Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Sat, Aug 12, 2000 at 14:50:55 (GMT)
From: Aug 02, 2000 To: Aug 10, 2000 Page: 4 Of: 5


Joey -:- We got Katie...and we ain't lettin her go!! :) OT -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 13:31:59 (GMT)

EddyTheTurtle -:- M can go to India any time -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 11:07:45 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- M can go to India any time -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:37:46 (GMT)

buzz -:- have a nice day -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:33:19 (GMT)
__ poul -:- have a nice day -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 10:55:07 (GMT)

Loaf -:- Ant Farms, Parkinson's Law and the Queen Mother -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 07:40:16 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Ant Farms, Parkinson's Law and the Queen Mother -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 08:36:21 (GMT)
__ __ Joe -:- Happy 100th to the Queen Mum! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:43:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ Lurkex -:- Happy 100th to the Queen Mum! well......... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 22:51:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Sir David's Law -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:10:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Lurkex -:- Are you one of them? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:46:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Are you one of them? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 09:29:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave -:- The power behind the throne -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:56:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ gErRy -:- You live a long time too if... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:57:20 (GMT)

sam -:- anyone get k in Oz in 7o's? nt -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:09:08 (GMT)
__ Aussie ex -:- anyone get k in Oz in 7o's? nt -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 10:36:11 (GMT)

Joey -:- Goodnite Mickey, Donald, Goofy....))) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:21:17 (GMT)
__ Stonor -:- Goodnight individual thought? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:37:16 (GMT)
__ __ Joey -:- Thank you so very much, Stonor -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:08:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- Sweet Dreams, Joey! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:33:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Joey -:- Sweet Dreams to you, Stonor -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 06:44:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- PS re: Sweet Dreams to you, Stonor -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 13:36:51 (GMT)

Jim -:- FA's -- did you know that Daneane is blocked? -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:53:39 (GMT)
__ Forum Admin -:- FA's -- did you know that Daneane is blocked? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:29:21 (GMT)
__ __ Forum Admin -:- Try again now.... (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:33:07 (GMT)

Joe -:- Well? What about Dettmers? No Comments? -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:46:32 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Well? What about Dettmers? No Comments? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:32:05 (GMT)
__ __ Joe -:- I Agree, Dave... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:49:09 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Me not say anything? Are you kidding? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:46:18 (GMT)
__ __ Bill...dettmers the LIAR -:- Me not..... dettmers shared your distain??thats BS -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 06:02:24 (GMT)
__ __ Joe -:- Me not say anything? Are you kidding? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:25:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ O -:- Me not say anything? Are you kidding? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:11:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- Bullshit -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:28:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ O -:- I guess honor would be too much to expect -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:10:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- I guess honor would be too much to expect -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:43:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ O -:- I guess honor would be too much to expect -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:20:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- I guess honor would be too much to expect -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 03:28:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Bullshit, again O -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:22:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ O -:- Bullshit, again O -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:13:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Yeah, but what are you? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 00:35:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ la-ex -:- Bullshit, again O -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:15:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Me not say anything? Are you kidding? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:42:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- Me not say anything? Are you kidding? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:02:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Explanation owed to premies and exes alike -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:16:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- In Defense of Dettmers -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:49:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ bill -:- What search engine picks up that open letter? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 06:25:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- What search engine picks up that open letter? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 15:56:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ bill -:- What search engine picks up that open letter? -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 02:55:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Here's the MRC bullshit, bill.... -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 03:48:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ bill -:- Here's the MRC bullshit, bill.... -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 06:04:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- kewl bill, look forward to your comments (nt) -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 11:52:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- In Defense of Dettmers -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 17:22:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Exactly Marianne, you nailed it, good job (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:26:01 (GMT)
__ G -:- Comments -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:11:08 (GMT)
__ __ Gregg -:- The Proof is in the Pudding -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:59:46 (GMT)

