Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 23:24:11 (GMT)
From: Jul 06, 2001 To: Jul 15, 2001 Page: 5 Of: 5


bill -:- Recent Mike Dettmers comments in this Nigel post -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:34:18 (GMT)
__ PatC -:- Thanks Bill. Nigel raised a very good point which -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:40:16 (GMT)
__ __ bill-I guess your right, -:- there are issues behind the issues...nt -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 20:59:59 (GMT)

Moley -:- OK Exes - Let's Vote - Glasser and Brian -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:29:01 (GMT)
__ janet -:- OK Exes - Let's Vote==='yes'........ nt -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 16:41:41 (GMT)
__ Tonette -:- Fighting like cats and dogs -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:06:07 (GMT)
__ __ Forum Admin -:- Hey, don't I get a mention? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:04:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ Tonette -:- I love you too. -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:24:58 (GMT)
__ Bob -:- OK Exes - Let's Vote - Glasser and Brian -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:59:29 (GMT)
__ Bin Liner -:- Don't vote it only encourages them .... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:29:39 (GMT)
__ __ Stonor -:- Don't vote it only encourages them .... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:20:55 (GMT)
__ __ Dermot -:- Bin,it's not the politics or personality -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:57:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ bill-safe to say that -:- charles didnt 'glean' anything from us, too bad.nt -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 03:42:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ PatC -:- not the politics or personality - it's the secrecy -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:55:48 (GMT)
__ __ PatC -:- I'm all for transparency - amen, Bin -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:56:09 (GMT)
__ Dermot -:- YES (nt) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:35:30 (GMT)
__ Moley -:- Well here's what Bri said about Jim...(from below) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:14:26 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- Just ask Jim, Moley -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:35:04 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- Hello, everyone seems to be leaving -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 14:29:20 (GMT)
__ __ Tonette -:- Please, don't leave!!!!!!!!!!!! -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:22:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ Katie -:- Last post for a while - and maybe forever (I hope) -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:59:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ bill -:- Aint you fergitting something? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 21:33:30 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Bye! -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:45:18 (GMT)
__ __ Moley -:- Katie - I don't have any problem with Jim's -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:01:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ janet -:- notice how CG has now got us all divided? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:25:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Chuck S. -:- Yes. That's the purpose of many of the ... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 20:47:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ PatC -:- Bollocks, Janet. If it had not been CG it would -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:49:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- Bollocks, Janet. If it had not been CG it would -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:44:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- I understand Helen but -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 19:02:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- I understand Helen but -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 20:42:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Pat -:- meant to say 'cast our vote' (nt) -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:45:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- sorry Pat, meant to say from Helen to Pat (nt) -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:46:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ bill -:- Ka -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 03:05:59 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- charles aint worth the posts. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:45:54 (GMT)

Nigel -:- The Mystic East has much to answer for… -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:06:17 (GMT)
__ janet -:- do this as a fill-in-the-blank page generator! -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:01:02 (GMT)
__ Moley -:- Stop confusing me! Mrs Pig is the highest... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:36:05 (GMT)
__ __ PatC -:- Too hilarious N and M -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:58:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ Richard -:- I like Ken Kesey's take on it -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 03:23:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, Richard, but that shit sucks -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:15:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- I used to talk like that Richard, but I'm just an -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:27:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- Empowerment -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:54:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Empowerment -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:59:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- Literizing the lyrical -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 06:36:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Don't get your tits in a tangle, Postie -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:50:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- PatC. Jim. Do your inner children need a hug? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 15:25:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Do your inner children need a diaper change? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 16:59:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- Compassion is one thing, slamming is another -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 23:08:21 (GMT)
__ Brian -:- Only partially -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:27:24 (GMT)

Tony -:- Hey!What the flamin' hell is goin' on 'ere. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 12:47:35 (GMT)
__ PatC -:- G'day, Grandpa -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:30:56 (GMT)
__ Cynthia -:- 'Bury the Beragon' LOLOL -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:12:41 (GMT)
__ __ Katie -:- 'Bury the Beragon' Double LOLOL -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:42:21 (GMT)

Jim -:- Could it be any clearer? (here's a good one, JM!) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 12:38:02 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Was it something I said? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 21:07:14 (GMT)
__ PatC -:- Could it be any clearer? Rawat's nuts. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:51:33 (GMT)
__ __ Tonette -:- That may very well be true. -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:51:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Hm, I wonder ....... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:55:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Tonette -:- Nigel could summarize it -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 06:54:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- What's in Rawat's head? Whatever it is -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:15:42 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Here's the first premie response to this one -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:09:55 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- And here's how Cat answers the question -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:50:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ CW -:- Jim= Mr Spin -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 18:17:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- What? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 18:26:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ CW -:- I see myself in you? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:11:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Bin Liner -:- Phenomenon dickhead.....for the record -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:45:45 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Here are some more great quotes, JM -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:56:14 (GMT)
__ Rick -:- Could it be any clearer? (here's a good one, JM!) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:53:24 (GMT)
__ __ Toby -:- That is why you sang arti to him,rick?(n/t) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:20:29 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- ***DARE ANY PREMIE TO COMMENT*** -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 13:15:49 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Another amazing quote (JM?) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 12:59:54 (GMT)
__ __ Tim Matheson -:- Hey, when I was 17 I thought I was LORD of the Uni -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 13:30:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ Bin Liner -:- You blew it though , the serious heavy hitters... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:08:16 (GMT)

Salam -:- It could be lack of communication -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:52:23 (GMT)
__ PatC -:- Forum Five Battle is Proof that Expremies -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:07:44 (GMT)
__ __ Gina (from the gallery) -:- Here, here, Pat. Quite REAL. Well said. nt -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:07:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ PatC -:- Glad someone agrees with me, Gina -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:26:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Gina -:- Pat, I have a question that is OT. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 19:26:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- gina, I'm at work. Email me OT. NT -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 20:41:21 (GMT)
__ __ Steve Quint -:- My Bitch -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:23:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ PatC -:- But it's more bitching to avenge it, Steve -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:32:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Steve Quint -:- Anger Management -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 13:53:47 (GMT)
__ __ such -:- are ex-phlegmies.we don't need no stinkin' snot(nt -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:07:12 (GMT)
__ Stonor -:- just a couple of typos ... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:04:59 (GMT)
__ __ Steve Quint -:- Hi Stonor -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:15:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sonor, I mean Stonor -:- Don't bug me about typos! ;) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:27:13 (GMT)
__ Steve Quint -:- It could be lack of communication -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:59:46 (GMT)

Forum Admin -:- Difference between F5 and Lifes Great -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:31:20 (GMT)
__ Nigel -:- Some things the same the premie world over... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 14:29:50 (GMT)
__ __ Deborah -:- Some things the same the premie world over... -:- Tues, Jul 10, 2001 at 03:16:22 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- Recent Mike Dettmers comments in post above^..nt -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:31:58 (GMT)
__ __ PatC -:- exactly, Nigel, intimidation of wavering PAMs -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:22:38 (GMT)
__ __ Chuck S. -:- Excellent, Nigel. I agree. (nt) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:17:33 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- I'll say it again -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:26:07 (GMT)
__ __ PatC -:- 'posts might get deleted if they are not polite' -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:17:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ Katie -:- It's not all mush -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:23:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- What do they say about me ?? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:06:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- What do they say about me ?? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:49:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Oscar Wilde -:- There's only 1 thing worse than being talked about -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:46:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ PatC -:- LG is not all mush (like AG) - I absolutely agree -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:33:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- LG is not all mush (like AG) - I absolutely agree -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:46:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Katie makes a funny -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:00:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ salam -:- weeelll -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:20:32 (GMT)
__ Deborah -:- Difference between F5 and Lifes Great -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:55:07 (GMT)
__ JHB -:- Good point, FA! -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:50:19 (GMT)
__ __ PatC -:- Good point! But but -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:31:10 (GMT)

Jim -:- The limits of civility -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:24:54 (GMT)
__ Scott T. -:- The limits of civility -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:13:25 (GMT)
__ __ bill -:- My approach in the 3d world -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:21:59 (GMT)
__ Daneane -:- Argument | Logic | Ranting -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:05:47 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- I agree | Cool lines too | Never tried that -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:11:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ Deputy Dog -:- Jim you are such a card! -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:49:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ PatC -:- DD says: ''I know when I'm being had. '' -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:25:48 (GMT)
__ suchabanana laughing -:- r.e. the wizard of Oz's premie lobotomies... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:17:31 (GMT)
__ __ Copyright Catweasel -:- Get your own material -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:45:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ MK -:- PAT, I thought I advised you to... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 09:57:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Chuck S. -:- A lot of your paranoia would go away if... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:49:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ such -:- kiss da smelly feet, copycat weasel. got it? haha -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:18:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ CW -:- Dont give up your Day job junior -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:28:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ such -:- so, talk to my booking agent. you got bucks? (nt -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:45:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Don't sell your soul, Swami. CW's the enemy. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:37:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ SuchaBANANA -:- play banana bucks -- NOT for the faint-hearted!(nt -:- Tues, Jul 10, 2001 at 01:36:56 (GMT)
__ Dermot -:- Total,100% agreement Jim -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 00:46:10 (GMT)
__ Deborah -:- Inother words: The civility of limits -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:49:18 (GMT)
__ __ Brian -:- Hi Deborah -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:59:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ Deborah -:- Hi Brian...How are you doing today? -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:53:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ Francesca -:- Thanks Brian --------------- n/t -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:38:14 (GMT)
__ __ Katie -:- OK Deborah, you asked for it... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:14:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ Deborah -:- OK Katie, take this... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:33:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Katie -:- Dear Deborah -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:22:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Questions for Katie -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:50:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ JHB -:- Gerry's one of the nice exes!! -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:52:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Brian -:- JHB's not one of the nice exes!! -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:11:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- H ah ahahahahaha --CHOKE! -- LOL :) NT -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:54:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Katie -:- What I care about -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:57:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- No you're not outta here -- I hope -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:48:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- No you're not outta here -- I hope -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:00:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You didn't answer my question -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:03:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- I did not say that, Jim -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:19:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie H -:- I did what I thought was right -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:25:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You STILL didn't answer the question! -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:54:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- They had that a year and a half ago at least. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:27:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I don't understand what you're saying here NT -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:33:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Okay Jim, you play dumb. NT -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:36:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Or -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:42:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You're really not making sense now -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:00:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- LOL!! Who's not making any sense? nt -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:11:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Or when the good cop's patience suddenly runs out -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:50:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Or when the good cop's patience suddenly runs out -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:41:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Stonor give me overt aggression over covert -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:16:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Really, Pat? Interesting. -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:53:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Really, Stonor, too OT -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:37:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- OT in your opinion ... -:- Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 22:01:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Stonor, you really have no business here -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:05:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- You've said the same thing to me many times, Jim -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:41:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Let's play fair, Katie -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:54:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Playing fair goes both ways, Jim -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 18:46:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Wrong as usual -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 19:47:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ MK -:- Stop sucking up to Jim Pat -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:04:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Stop sucking up to Jim Pat - yes, mommy -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:52:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- :) Take a nap, that's what I do. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:54:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- I've never underestimated either your awareness -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:57:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Yeah, sure, go cryptic on me ... another ... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:08:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- I didn't go cryptic on you. I went home. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:43:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- capitalizing on the SF is ok on AG but... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:54:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mr Bozom -:- Come here, I will protect you from this place -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:36:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ SF -:- I thought he was supportive -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 20:41:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- The Tyanny of Structurelessness? - that's AG! -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:50:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ SF -:- she's a lot like me -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:49:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- The Tyanny of Structurelessness -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:08:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Uh oh, ... she's here! -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 06:14:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Steve Quint -:- I'm Glad To See Your Eye Is Doing Better nt -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:57:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Albalon -A is the best, and an LCD monitor :) nt -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:21:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- I did what I thought was right - I know -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:39:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- right - and might -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:57:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Up yours Jim. -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:08:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, Stonor, did you say something? NT -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:27:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- And it didn't cost you anything, Jim ... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:45:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- I try never to answer your questions -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:06:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You don't? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:06:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- What is that aggressive gibberish? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:30:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You mean all that premie shit? -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:49:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- No, I mean your 'style'... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:57:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Avoiding what points? NT -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:05:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Try this one ... -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:10:28 (GMT)
__ __ PatC -:- In other words: politics as usual -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:07:03 (GMT)
__ PatC -:- But Jim the premie memosphere is niceness -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:47:42 (GMT)
__ __ DLB -:- 'won't attack on LG but I will shred it over here' -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:39:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ FA -:- MK please stick to one alias or you will be banned -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 19:59:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ MK -:- Hypocrisy in FA rules -:- Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 04:52:41 (GMT)
__ JohnT -:- what the *'%! -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:28:19 (GMT)
__ JHB -:- I sort of agree with you -:- Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:42:08 (GMT)
__ __ Chuck S. -:- Very sensible, John (NT) -:- Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:18:30 (GMT)


Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:34:18 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Recent Mike Dettmers comments in this Nigel post
Message:
Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:29:50
From: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Some things the same the premie world over...
Message:
Over on Life’s ‘Great’. Michael Dettmers, who up till now has NEVER been less than respectful, straightforward and courteous - to premie and ex-premie alike - posted the following:
>>>>>>
Dear “I’ve Heard Enough,”

Thank you for your response. You aren’t the first person to suggest to me that I am “pompous, self-righteous, judgemental and holier-than-thou” so I’ll take that assessment on board as an indication of some of my own character flaws that need changing. I also have no problem with your comment that “(My) opinions and perceptions were of minimal interest to (you) 20 years ago and are of even less relevance in 2001.” That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. It is not shared, however, by the many people who have told me that my reports have been helpful in their efforts to leave Maharaji and his cult, some after almost 30 years of involvement. Most of those people have appreciated the factual content and tone of my reports and would strongly disagree with your assessment that they have contributed to a lunch mob mentality.

As I stated in my response to SC above, I make no comment on your’s or anyone else’s perceptions or experiences. They are, by their very nature, personal and subjective. Your observations are another matter, however. Just because you haven’t observed the behavior and incidents that I have reported doesn’t mean that I am lying. I stand by what I have written.

I understand your dilemma. For example, when Bob Mishler publicly exposed Maharaji as an alcoholic in 1979, I did not agree with his opinion. I had personally observed that Maharaji drank excessively, but I rationalized it and all of his behavior within the framework of the belief system to which I subscribed at that time. Within that belief system, I was sure that there was nothing that Maharaji had done, or might do in the future, that would ever change my exhaulted opinion of him.

I understand that my apparent 180 on EPO has brought my credibility into question for some. I say apparent because, when I first posted, I had no intention of saying anything negative about Maharaji, despite my personal feelings to the contrary. I had long since gotten on with my life and I didn’t want to dredge up the past. However, even though I thought I had put my past with Maharaji behind me, the internet made it possible for others to make that endeavor much more difficult. My initial postings on EPO were attempts to clear my name. They failed miserably. Nevertheless, I posted in my own name and I provided my e-mail address which enabled many people to contact me off-line. It was through off-line e-mails and subsequent phone calls that I became aware of the Jagdeo matter. Without repeating all of the details for the umpteenth time, Maharaji’s unwillingness to do the right thing in this matter is what prompted me to speak out.

Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>

Reasonable reply, no? (Especially bearing in mind MD had been provoked somewhat by this anonymous, premie flamer.) Ok, so then this second hand-puppet – a person who when not flaming complains about being harassed by exes on FV - jumps in with a typical triumph of bile over content:

>>>>>>>>>>>

Michael whatever gave you the idea that someone (like M?) should listen to you and ignore there own perception. Gotta say I would have told you to 'Piss off' as well. I think M was mighty tolerant of what could only be described at that time as your grandiose self delusion. What qualified YOU to tell HIM what HE should do. Sorry mate but you come across as a totally up yourself wanker. Get it straight Mikey - it was YOUR opinion and at that stage you were no more qualified than the rest of us to make such a call. Except that he trusted you so much he asked you to run the show. Ask yourself ;would you go and tell Jack Nasser how to run Ford? More to the point ,do you think he would listen? (Careful here Mike , I know the guy!) Funny thing the mind ..useful tool, cant live without it, sum total of your experience...but it just pales in comparison

>>>>>>>>>>>

(Wow - I bet these posts took some courage, guys?)

The funny thing is, the thread in question concerns Michael Dettmer’s credibility. These troll posters must know they haven’t a hope in hell of damaging MD’s cred without establishing some credibility of their own, ie. as real people with names and histories. So why do they do it?

I am wondering whether the purpose is to put off other ex- or wavering-PAM’s from coming forward with more damaging information about Maharaji. Intimidation, basically. I can't think of another reason. Remember, also, Bjorn’s multi-alias harassing of Jagdeo’s victims? Whether intentional or not, the effect is much the same.

Bearing this in mind I think the FAs here should show no mercy when anonymous posters flame named individuals. Remove such posts on sight and and block repeat offenders.

How CD manages his own forum is, of course, his business…


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:40:16 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Thanks Bill. Nigel raised a very good point which
Message:
I intend to address soon - malicious and deceptive anonymity.

Nigel said: ''Bearing this in mind I think the FAs here should show no mercy when anonymous posters flame named individuals. Remove such posts on sight and and block repeat offenders.''

I wouldn't word in quite the same way but I am working on an argument for zero toleration of malicious anonymice. Anonymity is here to protect the innocent and sincere people who do not wish to come out quite yet.

It is not here to protect the likes of the cerises, Mr Williamses, Marolyn phony fucking Kintires or Catweasels. We have lost two FA's over the anonymity issue in the six months I've been here, Nigel and Bazza. There are very few reasons for anonymity including the anonymity of the webmaster or the FA.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 20:59:59 (GMT)
From: bill-I guess your right,
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: there are issues behind the issues...nt
Message:
sfgfhs
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:29:01 (GMT)
From: Moley
Email: moldy_warp@hotmail.com
To: All FV Exes
Subject: OK Exes - Let's Vote - Glasser and Brian
Message:
As EPO webmaster Brian appears to have had a private conversation with Charles in which he expressed his personal opinions of the posters on this forum, apparently taking at face value Glasser's assertion that he had been threatened at work. Do you think, in the interests of mutual trust, that we have a right to know what Brian said?

Vote, YES or NO :

Should Brian tell us the entire contents of what he said to Charles about the exes on FV?

I vote : YES

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 16:41:41 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: OK Exes - Let's Vote==='yes'........ nt
Message:
ok
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:06:07 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: Fighting like cats and dogs
Message:
Correction, my dog and cats get along better than this. My son and daughter don't sustain this level of bickering.

