

If I doubted, I was going to make life much more difficult for myself- I could be lost forever in delusion, illusion and confusion. Better hold tight to those lotus feet.

When I finally did quit, even then it didn’t seem like I was doubting. It all happened too fast.

It was as if a gust of wind suddenly blew the paper castle down. Standing looking at the pile of rubble, doubt wasn’t an issue. Everything was as plain as the nose on my face. The castle had been paper all along. See, you can even rip it and set fire to it.

The weird thing is, if it was real and true- if there was a God, and he or she did decide to stroll around in all her glory, doubt would be irrelevant anyway. You could slash the paper castle and the stone would blunt your blade.

But in the meantime, why don't we all start playing with matches.

Anth the Paper Tiger

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 15:37:27 (GMT)
From: Deputy Dog
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Fire cannot burn it... (nt)
Message:
sdkfjlksdjf
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 16:10:25 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: Deputy Dog
Subject: Fire cannot burn it...
Message:
Nice words...True to what, though...? Just because you believe something is true doesn't mean it is... Why do you DD need Maharaji? Please answer me...
S
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:24:40 (GMT)
From: Deputy Dog
Email: None
To: SB
Subject: SB - Inspiration (nt)
Message:
dafg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 15:33:59 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: Deputy Dog
Subject: Inspiration?
Message:
In what department do you need inspiration?? Do you need inspiration to live your life? I would like to hear DD why do you need GMJ to inspire you. What would you lose without his inspiration?

love,

S

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 12:35:40 (GMT)
From: Robbie
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Are expremies liers?
Message:
In a post below Jim states that the mistress story was a fake.
What else?
This tread was deleted by the administrator. Why?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:25:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: No and no and a damned good question (I think)
Message:
Robbie,

Like Susan said -- like I said myself right there and then -- I was joking. That's your first 'no'. Your second is for saying that the thread was deleted. It wasn't. My post is called 'My interview with Dettmers'.

Here's the question: if the mistress story was untrue that would be significant somehow, right? It would vindicate Maharaji in your eyes? Fine, I agree. But what then does it mean if the story is in fact true? Nothing?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 20:44:31 (GMT)
From: Robbie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I sent this thread 3 times. It was deleted twice.
Message:
Why????
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 15:09:21 (GMT)
From: Are you clicking
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: your 'Submit' button once (to preview) or twice?
Message:
If you click to 'Submit' you will get a preview of how your message will appear. You must then click on 'Post message' to confirm. If you don't realise this (or forget) and click 'Back' instead, your message will not appear.

You haven't posted anything that would get you deleted, as far as I can see, so I think you must be mistaken.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 16:15:36 (GMT)
From: Robbie
Email: None
To: Are you clicking
Subject: Webmaster deleted my thread twice
Message:
posted 3 times within 5 hours.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:33:13 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: Webmaster deleted my thread twice
Message:
Webmasters:

To prevent this kind of confusion happening again, is there any chance that the 'submit' button can be re-labelled 'preview'?

(After all, right above it are the words: 'Check this box to skip Preview').




PS A message will not be posted until the 'Post Message' box is clicked.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 08:14:14 (GMT)
From: Forum Administrator
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: No chance (nt)
Message:
..nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 20:11:02 (GMT)
From: Robbie
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Yes, Webmaster deleted my thread twice
Message:
Come on cq, even the replies to my posts were deleted. I checked after posting it, and it was there, then it was gone together with the replies, and I posted again and the same thing happened.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 09:49:40 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Webmaster/mistress
Subject: Yes, Webmaster deleted my thread twice
Message:
So it's over to Webmaster/mistress:

Any statement/re-iteration of policy forthcoming on this? I know we're all guests on this site, but nonetheless, I for one would appreciate an explanation, at least so we know where we AND you stand on this important matter.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 14:23:29 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: mistress story
Message:
Robbie, the mistress story is NOT a fake. I am sure there have been things posted here that were wrong. I think some of the Claudia stuff was wrong. In fact, someone said she was dead and she is not dead, she is apparently living happily. But the Monica Lewis story I have heard from those who are in a position to know and that one appears to be true.

Read what Jim wrote again, he was joking.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 12:58:25 (GMT)
From: Can ANY of
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: you premie flamers spell even the simplest words?
Message:
(nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:09:23 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Can ANY of
Subject: you premie flamers spell even the simplest words?
Message:
I've found that many people who post here with lousy grammar do so because English is a second language to them. This is the global village, after all. I've learned to give people like Robbie the benefit of the doubt that English isn't their native tongue. Christ, you certainly wouldn't want to hear, or read, my Spanish.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 22:55:09 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Also...
Message:
Some people haven't had much schooling and should not be ridiculed because of it. Gee, I sound like such an understanding bloke today. I wonder what's come over me. Maybe I'm creating a new reality, one that a kinder, more gentle, Jerry will exist in.

Sigh.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:44:48 (GMT)
From: Harry
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Also...
Message:
Hey hang on a minute Jerry. Are you saying you create your own reality? If reality is 'Truth' as you say, then how can you change it? Is 'Truth' somewhat fluid, or set in stone?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:11:58 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Harry
Subject: Are you serious?
Message:
Harry,

I was joking, being wry. I don't know if you realized that. But here's a perfect example of missing reality. I was being wry but don't think you caught it. Also, I'm not sure if you were just being wry in return. Were you?