Zelda -:- Jim- ..a word please -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 20:46:15 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- Zelda, I LIKED your post -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:12:40 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- How patronizing, Katie -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:03:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ Katie -:- Go flame some premies for a change, Jim! (nt) -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:45:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ Zelda -:- How patronizing, Katie -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:57:17 (GMT)
__ Stonor -:- All of you, a word please. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:05:27 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- All of you, a word please. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:29:59 (GMT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- All of you, a word please. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:43:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- All of you, a word please. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:19:29 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- That man, my dear, is a complete fool -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:19:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ Zelda -:- cheeze! ALL A YAS -are not getting it so far -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:22:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- A fuller explanation of y YOU don't get it, Zelda -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:53:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense ....... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:38:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Zelda -:- Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense ....... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:43:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense ....... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:31:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Zelda -:- Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense ....... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 07:53:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense ....... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:08:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Zelda -:- Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense ....... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 08:04:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Are you SURE you're not Cynthia? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:20:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Zelda -:- Are you SURE you're not Cynthia? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:31:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- That man, my dear, is a complete fool -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:25:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- And what's in it for me? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:55:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Self-centredness? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:15:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Not to change the subject but .... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:26:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Not to change the subject but .... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:31:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You're evading the question -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:31:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- YOU are the one evading the issue. (NT) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:56:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Bullshit, Stonor -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:44:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ gErRy -:- It's intense because Mercury is in retrograde... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:42:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- It's intense because Mercury is in retrograde... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:55:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Let me withdraw part of my last post -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:36:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- jeez you really know how to hurt a guy... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:43:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- You're just too sensitive(insert sarcasm emoticon) -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:06:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- Uh, (duh) what was the question again? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:58:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Some people are more sensitive to verbal abuse... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:11:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ George Dubya Bush (Shrub) -:- Retrograde? My Mercury's in the garage!!(NT) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:09:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Bliss is a Mercury in the garage!!(NT) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:35:26 (GMT)
__ Jerry -:- About astrology -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:08:49 (GMT)
__ __ Zelda -:- About astrology -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:04:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- About astrology -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 10:52:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Zelda -:- About astrology -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 20:41:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- About astrology -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 21:38:48 (GMT)
__ __ Michael -:- About astrology -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:28:24 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Oh, you want to talk about astrology, huh? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:09:28 (GMT)
__ __ Zelda -:- Jim needs Aromatherapy -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:28:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- Basil might be better for Jim! -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 03:03:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Zelda -:- Basil might be better for Jim! -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 08:20:50 (GMT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- Oh, you want to talk about astrology, huh? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:29:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ Joey -:- Oh, you want to talk about astrology, huh? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:38:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Could, shmould, Dave -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:39:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- Searching for Correlations...... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:31:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I agree wholeheartedly -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:57:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Don't go there, Jim -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:10:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Hey Dave, why don't we start shnozolas.com ? :) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:43:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Hey Dave, why don't we start shnozolas.com ? :) -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:25:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Hey Dave, why don't we start shnozolas.com ? :) -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 03:47:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- oh oh now I am busted -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 00:56:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- oh oh,me and my big mouth... -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 04:36:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mango Eater -:- with mango fibre stuck between your teeth? Not! -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 15:18:17 (GMT)