Who cares what Brian said to the brainwashed, cult inflicted, deluded Glasser? What the hell does it matter? Brian could of said we are ALL raving lunatics for all that I care.
No. The forum doesn't have an inalienable right to know what was written in the mail Brian and Glasser wrote to each other. That's between Brian and Glasser. Kinda like a phone conversation.
It is sad to me that the premies and ex's here can't keep the chat to a somewhat 'civil' level. Has 'civil'ever become a loaded word!
If you could put Katie in a bottle you would want to take a sip because she is so sweet.
If you wanted to reward Brian for all the work he does with Forum V, we would each have to give a credit card number in order to log on here.
If Jim didn't post and keep a fine tune focus on cult busting then Forum V would evolve to become a web site much like 'It ain't so' or LG only from an 'ex' perspective.
Everyone here is valuable.
And by-the-way, do you think the e-mail Glasser got from Jim et al was a threat? Boy, is that imagination on Glasser's part.
If Glasser is so concerned with e-mail's from ex's let Glasser take it to the originating ISP! And if it bothered Glasser so much that he got mail at work, well, just how the hell was that address available in the first place?
Please, let's give this a rest and try to get on with each other.
I am not taking sides sides because I enjoy everyone here. Including Jim, who has seriously pissed me off in the past. Jim is Jim, you aren't gonna change him nor would one want to. Katie and Brian, although married they are not siamese twins for pete's sake, contribute invaluably to this forum. As does everyone else who posts here.

Back from vacation, it was great, pun intended,
Tonette

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:04:34 (GMT)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: Hey, don't I get a mention?
Message:
Tonette wrote:-

If you wanted to reward Brian for all the work he does with Forum V, we would each have to give a credit card number in order to log on here.

Brian does deserve thanks for his work on Forum5, which is writing and maintaining the software it runs on, and hosting the forum on the EPO site.

But surely I deserve some sort of mention, even it's negative, for doing the day to day administration of the forum?

Forum Admin

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:24:58 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: I love you too.
Message:
I thought I had all my bases covered in saying that everyone is valuable here. Which is not just bullshit talk but very sincere.
Kudos to you. Glad I don't have to do your job, which I might add, I think you do exceptionally well.

Tonette

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:59:29 (GMT)
From: Bob
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: OK Exes - Let's Vote - Glasser and Brian
Message:
(yes) But: Let's not give too much significance to this glassner guy. The Big picture is that rawat is very upset and has some premie volunteers try to fix the problems for him. The fact that even on his own life is great forum is open criticism and questioning should tell us where we stand. There will be many more premies setting up arguments, but let's not forget who is taking the lead, the initiative.

One more thing: On our forum we are critical thinkers, but the process of 'exing' is most of all an individual assesment of one's own past, feelings, conclusions. Very experience oriented.
10 years ago when I got out, I was still much into magical thinking. Describing my feelings at the time,(there was no forum) I might have used words which were flawed in the sense of logic. Let's be not too hard on the new exes.

(I have worked a lot with Alzheimers patients: you are supposed to not listen to their 'logic' but to the authenthicity of the feelings behind it.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:29:39 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: Don't vote it only encourages them ....
Message:
.... & in this context we all know who 'them' is .

I'm all for transparency , it's the only weapon in this war of words which packs the necessary punch . I'm talking about the war between the cult & its opponents not the war between J & KB .

I'd need to know a great deal more about the latter , & frankly I'm not sure I want to , before taking sides .

If we have a 'right' to know what Brian said , then we also have a 'right' to know why Jim is playing politics .

This Glassercultfuck has successfully lobbed a grenade of some sort over the wall . I wouldn't have liked to have been the catcher .

I think that the people who keep this site up & running should be applauded , & that as long as just about anyone can say anything on here , which is generally the case , then it serves its purpose .

I've kept out of this until now .

Accept this in full and final payment.

Lawyers : Fuck em : Pat Dorrity

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:20:55 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Bin Liner
Subject: Don't vote it only encourages them ....
Message:
Agreed, Bin. And not that anyone seems to want to know, but to this 'outsider', both Pia's and Charles' sites make the cult look even worse, and that is possible! ;)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:57:14 (GMT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Bin Liner
Subject: Bin,it's not the politics or personality
Message:
clashes that concern me.I'd just be interested to know what information that fuckwit Glasser gleaned about us us exes.

His site(especially the 'critics' section)makes me wanna puke.

I have nothing against Katie, Brian or Jim AND I know I can't DEMAND to know the contents of private correspondence.

Had I been the webmaster or the FA I would have let all the exes know what went on with Glasser because I would have felt duty bound. Brian and the present FA see things differently. I can live with that. I'm NOT the webmaster or FA :)) They have their reasons and that's fine by me. Doesn't stop me from voting for what I'd like though !

Also, if everything was disclosed at the beginning all this argumentative personality shit would have been avoided. Now it'll be swept under the carpet and fester. That's my pennysworth.

Finally...a note to Katie....I have'nt been privy to any info (other than I've read in the posts)concerning the notorious emails :))

Cheers

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 03:42:51 (GMT)
From: bill-safe to say that
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: charles didnt 'glean' anything from us, too bad.nt
Message:
asdggasdd
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:55:48 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: not the politics or personality - it's the secrecy
Message:
It's the behind closed doors politics that took place that caused this furor. I'm just glad it is all coming out in the open and also wish to see the former FA vindicated.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:56:09 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Bin Liner
Subject: I'm all for transparency - amen, Bin
Message:
You said it all. I do not like behind closed doors politics. That's why I left the cult. EPO should be open and transparent.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:35:30 (GMT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: YES (nt)
Message:
zz
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:14:26 (GMT)
From: Moley
Email: None
To: All exes
Subject: Well here's what Bri said about Jim...(from below)
Message:
Speaking of trouble-makers, Jim Heller is in no way
connected with EPO or the forums that are hosted on our website. He is a big-mouth with an opinion, driven by an obsessive need to 'win' arguments. His last 'official' connection with EPO was back in 97 when he was one of the 3 people who contributed money to secure the domain name and pay for the first year's
hosting on a server. Since then he hasn't run anything more complicated than his mouth.

Katie and I took over the site in January 98, after
the old webmaster wanted to quit (and Jim, BTW, didn't want to do the work). Since then, he has lost all credibility in our eyes and we can trust his rare approval of our decisions as a North Star indicating that we're going the wrong way. You'll notice that he disagrees (publicly, of course) with the FA's new policy.

[Jim's comment:] This is what incensed me so. Yes, it was sent to me by someone who actually, at the time, was completely privy to these communications, the 'rogue' FA. I now have his permission to post this. I didn't before. He sent it to me out of obvious concern about the EPO webmaster knifing me in the back, as it were.

More later ....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[Moley's comment:] So with what other words of comfort did Brian appease this lying premie slimeball, Glasser? Who else did he wash his hands of in such glowing terms?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:35:04 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: Just ask Jim, Moley
Message:
He has a copy of that e-mail obtained from someone who had no right to share it with him - obtained BEFORE he started demanding that he had a right to know what had been said about him. He's already posted what Brian said about him personally, and I'm sure he'll share the rest.

I think Brian himself already posted in entirety what he said to Charles re the ex-premies on this forum who had allegedly threatened him. But I DON'T have a copy of said E-mail, so I'm sure Jim will correct me if I'm wrong.

BTW, I can't believe you apparently think it's OK for Jim to pretend he has a 'right' to know what was said about him when he already knew because he had a copy of said e-mail. But maybe you all already knew the contents of the e-mail already. As I said to JohnT - NOTHING would surprise me at this point.

And you and others are probably right - I don't belong here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 14:29:20 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Hello, everyone seems to be leaving
Message:
Katie me dear, don't let them boofheads drive you away. I don't know who the others are, but I don't recall asking you to leave. I think it's time to get your broom out.

p.s. this must be exhausting, I can only imagine what anyone will go through trying to keep up with this crap.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:22:45 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Please, don't leave!!!!!!!!!!!!
Message:
Shit Katie, this has gotten way out of hand!

Jim doesn't like you and is very angry. Right now. Besides, he's never liked you or thought your input had any worth.

But I do. I really enjoy all that you do here and think that the way that you talk to people is sincere, can be healing, and is invaluable. I always read your posts. I really do.

I can't do much to settle the score between you and Jim. Wish I could, but I can't.

I, for one, would really, really, miss you if you tossed in the towel.

Please don't go!

Sincerely, Tonette

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:59:56 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: mishkat@gateway.net
To: Moley, Salam, Tonette, Bi
Subject: Last post for a while - and maybe forever (I hope)
Message:
Thanks for the support y'all (Moley, Salam, Bin, Tonette, and anyone else I forgot). But I've been getting e-mail messages from friends that say 'You don't need to do this' (I am sure other people on here agree, but these were messages of concern). And they are right.

I am outta here - for now, and I hope forever. (I keep in mind what Nigel said when he said 'I have quit quitting the forum - in other words 'never say never') I am stubborn and hard-headed, as you may have observed, but I am also not impervious to personal attacks, and last night I was finally personally devastated by the some of the posts about me here. I'm still recovering - and I need to get out for my own well-being.

I certainly do not think I'm needed, or even wanted, by the great majority of posters on here. I personally don't need to hear the things that are said about me on here, and elsewhere, by people who do not know me in 'the real world'. (Don't think that I haven't heard them before from people who DO know me - usually my relatives.) They upset me too much - and I have realized that any good I might gain here, or any help I might be able to give someone else here, is just not worth it in the final accounting.

I am putting my e-mail address up above in case anyone cares to e-mail me (this should go without saying, but I will protect anyone's confidentiality - premie, ex, or 'non-anything.) At this point, I am not very interested in talking about the forum - I'd rather discuss ornamental perennials, container gardening, dealing with aging parents or grown children, relationships, the 12-Step programs, psychotherapy, and even astrology, the extent of personal responsibility, or other 'crappy New Age ideas'.

To reiterate my reason for even working on the site and posting on this forum in the first place - I had a premie friend who killed himself. I felt very bad that we weren't in contact when he went through the crisis that led to his taking his life. One of the reasons I chose to work on this site and post on this forum in order give hope to people who were as confused as he was. Along the way, I have learned a lot myself from posting here, but almost all of it has had nothing to do with my experiences as a premie - and I think I've learned about all that is possible for me to learn here.

I should also reiterate that Brian and I (and J-M) are committed to keeping the ex-premie.org SITE (not necessarily the forum) on line. We intend to keep doing that. We have been involved in forum policy because the forum has been hosted on this site - which is registered in our names - and we are ultimately responsible (legally, and, in my opinion, morally) for what is posted on the forum. We hope that the ex-premies who use this forum can work out some solution which will prevent this conflict in the future.

Take care, all of you - best wishes & all that - and feel free to e-mail any time,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 21:33:30 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Aint you fergitting something?
Message:
Hi Katie,
I must be blind, I dont see where you can say

'I certainly do not think I'm needed, or even wanted, by the great majority of posters on here'

You have been a long time plus here and think of the posts by lurkers who dropped in to call you the house mother of the forum.
Even they could see your care and think of all the folks who
were in various states of distress and you responded and
helped them. Boy the list is long of those you took aside
and gave a shoulder to.
Even those that came here once, like gary meade, you made the
off lineforum for him and peoplethat were just leaving the cult and needed that qoieter more focused help.

Sheesh, think of all the folks that got thier only kind words from you.
Those like me who are barely capable of offering a personal
hand and dont know what to say to some forms of distress
were pleased to see you come to the aid again and again to a number of posters who needed the touch to even weather the forum
so that they could keep here and adjust thier heads.

A hard guy forum is not what most folks need. You knew that and
stepped right into the fray to provide stuff that frankly
even the most personable of the guys dont provide.

How about just not reading those old timers who are not
offering freindship but you just
continue a dialogue with new folks
and dont even bother reading all the posts to that new person.
The new folks will read your posts and your great usefulness to them will be for them to appreciate.

You and I are not really after changing the ex's, leave the new posters to read who they want. They could read a post from you
telling them to just read those that seem to be a help to them
and not those that they cannot handle. Or however you say it.

by the way, do you think that the rest of us forum posters
read any attacks or comments at you seriously?
HOw about just cherry picking your involvement here?
Pick those you love and hang with us/them, and greet the
wanderers with your grace and wit and save the sword for use against Brian:)

Trust the newbies to read whom they want, protecting them is
the FA duty. We should make sure the FA has that as his/her
main focus. I guess that is what the fuss was about with that
recent issue with charles.
In that case, I support you and Brian for being staunch about
protecting the newbie, even the hostile one.
We can handle hostility from a premie!
They take time.
We have all the real cards, and the point is to help them, not
fry them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:45:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Bye!
Message:
Katie,

I'm sorry this happened. I really am. One day I'm minding my own business, the next thing I know someone's posted the background information on 'Charles' the pompous asshole who was anonymously rubbing his supposed greatness into our drug-abusing, mentally unstable or, at minimum, empty, disgruntled faces. Did I think it was funny that 'Charles' was now a real person, Charles Glasser? You bet I did.

So then what happens? Well, the next thing, if I recall, was Brian posting a full on character assassination of the FA who dared to post this information. Brian could have dealt with the matter in private but he chose the public soapbox, didn't he? There could be no question about it, this 'rogue' FA was detestable. Not only did he publish this info on the webmaster of that vile, bullshit site but he crossed another line and outed him as an anonymous troll who'd posted months before as 'Not so Nice Guy'. I cannot, for the life of me, think of a single thing that this rogue FA could have done worse. As we all know, anonymity and comfort for posters here, regardless of anything else, is paramount. Rogue FA was simply evil.

Okay, so, as I said, I was just a bit of a bystander at first. I was a bit shocked, I must say, to see Brian lay his 'Shut-the- fuck-up-because-you-don't-do-the-work-,-I-do' trip on Joe of all people. I've been getting it for years, but Joe now? Anyway, like I say, just watching.

Then what? Then this. Rogue FA, having been vanquished as the evil sod he truly is, did something even worse. He shared with me this one email that was part of some FA email loop before you changed the password. Oh boy, I thought. Brian said that about me?

So yes, I knew. But what was I to do? I tried to get Brian to talk about it directly on the forum and he jsut laughed at me. I was 'pissing in the wind', recall? Getting it all over me and looking like a fool. Oh yeah, that helped.

Yes, I would have had no problem posting Brian's email if Rogue FA allowed. There's no fucking way, Katie, that I'm going to be backstabbed by the EPO Webmaster, of all people, and keep it 'our little secret'. Unfortunately, Rogue wouldn't let me post it until today. Was I duplicitous in suggesting that I didn't have the email yet? Maybe. To the extent that I mislead anyone, etc. I apologize. However, I really wanted that email out here for all to see and, though I knew what it said, I could, until today, only get you or Brian to post it. So, that's what I tried to do -- pressure you two (and I see your point that it's Brian's call ultimately) to do so. When that failed, I backed off a bit but, as the discussion unfolded today as it did, it became a central issue all over again.

Now, setting aside my own 'creepy' personality, can you not see that this kind of expression, open or not, from the EPO Webmaster to a premie who's just started his own hate site against ex's is not a good thing, to say the least? For several reasons?

What about THAT issue, Katie? Sure, I'm untrustworthy. There, I've proven it again. But what about Brian? What about you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:01:38 (GMT)
From: Moley
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Katie - I don't have any problem with Jim's
Message:
manoevres. Whatever they were. And who knows for sure?

IF Jim knew the contents of Brian's Email, but pretended in public that he didn't, then the way I see it, Jim was less than totally upfront because he wanted to get to the bottom of the matter for the sake of ALL the exes here - not just himself. That's why I have been supportive of his posts. I don't at all see this as a personal thing between Jim and Brian.

And: Don't be silly - of course you belong here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:25:55 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Moley, katie, Jim, Brian
Subject: notice how CG has now got us all divided?
Message:
brilliant tactical maneuvers. divide and conquer. set them at each other's throats. machiavellian strategy. classic CIA MO.
to bust up a cell of resistance, set them at each others throats and walk away.

it worked on the SDS. it worked on The Movement.

look what glasser has led you into.

gonna stop and recover yourselves before he succeeds?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 20:47:13 (GMT)
From: Chuck S.
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Yes. That's the purpose of many of the ...
Message:
... premie anonymice. Disruption, and distraction. I'm tired of it, it happens again and again, and if it just keeps being allowed to happen again and again... it's too tiresome. I'm already posting less as a result. I'd like to see some major Pest Control put in place. I don't feel it's OUR responisbility to protcect the identity of ''anonymice'' pests.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:49:58 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Bollocks, Janet. If it had not been CG it would
Message:
have been something else. The fight here has been simmering and never really brought out in the open. It was triggered by the disagreements about how to handle something like the CG site. There are deep philosophical differences between the FV contenders in this battle and I am glad that it happened.

It has exposed the dangers of conducting politics secretly. I notice Helen says she wished that the battle had taken place in secret by email. The moment that happens I'm out of here. I lived with one wizard behind a curtain running the show. I don't need anymore invisible wizards deciding stuff for me behind closed doors.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:44:16 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Bollocks, Janet. If it had not been CG it would
Message:
Sorry, Pat. I don't agree that every disagreement must be aired publically. The FA doesn't owe it to any of us to 'share' everything that goes on behind the scenes, so that we can cast out vote about it. I personally don't want to know every detail that goes on behind the scenes of the forum. I come here with one purpose, which is to read and post about what it was like to be in a cult...period. Friendships and relationships develop here which is wonderful, antipathies also develop here too, which is natural, but I don't want to read all the nasty details here.

I think it is a misnomer that airing everything out on the open is a sign of 'mental health.' The reason I think this is because some problems will never be resolved by being aired, they just go on and on. And other peoples' involvement only makes these wounds hurt more at times. I am watching Katie getting beaten up pretty badly here all in the name of 'getting everything out on the open.' ANd I don't like it. It reminds me of growing up Unitarian in the 60s and 70s....and being in a so-called encounter group. It became a rather predatory scene, with no one in charge to say 'ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 19:02:42 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: I understand Helen but
Message:
Would you really prefer things to be decided for you in your name as an ex behind closed doors. I agree that the fight got out of hnad and that Katie bore the brunt of it. I would have preferred to see Jim and Brian go at it alone since it concerned them. Next time I think we'll just ask them to arm-wrestle.