If reality is 'Truth' as you say, then how can you change it? Is 'Truth' somewhat fluid, or set in stone?

If this is a serious question, it's too deep for me. What you're doing is assuming that everything that's of normal consciousness is an illusion, since that all includes change, and that there is some other consciousness to aspire toward where everything is constant, never changing. I've never known of such a consciousness myself.

To me, things change. That's reality. Some people say that consciousness, itsef, is the unchanging reality, but that, to me, is a concept which is somewhat surreal since the very nature of consciousness is still hotly debated between the materialists, (of which I am one), and the spiritualists.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 06:48:43 (GMT)
From: Harry
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Who, me? You'll love this.
Message:
I've been off-line for a few days.Yeah, I was being a mite wry (nice word). Having said that, let me say this; that I do think we create our reality up to a point. I haven't worked out what that point is though. The mind and its relationship to the universe is a big, glorious mystery, as is the mind, and who knows what we're capable of. I have a friend in his sixties who does affirmations and stuff like that (I do too); one being that the next 60 years will be better than the last, and that every year he is getting biologically younger - true, I kid you not. He is leaving for Base Camp on Mt Everist this year, and I reckon he could climb to the top. He survives on Tim Tams ( biscuits) and red wine and is as fit as a Mallee Bull. I think we're creating our reality every day, but most people just let it happen to them. Of course, this doesn't explain starving kids, etc, but there is something going on for sure. I feel that there is something out 'there' that responds to our energy. I can't explain it, but I Know this to be true.
Re 'Truth' and 'Reality'. I suspect they're expanding with the Universe, as are we.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 15:16:21 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Harry
Subject: I'm so pretty, I'm so pretty....
Message:
Harry,

The only reality that affirmation is going to create is how you feel about yourself. Mother nature and the rest of the world might not feel the same way, though. I guess if you walk around saying to yourself, 'I'm beautiful, I'm beautiful, I'm beautiful...', all the time, you're going to add a little sunshine in your life that might not otherwise be there, and people might respond to you in a more positve light, if they don't find you somewhat overbearing, as I do people who are all hyped up on this stuff, those who go to far. But reality is something that we really have so little control of. That's reality. Here's what St. Francis had to say about it;

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference

I think he was more in tune with reality than people at 60 telling themselves that they're only going to get younger in the 60 years to come. But if it's just a smile you're looking to put on your face, why stop at 60? Me? I'm going to be the most virile, vibrant person on the planet for a HUNDRED years to come. And if that affirmation don't work, well there's always that song from West Side Story to sing to give me a boost;

I'm so pretty, I'm so pretty
I'm so pretty and giddy and er...

No, maybe I'd better sing a different one.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 18:02:18 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Thought you meant the Sex Pistols there! (nt)
Message:
Thought you meant the Sex Pistols there! (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:39:03 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: or....
Message:
It's this media. Happens to me all the time. It's impossible to express onself fully in a post.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:47:05 (GMT)
From: Harry
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: or....
Message:
Selenie, it would help if you did a spell-check ;)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:53:37 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Harry
Subject: my image is already shot Harry
Message:
I know. What can I say? As I said, soon I'll be washing underwear at the RES insead of computing. Is it the meds ??
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 23:57:42 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: of course that last typo was intentional
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 00:10:54 (GMT)
From: trixie
Email: None
To: thread
Subject: My 'reply' to Robbie was deleted last night.
Message:
Late last night.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 03:12:52 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: trixie
Subject: I've had lots of posts deleted
Message:
Wanted to start a contest a few months ago, I think I would have won.. most posts deleted in last 3 months or something.

The reason I have been given is when a post is deleted somewhere in a thread the whole thread tends to go away. A software
'glitch' .... I don't know.
I figure I'll let it go. Whatever. It's kind of amusing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:24:44 (GMT)
From: trixie
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: I was thinking Robbie geeked into my computer
Message:
or else had the forum boss taped to the swivel chair while he messed around with the controls and made sure that my anti robbie post never stayed on screen.

This IS Robbie of Rob I hope and not the guy who was in the hospital way back. I get the names confused.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:32:57 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: trixie
Subject: trixie what planet did you come from?
Message:
Just kidding. Don't remember you.
and.....I don't know any forum history. The shock therapy I received this summer erased it all from my mind.
:)
It didn't kill me so I guess I'm stronger.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 08:16:51 (GMT)
From: Trixie
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Selene SSShhhh
Message:
Nanu Nanu!
I have never had shock treatment but may do if any of my alias s get stroppy. My alter ego is in love with Dobie Gillis. 9:-))
and she thinks hes Rob too.
Love
Trixie
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:15:44 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Trixie
Subject: I think Robbie is Pierre
Message:
Remember Pierre? He had a hard time with posts being 'deleted' too. And he 'sounded' just like Robbie. Fancy that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 19:53:31 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: I think I'd like to be Selene ...
Message:
...but htis is the real world (remember? ... vaguely) even if we do get it sometimes backwards.

THE POSTS WEREN'T DELETED (or were they?)

NO!

...it's just that we punched 'submit post' thinking we were submitting our post. It was submitted - but only to the preview page.

'Post Message' is the button that shares you with the world.


Ohhhh.... PostMeister ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:02:10 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: huh? cq you need a vacation
Message:
and I know just the place.

be careful what you ask for......
You really do not want to be me. you are fine just the way you are.