Jim -:- Four wrongs don't mkae a right -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 15:53:49 (GMT)
__ Rob -:- Hey diddle diddle.... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:37:59 (GMT)
__ The One you Despise -:- Mad man -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:39:39 (GMT)
__ sam -:- Is HEY an Aussie? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:55:02 (GMT)
__ __ Katie -:- Hey is catweasel -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:16:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ Felix the... -:- Hey Catweasel? You reckon? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:03:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Katie -:- Hey Catweasel? You reckon? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:50:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Whiskas -:- Hey Catweasel? You reckon? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:05:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Hey Catweasel? You reckon? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:16:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Now you let the Cat out of the bag -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:13:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- naw Roger has more integrity -:- Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 01:38:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You would apologize for outing him? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:02:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- You would apologize for outing him? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:13:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, I missed the joke -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:24:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- The joke is... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:40:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Ha ha -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:24:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- good grief Rob -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:40:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- good grief Rob -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:59:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Hi Rob -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 15:41:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Hi back -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:34:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Hi again Rob -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:59:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Bolt the cat flap, honey! -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:11:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Bolt the cat flap, honey! -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:28:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A good Mouser -:- A Cat at the Races -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:04:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- A Cat at the Races (OT) -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:20:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Other things on my mind -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:54:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- ps -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 06:16:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- ps to Rob -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 15:43:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- pps to Katie -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:38:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- you are wrong -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:11:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- and another thing for the record -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 20:09:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- are you kidding? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:47:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- this is getting very OT, but -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:57:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- also -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:02:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- uhhh... -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:22:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- uhhh... -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:01:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- uhhh... -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:14:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- so happy to provide some entertainment -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:07:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- Selene, I apologize -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:26:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- had a great trip -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:45:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- It was probably my ex-husband -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:50:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ The Burmese Manx -:- ps: You are reading far too much into this Rob -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 14:14:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- How about a group hug? (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:39:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Miaow -:- You would apologize for outing him? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:07:15 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- He's probably Amaroovian (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:59:52 (GMT)
__ Angry EX -:- IT 's MAHARAJI'S FAULT! -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 16:17:31 (GMT)
__ __ X -:- such an angry lad -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 06:35:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ SB -:- Can't drink beer anymore: It gives me an ugly skin -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 12:38:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ Lotus Eater -:- you got a problem with 'angryex' being angry? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:55:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ X -:- you got a problem with 'angryex' being angry? -:- Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:05:22 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- IT 's MAHARAJI'S FAULT! -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 16:55:18 (GMT)
__ __ Joe -:- Stopping Maharaji..... -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 16:34:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- Stopping Maharaji..... GREAT post, Joe! -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:50:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ shp -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 17:47:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ De Pro Gram Anand Ji -:- on being treated like God -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:40:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ shp -:- on being treated like God -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 12:50:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ But -:- and what do you know? 0 (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:20:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- No, that's not unreasonable, shp -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:05:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Does it take much effort to be that mean? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:34:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- 'Mean'? Give me a break (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:47:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Yeah, it was mean...nt -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:36:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- That's the worst post from you I've seen Jim (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:28:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- I thought it was kind of funny, myself -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:54:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- I thought you both had more class. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:28:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Okay, I really am going to kill myself now -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:59:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Talk about melodramatic! Give me a break! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:42:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Are you sure you're not a schoolteacher? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:48:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- You know (fucking) well that I'm a schoolteacher. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:11:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Well teachers shouldn't swear -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:15:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Should lawyers swear? Double standard? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:33:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Trying to change the subject back, are we? -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:58:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- I wear my hair the way it grows! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:27:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- ex-premie elitism is no better than premie elitism -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 13:22:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Two wrongs don't make a right. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:51:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- Then go and have your intelligent discussions (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:56:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yet another word you don't use properly! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:10:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- waving off the insult contest, go away. -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 19:47:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ SB -:- waving off the insult contest, go away. -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 16:30:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Great Post shp! -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 13:47:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You're a new age clown, shp -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:21:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- and you are still in high school, -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 12:28:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Yet another word you don't use properly! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:09:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yet another word you don't use properly! -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:28:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Then I must be doing something right (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:30:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ gErRy -:- Fuck, I thought Jim's response was hilarious, but -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:03:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Lotus Eater -:- just a few more steps -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:00:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- why treat a major con-artist as God? (nt) -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:55:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:42:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ shp -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 21:59:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Believe me when I say -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:47:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:59:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ SB -:- Very nice analysis G = Thanks (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:30:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Elaine -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:12:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 18:31:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ shp -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:06:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ G -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:31:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ gerry -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 17:57:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Carol -:- on being treated like God -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 18:19:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 18:20:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Way -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 18:17:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- on being treated like God -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:16:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- on being called 'Gentlemen'. Ladies? ... (nt) -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:53:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- on being called 'Gentlemen'. Ladies? ... -:- Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:19:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Lurkex -:- Premies, sibling rivalry and more... -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:20:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Carol -:- Premies, sibling rivalry and more... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 18:43:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ shp -:- Premies, sibling rivalry and more... -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 13:18:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ gerry -:- You are nuts, Sandy -:- Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 19:20:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Lotus Eater -:- Great post. (nt) -:- Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:12:07 (GMT)


Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 13:31:59 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: We got Katie...and we ain't lettin her go!! :) OT
Message:
If you think the coronation of Dubya as the Republican poster boy, was yesterday's top story....think again!
All I can say is this.
It's a great day to be Canadian!!
And God bless the True North Strong and Free!!
Yeeeeehaaw! Weeeedoggieeee!!

*********************************

Navy seizes Katie

Commandos put end to ship's 'hostage taking' of military shipment
ALLISON HANES, LEVON SEVUNTS of The Gazette contributed to this report
The Gazette; CP

The captain of the GTS Katie made one last gesture of defiance before his rogue vessel was stormed by Canadian commandos yesterday, ending a 21Ú2-week standoff on the high seas.

Flanked by two Canadian warships and with a Sea King helicopter hovering five storeys above the deck, Capt. Vitaly Khlebnikov sped up and swung his 750-foot cargo ship into a sharp turn. But it was futile.

As armed, dark-clad Canadian sailors from HMCS Athabaskan dropped one by one to the Katie's deck, the captain put out a mayday call over marine radio, saying his ship was being attacked by pirates and he needed help.

Yesterday afternoon, after exhausting all diplomatic and legal options and despite urgings from the United States to find a negotiated resolution, Canadian forces seized control of the American-owned, Soviet-built ship that had held 10 per cent of Canada's military hardware and three soldiers hostage in a contract war.

'Being held hostage by these companies is not something acceptable at all. It's totally unacceptable,' Canada's defence minister, Art Eggleton, said after the operation was complete. 'No responsible government can allow interference with its military capability.'

The Katie's defiance and unpredictability during the previous 24 hours clinched Canada's decision to unleash Operation Megaphone, Eggleton said.

When the ship's owner, Third Ocean Marine Navigation of Annapolis, Md., refused a settlement Wednesday night, it was given an ultimatum by the Canadian government, which already had permission to board from St. Vincent and the Grenadines, under whose flag the Katie sails.

In the wee hours of yesterday morning, the Katie began to move again after being anchored 86 nautical miles south of the Avalon Peninsula in Newfoundland since Sunday with two Canadian warships breathing down its neck. The ship sailed toward the Cabot Strait - but with the expressed intention of dropping anchor again outside Canadian waters.

At 1:45 p.m., the military pounced.

Two warships, the destroyer HMCS Athabaskan and the frigate HMCS Montreal, pulled up on each side within 1,000 yards of the GTS Katie, said Capt. Drew Robertson, who commanded the mission.

A warning was sent to the Katie before the boarding, telling it to hold its course and speed. But the ship veered violently.

Nevertheless, a Sea King helicopter carrying seven sailors approached the bridge of the Katie from the stern and the seamen, armed to the hilt, were lowered one by one to the deck from a height of five storeys.

The landed troops then secured the bridge and the upper decks while the Sea King brought seven more sailors and dropped them aboard.

Another Sea King, a Labrador helicopter and an Aurora surveillance plane backed up the operation.

The ship was captured within 45 minutes, Robertson said.

'The biggest challenge was for the Sea King pilot to deal with the (Katie's) manoeuvre,' Robertson said. 'The Sea King was pretty much rock steady at the bridge, and there was no danger to any of our personnel.'