But I also believe that premie lurkers will benefit from seeing that we are not some monolithic homogenous group with a secret adminstration like ........a cult?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 20:42:20 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: I understand Helen but
Message:
The opposite of a cult isn't letting everything hang out for all the world to see. The opposite of a cult is behaving responsibly and taking responsibility for actions. For email to be taken out of someone's confidential mailbox and shown to someone else is not responsible behavior. The ends does not justify the means, I am sorry.

We can't stoop to these kind of tactics in the name of getting everything out in the open. It's not healthy behavior, it's childish stuff.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:45:50 (GMT)
From: Pat
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: meant to say 'cast our vote' (nt)
Message:
haslghlajfg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:46:43 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: Pat
Subject: sorry Pat, meant to say from Helen to Pat (nt)
Message:
jaskjdlk
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 03:05:59 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: Ka
Message:
HI Moley,
Seems personal to me, but I know, I think, what you mean.
I am exhausted by the charles episode.
I dont think I can play a part, so I bow out.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:45:54 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: charles aint worth the posts.
Message:
I fer one cant read the threads that deal with this subject.
Katie, why do you?
You made your statement, Brian and others made thiers,
just ignore the issue.
Thanks for the info you just posted, that should end it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:06:17 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Everyone
Subject: The Mystic East has much to answer for…
Message:
Not the East, itself, but the willingness of Westerners to accept the absurd and attribute magical powers to a fellow-member of homo sapiens… (with whom we all share a common primate ancestor. Who was LOTU back then, I wonder?)

Provided, of course, the self-styled god-a-blob isn’t their very own next-door neighbour.

I mean, try this:

>
'Who is Norman? The highest manifestation of God is Norman. So when Norman is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion? Norman Templeton Jones knows all. Norman Templeton Jones is Brahma (creator). Norman Templeton Jones is Vishnu (Operator). Norman Templeton Jones is Shiva (Destroyer of illusion and ego). And above all, Norman Templeton Jones is the Supremest Lord in person before us. I have come so powerful. I have come for the world. Whenever the great come,the worldly oppose them. Again I have come and you are not listening. Every ear should hear that the saviour of humanity has come. There should be no chance for anyone to say that they haven't heard of Norman Templeton Jones . Those who have come to me are already saved. Now its your duty to save others. Shout it on the streets. Why be shy? When human beings forget the religion of humanity, the Supreme Lord incarnates. He takes a body and comes on this earth ......

Or how about…
>
'Who is Nicola? The highest manifestation of God is Nicola. So when Nicola is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion? Mrs Nicola Braithwaite knows all. Mrs Nicola Braithwaite is Brahma (creator). Mrs Nicola Braithwaite is Vishnu (Operator). Mrs Nicola Braithwaite is Shiva (Destroyer of illusion and ego). And above all, Mrs Nicola Braithwaite is the Supremest Lord in person before us. I have come so powerful. I have come for the world. Whenever the great come,the worldly oppose them. Again I have come and you are not listening. Every ear should hear that the saviour of humanity has come. There should be no chance for anyone to say that they haven't heard of Mrs Nicola Braithwaite. Those who have come to me are already saved. Now its your duty to save others. Shout it on the streets. Why be shy? When human beings forget the religion of humanity, the Supreme Lord incarnates. She takes a body and comes on this earth ......

Hmm…looks a bit more like a cult now?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 18:01:02 (GMT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: do this as a fill-in-the-blank page generator!
Message:
plug in anyone's name and read it on the next page...
ought to open a few eyes.
it reads like the insane rantings of a stalker or a psychotic delusional.

maybe it'll jog a few more premies out of their bizarre cognitive dissonance.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:36:05 (GMT)
From: Moley
Email: moldy_warp@hotmail.com
To: Nigel
Subject: Stop confusing me! Mrs Pig is the highest...
Message:
...manifestation of God. Honestly, Mrs Pig (from Ovingham) today told me I only had to give her £285 per annum, and paint the outside of the chalet green and brown. Then we discussed the damp course and generator and she said we could get the keys from so-and-so but she, ultimately, had total control. Meaning what? Well, I was heading back to the car and she called me back and said:

'Who is Mrs Pig? The highest manifestation of God is Mrs Pig. So when Mrs Pig is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion? Mrs Pig (the farmer's wife) knows all. Mrs Pig (the farmer's wife) is Brahma (creator).Mrs Pig (the farmer's wife) is Vishnu (Operator). Mrs Pig (the farmer's wife) is Shiva (Destroyer of illusion and ego). And above all, Mrs Pig (the farmer's wife) is the Supremest Lord in person before us. I have come so powerful. I have come for the world. Whenever the great come,the worldly oppose them. Again I have come and you are not listening. Every ear should hear that the saviour of humanity has come. There should be no chance for anyone to say that they haven't heard of Mrs Pig (the farmer's wife). Those who have come to me are already saved. Now its your duty to save others. Shout it on the streets. Why be shy? When human beings forget the religion of humanity, the Supreme Lord incarnates. She takes a body and comes on this earth ......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:58:29 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Moley
Subject: Too hilarious N and M
Message:
I blame all those stupid Hindu words. Maharaji, satguru, satsang, satchitanand etc etc. Made it all sound so esoteric when basically its revivalist yoga for peasants.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 03:23:15 (GMT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: I like Ken Kesey's take on it
Message:
'We are all gods and may as well get used to it.'
- Ken Kesey (I think it was his quote - if not I'll claim it)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:15:51 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Sorry, Richard, but that shit sucks
Message:
Richard,

It might not be so bad if we hadn't OD'd on a real life guy who actually pretended that he -- not we -- were God. But, as it is, don't you think it's a bit silly, if not dangerous, hell, bad taste at least, to bandy this god shit about. Isn't it like taking Hitler's 'super race' concept and trying to play with it in some nonsensical way as in hell, we're ALL the 'super race'. I say fuck off with that shit. (Nothing personal). We've had more than enough 'God' to last a lifetime.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:27:34 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I used to talk like that Richard, but I'm just an
Message:
old fogey and so many of the people who talk like that nowadays (it was cool in Ken Kesey's kool aid acid test days) are simply mouthing hip cliches and don't really have an original thought in their brains and are often pretentious. But, yes, it used to be cool and fun in the good old days to blow each others minds with cosmic stuff like that but hey we were teenagers then.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:54:10 (GMT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Jim 'n PatC
Subject: Empowerment
Message:
I don't think Kesey was saying we were all God as in being able to change the weather. My take on that quote is that he was challenging folks to take some responsibility and express some personal power and act as if we were gods - not God. If that offends the two of you then so be it.

Frankly PatC, the comments you posted to me are flippant and condescending. Do you think I'm just naively mouthing hip cliches? Perhaps one day I'll evolve to your mature level of savoire faire. And Jim, no I don't think it's in bad taste to suggest we humans are a bit more complex than typical mall shopper or bar fly behavior would indicate.

A person can have a sense of empowerment without becoming Hitler. My personal mythology is attributed to no one but myself and needs no justification.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:59:20 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Empowerment
Message:
Richard,

I'm sorry you don't see what I'm saying apparently. The word 'God' as in 'That's me' is a bit dangerous around these parts. And yes, I agree with Pat, Kesey was just fucking with words poetically. That's cool except when people start interchanging the literal with the lyrical. Maharaji said he was God literally. Why muddy the waters with a lyrical expression in the circumstances?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 06:36:12 (GMT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Literizing the lyrical
Message:
Of course I understand that literalizing the SatGuru mythology is what caused this whole mess in the big-ning. Of course literizing the lyrical can be dangerous. And of course M's continued abuse of the lyrical notion he may have some divine DSL while still denying it is certainly hypocritical. Fortunately for myself I can handle a bit of the lyrical without becoming too literal. It's one of my drugs of choice and probably kept me sane in the ashram. And certain people who 'just fuck with words poetically' as you put it, can provide unique and useful perspectives for me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:50:24 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Don't get your tits in a tangle, Postie
Message:
Jim and I were being hard-line anti-New Age. I think he and I have been spending too much time over on Lifes Great where that kind of talk is real cheap and by cheap I mean chintzy. Sorry, if I offended you. You know that I respect you deeply and affectionately even if I haven't seen your ugly mug in person.

Basically I think I was being flippant towards you unfairly and it was mostly a reaction to an overdose of warm fuzzy fascism (the tyranny of structurelessness as some else called it down below) on LG. Sorry, Richard. Do you forgive me?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 15:25:22 (GMT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: PatC. Jim. Do your inner children need a hug?
Message:
As I was channeling HungFu the ancient vegetarian master this morning, I realized you and Jim both need to let your inner child out to play more often. In fact let your inner children hug each other. There. Doesn't that feel all warm and fuzzy. Now sing this song 'Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so....'

Mr. Rogers the Namasté-Shalom-Peace-Blessings-Far-Fuckin'-out-Man-Cosmic-Dude-Pschedelic-Jai-Sat-Chit-Anand-All-One-God-Spirit

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 16:59:44 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Do your inner children need a diaper change?
Message:
It's finding those inner arms to do all that inner work which is so exhausting, Richard. I was looking at another thread where Jim was being testy with you and I thought, Jim really needs to stay away from LG. So do I. We've got enough of that over here. I used to think it was all so innocent.

That's the way half my cutomers talk and I nod knowingly at them as they tell me about rebirthing the inner child and see the Christ in themselves. Sometimes I just want to put LSD in the water supply and let people see just how far their imaginations can take them if they really let it rip. As Jim said to you further down. We're so awash in this stuff that it's getting dangerous. Maharajism couldn't exist if it were not for the New Age.

Anyway, I'm glad you saw that I was not being argumnetative or belittling - just a bit stuffy and huffy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 23:08:21 (GMT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Compassion is one thing, slamming is another
Message:
Since you've had similar experiences to those new agers, isn't it possible to be compassionate towards them? You could just call them new age assholes I suppose but how does that help them or you? I don't have much patience for mind candy either but would defend someone's right to think or believe however they want - as long is there is no harm to anyone. I know you and Jim were fumigating for rubber chicken thinkers so we're still cool.

I am secure enough in my own view of life that I don't need to slam or belittle someone else to make myself feel better. You have a good heart and seem to use it wisely. If you are actually not posting here again, too bad.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:27:24 (GMT)
From: Brian
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Only partially
Message:
I can certainly see your point about Norman. That anyone would believe him to be the Lord is pretty laughable.

But everybody already KNOWS that Nicola is the Lord. You're mixing apples and oranges here... a common grocery error, btw.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 12:47:35 (GMT)
From: Tony
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Hey!What the flamin' hell is goin' on 'ere.
Message:
I take a break from the Forum only to find on my return that you are all fighting like flamin' cats and dogs.Geez,tie me bloody kangaroo down sports.Have you all gone troppo or sumthin'.
Us aussi blokes like to call a spade a spade you know and it is just not cricket to all be fighting in this way.Now pull yourselves together and bury the beragon.
All of the above is written with tongue in cheek naturally.
I would like to say to any premie lurkers out there that there is life after leaving knowledge and it is simply GREAT1I have found that leaving behind all that shit,one begins to feel the real freedom that is not dependant on a fucking guru.I have also discovered that there is life beyond the Expremie website as welli.I have read posts where premies often query why exes hang around.I understand why exes hang around but let me say that there are lots of us who don't and have just gotten on with our lives and just drop in for a chat every now and then and just see how things are goin'.

Cheers Tony.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:30:56 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Tony
Subject: G'day, Grandpa
Message:
Yes isn't life grand without the gooroo? I emailed you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:12:41 (GMT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Tony
Subject: 'Bury the Beragon' LOLOL
Message:
Funny you should say that, Tony...

This week I had a huge moving sale in my yard, and my husband was pulling stuff out of a closet and he held up my baragon and said, what do you want to do with this? said ''the trash!'' I've had this thing since 1976. It's not coming with me to my new home, haha!

Yeah, the arguing is still going on here, but I haven't had the time to chirp in. Good stuff is happening, too.

Be well!
Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:42:21 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Tony
Subject: 'Bury the Beragon' Double LOLOL
Message:
Hey Tony, thanks for the laugh.

What can I say - at least we ain't a cult!

Love - and hope you're well -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 12:38:02 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Could it be any clearer? (here's a good one, JM!)
Message:
Guru Maharaj Ji, what does it feel like to be the Lord of the Universe?

What should I tell you about it?

Just what it's like

What it's like? Nothing. Because you are not in yourself; something else; somewhere else, one with someone else.

How is it like to be a puppet?

You don't know ...... do you? When you become Lord of the universe, you become a puppet, really! Nothing else, not 'you'. Not 'I,' not 'you,' no egos, no pride, nothing else. One with humbleness, servant. Very, very beautiful. Always in divine bliss. Creating your own environment -- wherever you go, doesn't matter. Like my friends used to play and I used to sit right in the corner of my ground and meditate (Laughter).

She wants to change places with me! I wish I could change places with everyone, and give one hour of experience to everyone! But it is not possible.

Portland, Oregon, June 29, 1972 -- from Elan Vital, Summer 1978

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 21:07:14 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Was it something I said?
Message:
It's been eight hours since I first posted these 'smokgin gun' quotes over on LG, yet besides the two 'responses' below, SC's and Cat's, not only has no one else replied but no one's talking there at all. Okay, one person said something to JM but that's about it. Coudl it possibly be that the premies can't think of the right lies this time?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:51:33 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Could it be any clearer? Rawat's nuts.
Message:
Since I started re-reading some of this old satsang I have come to the conclusion that Rawat was describing his own mental illness, anxieties, confusions and paranoia. His own mind was driving him nuts and he assumed that everyone was crazy like him. He felt like a puppet. How horrible. No wonder he drowned his dementia in booze. If only he had followed in Jesus' footsteps and done the twelve step program.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:51:19 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: That may very well be true.
Message:
Where else is Ralwat going to come up with his 'satsang' except from his own experience? And let's face it folks, we all and have always had a constant running dialogue in our own minds. Even in meditation.
Ralwat is nuts but then again, wouldn't you be too? From age 5 or so having people regard and treat you as something divine?
Ralwat never had a chance but woe to the vunerable he takes with him down this insane, delusional, untrue and twisted road.
Yes, Ralwat could use a program alright, but I think it would have to be a little bit more intensive than a 12 step one. He needs a fucking shrink, not a therapist, a PHD, and a good one to boot!

You make me laugh Pat.

Love, Tonette

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 05:55:05 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: Hm, I wonder .......
Message:
You know, you guys may have a point there. What IS in that head of his?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 06:54:04 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Nigel could summarize it
Message:
What's in his head? God I wouldn't want to be Ralwat even for a day!
He's got grandiose delusions as well as squint-eyed view of the world. But Nigel with all his learning could better define Ralwat's thinking.
I would speculate that there could be a new book written on the diagnoses and neuroses accompying the mind of the 'divine.' Shit, you could probaly teach a college course on it and get recognized from the psychological association if you coined a new diagnostic term.
Maybe we should ask one of the channelers here to enter Ralwats realm and report back. Let's see if they can put their money where their mouth is.

Tonette

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:15:42 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: What's in Rawat's head? Whatever it is
Message:
It's enough to drive him to drink.

But seriously, that satsang from the early day's is mixture of youthful ignorance and plain old craziness. As for the adult Rawat? Well, it's a mixture of middle-aged ignorance and plain old craziness.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:09:55 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Here's the first premie response to this one
Message:
I posted these same two quotes about being the Lord on LG. SC is the only premie who's replied so far. Here's what he says to this one:

I think he's saying it doesn't feel like anything because it's not on his ego register as a relevant 'position', merely a fanciful title bestowed by over enthusiastic premies.

No comment. More like speechless. As Katie said, there's a lot of intelligence on LG.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:50:17 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: And here's how Cat answers the question
Message:
'How about you just FUCK OFF. Your not welcome. Hey, does this have a familiar ring to it? Why do you bother etc, etc'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 18:17:14 (GMT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim= Mr Spin
Message:
Put it in context Jimbo. I was slinging off at your all too familiar attitude. But anyone who goes over to 'Lifes Great ' will see for themselves you big goof!
But are you not supposed to be intelligent?Oh sorry my mistake
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 18:26:29 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: What?
Message:
Cat,

All I did was post there the same first two quotes that I posted here, the one where m describes what it's like to be Lord of the Universe (ha hah ahahahahahahaha!) and the one where he talks about how, as Lord of the Universe, he could blow us all away, etc. I asked for comments and yours is what I reposted here. And you call that 'spin'?

Face it, brother, you're hooped. These are arguably the most damning quotes I've seen yet. Especially in light of Maharaji denying that he ever claimed to be God. These constitute a full-blown 'smoking gun'. This is the cult leader in unconstrained meglomania. Puts other cult leaders to shame, if you think about it. The fact that you can't do anything but tell me to 'fuck off' in reply shows that you've got no substantive reply. Like I said, game over. You lost and you know it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:11:49 (GMT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I see myself in you?
Message:
Look you will never understand. There are alot of people who find you boring , aggressive and uninteresting. Your posts are predictable humorless and attacking. You were out of synch with what happens over there (not that it would be a new phenomena,eh?)
But if you aren't quick enough to pick it you lightweight it was pure farce. I simply gave you the sort of response you generally reserve for anyone you dont like or are paranoid about here. Familiar? Some times big boy you are just the slowest!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:45:45 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: Phenomenon dickhead.....for the record
Message:
I find Jim's posts interesting , witty , & free of bullshit.

If you don't like being attacked then put up a decent defence.

Thing is you haven't got one , because the bloated little fucker you think is God hasn't got a leg to stand on , & no amount of waffle from you can disguise the fact .

Pat Dorrity

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:56:14 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Here are some more great quotes, JM
Message:
Also from Portland, here's another quote I hope JM includes in his miscellaneous section of weird ideas m spouted:

When we go to God, we feel something. Even Jesus talks about twelve steps on a ladder. There are five organs in us which commit action. Five are for knowledge (the five senses). Eleventh is our mind, that is freaking out. Twelfth is our brain. That's the composition of one man, how he acts, okay? The five action organs can be found everywhere. But not all these twelve organs can be found in animals -- the twelfth, brain, maybe you find in monkeys or so on, but the eleventh, the freaking thing, may not be found. But Jesus says, 'Man has to be perfected; he must rise beyond all these ladder steps.'

And here's m in '75 in Caracas again on the mind:

And this little thing is mind. And let me explain to you a little bit about mind, because it'll help you. This is our enemy; and we all get our troops together, and our weapon that we fight with is this Knowledge. So let me tell you about mind. Because if I do not brief you about mind, then you are going to say, 'Well, Guru Maharaj Ji never told us about mind, so how are we supposed to defend ourselves?'