Look I am not defending Robbie but I do have to defend meself here. When my posts, several of em, were deleted I know I pushed the correct buttons. I'm good at that.

Don't be mad. Thanks for the email. Theresa is better.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 05:17:27 (GMT)
From: Trixie
Email: None
To: Selene et al
Subject: Fact: Robs posts were deleted OFF OF THE FORUM
Message:
I posted a reply to him and they were both on the screen on the index and then they were removed. I know because after I made a cup of coffee and came back to continue the assault, the thread was gone.
This is not a case of submit button mix up.

Unless the computer glytchs extend to removal of threads, somebody done it

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:09:54 (GMT)
From: oh and ps from Selene
Email: None
To: all
Subject: I am NOT trixie!! nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:17:13 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: all
Subject: ok while I am at it
Message:
might as well do it.
Dare I say it the evil guideline word? wasn't there some sort of agreement, informal as it was, about anonymity. That one would stick to one alias so as to avoid general mayhem and confusion, fun as it may be for that individual it is NOT fun for me to be confused and/or associated with such. hmmpphh.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 03:07:15 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: ok while I am at it
Message:
No one's confused Selene.
Do you see 'general mayhem and confusion'? Where?? :::)))

And don't worry about 'Trixie' trying to imitate you.

You're inimitable baby, and you know it!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 04:09:24 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Hi Joey
Message:
It was one of those days. I'M confused.
As for general mayhem and all, it comes and goes.

It doesn't help to have people using 3, 4, or 5 different names but hey Fuck It. As I said, it was one of those days.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:12:08 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Hi Selenie
Message:
Well then, you just have yourself a better day, today:)

Luv ya,

Joey

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 00:17:39 (GMT)
From: trixie
Email: None
To: thread
Subject: Betcha Robbie smells 'press'..
Message:
so he has jumped in in an effort to mingle and spar. Accusations of Liar Liar will eventually lead to a accusations about the 'press coverage'

Robbie you are so obvious
Now deny it

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:26:01 (GMT)
From: Mr D
Email: vpost3@hotmail.com
To: trixie
Subject: That's my job, Trixie
Message:
Trixie wrote:

'This IS Robbie of Rob I hope '

Now I'm the one who's supposed to accuse everybody of being Rob. But in this case I doubt that Robbie is Rob. Rob after all used to be able to spell. Plus he wore a kilt and played the bagpipes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 08:06:51 (GMT)
From: Trixie
Email: None
To: Mr D
Subject: But Mr D have you seen the pattern in his
Message:
kilt- I mean style?
Chummy manly comments. Close in so his redish arm hairs touch yours.
boozy swings at a subject. Defensive about M until he gets too obvious, then hes cavalier about his critism.
He slides in on a DIFFERENT thread than the one which concerns him then circles till his pet worry is blurted out by someone hes been baiting.
Rob said he was a Gemini. This Robbie is sticking to the patterns of Rob.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 08:49:05 (GMT)
From: Robbie
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: I cant spell, but how stupid can you guys be?
Message:
I HAVE NO WORDS.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 11:17:05 (GMT)
From: Mr D
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: What's up? The wind get under your kilt? (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 10:17:54 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Robbie
Subject: Not that stupid
Message:
Are you Pierre?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 18:31:00 (GMT)
From: trixie
Email: None
To: Thread
Subject: Stupid Rob wore his..
Message:
Supposed Mensa badge on his arm. In truly bad taste he referred to it when he hoped it might intimidate or mask his sloppy nightclub style.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 07:19:19 (GMT)
From: Albert Einstein
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: from my memoirs
Message:
Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature,and therefore this holds for the actions of people. For this reason a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a supernatural Being.

However it must be admitted that our actual knowledge of these laws is only imperfect and fragmentary, so that, actually. the belief in the existance of basic all-embracing laws in Nature also rests on a sort of faith. All the same this faith has been largely justified so far by the success of scientific research.

But, on the other hand, everyone who is seriously involved in the persuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the persuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:34:06 (GMT)
From: blood boils
Email: None
To: Albert Einstein
Subject: from my memoirs 'that's a keeper' (nt)
Message:
aaaa
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:32:16 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: blood boils
Subject: from my memoirs 'that's a keeper' (nt)
Message:
Hey, did you have a good fart?:::)))
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 06:55:41 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Something bothers me
Message:
I still hope for an evolution of myself and humanity towards an awareness of tolerance and understanding.

One of the reasons I'm not interested in being a premie is because I could not any longer see how Maha's little cult could bring anything other than exclusiveness and division and spiritual arrogance.I can't see real human evolution happening whilst one group believes it holds the key to Truth and all the others are misguided , lost or evil.

Divisions, divisions. I'm right you're wrong. Jesus is the only way. No Krishna! Buddhism, nihilism, all the isms including Atheism (just another belief). Well bollox to all that!

We humans have great potential for compassion and nobility of spirit, understanding and even Love. IMO one important process in reaching this potential is to dissolve the petty ego arguments over what is the correct belief system and to respect the sovereignty of the individual to choose their path in life. Having said that I acknowledge the necessity for laws which discourage people from abusing other's rights.

I'm talking about respect for other's beliefs and perspectives and the right to choose the lifestyle one decides upon (within the law) without others attacking viciously one's choice. Discussion ? Sure, wonderful. Biggoted attack???

There appears to me to be a good guys bad guys thing here on the forum.Cowboys and Indians shit. Premies who post here, even when they're not defending M or preaching are dismissed as being morons or new age idiots. I don't like it very much. It just doesn't feel good to me so I'm not intending to participate too much in this forum in future. So good riddance to new age dreamer Hal. I won't say I'm leaving because I've learnt to never say never. Bye for now anyway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 05:28:29 (GMT)
From: bb
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Something bothers me
Message:
Hi Hal,
Well, how about OLD age views?
Kind of a silly tag 'new age', books, tapes, ect.
Maybe OLD age has more respect or something so........what are your OLD age views? Views expoused by villagers throughout the ages. I know the health food stores have all these chinese and indian products that CLAIM to have 'been used for 5,000 years'
which is not true of course. What were the OLD age views of those who lived before all the religions got so big? Probably you could guess some good guesses.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:04:53 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: bb
Subject: To bb
Message:
BB
Just read your post above 'Not fair Michael' and it was really well put. I'm finding a bit more understanding coming about all this through reading some of the really excellent posts on this forum. I have to admit certain things about myself and one is that I am still often in a 'premie mode' or 'spiritual seeker' mode. I guess it'll take me longer than I thought to see this in a truly different perspective.

Cheers Hal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 20:54:31 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Hal - What's wrong with being a seeker of truth?
Message:
What's wrong with being a seeker of truth, 'spiritual' or otherwise? Each individual deserves to be given the freedom and peace of mind to think for him/herself and come to his/her own conclusions. There are two kinds of contol/enslavement - one is through seduction - m/premie style for example, the other is through intimidation. Both types are here, the latter being in greater force. (and not in the sense of 'May the Force be with you.')

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 22:26:06 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Hal - What's wrong with being a seeker of truth?
Message:
Well apparently there is nothing wrong with being a seeker of small t truth but the big T Truth is connected to a premie mind set or something so I'm told. I don't know I'm confused at present. I sure don't feel as empowered as I did when I used to meditate daily.

I think that what I need to learn is not to be too open about my heartfelt stuff on here and if I do come back on ' toe the truculent, angry, aggressive party line.

Someone told me the following in a previous thread. Although I rejected M I'm still in a premie mindset and just using this forum for my own selfish reasons and then vomiting on everyone here. You'd better ask Occ Observer and Joey , they know better than I do .

Hal the confused wondering where I belong idiot.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:33:47 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Read 'The Guru Papers', Hal
Message:
I think you'll find the book extremely helpful. Seriously.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 15:43:13 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: and what's wrong with being a meditator?
Message:
Hal,

It seems to me that some people who post here (both premie and ex) are under the impression that meditation and the Maha are part and parcel of the same package (mixed metaphor, but I hope you get the meaning). IMO, such an impression is misguided.

OK, so the supposed “secret” of meditation is what M baits the hook of his personality cult with, but those of us who are fortunate enough to have wriggled off that hook need not, as a consequence, become soured towards any/all kinds of meditation by association.

When I first started posting here last autumn, I could hardly bear to look at his name in print, much less write it. Slowly it dawned on me that, even though I had left DLM nearly a quarter of a century earlier, that Maharaji feller still had some of his bloody hooks in me.

I’m not entirely de-sensitised to/independent of him even now - witness my continued communications here. I think I’ll know when the final hook is out - that’s when meditation happens with absolutely no thought of M at all, and that might just coincide with my moving on from this Forum. [I’d still email those friends and acquaintances I’ve made here - but probably without referring to the Maha much (if at all) in those mails.]

If the ideas I’ve expressed here push any buttons for the likes of Occasional Observer (who does more than just observe!) and Joey, well, - deal with it guys (- and let us know how you feel, if it helps). There’s no need for a ‘party line’ here, and if one appears to be forming, it’s something that I personally prefer NOT to encourage. The more diversity of opinion the healthier, I think (but feel free to disagree!).




PS What the hell was that all about “using the Forum for selfish reasons”? Said from the depths of selflessness was it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:16:54 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: and what's wrong with being a meditator?
Message:
If the ideas I’ve expressed here push any buttons for the likes of Occasional Observer (who does more than just observe!) and Joey, well, - deal with it guys (- and let us know how you feel, if it helps). There’s no need for a ‘party line’ here, and if one appears to be forming, it’s something that I personally prefer NOT to encourage. The more diversity of opinion the healthier, I think (but feel free to disagree!).

No cq, you really haven't pushed any buttons for me. Everything you've said in your post is totally relatable.
But I don't believe my objections to Hal's posts are based on forming a 'party line' that is anti-God or anti-meditation.
As far as God goes I still believe, and as far as meditation goes...it may benefit some, and then there are others who should stay away from it. Those are pretty much my views.

ButI DO object to the tags that Hal has used in labelling ex-premies.
Jim who has spent alot of time sharing his views with Hal in order to help him break free from the cult, has been called by Hal, 'dumb and impervious to reason.'
Jerry who has engaged in several civil and encouraging exchanges with Hal, has been called 'nasty', when he expressed doubts about Dettmers sicerity as to his version of why he really parted ways with m.
And when attempting to make the point that there was something very fundamentally fanatical about being a premie, that this was still a cult of idol worshippers...well Hal turned around to accuse me of being guilty of 'religious intolerance.'