Well listen! This mind is something else. This is the definition to it: that really there is no definition to it except one explanation, and that is 'something else.' It can get you at the place you least expect it; it can get you in a way that you least expect it. And it cna do something to you that you least expect it to do. It is something else. It really is.

******

But there is something besides that brain that drives us nuts, that drives us crazy, that drives us wild. And that is mind. And that is the greatest enemy that we can ever have.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:53:24 (GMT)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Could it be any clearer? (here's a good one, JM!)
Message:
Jim,
Maharaji still never said he was God or the Lord of the Universe, only that he knew 'what it was like'. That was the question... 'Guru Maharaj Ji, what does it feel like to be the Lord of the Universe?'

Maharaji was only cleverly eliciting the student's own projections about this phenomenom in order to further him along his path.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:20:29 (GMT)
From: Toby
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: That is why you sang arti to him,rick?(n/t)
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 13:15:49 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: ***DARE ANY PREMIE TO COMMENT***
Message:
These two quotes vanquish any possible hope Maharaji could ever have to pretend that he isn't a liar. He now says he isn't God and even denies that he'd ever said otherwise. These two quotes are the proof. Comments? Admissions? Apologies?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 12:59:54 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Another amazing quote (JM?)
Message:
You know, I was in Denver, and I was giving satsang about Perfect Master. And like, a Perfect Master, when we call him a Perfect Master, we have just said something that we really don't sit back and try to understand. When we say Perfect Master, when we say this, this person who is infinite, call him Guru Maharaji Ji, call him Perfect Master, call him Lord, call him anything you want, he doesn't need to come into this world. You see? He doesn't.

Because he is perfect. All he has to do is one day get up and just scream through the blue skies, and say, 'You! Everybody! Realize Knowledge. Otherwise I am going to do something to you guys you never dreamed of.' And then he could do something that would sort out every person who realized Knowledge and is meditating, and every person who has not realized Knowledge.

He could do anything he wants, because we just called him perfect, and he is perfect. And in fact, he could very well do that. He could, with a blink of his eye, make the people who haven't really realized this Knowledge, who are really into darkness, stand up twofeet from the ground. And so you can trace them exactly, wherever they are, and turn them into this funny colour. And then you can really imagine what a big ego hit that's going to be, what a mind blower that's going to be. Because everybody will be able to see: 'Oh, you didn't realize Knowledge, eh? See what you get for that?'

But he doesn't do that. He comes into this world, and bears a body just like everyone, and comes and knocks at everybody's doors. Doesn't pressure anybody, but begs them. Doesn't make a rule, but begs them to realize this Knowledge. Tells them what it can do to them. Tells them how beautiful it is. Tells them that this is the answer.

And he also makes a history. He makes like a trial behind him every time he comes, so that the other peopel can see. 'He's right. This is what should have happened. This was the Perfect Master, and this is what we did. And we are supposed tp realize this Knowledge, we are supposed to understand this Knowledge.'

But again and again he comes into this world. He bears with us human beings. And I mean, he doesn't have to.

********

And so premies, the Perfect Master comes, and he comes in the human body. I mena, he doesn't have to. All he has to do is have a body that's as huge as the world -- and even bigger, as the universe -- and then pick up the whole world on his little finger and say, 'You guys want to live, or should I blow you away?' He could do that, because we call him Almighty. And if we call him Almighty, it's a jazz for him to do this. It woudln't take him anything. Because he's perfect. And he could just very well do that and say, 'Look. If you don't realize this Knowledge, all I'm going to do is -- boomp! -- and you are never going to know what hit you.' But he doesn't do that.

Why? He bears up with everything in this world. Look at us humans; look at the people of this world. Everytime he comes, they say, 'Forget it, he is not the one; he can't be the one. He doesn't have Knowledge. This is some crazy thing.' And I mean, if really this ever happened, that the Almighty, the all Perfect Master, just picked up the whole world in his hand and said, 'Should I kick you?' ....

He doesn't have to go to any person and say, 'Should I kick you?' If he says, 'Should I kick your world?' you'd never know what hit you, and you are going to go flying somewher else. But he doesn't. And it's really beautiful.

Guru Puja Festival, Caracas, Venezuela, July 23, 1975 -- Elan Vital, Summer, 1978

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 13:30:23 (GMT)
From: Tim Matheson
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey, when I was 17 I thought I was LORD of the Uni
Message:
I mean who didn't?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 22:08:16 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: Tim Matheson
Subject: You blew it though , the serious heavy hitters...
Message:
...go on to convince others .

Better luck next time round: Pat Dorrity

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:52:23 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: It could be lack of communication
Message:
take that u nasty cat. I hate mesthes to petheth
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:07:44 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Forum Five Battle is Proof that Expremies
Message:
hardly agree on anything at all not even the thing that premies expect us to be in agreement on namely how to deal with premies. I think this latest battle is perfect.

Thanks for the chuckle.

The problem could be too much communication. I feel a bit communicated out. All the battles going on here have been exhausting because I take them too seriously sometimes. The thing is people are talking and fighting.

To me that's got to be better than Maharajism where the ''purity of the Master should never be doubted'' or ''no, we can't do that - Margie wouldn't like it'' or ''that's so precious - I bet Dad would like that'' or ''I'm sooo happy to have Mwodgie there as my best friend to remind me to enjoy life with this precious gift of Knollidge.''

Fights are normal and fair fights (like this latest one) are a bit heavy and boring (like studying computer manuals) and usually necessary - except I never read manuals. All the contenders in this latest battle are the kind of people whom I think I would enjoy having as acquaintances - as are most of the people I talk to here including you who has no sense of humor.

Actually I feel kind of thrilled that there has been a public battle here. The premies will see that we are not some sort of homogenous, groupthinking........cult, but real ordinary people who hardly agree about anything except that Rev Rawat really ought to be a gentleman and come clean about being so silly and then take the veil in Mother Theresa's convent in Calcutta.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:07:53 (GMT)
From: Gina (from the gallery)
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Here, here, Pat. Quite REAL. Well said. nt
Message:
yo
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:26:56 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Gina (from the gallery)
Subject: Glad someone agrees with me, Gina
Message:
You can toss me peanuts from the gallery any time.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 19:26:12 (GMT)
From: Gina
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Pat, I have a question that is OT.
Message:
May I email you with a question about your restaurant?

And would you like your Georgia peanuts boiled or parched?!
Gina

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 20:41:21 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: pdconlon@yahoo.com
To: Gina
Subject: gina, I'm at work. Email me OT. NT
Message:
j
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:23:38 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: PatC
Subject: My Bitch
Message:
You know what's a real bitch, Pat? Admitting that one has been brainwashed. A bitch and a half.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:32:31 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Steve Quint
Subject: But it's more bitching to avenge it, Steve
Message:
And the best revenge is to live well. Aren't you up awfully late? I hope you have a good sleep routine. You were the one who said routine and mundane stuff is what keeps us sane. Amen. And sleep beats manic phases anyday. I know. You think I haven't looked into the world that you once lived in. I have and I decided to ''stiffen my sinews and summon up my blood and disguise fair nature...' as the Bard said. You are your own master. Rule!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 13:53:47 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: PatC
Subject: Anger Management
Message:
You know I took an anger management workshop earlier this year - six two-hour sessions with a great group of men.

It was a very good course. I lost the material but the two leaders were great and so most of the ideas sunk in rather quickly.

The techniques and ideas presented by the leaders and the members were very valuable for handling what I would call situational anger - something or somebody pisses you off and you go take a walk around the block or something until the anger passes and you can clear your mind to think of ways to deal with the situation effectively.

When the anger has built up gradually and chronically over many years from continual abuse, it's a horse of a very different colour.

I agree one hundred percent that the best revenge is living well. It's easier said than done.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:07:12 (GMT)
From: such
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: are ex-phlegmies.we don't need no stinkin' snot(nt
Message:
P+L
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:04:59 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: just a couple of typos ...
Message:
but totally hilarious, and thank 'Whatever-It-Is' that it isn't about size, or the little guys would NEVER win!

And Steve, did you get my email? ;)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:15:05 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Stonor
Subject: Hi Stonor
Message:
I just reread your latest email. Thanks again. What's with the comma in the emoticon? Do you have a bad eye or something?

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:27:13 (GMT)
From: Sonor, I mean Stonor
Email: None
To: Steve Quint
Subject: Don't bug me about typos! ;)
Message:
the one I really hate with that name of mine is Atoner. THAT's scary.

Hi Steve. I'm thinking of dumping my $20 for calling as much as I want in Canada after 6 and on weekends, so if you want to have a chat, make it soonlish. ;)

I have allergies. :(

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:59:46 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Salam
Subject: It could be lack of communication
Message:
Hi Salam. Love your cartoon.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:31:20 (GMT)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Difference between F5 and Lifes Great
Message:
I've just posted the following on Lifes Great in response to posters there commenting on the difference between the two forums:-

I've read the thread I started below, and one of the issues raised is the difference between how this forum is managed and how F5 is managed.

Well, I haven't been reading here regularly that long, although I have popped in here on and off for some time.

The main difference between the forums, IMO, is that when exes come here, they like to argue. In fact they love it. If a premie says something an ex disagrees with, the ex will not only disagree, but will bring out logical reasons why they disagree!

When premies go over to F5, they generally behave differently. There are several different varieties of premies on F5.

There are those who spam. We've had a few recently (or the same one being clever with proxie servers) who just try to fill up the forum with posts that make no attempt to address the subject matter of the thread. And when I say try to fill up the forum, I'm talking 30-50 posts. Talk about dedication!

Then there are those who preach. These are similar to spammers. They appear in random threads giving short satsangs about Maharaji and knowledge, but never engage in discussion.

Then there are the multiple alias premies, who generally write unpleasant things, and keep changing their names so that they can continue posting.

Then there are those like the webmaster here [CD] , and Catweasel, whose purpose in posting on F5 is a mystery to me, but they are tolerated.

Then there is the occasional premie who sincerely believes in Maharaji and knowledge and tries to use reason to argue their case. These are like most of the posters here, but unfortunately, rarely post on F5.

Unfortunately, as I said, the last kind is rare, and I spend a lot of my time dealing with the first three.

Now the big question is:-

If the ex-premie community is a hate club, why is this premie forum not subject to the same abuse by exes, as the ex forum is by premies???

Over to you:-)

Forum5 Admin

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 14:29:50 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Some things the same the premie world over...
Message:
Over on Life’s ‘Great’. Michael Dettmers, who up till now has NEVER been less than respectful, straightforward and courteous - to premie and ex-premie alike - posted the following:

>>>>>>
Dear “I’ve Heard Enough,”

Thank you for your response. You aren’t the first person to suggest to me that I am “pompous, self-righteous, judgemental and holier-than-thou” so I’ll take that assessment on board as an indication of some of my own character flaws that need changing. I also have no problem with your comment that “(My) opinions and perceptions were of minimal interest to (you) 20 years ago and are of even less relevance in 2001.” That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. It is not shared, however, by the many people who have told me that my reports have been helpful in their efforts to leave Maharaji and his cult, some after almost 30 years of involvement. Most of those people have appreciated the factual content and tone of my reports and would strongly disagree with your assessment that they have contributed to a lunch mob mentality.

As I stated in my response to SC above, I make no comment on your’s or anyone else’s perceptions or experiences. They are, by their very nature, personal and subjective. Your observations are another matter, however. Just because you haven’t observed the behavior and incidents that I have reported doesn’t mean that I am lying. I stand by what I have written.

I understand your dilemma. For example, when Bob Mishler publicly exposed Maharaji as an alcoholic in 1979, I did not agree with his opinion. I had personally observed that Maharaji drank excessively, but I rationalized it and all of his behavior within the framework of the belief system to which I subscribed at that time. Within that belief system, I was sure that there was nothing that Maharaji had done, or might do in the future, that would ever change my exhaulted opinion of him.

I understand that my apparent 180 on EPO has brought my credibility into question for some. I say apparent because, when I first posted, I had no intention of saying anything negative about Maharaji, despite my personal feelings to the contrary. I had long since gotten on with my life and I didn’t want to dredge up the past. However, even though I thought I had put my past with Maharaji behind me, the internet made it possible for others to make that endeavor much more difficult. My initial postings on EPO were attempts to clear my name. They failed miserably. Nevertheless, I posted in my own name and I provided my e-mail address which enabled many people to contact me off-line. It was through off-line e-mails and subsequent phone calls that I became aware of the Jagdeo matter. Without repeating all of the details for the umpteenth time, Maharaji’s unwillingness to do the right thing in this matter is what prompted me to speak out.

Michael
>>>>>>>>>>>

Reasonable reply, no? (Especially bearing in mind MD had been provoked somewhat by this anonymous, premie flamer.) Ok, so then this second hand-puppet – a person who when not flaming complains about being harassed by exes on FV - jumps in with a typical triumph of bile over content:

>>>>>>>>>>>

Michael whatever gave you the idea that someone (like M?) should listen to you and ignore there own perception. Gotta say I would have told you to 'Piss off' as well. I think M was mighty tolerant of what could only be described at that time as your grandiose self delusion. What qualified YOU to tell HIM what HE should do. Sorry mate but you come across as a totally up yourself wanker. Get it straight Mikey - it was YOUR opinion and at that stage you were no more qualified than the rest of us to make such a call. Except that he trusted you so much he asked you to run the show. Ask yourself ;would you go and tell Jack Nasser how to run Ford? More to the point ,do you think he would listen? (Careful here Mike , I know the guy!) Funny thing the mind ..useful tool, cant live without it, sum total of your experience...but it just pales in comparison

>>>>>>>>>>>

(Wow - I bet these posts took some courage, guys?)

The funny thing is, the thread in question concerns Michael Dettmer’s credibility. These troll posters must know they haven’t a hope in hell of damaging MD’s cred without establishing some credibility of their own, ie. as real people with names and histories. So why do they do it?

I am wondering whether the purpose is to put off other ex- or wavering-PAM’s from coming forward with more damaging information about Maharaji. Intimidation, basically. I can't think of another reason. Remember, also, Bjorn’s multi-alias harassing of Jagdeo’s victims? Whether intentional or not, the effect is much the same.

Bearing this in mind I think the FAs here should show no mercy when anonymous posters flame named individuals. Remove such posts on sight and and block repeat offenders.

How CD manages his own forum is, of course, his business…


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jul 10, 2001 at 03:16:22 (GMT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Some things the same the premie world over...
Message:
Your right on with your observation of the coward swipes at MD. If they don't have a name they have no credibility.

And the premies who don't do direct service LIE because they don't know. Never done service that included M directly. Any premie who has, knows.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 04:31:58 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Recent Mike Dettmers comments in post above^..nt
Message:
vdndxn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:22:38 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: exactly, Nigel, intimidation of wavering PAMs
Message:
You hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what these anonymous spin-doctor premie spiders are doing. They know all the dirt and are unethical and cynical unlike most of the posters on LG who are genuinely confused. I will no longer tolerate the cerises and MKs.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:17:33 (GMT)
From: Chuck S.
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Excellent, Nigel. I agree. (nt)
Message:
x
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:26:07 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: I'll say it again
Message:
CD generally deletes posts that are personal attacks on someone who is participating in that forum, or on Maharaji. He's deleted whole threads many times - and I think that at least once he deleted all the posts. I'm guessing he doesn't have time to take as much of an active role as he did once - but I think many of the people there know he does this, and are aware that their posts might get deleted if they are not polite. (I certainly am).

I'm not suggesting that you do this, FA - but I think it is a factor in the civility over there.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:17:58 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: 'posts might get deleted if they are not polite'
Message:
Thank god you aren't suggesting that here. If that rule were enforced by FV FA we might as well close it down and all go home.

However I do not regard the general mushy ''concensus'' over on LG as polite. It actually is quite insulting to anyone with half a brain and I often stop reading because I feel as if I am being patronized. That's NOT polite.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:23:39 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: It's not all mush
Message:
There are things to talk about over there. I am not going to go over there and tell people they are idiots for following Maharaji - in fact it is obvious that almost all the people there (there is at least one exception) are quite intelligent. However, I don't like generalizations about ex-premies - and I will object to unfair criticism of J-M and Michael Dettmers, who get criticized a lot over there. I'm not in it to convince people not to follow M - but I do want them to consider that ex-premies might be human beings.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:06:33 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: What do they say about me ??
Message:
I don't read this forum.

I guess they know a lot about me I don't know myself .... as usual !!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:49:56 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: What do they say about me ??
Message:
You haven't been mentioned all that much over there (Michael Dettmers is mentioned far more often), but from what I gather, most people seem to have read what is said on Pia's site about you, and some of them believe it.

Love to you, J-M -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:46:39 (GMT)
From: Oscar Wilde
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: There's only 1 thing worse than being talked about
Message:
... not being talked about!

JohnT
- in case you didn't know

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:33:55 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: LG is not all mush (like AG) - I absolutely agree
Message:
Katie a lot of real progress has been made with this latest battle. (See what I feel about it - I told Salam under his Tom 'n Jerry cartoon above.) It's not over. The talking on the net is just beginning amongst current and former followers of Rev Rawat. Cyberspace really is the new agora/townhall.

I don't care how much the premies slag us. I think it's good for them. They have lived in a world where it is wrong to criticize. (''If you want to do service then don't come to me and tell me what to do or criticize me. Come to the Master and humbly ask: what can I do for you,'' Rev Rawat 1999 - okay Glen start checking which video that's on so you can recall it.) I don't mind being criticised which is why I declined Chris offer to remove MW's offending posts on LG.

What I can't stomach is the New Age anything goes whatever floats your boat warm fuzzy fascism which seems to be the mindset of so many of the fringe premies who post on LG. But I must concede that they are nicer and more honest than the creepy cerise/MW/OzBorg spindoctor spiders who come here.

There is a big difference between the premies who know and those who don't. Quite a few of the LG guys have had no real proof but are open to the truth. The spiders already know all the dirt but are being very cynical. Their cynicism and lack of ethics often stinks up FV.

Most of the FV regulars didn't become exes because of Dettmers revelations. Most of us walked because of personal, psychological, spiritual or philosophical reasons. The game has just begun. We'll all be blowing air kisses soon and you will be reminiscing about the good old days when we were all fighting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:46:37 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: LG is not all mush (like AG) - I absolutely agree
Message:
Thanks Pat - I didn't think you really thought it was all mush.
You know one thing I really appreciate about LG is that some people there are very honest about what they believe, and why. I respect that even when I don't agree with them and vice versa. There is a huge difference between what is being said on that forum, and what is *allowed* to be said on ELK or the EV site.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:00:37 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Katie makes a funny
Message:
...in fact it is obvious that almost all the people there (there is at least one exception) are quite intelligent.

Yes, quite.

????????

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:20:32 (GMT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: weeelll
Message:
what did you expect them to say? What a woundeful MD is? Or how much they all like Jim?

Just as much we have a go at them, they have a go at us. I like it like that. Imagine how boaring it is if everyone agreed,

Yah yah, I agree
Oh yeah that correct
yeah yeah[ nodding like parotts]

Lets kick each others butt, it's healthy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:55:07 (GMT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Difference between F5 and Lifes Great
Message:
According to the post below, the state of LG is undergoing a huge flex in personality.

My response to his thread may shed some light on your proposed question.

Tell me what you think!

Cheers :} p.s. You guys are doing a good job, must be tough!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:50:19 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Good point, FA!
Message:
If the ex-premie community is a hate club, why is this premie forum not subject to the same abuse by exes, as the ex forum is by premies???

Thanks for this - let's hope some premies have the balls to answer!

John the what's that strange noise in the forest - a sort of loud rhythmic chhh chhh chhh but like really loud cos I went out and it's coming from the forest way over the other side of my field.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:31:10 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Good point! But but
Message:
There are four sane and polite premies over on LG who enjoy discussions and I know three of them. LG doesn't SEEM to get spammed by premies as much as FV because most of the posters there are basically anonymous spammers. And I'm only half joking.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:24:54 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: The limits of civility
Message:
Anyone reading Lifes Great [sic] these days must be laughing. Starts off a bunch of premies are doing their thing there, more or less undisturbed. Virtually no one ever used the forum for the longest time. Someone could post something one day and it could be days, if not longer, before anyone would reply. Yeah, it was slow alright.

Recently, however, premies did start talking there a bit. And, as we all know, wherever two or more are gathered in His name, some ex is bound to drop in sooner or later to question or challenge their cult thinking. Now why is that? Beats me. Might as well just call it human nature because, whatever the impulse, it sure is a strong one. We correct or at least question things we think are wrong. You mispronounce a word and I can't help but say something. Maybe not the first time, maybe not even the second but, if the error persists, it's just so hard to say nothing.

So exes drop in, politely at first (we ARE guests there, after all), conversation starts and then ..... well, you have to see what's happening there now. It's beginning to look like a flea circus. Every possible excuse to avoid the facts is coming off the shelf. All the evasions, all the murky smokescreens, the fetid Cat-like 'counter attacks', it's all there. It's frustrating, yes. It's pathetic, sure. It's also hilarious. Every imaginable subterfuge, every stupid ploy, every avoidance and the like are all undertaken. And it's all nonsense. Worthless bullshit is what it is. All of it.

So then, naturally, exes who succumb to that urge to mix it up with such foolishness invariably find their patience tested and here's where it gets so interesting. Right now, the premies there are having a love fest with Katie and Brian. In their views, K & B are 'good' exes. They're honourable and trustworthy and, most importantly, they ensure the premies that they're respectable. In short, they're decent and civil.

Others, like me, are deranged, pugnacious assholes. Carlos wants to do a Lakota rain dance for me to cleanse my soul. Several have urged to to seek counselling. None can believe how unfair and twisted are my arguments or those of others like me who don't treat the premies respectfully there. Are we mad or something?

To me, there is absolutely no percentage in wasting any time or energy at all presenting a civil front to these guys. They are liars and dissemblers in the extreme and thus, in my view, deserve no respect whatsoever. They want to call this place a 'Hate Club', fine. Who cares what they say or think? Their opinions are worthless.

I know, there's a philosophy floating around these quarters that roughly suggests that being nice to premies today will engender their 'trust' and thus pave the way, somehow, sometime, for real discussion. It's all an investment of patience, in that respect. Be nice to CD today and maybe, if you're lucky, ten years from now he might be willing to talk openly and honestly about things. In any event, be nice today and you're showing him, by example, how fundamentally decent you are and maybe that will make a difference. There are other reasons offered for being nice to these guys such as that it's only fair to be 'compassionate' as we, too, were once lost in the exact same cult thinking. It's not their fault, that was once you making those ridiculous arguments. Be nice. Or the premies won't 'hear' what you're saying if you shout. Again, be nice, show some respect.

Okay, I don't buy any of those theories. The first, that long term investment of niceness will someday pay off is bogus, if you ask me. Premies are not abused children or dogs cowering under the porch. And we aren't social workers trying to show them that it's okay to 'come out now' the big, bad stepmother's been taken in for questioning. Hardly! These are people we served side by side with. Sad to say, they're our old cult friends. They know what's going on here. They know that we just opened a few boxes they're afraid to look into. It's not fear of us that drives them away, it's fear of what's in those boxes. Trusting or liking us is really beside the point. The real problem is avoidance and, to the extent that we don't press the issues with premies, (if we're inclinced to confront the cult at all on that person-by-person level), we're likely doing them a disservice. We're enabling their avoidance, helping them hide.

As for the idea that shouting, ricidule, etc. never accomplished anything that gentle, dispassionate well-reasoned argument couldn't, that's wrong too. This kind of emotionally-charged response to evasion is the only effective reply I can imagine that thoroughly communicates the full thoughts of the frustrated ex. Avoidance will always hide behind civillity but that's just a ruse. Someone trying to argue past that ruse is, in my opinion, foolish if they think they have to to gauge their own replies to match the ostensibly civil tone of the dissembler. Why? Because it leaves too much of an impression of undeserved respect. It is not the case that premies who throw up bullshit arguments deserve respect the same way a normal conversationalist might whose views are at odds with whoever's he's talking with. The premies need to know that, in my opinion. They need to know that their bullshit fools no one.

Finally, there's the argument that it's only fair to cut these guys some slack being that we were once in the cult ourselves. This, too, is wrong, in my opinion. For one thing, we may have been in the cult but it's quite likely, depending on when we were involved, that we never shucked and jived the way these guys do today. I can't recall a single lie I ever said in defence of my faith. I certainly never passed off Shri Hans' saying that anyone who doesn't recognize the guru as God is blind as tantamount to a tipsy father telling his kid about elves and goblins as he tucked him in. Sorry, but that kind of argument offends me. It's an insult to my intelligence and a blight on the character of any who'd utter it. It matters not how 'nicely' the excuse is advanced. It's ugly and deserves no quarter.

So, at the end of the day, I'm left thinking that this whole 'civillity' concern is in itself insulting. AS IF we need to be constantly curbed in, as if we don't have decent ethical values and don't know how to communicate with people fairly. The only reason our behaviour is even a question is because the premies are trying to running off to the sides of the stage and clinging to the curtains, trying to pull them down with them as they go. That's not our problem. It's theirs. And to the extent that anyone sides with them and says that we're somehow not fair here, that's wrong too. We've got nothing to be ashamed of. We paid our price and now, for whatever reasons motivate us -- compassion, vengeance, who knows? -- we're justified in putting the boots to this cult as best we can. If the premies can't handle it, too fucking bad.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 10:13:25 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: The limits of civility
Message:
Jim:

Well do what you want, but I think the research shows that neither agressive argumentation nor civil discussion changes many minds. Whether you're ridiculing or dicussing dispassionately you're presenting the same evidence. What changes minds is an experience of discontinuity that motivates a reexamination, that is primarily initiated by (in this case) the premie. It also helps if there is an 'authoritative' image of the situation, like that provided my Michael Dettmers. The basic idea, though, is that someone *else* can't change *your* mind *for you*. The style choice has mostly to do with the emotional needs of the ex. I get more out of being kind of nasty, as a general rule, but that's just me.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 15:21:59 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: My approach in the 3d world
Message:
Like all of us, in my life I have to deal with people
who will not respond to my request for them to change.

After they intially rebuff me, especially if it really bothers me, I frankly hope that I will find just the right frame of mind
to be able to talk with them in a way that lets me say what I really feel about the issue but with detachment and freindliness
with total honesty.

Just this morning I had a discussion with a few guys over breakfast and one of them talked about how his son in law
talked about going to the strip bar with his freinds.
It pissed my freind off completely as you might imagine, but he said nothing.
I suggested that he first find the way to talk about the subject
with the qualities I mentioned above, then I suggested what I would do if I was him.
I would go with the son in law to that bar and after a beer or two, get an off duty stripper to come to the table and give her 20$ just to talk. Ask her about her life, her aspirations, her home life and what she is saving for, how are her kids, ect.

It would strip away the illusion of the fantasy stripper to see
the human underneath the job. I knew a premie stripper and a premie woman who ran a strip bar in hartford.
When you talk with them, you can hardly get that same sex effect
anymore from strippers, the curtain has been opened.
His son in law may still go, but you shined some light in that place.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:05:47 (GMT)
From: Daneane
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Argument | Logic | Ranting
Message:
First off, that was a hell long post to in essence say, 'fuck off'.

But really, I don't think it's that simple, or that sinister.

There is blantant just being an asshole.

There is blantant picking a fight to pick a fight.

There is just being rude.

But I think you're talking about civility in a discussion. And I think it's more of a reciprocal level of civility. If a premie can hold her own and logically, or at least intelligently, attempt a defense or discussion....calling her an asshole out of no where would not be un-civil, but pretty stupid. However, in response to some mindless garbage that is dependent upon your Satanic evil hating nature...then yeah...shred her.

But in both cases it seems a very specific thing. To just be civil on this Forum as a rule seems awfully fake. To be rude and fling insults as a rule seems just as crazy.

Sometimes is seems like EPO and the Forum is seen as some sort of institution or something....like it serves as a respresentation of all ex-premies. But the rules apply the same for anyone who posts here - premie, ex-premie or anomalies such as myself.

I post and read the Blue Rodeo message boards a lot. Over there its all one love one happiness, lets write about unity and utopia. That's fine over there.

But I really just couldn't see that level of nicety and politeness being of any use over here. The issues at hand and the rigid conflicts discussed...to really get anywhere, need to take a step beyond that.

I think that vast differences of opinion and intensity of discussion here is necessary given the bland brain-washing M quoting dogma it refutes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:11:26 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Daneane
Subject: I agree | Cool lines too | Never tried that
Message:
If a premie can hold her own and logically, or at least intelligently, attempt a defense or discussion....calling her an asshole out of no where would not be un-civil, but pretty stupid.

Not only do I not condone that I'm not sure I've even seen that happen here at all. Truth is, we're all so eagre for premies to stay the course and discuss these matters honestly, we're not about to scare them away just to be rude. At least I can't think of anyone who's done that. Can you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:49:28 (GMT)
From: Deputy Dog
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim you are such a card!
Message:
Truth is, we're all so eagre for premies to stay the course and discuss these matters honestly, we're not about to scare them away just to be rude. At least I can't think of anyone who's done that. Can you?

Jim do really mean that? This must be some sort of bizarre, satirical, ironical statement you are making. You can't be serious! You can't think of anyone who has been rude just to be rude on this site. Not even you?

Okay, okay I know when I'm being had. Jeeze, you really had me going there for a second.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:25:48 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Deputy Dog
Subject: DD says: ''I know when I'm being had. ''
Message:
I beginning to think you do.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:17:31 (GMT)
From: suchabanana laughing
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: r.e. the wizard of Oz's premie lobotomies...
Message:
You're just not Feeling IT,Jim. You must be 'in yourmind.' hahahohohehe 'counselling', huh? But, wait, miragey doesn't believe in 'counselling', right? Remember, he didn't take well to it himself, did he? [the truth was too confronting, I guess] so, guess that's out. next...

No, honestly, I still think civility is also important - even if just for the sake of the other plegmies, aspirins, potential cult recruits, and their respective families who might be reading -- and wondering... y'know, first impressions about exes, and all [as if exes were some kind of alien species].

Incidentally, Visions phoned me a lil' while ago to see if I wanted a whole bunch of vids - no thanks - and they happened to mention that EVI operatives have been literally telling the phlegmies for the past several years to refer to EPO as ex-premie.hate [that's what they call the site over at EVI] -- probably as a way of injecting a mind-set among the faithful, so as to totally dismiss the truth presented here and the exes, and thereby not to take a really good hard look at the facts or what the informed exes have been telling them -- for years.

I checked out LG today - and I couldn't believe the patently magical thinking - beyond any rhyme or reason.

What kinda got to me was when some total ignoramus posted that ex-premies 'don't have a clue' what they're talking about. I mean, c'mon! Some of us were directly and heavily involved with da maha personality cult for about 30 years and have witnessed the cult operations, various abuses, m's diatribes, and all the piles of spin doctoring almost every single step of the way, as well as being in various org positions with privileged information or even privy, in some cases, to miragey's very naughty behind-the-scenes hypocritic and criminal shenanigans [i.e. mikeys donner + dettmers].

So, yeah, I'm still all for civility. But, yes, it can be very frustrating -- dealing with people who pray for darshan dreams and consult asstrology and spirit channelers, and read into remote coincidences vague cosmic connections and life directions, while demonizing the human capacity to reason and ask simple honest questions and demand simple truthful answers. I mean, lots of premies have been so indoctrinated, that they don't even KNOW how to think for themselves anymore -- their mental processes are all confused - kinda like rotten vegetables.

Yeah, that's the ticket: premthought junks healthy natural-born intelligence, destroys brain cells, and hence longterm exposure to premthink engenders rotten vegetables - where there once was a brain. Scarecrows going to the wizard of Oz for heightened consciousness or enlightenment -- and getting an insidious lobotomy, in the process -- where m. is personally concerned!

Indeed, Premie = lobotomized human being: where a mind is a terrible thing to have. Jim, you simply can't have a rational discussion at LG, because premies have lost the ability to think anymore in Reality here and now. They prefer nebulous fantasies, guru superstitions, and believe that miragey is responsible for their experience when press their eyeballs or stick their thumbs in their ears or feel calm from slowing down their own breath or when they faint or get all gooey from gurupie star infatuation - and then think it was some kind of miraculous transmission from the mahahaha who is directing their lifeforce.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Premies ARE NOT members of a cult -- everybody else IS, though. right! We're the ex cult, to the fanatics.

And of Course, maha never claimed to be a messiah, or claimed guru is greater than god. That's why Millenium '73 never happened, or the Krishna crowns, or the allusions to Jesus, Buddha, or the Living Lord, or the toe-kissing, or Arti, or the prostrating on the floor to him or his pictures, or the regimented and ritualized dedication of thousands of lives to the satguru the Lord in the flesh, or instructions to deposit cash anonymously in envelopes to the guru, or the Rolexes yachts mansions dozens of mega-luxury cars and da booze and drugs and mistresses for the non-attached guru who, of course, is above the materialist maya - which we don't need, but which HE knows how to enjoy - so give Him your money, your minds, 'SURRENDER' your lives to him him him him him HIM googoo gaga dada rugu.... and NEVER for a second question any of it - especially r.e. Him!

Since distancing myself from the maha personality worship cult [generated by the Rawats claiming ownership of incidental universal yogic exercises], I almost forgot how far gone premiethink is from reality and sensibility, until I read some of the posts on LG today.

Civility can be frustrating, certainly. But I'm gonna try, anyway. I can't speak for you, naturally, but I frankly don't generally enjoy cursing or crapping on people out of impatient frustration or anger. That just undermines and tarnishes the effectiveness, value, wisdom, and light of the actual truth.

It's really great to see some of the regulars here engaging, however. I hope they will keep it up. It forces some of those premies to at least try and have an honest conversation they have denied themselves for too long, in many instances.

In fact, some of those premies have lost the ability to think straight anymore [especially where it involves miragey] or even look at the facts without the cult blinders m. has pulled over their eyes. It's sad and pathetic, actually.

I urge the exes who are so motivated -- to keep on politely engaging the premies at those websites, using every ounce of articulate sensibility and truthful intelligence within them.

...gonna go get a decent Italian calzone right now; only had a hard, overcooked soyburger today to eat.

In conclusion, I commend you and some of the exes for trying to talk sense with the nonsensical. If they could only just see that their inner experience is NOT tied to miragey and that his dismal failings have invalidated any claims whatsoever he might have hypothetically ever had to spiritual mastery. The maha personality cult is the proverbial 'brain drain'! The premies ARE his puppets, guru slaves, servants, doggies, whatever [just like Shri Hans said they were: Servant or Slave: 'The servant is the Master's dog']. The shame of it all -- a chain chain chain of fools - like the medieval Children's Crusade. That is the end result and power of people's wishful thinking and the spiritual manipulators who prey upon the heartfelt aspirations of those gullible, sincere people, perverting yogic practices and selfishly ritualizing disinformation for the perpetrators' own personal aggrandizement and worldly enrichment - at the expense of others' shattered lives and dreams.

Oh well, this stomach is growling... ciao for now. am going to hear a string quartet tonite.

Peace and lentils,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:45:10 (GMT)
From: Copyright Catweasel
Email: None
To: suchabanana laughing
Subject: Get your own material
Message:
You plagurist!! Wizard of Oz ,Lobotomies??? Hey; You be the straight man and I'll tell the gags. Got that little fella?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 09:57:56 (GMT)
From: MK
Email: None
To: Pat C
Subject: PAT, I thought I advised you to...
Message:
I said REMOVE your fingers from your rectum, NOT stick them up further!
(an exchange took place half way down the forum page where Mr C made some threats to MK)

Mr Conlon. Your days of telling me how to behave on this forum are over you old tart. Your days of making threats to pwk are over. You're a has been, a nobody, a washed up, confused fool who changes tack with every wind that blows and is barely funny anymore. Your relevance is sunk. You grovel to the most unpopular poster on any PWK/EX website and think it's gonna get you somewhere? Geez Pat, hasn't CW taught you ANYTHING? After all, he now positively 'glows' following your recent 'ammended' approval rating of him because he just 'larks about harmlessly' unlike me and Mr Williams who are dangerous EV saboteurs. Funny that, your bile was once reserved exclusively for the Cat.

Talking of the disappearing 'niceness' where's your saccarine coating gone beardyboy? Or is that reserved for Jimbo (slobber slobber) only?

I agree my time here is about up as well. I am also a spent force now relegated to endlessly repeating myself with childish slurs and accusations. Well, not quite, I had a nice chat with MD on LG. Hey, rush over and see if you can find me! It's personality handle number 37, being a guguji toekissing cult apologist recognition expert you should be able to spot me no worries.