Down below, there's also another post from 'blood boiling' implying that there are fools and madmen participating on this forum.

Now I'll tell you this cq. As individuals and as a group I know we certainly have our faults. But I don't believe for a minute that as former cult members we are the kind of people characterized by these terms, and it bothers me that ANYONE would contribute to this unseemly picture, by so freely throwing out the kind of labels that Hal as.

FInally with all these negative tags being thrown at us, here's ANOTHER description of former cult members, one that's a little more positive.

...They have had an unusual life experience which, with a healthy sense of perspective, will surely foster a deeper appreciation for freedom. Former members of destructive cults are survivors. They should acknowledge their own strength and power. If they can come through their cult experiences, then they can make it through just about anything. (from Steve Hassan's, 'Combatting Cult Mind Control)

Just thought I'd end it on a positive note:)

Take care, cq, and,

All the Best,

Joey

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 00:29:14 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Excuse me Joey
Message:
I'm trying to get of this forum but I must correct a couple of inaccuracies, seeing as you are such a stickler for detail.

I didn't refer to Jim in my moment of frustration as dumb and impervious to reason. I did call him dense and impervious but I would never suggest that Jim is dumb because he is far more intelligent than me I assume. Also I would not describe him as being impervious to reason as he lives his life by reasoning things out very well.

Jim has assisted me by offering alternative ways of viewing the issues and I respect him and have appreciation of him.That doesn't mean that I have to pranam and agree with everything he says. Jim also plays tough , or hadn't you noticed?

I really don't think Jim needs you to defend him against little old me, do you? You seem to enjoy trying to stomp on me and it's been going on ever since I first dared to venture a different opinion than yours some time ago. If you can't handle someone disagreeing with you on a mere idea then you really are going to find this forum increasingly frustrating. I now notice you are now jumping all over' blood boils'just because you imagine he was critisising you personally.

I also didn't call Jerry nasty, What the hell if I did call someone nasty anyway? I have seen you call people a lot worse than 'nasty'. Did you major in hypocricy?

Anyway little Joey I'm taking a sabbatical so you'll need to find someone else to play tough guy with.

( I'm proud of myself for keeping that fairly civil you fu...........oops! )

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Apr 06, 2000 at 04:23:48 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Excuse me Hal
Message:
It's interesting to me Hal how you play with words.

It's true that Jim doesn't need me to defend him, but that wasn't the main point of my post.

The fact of the matter is that in every instance you've blown a cork here you've ended up puking over some of the people who have been reaching out to you, and in your latest epiphany, for reasons incomprehensible not only to myself but to others as well.

You seem to enjoy trying to stomp on me and it's been going on ever since I first dared to venture a different opinion than yours some time ago.

Now this is a prime example of how you twist things around.
You ventured not just a different opinion, but you accused me of 'religious intolerance,' just because I ventured a different opinion from you.

If you can't handle someone disagreeing with you on a mere idea then you really are going to find this forum increasingly frustrating.

Well you might want to think about that while you're on sabattical, Hal. BTW, whaddya gonna do next? Go over and whine about it at Recent Exes?

( I'm proud of myself for keeping that fairly civil you fu...........oops! )

Ta ta, Mr. Bullshit Civility...we'll see ya whenever.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:25:35 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: cq and Hal
Subject: meditation vs Maharaji
Message:
When I 'received Knowledge', i.e. when I learned the old-style techniques, what I wanted was to learn how to meditate, I didn't know what I was getting myself into. My main motivation was that I wanted to feel more peaceful and happy. I didn't 'receive' it because I thought he was God. Actually I was rather perplexed as to what all the fuss over him was about, I saw him as a figurehead. I didn't view it as him giving me 'grace', I bought into that a little, but not really, not literally. The problem was that I didn't recognise the danger in going through the motions of devotion, and I didn't know what he was really about. Once you start pretending, it starts getting a hold of you. It took a few years for Rawat to really brainwash me. Also, moving away from him has been a gradual process.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 03:36:42 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Hal - there is something good about being a seeker
Message:
of Truth. And I'm ready to argue that with any materialist here. Materialist atheism does not make sense. There's also nothing wrong with meditating. That's not my issue with Maharaji. You don't to submit to the truculent, angry, aggressive party line. Stand your ground.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 04:54:56 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Hal - there is something good about being a seeker
Message:
Hey G,

Hal can do whatever he wants, including going back to being a premie, if that's what he chooses. But seeking the truth doesn't necesarilly mean searching for God, or anything spiritual for that matter. It just may be that the truth is there is no God, and our universe, as we know it, and will ever know it, is entirely the result of how matter and energy has come together to form human consciousness and intelligence. And it's also feasible that without that evolution of matter and energy, there would be no consciousness at all. It certainly looks that way to me.

And finally, it's only because of Jim's domineering presense that it looks like the skeptic's view is the one held by the majority, but if you were to make a list, you'd find that skeptics are actually in the minority around these parts. While new agers pop up by the dozen, it's a rare breath of fresh air when a new skeptic climbs on board.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 20:25:41 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: 'Domineering'?
Message:
Jerry,

Oxford --

domineer: behave arrogantly or tyrannically.

Et tu, Brute?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:40:24 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: 'Domineering'?
Message:
Funny, Jim. How's about 'Jim's POWERFUL presense'? Would that be better? And Caesar never actually said that. What he actually said was 'And thou, Brutus, my child!' Caesar had an affair with Brutus' mother for some twenty years and thought Brutus might be his son. Betcha didn't know that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:09:52 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: seeking Truth or truth
Message:
No, it doesn't necessarily mean seeking 'God' or something conceptually labeled 'spiritual'. But it does mean trying to get to the heart of things, including seeing past overly-simplistic concepts like 'matter' and 'energy'. Labeling consciousness at 'material' is just as conceptual as labeling it 'spiritual'. All we really know is that we experience it. What we believe about it doesn't change it. What is most important is to experience it.

Materialists who label themselves skeptics are, IMO, kidding themselves. It also shows a certain arrogance. How skeptical are you about your own belief system? I see value in real skepticism, so why not take partial skepticism a step further? I brought up some problems with the materialist philosophy in prior posts. I got no response. Why? Without turning on the skeptical spotlight to examine this belief system, you are not truly a skeptic. Maybe you cling into this belief because you fear the unknown or want to believe you have a handle on what's going on. 'Matter' and 'energy', we don't even know what they are. Can you give a clear and thorough definition of these terms? What are they made of, where did they come from? In 'matter is a form of energy', what exactly does 'form' mean? What causes it to take form? Consider that the most brilliant physicists, while not being theistic, have not taken the materialist stand either.

In a time of great doubt about things 'spiritual', I did consider the materialist viewpoint, which I thought at first was just 'atheistic'. But upon careful examination, I found that it has too many logical problems and there is too much evidence against it. I doubt very much that it is true.

You wrote about 'new agers' and so-called 'skeptics' (read materialists). Do you believe there are no other categories? Anybody who is not a materialist is a 'new ager'?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:30:18 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: G
Subject: seeking Truth or truth
Message:
Way,

I'm not a scientist, so I'm not going to argue with you as if I am. I've got a layman's understanding of what science is about, the same as you. You ask what is 'matter', what is 'energy'? Look it up. I really don't have all the time in the world to teach you about it. I'd have to review what I've read about it myself. And personally, I think you're just playing dumb. You've read the books. You never came across these terms and what they mean? I think you should pay a little more attention when you're reading if that's the case. You're not going to learn very much if you're so inattentive.

As for no response to problems you've brought up concerning the materialist viewpoint, you're outright lying there. What have we been doing here, if not arguing the 'problems' since we've met on this forum? I think what it boils down to is that some people just don't want to see what's right under their noses, EVEN WITHOUT AN EDUCATION IN SCIENCE, that everything we know is a result of what this physical body allows us to, everything we see, hear, touch, feel, and think. Without the body, a living one, there is NOTHING.

If you don't believe me, pay a visit to the morgue and tell me what you see. Just don't let your imagination run wild on you, and you might see things the way they really are. In the morgue is the end of the line, pal. Only because people have vivid imaginations can we see more than that, but it's just our imaginations that do. And where do you suppose the imagination rests? Why, in a living body. Surprise, surprise. Stop being such a jerkoff and just look at it the way it IS. You are into consciousness, aren't you? Then be conscious. In consciousness, this is it. Period. There is nothing else.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:27:06 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: you entirely missed my point
Message:
I go by 'G', not Way. And don't call me a jerkoff, I don't call you names.

I wasn't asking you to teach me what 'matter' and 'energy' are, I was pointing out that even the brightest physicists don't know what they are, and that is something they themselves admit. Basically, you believe that everything is made up of this conceptual 'stuff' out there, you don't know what it is, but by golly, everything is made of it, and that's that.

you're outright lying

I'm not 'outright lying', I brought up some issues that were not responded to. Just one example, when two paired particles emerge in a gas chamber, where do they come from? If you are going to attack other belief systems, shouldn't you be willing to deal with criticisms of your beliefs?

Without the body, a living one, there is NOTHING.

What did you get this Knowledge from?

pay a visit to the morgue and tell me what you see

I've already seen dead bodies. 'NOTHING' is just in your imagination.

You are into consciousness, aren't you? Then be conscious. In
consciousness, this is it. Period. There is nothing else.

What are you saying?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:05:44 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: G
Subject: you entirely missed my point
Message:
G,

I called you a jerkoff because I feel as if YOU are jerking ME around. I feel that way about anybody who presents the kind of argument that you do. You go into corners of the unknown and say 'see, see, goes to show you how much YOU know!' Me? I just try to present an argument based upon what's known, and what we can discern from that.

I brought up some issues that were not responded to. Just one example, when two paired particles emerge in a gas chamber, where do they come from?

To be honest, I couldn't tell you and didn't respond because I haven't the slightest idea. Maybe someday they'll find out. Were you expecting an answer from us on this? Seriously. What are you trying to prove? That because scientists haven't got all the answers, they don't know anything? Well, maybe they don't know where these particles emerge from, but they do know they're there. That's a start, don't you think?

When I was talking about there being NOTHING when you're dead, I was saying that dead bodies don't see nothing, they don't hear nothing, they don't feel nothing, they don't think nothing, etc, etc. Do you think they do?

You are into consciousness, aren't you? Then be conscious. In consciousness, this is it. Period. There is nothing else.

What I mean by this is that consciousness is always in the present, G. It never exists anywhere else. The question is, where does it come from? Based upon those dead bodies in the morgue, I'd say it's a property only the living have.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:52:40 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: those particles
Message:
I'm not intending to jerk you around, and I'm not only appealing to the unknown.