Fortunately Michael is a little more 'on the ball' you you are old dear.

The people on your e-mail contact list are of NO consequence to me Pat. You go for your life, out me to them and save the world from my evil dark deceptive lying cheating thieving presence.

DW

(hey that's cool, now we have CW + DW Hey... Anyone out there with the initials EW FW GW HW IW JW KW LW MW..oh yea, got one! Ok, lets all post in a row, oooh what fun we'll have.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:49:43 (GMT)
From: Chuck S.
Email: None
To: ''DW''
Subject: A lot of your paranoia would go away if...
Message:
...you would just post under your real name. Why don't you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:18:05 (GMT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Copycat weasel
Subject: kiss da smelly feet, copycat weasel. got it? haha
Message:
I already AM the straight man, 'cause I'm absolutely straight with folks about the googoo cult stuff. Sorry to hear about your terminal lobotomy and how it's affected your reasoning [if that Really is you, in fact, and not just another stupid imposter here].

And I've been telling some folks about the premies' lobotomies for quite some time now. Didn't know you had seen the divine light of truth recently about the wiz and the vids -- and regarding your own lobotomy, too.

Lastly, I tell the 'gags', ya dimwitted fool, but I'd be happy to gag you, too -- with an ol' ashram kitchen serving spoon, or perhaps a gold-plated Boeing 707 toilet seat, if you prefer. haha [a joke, of course]

So, go take a whiz somewhere else, copycat whizzle. Frankly, I usually don't respond to weasels anymore, anyway, especially after listening to and actually believing a fatass weasel [who practiced cheat and deceit], following him, and giving away my hard-earned money for almost 30 bleepin' years.

You oughta learn a lil' respect for your elders, copycat weasel. I mean, even my ol' friend Charnanand used to ask da lil' swami for his advice on matters of importance. 'Course he was usually a gentleman (premie notwithstanding), something definitely alien to the weasel species.

But if yer lookin' for a comedy act -- hey, we already got one -- it's called miragey. got it? And I ain't talkin' 'divine comedy', either. By the way, you like cream pies? My friend Pat Halley thinks that cream pies should be de rigeur whenever the greedy false guru appears in public. I'll probably be sharing this information soon with everybody here, too [when I bloody well feel like it]. got it? hahahohohehe

hope yer enjoying life today, in yer weasel hole. remember m. talkin' about ratholes? You know, he lives in a 28,000 sq ft rawathole himself - built and paid for by da poor phlegmies. [You know, like phlegm -- aka hardcore tech #4.]

G'day, ozzie is it? So, where's harriet and lil' ricky? I knew ozzy - ever bite off the head of a bat in front of thousands of screaming fanatic teenagers? kinda like m. does every time he opens his insipid sikh copycat mouth - he's got vampire bats in the belfry, too, y'know. So, beware of vampire gurus, copycat whizzle - first they'll drive you batty, and then they suck your brains and blood bone-dry.

Well, Happy lobotomy to ya!

Peace and lentils,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:28:37 (GMT)
From: CW
Email: None
To: such
Subject: Dont give up your Day job junior
Message:
You are as funny as an ole pair of smelly socks.Piesse and Lintils. (I could build you a career!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:45:42 (GMT)
From: such
Email: None
To: CW
Subject: so, talk to my booking agent. you got bucks? (nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:37:18 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: such
Subject: Don't sell your soul, Swami. CW's the enemy.
Message:
At least he and few other silly sods think so. Weasel's make the best managers. As long as you don't mix business with pleasure. I can't believe CW doesn't like your Sternian sense of humor.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jul 10, 2001 at 01:36:56 (GMT)
From: SuchaBANANA
Email: None
To: CW, m., + poor phlegmies
Subject: play banana bucks -- NOT for the faint-hearted!(nt
Message:
http://www.treeloot.com/play/help/popups/bananabucks_shock.html
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 00:46:10 (GMT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Total,100% agreement Jim
Message:
The recent premie revisionism (obviously copied from official Rawat/Ev utterances)is the real uncivility. It's a deep insult to our common-sense and , more importantly, our life history.

Personally, I think it's utterly futile debating with certain premies. Real debate can only take place when both parties agree on certain fundamental ground rules. The most important being the acceptence of 'rationality' as the basis of the argument :) Fat chance of that with most premie posters.

When certain premies (and ex premies) pick up on some of your posts, where your eloquence degenerates to 'fuck off moron , you are a fucking idiot' :)) I think they view it (deliberately) out of context. They fail to acknowledge the perfectly rational statement or question posed by you to initiate debate. For example, the god-in-a-bod question. You throw up ,say, the peace bomb satsang or a pertinent Shri Hans quote.The response you get is some twisted, convoluted EXCUSE of an answer. An 'answer' that we (and surely, surely SURELY??) even premies know is a LIE.

Lately I just haven't got the energy or inclination to engage with dyed in the wool lying premies. They respond to us as if we've never actually talked the talked and walked the walk of premiedom.I agree with you that the majority of premie posters are comtemtible.Or let's say, their views and how they express them are contemptible. I also agree that some exes seem to place more importance on being civil as opposed to actually confronting cult bullshit.

I'm sure I know some non-posting premies with whom I could discuss issues, but even with them I think the 'it's an experience of the heart not the mind' response would bring discussion to a frustrating end.

I was speaking on the phone to a premie the other day. We were actually discussing non K & M matters but I did ask if she went to Nottingham. She went to Nottingham and a Euro prog and was hoping to make it to a third. I just said ' oh, I'm an ex now, I've left it all behind '. Her response? 'ohhh come off it ....you'll never be an ex....it's your heart' I just said ' nope..I'm an ex' then changed the subject. I just couldn't be bothered gettting into a futile discussion.

The phone call was 'civil'. In the case of ONLINE premie posters ...well, for those exes who can be bothered to engage with lying cult apologists, as far as I'm concerned 'civility' is NOT the most important factor. The most important factor is true investigation.

If every now and then you or anyone else is not wholly ' civil' .....so what? Maybe sometimes telling a lying, deceiving cult apologist to FUCK OFF would be more beneficial to him/her than ' oh yes premie ji I understand what youre saying but I dont fully agree with you my fellow, dear human being. Or then again maybe you are right ! Yes I see your point...Shri Hans was probably just play acting with the little Prem Pal and the Premies misunderstood.'

Give me the 'fuck off you lying wanker I, like you , spent fucking years in the cult and we both know you are a fucking lying asshole' :)

ciao all

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:49:18 (GMT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Inother words: The civility of limits
Message:
You raise an interesting point!

first I would like to address the K & B love fest. Do you find the timing as interesting as I do? Do you think it could have anything to do with Charles Glasser's Homepage.

CG sent a reply to JohnT with a 'I'm just a nice guy, i had a n-i-c-e talk with folks tone.' However, we know that his tone with me was 'I'm just as much as an asshole as you'...Same guy--different person.

K & B have worked CG, (and I'm not saying that's a bad thing--I just want to illuminate the strategy) CG is making a
fair guy persona to strengthen the 'We're reasonable' and shed the 'We're braindead angry guru groopies' images.

Premies, being followers, follow CG's lead and over night! Oh K & B are the 'nice ones'...

Well, in order for 'nice exes' to exist, there has to be a contrast of 'bad exes' in order for their egos to adjust to this new paradigm.

So, in fact, you and I and the other 'baddies' are just as paramount to the break-through as the 'goodies'.

The 'goodies' like K & B would never exist if it wasn't for 'baddies' so we have to just be ourselves.

This is why it's important for K & B to understand the dynamics of human and in this case, cult-human mentality and not try and homogenize our behaviour. It's egotistic of them to think that they are effecting this new paradigm with their 'good-guy' personality concepts.

Perhaps K & B would like address this comment.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:59:12 (GMT)
From: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Deborah
Subject: Hi Deborah
Message:
I haven't read any of the posts that you've made since you recently started posting here (except for those you've posted in the last week), so I don't have much of a feel for who you are yet.

I've had 3 eye surguries since January, and have spent little time reading and posting here as a result. Most of my puter time has been spent catching up on the programming that I do for a living.

But the way I treat premies is based on the way that they treat me, not on whether they are easily led to believe what I do - that Maharaji is a fraud.

I don't believe that I am part of any 'new paradigm' on the forum. I'm not even sure what that means. I've been posting here as myself since 1997.

Like JHB, I would also oppose any civility that required me to muzzle my true feelings about any subject. I've been very nasty to particular premies, just as I've been very nasty to particular ex-premies. But those were my chosen responses to the way that they had just treated me.

My recent posts here lamenting the lack of tolerance for premie viewpoints on the forum was addressing what I view as being one of the principle underlying reasons that an FA could get so caught up in 'premie-hunting' that he would betray the trust of the FA to protect forum confidentiality - and at the same time 'confirm' the charges that Charles had earlier made against the site and forum.

But the archives are full of 'uncivil' posts that I've made to premies in response to the problems that some individuals caused me as FA for a year and a half, as well as in response to attacks on me by individuals.

There are also plenty of examples of unwarranted attacks by me on premies back in the Forum1 and Forum2 archives. I've mellowed since that time, but I do still understand the temptation to misdirect anger meant for Maharaji (who hides from the objections raised here by ex's) onto the premies who show up here to offer any argument in the defense of someone who is too cowardly to address these objections himself.

It's one thing to take shots back at someone who attacks me, but another to attack based on their belief that Maharaji is some golden-boy, in my opinion. I used to believe that same thing myself, and if nothing else my choice to treat premies with respect is how I personally would want to treat myself for posting the same sort of drivel 30 years ago. I was a pretty well-meaning person then, and so I don't have any reason to believe that those still holding those beliefs are inherently evil.

But it's also altogether another thing to tell myself (or any others who use this forum) that if they can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all. When I'm attacked I find plenty of un-nice things to say.

BTW, my own personal 'agenda' is to protect the EPO website. My participation on the forum is only to share what I personally believe and feel.

I look forward to reading more of your posts. I'm sure that at times we won't agree on points, but there is no need here to create 'synchronised' expressions in order to show a 'united front' that is actually composed of individual opinions.

What I like about LG is not that 'the premies are all so wonderful', but that they are people who have chosen to speak their views online - and done so without regards to Maharaji's wish to suppress real online discussion of him and Knowledge by ANYONE.

As for your view that Charles was 'played' by me, you are mistaken. You weren't a party to the conversations that I had with him and you have no way of determining my level of sincerity.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:53:35 (GMT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Brian
Subject: Hi Brian...How are you doing today?
Message:
Hi Brian,

Thank you for your response to my post. I think that there is some misunderstanding about the purpose of that post.

I was not confronting you & Katie in that post, I was inviting your feedback. As you noticed I did not get into any confronting accusations last week because I didn't know quite what was happening.

Jim made a funny (to me, at least) comment that because of your 'civil' correspondance with CG that LG is enjoying a love-fest with Katie & Brian. I think good job! However, I was hoping that you and Katie could enjoy the irony of the situation since we all know Exes at EPO are NICE whether they send nicey emails or fuckYOU emails.

Because of the juxtapositon of Katie 'civil' PR and Jim, myself, Sandy etc. 'uncivil' posts we have drawn what I coined a new paradigm in the way the premies are currently perceiving EPO. I also think it's because CG has publically admitted your 'civility' that it is now safe for the gang to be discerning.

Premies are coping with all this the way they can and I was only trying to draw attention to the irony. I thought the whole thing last week was a little 'behaviour' righteous and wanted you guys to comment on it.

Hope you're feeling better, I'm sorry to hear that you've been out of commission and do wish you speedy recovery. No hard feelings.

Deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:38:14 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Brian
Subject: Thanks Brian --------------- n/t
Message:
n/t
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:14:23 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: OK Deborah, you asked for it...
Message:
First, my name is not K&B - my name is Katie. Brian and I DO have different opinions about many things, although that's not the conventional wisdom handed down by Jim Heller. Wouldn't you be insulted if I referred to you and D&?...

Here are my comments on your post:

You wrote:
K & B have worked CG, (and I'm not saying that's a bad thing--I just want to illuminate the strategy) CG is making a
fair guy persona to strengthen the 'We're reasonable' and shed the 'We're braindead angry guru groopies' images.

I did not try and 'work' CG, whatever you may be trying to imply. I responded to CG like I respond to anyone who I e-mail for the first time, at work or at home. I have to deal with a lot of delicate situations at work, and I have found that civility, and trying to connect with other people as human beings, solves a lot of problems.

I have made it very clear on here that I didn't like what Charles said on his page, and I made that clear to him too. However, I believe that he has a right to say it - I believe in free speech even if I don't like what is being said. I am trying to speak with him as if he is another human being (which he IS), and so far he has responded to me as if I am a human being. I appreciate that - it's a privilege I don't get sometimes on this forum.

Premies, being followers, follow CG's lead and over night! Oh K & B are the 'nice ones'...

I dislike generalizations about anyone - premies or ex-premies - or women or men - or Christians and Jews - or yadda yadda. And in fact, your statement is not true. Some premies hate me - Bjorn, in all his various incarnations, for example. This fact is conveniently ignored by Jim and others when they accuse me of 'fraternizing with the enemy'.

Well, in order for 'nice exes' to exist, there has to be a contrast of 'bad exes' in order for their egos to adjust to this new paradigm.

I am not sure what you mean by the 'new' paradigm. I haven't acted any differently than now during the whole time I've been on the forum (four years). I have gotten flamed for it by both premies and exes for ALL four years. Fortunately, I am also stubborn and hard-headed, and I do not like people telling me what I can and cannot say.

I am extremely sick of people criticizing me for being who I am. If I'm 'nice' (I call it 'civil') or if I get angry and swear - it doesn't seem to matter to those who would seek to put me into a box. I KNOW my views are not 'politically correct' to most of those who post on the ex-premie forum. I do not feel that that should prevent me from voicing them.

So, in fact, you and I and the other 'baddies' are just as paramount to the break-through as the 'goodies'. The 'goodies' like K & B would never exist if it wasn't for 'baddies' so we have to just be ourselves.

I have no idea what you are talking about here. Jim dislikes me very much, and has made that very clear publically and privately. I have no love lost for Jim, as he has gone out of his way to criticize, ridicule, and insult me personally - even revealing personal details about my life that I told him in confidence. I don't really have an opinion about you so far - I know you're a recent ex, and many recent exes come on really hot on here - so that's how I saw it.

Any characterization of yourself as a 'baddie' is of your own making (and is perhaps something you enjoy?) - since I've never characterized you in this way on or off the forum. I certainly have never told you not to 'be yourself' - that's ludicrous. BUT I am also entitled to express my own opinion about things that are done and said on this forum - including your posts - just like you are.

This is why it's important for K & B to understand the dynamics of human and in this case, cult-human mentality and not try and homogenize our behaviour. It's egotistic of them to think that they are effecting this new paradigm with their 'good-guy' personality concepts.

To repeat, Deborah, I have been acting this way towards premies for the last four years. My behavior has been consistent - and I do not see it as a 'new paradigm', or that it is anything I am effecting by manipulating. One of the reasons that premies trust me is that I haven't changed my reasoning and behavior in the time I've been here. I don't have an issue with premies per se, as you seem to. I don't seek to convert them, and I don't want to argue with them about Maharaji. In conversations with premies, I usually relate my own experience with Maharaji, or defend this site and forum and other ex-premies who may be being attacked by name. If you read any of my posts on Lifes' Great (I've been posting there because I'm tired of being called names here), you may see that.

Frankly, I am tired of being attacked, or told that *I* cannot be myself because it makes other people look or feel bad. I would hope that everyone here is expressing what they truly think or believe. If you are not, and the way I am behaving makes you feel bad, then *you* are the one with the problem.

Perhaps K & B would like address this comment.

Well, K did - and I hope you don't refer to us as 'K&B' in the future.

Sincerely,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 00:33:04 (GMT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: OK Katie, take this...
Message:
First of all I would like to say that you must have some EGO assuming that I was addressing YOU as K & B. If I addressed YOU as K-B, you would have a valid point but I used the '&' keyboard symbol for the word 'and', hence Katie & Brian.

Second of all, I am glad I read Brian's sincerely respectfully written post first. I was answering it when I noticed your inflamed Subject heading and have now decided to respond to you first.

*****************************************************************
I would like to address the following comments:

and I have found that civility, and trying to connect with other people as human beings, solves a lot of problems.

It is this type of comment that gets you into trouble, your tone of voice is condescending. Are you assuming that no one else has arrived at your level of civility. Are we at 'The Polished Ex-premie On-Line Correspondance Seminar' gee...I don't remember signing up for this course.

By the way, I have read some truly civil responses to premies on this forum and the real civil 'people' do not have to give a condescending preamble about their 'civility'. The well-written and effective authors never toot their 'I'm civil and your not' horn. NEVER! But when I read YOUR posts. Oh I'm so civil, Oh I believe that their 'human,' OH! I always try and do blah, blah, blah,

.......................Give me a BREAK!...............

Further along you bleet:

I KNOW my views are not 'politically correct' to most of those who post on the ex-premie forum. I do not feel that that should prevent me from voicing them.

hmmmmmmmm, Notice a double standard. Then WHY do judge and publically criticize how others handle situations????? You boast about sending 'civil' emails to the premies but then you open fire on the forum and you 'rightiously' to ex-premies. So, are your communication skills 'effective' or aren't they. Do you think the premies know something, we don't???

Any characterization of yourself as a 'baddie' is of your own making (and is perhaps something you enjoy?)

If you weren't getting my point with this comment - you should have refrained from commenting. (Again, what's with the smart-ass sneer? )

My point was this, Katie:

The premies at LG are currently making distinctions between 'good or nice exes' and 'bad or angry exes'. This is a breakthrough in my opinion. It was not meant to be a ego-bleeding reaction on my part. My self-esteem is very healthy and I clearly am not struggling with 'people-pleasing' issues. My agenda at this forum is very focused on the wrongs of MahaBigHead.
I actually am impressed that both you and Brian have been able to deflect some of the 'EPO is all HATE and ANGER' opinions. You are doing good PR. What I (admittingly ineffective) was stating is that the premies are having this reaction at the same time that Glasser has publically announced your niceness. I was implying that Glasser is doing a little image control by saying nice things, especially since his hypocritical email responses are being publically scrutinized. Now, that doesn't mean that you are not having 'civil' correspondance, it just means that Glasser is using the 'civil' correspondance to reconstructure his EPO image. Don't forget that our image of CG is just as accurate as yours.

Now between you, I, and the cyber doorknob, I KNOW that ALL of us at EPO are NICE. Shhhh......It's the premies that are playing good cop, bad cop! I'm OK with that game. Hell, I'm a player.

But it's completely another thing when I detect (or assume) that you do not distinguish 'The new premie Good Cop/Bad Cop game.' I was hoping you would see and appreciate the irony, that's why I requested your feedback. OH well! 'Scuse me for trying?

I certainly have never told you not to 'be yourself' - that's ludicrous

I agree, it WOULD have been ludicrous IF I accused that!

Frankly, I am tired of being attacked, or told that *I* cannot be myself because it makes other people look or feel bad. I would hope that everyone here is expressing what they truly think or believe. If you are not, and the way I am behaving makes you feel bad, then *you* are the one with the problem.

Well, Katie, I think I remember inviting you & Brian (hope I got that straight) to comment. My tone was not offensive, and your highly-defensive response is disporportional to my post. Your behaviour does NOT make me feel bad and I would appreciate it if would cool it with your 'personality defect' convictions . I'm sorry if you have been attacked by people for years, but I think the continual misunderstandings are something you need to take a look at. Coincidence?

So, in summarary, I was not attacking you or Brian. I was pointing out the double-standard appearance of your recent posts. You see & read Charles Glasser's web page. His persona is really different from the 'civil' responses to your emails. But I send an email that doesn't try and be 'front-desk' and he shows a whole other side of himself, doesn't he? The little wimp hides behind his silly anomymouse (although he left a trail of bread crumbs right up to the bad witch's house). It's important for all of us to see who we're dealing with. His rights do not take precedence to ours. Did Mr. 'Civil' remove the posts---NO. Are they you're posts up there? NO. Please stop trying to be a Mother Theresa at the rest of EPO's expense.

If you would like people to respect your individuality then it must be earned. You come across as a self-rightious, condescending, housemother. Handle yourself with premies the way you want, you have my support but please refrain from your personality and professional judgements of people here.

Now if you would have SHOWN me the same tact and 'human' understanding that you SHOW Charles Glasser's highly inflamed webpage, it would make it a lot easier to appreciate your 'civil' gifts. Perhaps we all could learn something from you.

Thank you for response in any case. I hope it has eliminated any erronious assumptions. Look forward to your correspondances.

Have a good day! I'll need to respond to BK, oops I mean B, just B. Sorry, I slipped :}

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:22:29 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: mishkat@gateway.net
To: Deborah
Subject: Dear Deborah
Message:
Dear Deborah -

I was quite hurt and angry when I wrote that letter to you - perhaps you can understand that and accept my apologies. And of course I have 'EGO' - who doesn't?

I apologize for over-reacting to the K&B thing - people have been lumping Brian and I together in the last week, and I had begun to lose my patience with it. You got some (not all) of the heat for it. And I'm glad you feel that Brian has better communication skills than I do - and thus glad you read his letter first. BTW, my 'inflamed' heading was supposed to be a joke - but it probably backfired.

I am sorry that you felt that I was condescending to you - that was not my intention. I can see that my 'tone' irritates you, but perhaps you can try and see beyond that. Also, it makes me feel bad that you heard me as 'coming across like a self-righteous, condescending, housemother' - that was not my intention either (YUCK).

But yeah, I was hurt and pissed off, and not at you in particular - and I apologize for the inappropriate heat you got from me. I also misinterpreted some of the things you were saying - I see that from your explanation of what you were trying to say.

To get to the point of your post:
The premies at LG are currently making distinctions between 'good or nice exes' and 'bad or angry exes'. This is a breakthrough in my opinion.

I don't see it as a breakthrough because it has happened before. I think I forgot that you hadn't been posting here for very long, and assumed that you knew this. That's why I didn't understand what you were saying about the 'new paradigm' - it's a repetitive paradigm, in my opinion.

You wrote:
It was not meant to be a ego-bleeding reaction on my part. My self-esteem is very healthy and I clearly am not struggling with 'people-pleasing' issues.

I am glad to hear that - and that's another thing I didn't get from your first post - perhaps because there were several other posts in the thread in which I felt that there WAS some 'ego-bleeding', as you put it.

Re what Charles thinks of me - it really doesn't matter. I can read what he says on the forum, but for all I know, he dislikes my 'tone' as well. I tend to write formally because I am a technical writer and find it difficult to turn that off when writing on a public forum, or to someone I don't know. And it turns a lot of people off.

You wrote:
But it's completely another thing when I detect (or assume) that you do not distinguish 'The new premie Good Cop/Bad Cop game.' I was hoping you would see and appreciate the irony, that's why I requested your feedback.

Again, Deborah, it ain't 'new' to me - and that's probably one of the reasons I didn't appreciate the irony. I've been accused several times by premies on here of deliberately misrepresenting my feelings so I can be the 'good cop' - one person even accused me of coordinating posts with Jim to give the 'good cop, bad cop' appearance (like, as IF). So I guess I am just tired of it. Pretty soon you'll probably hear from premies who dislike me and think you are great - it always happens.

Now a few more personal things I want to address:
You wrote to me in your post -
By the way, I have read some truly civil responses to premies on this forum and the real civil 'people' do not have to give a condescending preamble about their 'civility'. The well-written and effective authors never toot their 'I'm civil and your not' horn. NEVER! But when I read YOUR posts. Oh I'm so civil, Oh
I believe that their 'human,' OH! I always try and do blah, blah, blah,.......................Give me a BREAK!...............

First, I don't preface my posts to premies with 'I'm so civil, blah, blah, blah...' I feel forced into making those kinds of statements to EX-premies when people accuse me of being dishonest, or of 'fraternizing with the enemy' and such. I hate saying that stuff too - but I have felt the probably unnecessary need to reiterate it lately after several accusations of being a 'traitor'. Sorry.

You also wrote:
My tone was not offensive, and your highly-defensive response is disporportional to my post. Your behaviour does NOT make me feel bad and I would appreciate it if would cool it with your 'personality defect' convictions . I'm sorry if you have been attacked by people for years, but I think the continual misunderstandings are something you need to take a look at.

You're correct in the statement that my defensive response was disproportional to your post, although I did take some things you said to be offensive (but can see that they might not have been meant that way). Also, I exaggerated when I said I had been attacked by people for years. I have been attacked by Jim Heller for a number of years, and since he is one of the most prolific posters on the forum, that's been a lot of attacks over the years. So yeah, that is the problem I have had to deal with.

Anyway, even if the things I said didn't make YOU feel bad, the things you said made ME feel bad. Call me reactive - I am VERY reactive right now - and I need to get out of here. If you want to e-mail me, I am pretty sure there is a chance we can straighten things out - I do appreciate someone who confronts me to my face rather than talking about me behind my back.

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:50:51 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Questions for Katie
Message:
Katie,

What do you think of the fact that the premies on CD's forum have, as Pat C says, 'lionized' you and Brian at the expense of the rest of us? You don't see a bad joke in there somewhere?

Se, what really gets me is that, as you've said, you don't care what premies think, you're not interested in stopping or even slowing Maharaji down ... I have to wonder, what exactly do you care about in all this?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:52:09 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Gerry's one of the nice exes!!
Message:
Carlos wrote on LG:-

This doesn't make you a hate club. Just a community that has a lot of people who find nothing wrong with behaviors I find rude, that disrupt the peace this site used to know, as well as people like PatC, Brian, Katie and even Gerry, whose contributions I welcome.

Jim,

You'll be tarred with the nicesness brush next! Sorry Gerry for bringing this up:-)

John the obviously not as nice as Gerry

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:11:15 (GMT)
From: Brian
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: JHB's not one of the nice exes!!
Message:
John the obviously not as nice as Gerry

You can't help it, John. You were just born evil. It's really not your fault :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:54:58 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: H ah ahahahahaha --CHOKE! -- LOL :) NT
Message:
dddddd
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:57:40 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What I care about
Message:
I am making an exception and answering one of your posts directly because this is important to me.

I care about EX-premies, or people who don't want to follow Maharaji anymore - maybe they are on the fence or maybe they are just confused. And I care about people in general - whether premies or exes. If that means I don't belong on this forum, as you have *repeatedly* suggested, then so be it. I think it should have been obvious that I feel that way from my posts over the years (or even in the last week!), but perhaps you dislike me so much that you are unable to read my posts with an open mind.

As far as Lifes' Great goes - I am sick of your insinuations, Jim. I think people there are praising me and Brian because we acted according to our principles and treated premies like human beings. And if THAT isn't welcome on this forum, then I'm outa here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:48:08 (GMT)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: No you're not outta here -- I hope
Message:
Katie,

I know all this contention lately is wearing me down as well. Nasty premies (you must admit, many of those that post on here are very angry), bones of contention flying. And it's Friday, and I feel generally tired anyway. Maybe that will take the piss out of me, who knows.

But I go lurk on Lifes Great occasionaly and I don't last long there. To me, it's really nasty over there too. So I don't go there too often, and I definitely don't want to post there. I'm tired of reading that FV is a pit of vipers.

This Forum is made up of many people. If there's one thing that's gotten me down lately, more than any other, is being accused of groupthink, of some unified join the club mentality. That and that stupid hate club shit (sorry, but I had to use that word). I'm getting tired of posting here as well, to tell you the truth. I signed on tonight even though I told myself I wouldn't. I'm sick of talking about Maharaji. I'm sick sick sick of premies. That's probably the worst part. I haven't had to expose myself to premies (except my friends and family) for years. They're very nice about it, and I try not to get on them either.

But if the people who can hold a decent conversation with me and give a care for what I think and feel leave, like if you leave, I'll have one less reason to come here, that's for sure.

love, Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:00:52 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: No you're not outta here -- I hope
Message:
Thanks, Francesca - much appreciated. I hope you are not 'outta here' either.

Lots of love,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:03:27 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: You didn't answer my question
Message:
I like you about as much as you like me. You know what I'm talking about.

But you didn't really answer this question:

What do you think of the fact that the premies on CD's forum have, as Pat C says, 'lionized' you and Brian at the expense of the rest of us?

It's the contrast that interests me. The premies are having a field day praising you two in contrast to us 'militant' types. Do you agree with their opinions in this regard?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:19:44 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I did not say that, Jim
Message:
I did not say Katie and Brian were being ''lionized'' over at LG. I said they were being ''canonized.'' Actually it's a bit of both.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:25:24 (GMT)
From: Katie H
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: I did what I thought was right
Message:
And I didn't do it for the approval of either the ex-premies or the premies. I am sorry if you all feel left out, but them's the breaks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:54:47 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie H
Subject: You STILL didn't answer the question!
Message:
'Them's the breaks' doesn't cut it. I was asking you how you felt about the fact that the premies now have this whole 'good ex' / 'bad ex' myth to perpetuate. Can't you answer that?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:27:47 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: They had that a year and a half ago at least.
Message:
It's well established - that 'good'/'bad' duality - for exes, premies, and the rest of the human race as well. If you didn't want to (pre)dominate so badly, they might just blow it off in that way.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:33:16 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: I don't understand what you're saying here NT
Message:
ddddddd
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:36:00 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Okay Jim, you play dumb. NT
Message:
dudududum
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:42:52 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Or
Message:
you can play 'bad cop', while PatC plays 'good cop' and then complain when the people you aim it at call you by the role you have chosen for yourself.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:00:15 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: You're really not making sense now
Message:
Stonor,

What the fuck are you talking about? Either spell it out or shut up. You accused me below of avoiding points. You referred me to this post above. I told you I didn't know what you meant and now, instead of simply explaining yourself, you're turning into a tar baby. Did touch you? When? How do I get it off? Simple.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:11:24 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: LOL!! Who's not making any sense? nt
Message:
You aren't my snookie, are you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:50:05 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Or when the good cop's patience suddenly runs out
Message:
WATCH OUT!

Or the bad cop suddenly becomes solicitous of a premie who displays sincerity.

Anyway, Stonor, I hope you aren't going to try to drum up your little anti-Jim campaign again because it only makes you look foolish in the eyes of those of us who realize that heller is not one-dimensional as you seem to think, single-mided yes.

Some of us are here for more than to play politics or other little entertaining games.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 16:41:58 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Or when the good cop's patience suddenly runs out
Message:
Just for the record, Pat, you shouldn't necessarily believe or repeat what you hear from others. I'm not interested in politics, nor have I been posting here to play any 'other little entertaining games.' Your characterization of me is quite nasty and wrong. I have become seriously concerned about both covert and overt-aggression in any context, and I believe that everyone here should be as well - it does seem to be at the core of all forms of cultic manipulation. Have you checked out the Rick Ross site and another one I have posted in the past? We once discussed some of these issues a bit via email, until someone filled your head with some nonsense. I do not want to continue this discussion and have neither the time nor interest to disrupt this forum's far more important function with a re-hashing of anything related to this - it really doesn't matter at all in the big picture anyways, does it? Nonetheless, I am glad that we've talked a bit.

BTW, your post below wrt Thelma is hysterical!

Anna

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:16:10 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Stonor give me overt aggression over covert
Message:
Have you followed MK's posts? I did take a little dig at you but I don't doubt the sincerity of your motives as I do anonymous premie apologists. You and I can talk out misunderstandings but how can the playing field ever be level with these creepy anonymice? You are in no way my enemy. They are.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:53:01 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Really, Pat? Interesting.
Message:
So, you prefer the white heterosexual homophobic supremacists who put you in a concrete prison to m and his teams of propagators who sucked you into the cult?

And IMO the 'anonymice' aren't your enemies, they are human beings who have been extremely damaged by the encultification process, and are a mainly a pain in the butt for the FAs.

And yes, I agree that it's possible that we could talk out our misunderstandings, and that I find it virtually impossible to discuss anything for long with many premies - it's one reason why I've never been involved in a cult.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 17:37:35 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Really, Stonor, too OT
Message:
In real life I know I would enjoy your company and probably like you a lot but I see this forum as a place mostly for anyone whose life has been directly affected by Rev Rawat. We shared a huge part of our lives with each other. The socializing and OT discussions here between exes are almost incidental but always contain the subtext that we are all survivors of a great battle. 30 years ago we followed the Lord of the Universe. That is an incredibily significant thing that we share with each other but not with you.

So, though I may have enjoyed continuing this dicussion with you, I must bow out in order to not mislead you into thinking that I will be having future OT discussions with you on FV - maybe on AG but not here. And the subject matter that you raise seems once again to be an attempt to talk about the power politics of FV in the guise of an OT discussion. That is definitely not a subject that you should venture near. You saw what happened last time.

Your contributions in that area are irrelevant and impertinent but I laways appreciate your erudition. Offers of information are always appreciated but anything more makes you look like a pushy intruder. Forgive my bluntness. I think it could save us both some grief down the road.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 22:01:47 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: OT in your opinion ...
Message:
which I don't seem to share in this context. You are the one who raised the subject of my last post - to me overt and covert aggression are the two sides of the same coin - all aggressions are the attempt of one (or more) human trying to impose their will on another, as you are trying to do to me here.

Happy to end this futile 'discussion'.

Anna :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:05:45 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Stonor, you really have no business here
Message:
What an empty life you must lead, getting all tied up with an ex-member group of a cult you never belonged to! What's next, joining various disease recovery support groups so you have somewhere to go Tuesdays or Thursdays?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:41:25 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You've said the same thing to me many times, Jim
Message:
(Again, an important point to me, so I'm answering)

You have repeatedly told me that I do not belong here, and other people have agreed with you at times. I am a card-carrying ex-premie who received knowledge in November of 1972.

Who DO you think belongs here? People that agree with you? When you tell both me and Stonor that we don't belong here (and you may have said it to others as well), that's what you appear to think.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:54:06 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Let's play fair, Katie
Message:
Look. I'll answer your question if you answer mine first. I asked you a couple of times yesterday how you felt about the fact that the premies on LG were casting you and Brian in a positive light as 'good ex-premies' at the expense of us 'bad' ones. The closest you came to answering was 'them's the breaks'. I don't accept that as a real answer. So, you answer my question first, then I'll be happy to answer yours.

Fair?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 18:46:55 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Playing fair goes both ways, Jim
Message:
First, in the same post in which you first asked me that question, you asked me what I did care about. I answered THAT question because it was important to me to clarify my stance, and apparently you found no comment to make on it. I think I should get at least partial credit for that - although you obviously don't think so. Why did you not feel that answer was worthy of comment, whereas answering this question, which you posted in the same post, is so vitally important? You appear to be trying to make a point at my expense here, Jim, when you repeatedly ask:

I asked you a couple of times yesterday how you felt about the fact that the premies on LG were casting you and Brian in a positive light as 'good ex-premies' at the expense of us 'bad' ones.

I very much object to your use of the word 'us' in this question. All but one of the quotes you posted mentioned you by name. Several other people were mentioned, but your name was the only consistent one.

Any praise of my actions on Life's great was, I feel, mostly at YOUR expense, so cut out the 'us' and 'we' stuff. That's both leading and misleading. It's a red herring (no pun intended) - and thus I am only going to address YOU in this post.

I think you should speak for yourself, Jim, and stop trying to imply that you represent other people on this forum unless they specifically choose to identify themselves with you. Or if you are specifically representing someone else who doesn't want to come forward, you can say that as well. If anyone else who feels that they have been criticized at my expense wants to talk with me about it, then let them come forward.

The only things that I can see that the premies on Lifes Great are praising me for is my stand in favor of anonymity on this forum, my civility in speaking to them, my belief that ends don't justify means, and my honesty about what has happened on this forum. I have had to concede publically that it wasn't safe for premies to post here anonymously - and I was ashamed about having to say this because I've often told both premies and exes that they would be safe posting here under a pseudonym.

So how do I feel about the fact that the premies are praising me for doing these things? I think it's kind of sad that their opinion of ex-premies has sunk so low that they view these traits - which I don't see as exceptional at all - as uncommon behavior among ex-premies. I am glad that they appear to believe that ex-premies are capable of being honorable, honest, and civil, but I'm saddened that they apparently believe that this is such unprecedented behavior on the part of ex-premies that they have to mention it over and over again.

As for this being done at your expense - all I can say is that you have only yourself to blame for that. I can't defend your behavior towards premies any more, Jim, although I have done so in the past. Although I think your posts are often quite effective when you refrain from personal attacks, I don't agree with or respect the way you behave towards people who do not agree with you - including other ex-premies.

You seem to expect me to present a united front with you simply BECAUSE you are another ex-premie. If I do not assume what you apparently feel is the politically correct ex-premie stance, you then accuse me of being dishonest, a premie sympathizer, disloyal, 'undercutting you' or worse.