I'm not saying scientists don't know anything, just that there is still much left unknown. There was nothing anti-scientist in what I said. What I'm getting at about the particles is that whatever they are emerging from, it is not something material as we know it, and it is not absolute nothingness.

No, I don't believe that dead bodies see, hear, feel, or think.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 20:14:40 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: G
Subject: With all due respect, G
Message:
G,

I like you just fine outside of this subject. But inside, it's another story. I really get Jerry's point and was going to say it myself but then he did. You really do come off as someone trying to protect your own magical thinking with a blatant appeal to ignorance: 'if scientists can't explain 'x' how can we say for sure that 'y' doesn't exist?'. I don't think you'd get that far with that extremely weak and tenuous argument on its own. but you couple it with this haughty disdain you express for scientists (all but the few 'real ones' you imagine are right in there with you, scoffing at their mere 'materialist' colleagues who, unlike you and them, don't have the vision, or even sense of logic, to see clearly).

What's funny is that you swear up and down that you don't really think you're sharper than the scientific community when confronted. But you sure do make it sound like you do, G! Their 'illogical' this and 'illogical' that. It's a wonder they're not premies!

No, G, you talk out of both sides of your mouth on this issue. Sorry to say this because, honestly, I like you and don't want to diss you unfairly. But, truth is, I think I'm dissing you fairly on this. Is it possible, in your mind, that I just might have a point?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:05:39 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: With all due respect, Jim
Message:
You still have not responded to these issues.

Haughty disdain for scientists? Blatant appeal to ignorance? That empty rhetoric you pulled out of thin air. Because I don't agree with your philosophy, you falsely claim that I am against science and imagine that I'm imagining such and such. The best defense is a good offense. Sorry, it doesn't work.

I'm bringing up discoveries made by scientists and theories developed by scientists. How do you conclude that I have disdain for them, simply because I don't agree with some scientists' philosophies?

I am addressing materialistic philosophy, not defending magical thinking. The question is whether there is anything that is non-material, not whether there is a God, heavens, hells, or what not.

Do you think you are sharper than Einstein and Hawking? Do you think all scientists totally agree with your philosophy? That is what you seem to be implying. Do you think all scientists agree with your favorite author?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 21:30:40 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jim and Jerry
Subject: comic relief
Message:
Ok, how about some comic relief.

Evidence of partial brain consciousness?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 16:37:33 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Oops!
Message:
Sorry, G, I called you Way. I've had this discussion before with Way. I guess I forgot for a moment that I'm now having it with you. So far, neither of you have changed my mind about how I look at it. Thank 'God' (yuck, yuck).
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 15:50:15 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: the materialist viewpoint
Message:
I do see value in looking at certain things from a materialist viewpoint, but I consider it as only one viewpoint, I don't think it's the complete answer. For example, the 'selfish gene' concept sheds light on certain behaviors like males fighting over females, but does it explain the feeling I get listening to some beautiful music? I don't think so.

One thing at issue is the existentialist notion of existence over essence, with the extreme viewpoint being that there is no essence. To me, this does not make sense. How can something come from absolute nothingness? Even if you say 'vacuum fluctuation', you're already away from the hypothesis of absolute nothingness.
A vacuum is far from nothingness, so is a fluctuation. Also, is a vacuum material?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 03:04:26 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: stonor770@netscape.net
To: Hal
Subject: something to consider
Message:
Hi Hal,

I forgot to make it a capital 'T', but big or little, who cares - just more of the splitting hairs that many seem to think passes for serious 'debate.' Couldn't it be possible that all the little 'ts' add up to the big 'T'?

You wrote:
Someone told me the following in a previous thread. Although I rejected M I'm still in a premie mindset and just using this forum for my own selfish reasons and then vomiting on everyone here.

(Who's vomiting on who?)

Although the following was written from the context of wicca/paganism, I have read about 'egregores' or 'group mind' elsewhere, in practices among Tibetan Buddhists, and in more 'everyday' contexts such as the spread of the fanaticism of communism, for example.

It is generally taught within occult circles that thoughts are things, and further, that emotionally charged thoughts tend to be sticky things (i.e. they attach themselves to nearby people or objects as they are created). When any group of like-minded people get together and share emotionally charged words and/or images, whether in a riot or in a debating society, the pattern and energy of the underlying thoughts tends to flow together into a common pool, which we call a group mind.

I find 'egregore' to be a very interesting and useful concept. I haven't continued my web research, but I found this, which is the source of the text above. I have watched people change over time while posting here and fortunately, only temporarily at times, my self.

source of quote

Take care,

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:06:51 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Thanks guys-It all helps (nt)
Message:
k
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Apr 04, 2000 at 04:26:05 (GMT)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Something bothers me
Message:
What is it that is bothering you Hal? I think an important way to see what happens here is to try to understand where people are coming from. Most of us were premies for a long time, and during that time we accepted, in the name of being good, surrendered devotees, who were always filled with (ahem) love, a lot of nonsense spewed by Maharaji that was, in fact, damaging to us as individual human beings. We accepted it without question because of who we believed Maharaji was. And we believed he was that because that's who Maharaji said he was, not only by what he said, but how he acted, dressed, the songs he had us sing to him, etc. So, when a premie shows up here and spews the same stuff, it tends to get a reaction, because it's something the ex-premies are hyper-sensitive to, having worked through all that and come out the other side.

Over the time I've been around here, I have seen a premie or two actually speak intelligently and openly about their feelings and thoughts about Maharaji. I think it both cases, however, those people are now ex-premies. The other premies who show up do not for a second let their cult guard down, and for the most part just tell the ex-premies they are angry, twisted people, who never understood what Maharaji was about. This, also, because it is a discussion based on insults, gets a reaction. I know I react, because when I was a premie, I was sincerely into it, and tried to follow Maharaji's directions as best I could. I'm not going to accept somebody like X%/, (or whatever he is) who doesn't even know me, suggest that that wasn't true. But really, Hal, what do you expect?

Hey, and by the way, sometimes people learn the most when someone challenges what they say. Sometimes all sweetness and harmony is not only boring, it's suffocating. Just remember what it was like to be a premie. Dead, boring, suffocating.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 18:19:46 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Seconds away ... - there's no referee!(nt)
Message:
Seconds away ... - there's no referee!(nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 15:00:42 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Re:Something bothers me
Message:
Hal,

I'm hoping you will reconsider and continue your input here, which is often a worthy contribution.

I am very interested in seeing Rawat's cult exposed as much as possible. The best way to do this, so far, is this website. There is no better way happening.

As usage of the Internet increases and as more and more people learn of this website, the power here will increase. I find it very interesting that neither Joan nor Dettmers had ever read this site. There are probably many more people who would read it if they were aware of it.

I therefore hope that the Forum will become a stronger place. I think it is important that voices like yours are heard over and above the namecalling and disrespect that happens. We can't stop the negative aspect, but we shouldn't let it control the discussion.

On the other hand, it is equally important for differing viewpoints and styles to have access of expression here. Aside from the common goal of exposing Rawat's cult, we all have different approaches to life's questions, and this makes for an interesting discussion, with nastiness coming in mostly when someone perceives somebody else trying to get away with bullshit.

Your voice is similar to Rodney King's (who you definitely would have heard of in the U.S., and who you may have heard of in Europe): 'why can't we all just get along?' Or even Marilyn Monroe's, who wondered 'why can't people be a little more generous with each other?' But this certainly isn't a problem unique to this Forum. It is part of the human condition.

Your call for mutual respect is appreciated. Best wishes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 21:52:57 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Thanks Way. (nt)
Message:
j
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 13:38:48 (GMT)
From: Daneane
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Trust Yourself
Message:
Hal,

There is order in the universe, it's all arranged against me.

But besides that...I wonder if though you've fled the premie thang, if you still yearn for that happy solidarity and catch phrases of premiespeak. I'm not trying to be condescending or anything, I'm just trying to point out a 'possibility'. It's nice, you know, being in a group of people with common beliefs in happy denial.
I was thinking the other day that maybe one of the reasons people here will not let new age phrases float by in a discussion is about keeping things grounded. To try to get past running on feelings and phrases to root them in logic and rational thought.
I do believe some things can't be pinned down like that -- my love for the music certainly one of them. It's not like I can use Boolean logic or any of that other stuff to explicitly diagram which notes do something for me and why they should do something for you...I just like it and so be it.
It's much easier to argue something as invalid than assert a viable answer. If we didn't question though...well, this Forum would be name 'Raji Love Site' or something.
Things are pretty prickly here sometimes, I agree with you there...but I hope you'll tough it out. And now I'm late for work.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 19:31:26 (GMT)
From: blood boils
Email: None
To: Daneane
Subject: lowest common denominator
Message:
Sometimes these discussion forums sink to the lowest common denominator. One nice thing about them is that it is very easy to click to the next post in the event that someone is raking your last post through the gutter. It is often quite amusing to see someone get really upset as if every word, every mis-spelling is a matter of great importance. It would be wonderful if there were eloquent logical trains of thought all of the time but then we are all dealing with a past in which we accepted, to some degree or another, a very illogical path lit by a very uneloquent guide.

If you do not feel that your words are heard or appreciated and are only answered by fools and madmen, please remember that there are also many here who silently observe the human condition as expressed here and elsewhere.

We are all gathering our steam and our power. Don't let someone's harsh words drive you away. Their anger is justified but it is generally misplaced. The first place to direct the anger is at our own ignorance which allowed us to swallow such a load of hokey in the first place.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:19:26 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: blood boils
Subject: lowest common denominator
Message:
If you do not feel that your words are heard or appreciated and are only answered by fools and madmen, please remember that there are also many here who silently observe the human condition as expressed here and elsewhere.

Those of us who have disagreed with Hal are not 'fools or madmen' as you suggest.

Now look who's fallen for the 'lowest common denominator.' You're a hypocrite man.
And even if you change aliases, you won't get away with a post like this again.
Not that you got away with this one.
You've now been served notice.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 17:12:29 (GMT)
From: blood boils
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: wow...your are really a tough guy! (nt)
Message:
111
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 19:23:38 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: blood boils
Subject: Wow to you sucker, you're the bullshit artist!(nt)
Message:
222
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:41:22 (GMT)
From: Clint Eastwood
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Yep. I reckon so Joey...you're the enforcer (nt)
Message:
faaaaaaaart
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 13:50:26 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Clint Eastwood
Subject: And you're the chickenshit....
Message:
...who can't post under your own name.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index