There is a post by you on Lifes Great right now in which you tell a premie that you think I am dishonest, so you obviously feel no need to present any kind of united front with me. And you have always attacked and criticized my stance and my beliefs in front of premies, so obviously, you do not hold yourself to the same standard.

Well, that's it, if you really have to know.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 19:47:53 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Wrong as usual
Message:
First, in the same post in which you first asked me that question, you asked me what I did care about. I answered THAT question because it was important to me to clarify my stance, and apparently you found no comment to make on it. I think I should get at least partial credit for that - although you obviously don't think so. Why did you not feel that answer was worthy of comment, whereas answering this question, which you posted in the same post, is so vitally important? You appear to be trying to make a point at my expense here, Jim, when you repeatedly ask:

'I asked you a couple of times yesterday how you felt about the fact that the premies on LG were casting you and Brian in a positive light as 'good ex-premies' at the expense of us 'bad' ones.'

First, there's a big difference between answering a question and commenting further on something someone said. It's not a matter of 'partial credit' but rather a question of whether or not you're willing to really hash an issue out, something that you've proven over the years I've known you here, is not the case. You'll go so far and then, when push really comes to shove, you're off. That's my recollection anyway.

Was I trying to make a point at your expense? OF COURSE I was! So? What's your point? That that's not nice? What?

I very much object to your use of the word 'us' in this question. All but one of the quotes you posted mentioned you by name. Several other people were mentioned, but your name was the only consistent one.

Don't get illogical on me, please. Just because I was mentioned by name doesn't mean that the premies on LG were only talking about me. Indeed, they weren't. I never said they didn't mention me in particular but the fact remains, they did indeed, and continue to, talk about a whole bunch of 'us' as being distinct from you two who have made a point of distancing yourselves from us more vitriolic types. Who was it, Brian I believe, who told them that he believes that neither Maharaji nor Knowledge get a fair hearing over here? I rest my case.

Any praise of my actions on Life's great was, I feel, mostly at YOUR expense, so cut out the 'us' and 'we' stuff. That's both leading and misleading. It's a red herring (no pun intended) - and thus I am only going to address YOU in this post.

Dealt with above.

I think you should speak for yourself, Jim, and stop trying to imply that you represent other people on this forum unless they specifically choose to identify themselves with you. Or if you are specifically representing someone else who doesn't want to come forward, you can say that as well. If anyone else who feels that they have been criticized at my expense wants to talk with me about it, then let them come forward.

Poppycock. I'm not 'representing' anyone. These are my views about generalizations that are uttered by premies on LG.

The only things that I can see that the premies on Lifes Great are praising me for is my stand in favor of anonymity on this forum, my civility in speaking to them, my belief that ends don't justify means, and my honesty about what has happened on this forum. I have had to concede publically that it wasn't safe for premies to post here anonymously - and I was ashamed about having to say this because I've often told both premies and exes that they would be safe posting here under a pseudonym.

Aren't you leaving a few things out? How about your oft-stated views that you don't have any interest in changing anyone's mind about m, that you don't care if people follow the guy or not and that you likewise don't care what happens to him and his organization? If I were a premie, I'd be falling all over you for saying shit like that. Sure, the premies are praising you for specifically protecting Glasser's anonymity and wringing your hands incessantly on his behalf. But that's only part of why they love you.

So how do I feel about the fact that the premies are praising me for doing these things? I think it's kind of sad that their opinion of ex-premies has sunk so low that they view these traits - which I don't see as exceptional at all - as uncommon behavior among ex-premies. I am glad that they appear to believe that ex-premies are capable of being honorable, honest, and civil, but I'm saddened that they apparently believe that this is such unprecedented behavior on the part of ex-premies that they have to mention it over and over again.

You're a fool. How dare you talk about premies' assessment of ex's honour or honesty as if they're in any position to advance an opinion worth considering! That disgusts me.

As for this being done at your expense - all I can say is that you have only yourself to blame for that. I can't defend your behavior towards premies any more, Jim, although I have done so in the past. Although I think your posts are often quite effective when you refrain from personal attacks, I don't agree with or respect the way you behave towards people who do not agree with you - including other ex-premies.

Fine. Your opinion.

You seem to expect me to present a united front with you simply BECAUSE you are another ex-premie. If I do not assume what you apparently feel is the politically correct ex-premie stance, you then accuse me of being dishonest, a premie sympathizer, disloyal, 'undercutting you' or worse.

It's got nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with the truth. See, unlike you, I do care about stopping m as much as possible; I do care if people follow him. So I'm bound to be less civil than you. I think we both understand that.

There is a post by you on Lifes Great right now in which you tell a premie that you think I am dishonest, so you obviously feel no need to present any kind of united front with me. And you have always attacked and criticized my stance and my beliefs in front of premies, so obviously, you do not hold yourself to the same standard.

I stand by that post. And yes, I do criticize you and your beliefs. I'm not looking for any kind of united front so much as one based in truth. I know, for reasons of my own, that I can't trust you at all. Whatever.

Well, that's it, if you really have to know.

So now an answer to your question. I think you have every right to be here. You're an ex-premie, the cult was part of your life experience. I question why you'd want to be here, though, for all the reasons we've discussed. Stonor, on the other hand, is just a busy body with nothing better to do in life, apparently.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:04:14 (GMT)
From: MK
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Stop sucking up to Jim Pat
Message:
It makes YOU look like the foolish one, not Stonor...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:52:26 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: MK
Subject: Stop sucking up to Jim Pat - yes, mommy
Message:
Look foolish? I like Jim and will suck up to him any time I want. Darling, nobody looks more foolish than a silly anonymouse with cult alzheimers. Let me see if I can jog your memory. Think DW. Boo!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:54:51 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: :) Take a nap, that's what I do.
Message:
And don't underestimate my awareness, PatC. Of Jim, or of you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:57:56 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: I've never underestimated either your awareness
Message:
or abilities. I was just hoping that you were not going to waste your sweetness on the desert air once more.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:08:45 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Yeah, sure, go cryptic on me ... another ...
Message:
avoidance tactic ...

speaking of desert air ... have you caught the latest installment of the 'Selene Factor' at AG ... Thelma is about to make a very GRAND appearance ... waving a pool cue as s/he conducts the Balyogeshwar(sp?) orchestra ...


.

.

NO .. I will NOT post the link because I know YOU wouldn't be caught DEAD there! But Thelma? ... the legend is beyond even your control .............

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:43:06 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: I didn't go cryptic on you. I went home.
Message:
I was at work and thought you were going to bed anyway and I came home and see this and you know very well I wasn't being cryptic. I was being tactful and a little bit dry. I thought you were not a yank and not quite so literal minded.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:54:37 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Stonor and PatC
Subject: capitalizing on the SF is ok on AG but...
Message:
But only in context. Please do not quote me out of context here.

ParC it's a running thread/story I am writing on AG. I made a reference to a picture and thread that Themla would have fit into very well. Not meant in my head to be any thing derrogatory.
Don'tknow if you have been following my threads but they are MINE and I have had to come here of all places to clarify.

shite on a stick. Where can I go and write me fiction and not get in trouble?

I guess i need to find a writer's forum that will put up with me.
sigh.
As for this place carry on... without me.
I can't function in The Tyanny of Structurelessness.
(good link JohnT)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 17:36:47 (GMT)
From: Mr Bozom
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Come here, I will protect you from this place
Message:
Pat, shame on you. Selene is a budding writer. You should support her, but look what your doing. Bad boy.

And as for the rest of the bullshit that is being said in the last 15 post, put a plug on it. Gosh, what's the matter with you lot.

Got to be the planets again.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 20:41:11 (GMT)
From: SF
Email: None
To: Mr Bozom
Subject: I thought he was supportive
Message:
He's not been here as long as I have. Lucky him.
Don't know if I am a budding writer or not but I will write if I want to so fuck all.
cheers whoever thee bee.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:50:12 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: The Tyanny of Structurelessness? - that's AG!
Message:
FV is quite sane in comparison.

Okay, I will check it out but please be warned that Thelma CANNOT be insulted. She is completely insult proof. She has seen the inside of a toilet bowl up close too many times or been caught crawling around on all fours hunting for a soggy roach which she dropped behind the bed and her mascara has run with tears so many times raking rivulets through her pancake exposing her five o'clock shadow.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 23:49:25 (GMT)
From: SF
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: she's a lot like me
Message:
Good to hear you are aware of all the dynamics here.
love ya.
ok outta here again! what a mess.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:08:58 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: The Tyanny of Structurelessness
Message:
The Tyanny of Structurelessness by Jo Freeman.

It's a must-read for groups moving from consciousness-raising on an issue, to making or facing more direct political challenges.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 06:14:57 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Uh oh, ... she's here!
Message:
Do you really interpret that as 'capitalizing'? (Where's the PROFIT in it ... TELL me!! :) I was inspired, and why should it 'get you into [ANY] trouble'?! Pat knows I did the post above, and Your story is so much fun that it seemed like it was needed here. If Pat reads it he can easily sort it out (and enjoy it!) himself, Selene.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:57:28 (GMT)
From: Steve Quint
Email: the_avenger55@hotmail.com
To: Stonor
Subject: I'm Glad To See Your Eye Is Doing Better nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 05:21:28 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Steve Quint
Subject: Albalon -A is the best, and an LCD monitor :) nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:39:41 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Katie H
Subject: I did what I thought was right - I know
Message:
Did I criticize you? No. It was your political choice and you did it without seeking anyone's approval and knowing that you would not please everybody. That's been the story of my life. Of course I have never been very good at diplomacy or real politik because I tend to leap before I look. But some people are good at it. It takes all kinds.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 07:57:07 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: right - and might
Message:
I still feel, as I said about a week ago, that political considerations or interpersonal rivalries have distorted judgements around this issue. Many exes whose judgement I enormously respect have opined that the confidentiality angle has been overplayed, to the detriment of EPO.

The truth of the matter is that exes are closer to the truth of the matter than are premies! Premies do tend to have illusions and delusions and problems with denial. It's really not hard to spot, and fudging this point is unwise.

It's not all relative, but the 'official' stance of Forum V seems to be culturally relativistic between the m scene and liberation from it. One problem is that such a stance serves to rationalise the giving of cover to anonymous attacks on the 'out' posters here.

This cultural relativism is not an impression that a sincere outsider would get from reading EPO generally, so it's a bit of a shock to find such values apparantly dominating the Forum's 'foreign policy'. I do feel I've been somewhat conned and I've been posting here for well over a year now!

Forum V does need ambassadors who can play hard-ball real politik with real skill and diplomacy. We have not only 'right', but a very great deal of legal validity ('might') on our side. But we are in big trouble if those ambassadors (for whatever reason) are seen to be at odds with the posters here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:08:40 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Up yours Jim.
Message:
It's not at the 'expense of the rest of you', Jim. It's primarily at YOUR expense, and that's what you can't take, isn't it? Such an ego you have, and it's such a sick one.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:27:07 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Sorry, Stonor, did you say something? NT
Message:
ddddddd
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:45:59 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: a very inflated ego
Subject: And it didn't cost you anything, Jim ...
Message:
You had already well earned it through your own highly consistent efforts.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 02:06:47 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I try never to answer your questions
Message:
Because they are leading, manipulative, and intended to elicit a certain response. They are not honest. And I object to the prejudical working of this one. I do not think that any praise of me and Brian was done at the expense of the rest of 'US' - speak for yourself, Jim!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:06:58 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: You don't?
Message:
Here's a fast cull:

Look at the abuse that the EX's heaped on Katie and Brian recently. They are still getting reamed by EX's THIRSTY FOR BLOOD!!!! Why? Because they've committed the ultimate sin of talking to premies with COURTESY AND RESPECT!!! OHMYGOD!! HOW DARE THEY!!

or:

(Be careful ,be cunning) and it really didn't bother me.I actually dont hide where I am from. What gets me is the very well thought out Forum guidelines which in IMO are completely ignored by a good number of X posters.Responsible types like Brian and Katie are howled down and derided whenever the reasonable approach you would expect on an OPEN forum is requested ' Burn em at the stake' cry the old hands!
Guys like Jim and his little band of wild things over there think dialogue has to evolve into a radical form of deprogramming. With the notable exception of one Sandford Pass I would have to say that most of the P's posting are rational , measured and considerate. It is in fact the Jim's, Deborah's, Nigel's and a few others who are in dire need of a little deprogramming and let me be the first one here to offer it to them. Catweasel can and will help! Step right up and get your free full frontal labotomy....Really some of the stuff chewed over just astounds me.

or:

You, Brian & Katie owe no apologies, IMO. You owned you part, which was NOT where the error occured, but the clean-up. You were straight about it with Charles G. You were straight about it with your people. This in the midst of heavy dis aproval. It's easy to be moral when everybody agrees with you. You did it when it was tough.

or:

[Katie, always happy to respond] to a courteous ex, and you are practically the poster child of that. And, of course we aren't all like him. Are all exes like Jim, or Janet? Of course not! His site does bring home, tho, IMO, that the more inflamatory exes are likely to color 1st reactions to EPO.

Clearly, you've given the premies a whole new perspective. There used to be ex-premies. Now there are good ones and bad ones.

Sorry for the leading questions. That's just me being dishonest again. I'll have to watch that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:30:01 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What is that aggressive gibberish?
Message:
Please settle down and write more coherently rather than so emotionally.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:49:25 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: You mean all that premie shit?
Message:
Like I said, those are just a few premie blurtations I skimmed off Lifes Great [sic].
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 03:57:59 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: No, I mean your 'style'...
Message:
and avoidance of others' points. You know what I think of premie 'mindset'.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:05:02 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Avoiding what points? NT
Message:
ddddd
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 04:10:28 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Try this one ...
Message:
above

but I know there's not much point in talking with you, but it has been a bit fun tonight. It's after midnight in Montreal - so let 'er rip, Jim!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:07:03 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: In other words: politics as usual
Message:
K and B's strategy has been diplomacy and I understand it completely and it may pay off in the long run. They did not have much of an alternative option considering that they ARE EPO in the minds of premies and have had EPO's credibility at stake. Yes, the premies on LG have now canonized them and demonized us but - hey that's ''real politik.''

I was looking at a few threads on LG today and quite a number of the premies accused the Hate club of being a cult. This has been said by premies here many times. I was trying to see it through their eyes. Many premies regard western civilization as a cult and premdom as the true society. Most of the articulate exes regard science and other western thinking as the best tools we have for understanding the world. Many exes are quite brainy. Many premies do not want to think not only because they believe that ''the ultimate truth cannot be undertood with the mind'' but because thinking may collapse their house of cards and, heaven forfend, lead to disagreement and conflict.

This espousal of western civilization, science and common sense is so foreign to the warm fuzzy fascists and New Age nazis that they cannot conceive that there is a basic agreement in western society of certain objective truths. The fact that many exes seem to agree on an unspoken level (ordinary everyday common sense needs not be explained again and again) must make it look like an esoteric society to people who have no respect for western civilization.

Yes, I belong to a cult - the cult of common sense and civility of limitation (thanks again Deb for a good phrase) in which we know the limits of what can and cannot be agreed upon as a society because the alternative is intellectual nihilism, another Tower of Babel where language ceases to have any agreed upon meaning.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:47:42 (GMT)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: But Jim the premie memosphere is niceness
Message:
Premies are mostly a microcosm of the prevailing pussy-footing politically correct eunuchs and New Age nice-nazis. You really have to send them back to kindergarten to start all over again. The politically correct nannies and premies both espouse the notion that there is no objective truth. This is because they know that their POVs will not stand scrutiny. They therefore take the position of ''whatever floats your boat'' (a phrase that has been thrown at me many a time in discussions with New Agers and premies.)

It is fascism of the warm fuzzies. It's taken over the world and I got ulcers and nearly turned into a Republican when I lived in Berkeley and the Haight till I realized that I couldn't win and just washed my hands of it. Unlike you I am not a crusader. I can't go out and be a missionary for my brand of old fogeyism but I will not tolerate it in my own backyard. So I won't attack it on LG but I will shred it over here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:39:57 (GMT)
From: DLB
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: 'won't attack on LG but I will shred it over here'
Message:
OOOOhh, who's a big scary missionary man then!?

I'm going to run and hide behind a bush until I stop shaking in fear.

The reason you don't attack on LG is cos you're gun's empty. You'd be mincemeat in five minutes.

DLB (Daddy's little boy)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 19:59:14 (GMT)
From: FA
Email: None
To: DLB/MK
Subject: MK please stick to one alias or you will be banned
Message:
Anonymous people are not allowed to use multiple aliases - not even if they think they are being funny. Last warning, MK. Do it again and you will no longer be tolerated here.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 04:52:41 (GMT)
From: MK
Email: MK
To: FA
Subject: Hypocrisy in FA rules
Message:
I'll have to contact the ISPAV about this before taking any action. It appears that you have allowed an ex-premie troll to flame me in two different threads using 'DLG' whilst apprehending me for replying to just one of them. This indicates a sickening bias that has already cost FV a gammut of credibility in the wider community.

So, correct me if I'm wrong... Ex premies can proudly strut around using their 'real' names whilst sprouting what they think is the good stuff. Then when they want to ABUSE someone they duck behind an alias? Oh how very convenient for them.
Get real mate, I wasn't born yesterday.

MK

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 23:28:19 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: what the *'%!
Message:
If one is being cynically deceived, or even if one is merely dealing with embedded, wilful ignore-ance it could be dishonest to appear to regard the opposition's arguments as being made in good faith.

To do so is a political convention that can help avoid a slide into ouvert conflict (!). And onlookers -- the constuency -- can be repelled by displays of over-intensity. There is an art in conjuring demos. But undeniably, the thesbian convention is also a form of dissembling, of dishonesty, and a possible source of corruption.

Everything is not relative; there is such a thing as the truth of a matter; honest people get angry with liars. And that can help liars see the game is up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 21:42:08 (GMT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I sort of agree with you
Message:
I think if civility means avoiding confrontation in this situation, then we are wasting our time. It's OK if we meet our girlfriend's parents to hold our tongue if they happen to have different political opinions, but this is a psychological battlefield, and we have to be true to what we know and even believe.

Premies who come here must expect to be challenged, and when we go over to LG, even as 'guests', they either have to change the rules so we are banned, or accept that we will challenge them.

John the it's too hot here in latvia to go to sleep.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 08:18:30 (GMT)
From: Chuck S.
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Very sensible, John (NT)
Message:
x
Return to Index -:- Top of Index