Last night, 14 Canadian servicemen were in control of the Katie, reinforced by Master Cpl. Dan Daly, Cpl. Eric Lacroix and Pte. Jamieson Hatt - the three stranded at sea for more than two weeks during the contract war.

'The master (captain) was rather theatrical about our arrival but understandably so,' Robertson said. 'The crew was more welcoming.'

The Katie is being commanded by its own captain under the direction of the Canadian military on board, said Colonel Walter Natyncyk, director of joint operations.

If the captain ceases to co-operate, Natyncyk said, the military can fly in its own to pilot the vessel or get one of the warships to tow the captured ship.

By late evening, the commandeered vessel was south of Port aux Basques, on Newfoundland's southwest tip, and steaming toward the mouth of the St. Lawrence River. It is expected to reach port in Becancour by Sunday, where it is to unload 50 shipping containers of ammunition. Then it will be on to Montreal.

Aboard the Katie, Vitaly Khlebnikov, the ship's captain, said the armed invasion endangered the lives of his crew.

'God knows what would have happened if the helicopter had crashed on the containers below. We have 500 tonnes of high explosives on board.'

He questioned the need for a show of force. 'As far as I'm concerned, there never was a need for armed assault. We are all unarmed - we don't even have a slingshot on board.'

Khlebnikov refused to speak to the boarding party until he received word from General Maurice Baril, the Canadian Forces chief of staff, which arrived after 7 p.m.

The mood aboard the Katie after it was captured was quiet. But the crew is worried about what's awaiting them in Canada. 'We are afraid that we'll be taken off the ship and we won't get paid for all the work we did,' Khlebnikov said.

The owners of the Katie said they were shocked by Canada's actions.

'My reaction was ultimate surprise,' Peter Margan, president of Third Ocean, said from the company's Maryland offices. 'Angry is not a word I would use. I'm just surprised and confused.'

He said Third Ocean is now effectively bankrupt.

The Katie's high-seas standoff began with a dispute over payment between Third Ocean and Andromeda Navigation of Montreal. Halfway through its voyage back from Greece, the Katie slowed, then anchored on the high seas. It started and stopped three times before the military boarding.

Third Ocean said it is owed more than $288,000 by the Montreal contractor, but was offered only $90,000 in the last negotiations.

The Department of National Defence contracted SDV Logistics of Montreal to carry home from Kosovo 580 armoured vehicles and 390 shipping containers filled with military supplies valued at $223 million. SDV subcontracted the job to Andromeda, which then hired Third Ocean.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 11:07:45 (GMT)
From: EddyTheTurtle
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: M can go to India any time
Message:
M is certainly the richest Indian guru who has come from the East. But by far his biggest support is from India. If it gets really intense for him here...he will just liquidate his assets and go and retire in India away from the IRS and the angry crowds...I think he has it all worked out...

You want some examples..

Asele Nadar who escaped to Cyprus after his multi-billion dollar co. collapsed..and many more....So Prem Nagar is still waiting for Prem Pal Singh

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:37:46 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: EddyTheTurtle
Subject: M can go to India any time
Message:
Not Prem Nagar. That's owned by Maharaji's brother, Satpal Maharaj Ji (formerly Bal Bagwan Ji). The trouble is, Maharaji won't make as much money in India, with the Rupee being such a poor currency. Mind you, he will be able to live like a king there with the exchange rate from dollars and Swiss Francs to Rupees and I'm sure he has plenty of money stashed away for such an eventuality.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:33:19 (GMT)
From: buzz
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: have a nice day
Message:
to all the premies,ex premies,and to m.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 10:55:07 (GMT)
From: poul
Email: None
To: buzz
Subject: have a nice day
Message:
And have a nice day to Hitler and all the other nice out there
after all
We are all love love love
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 07:40:16 (GMT)
From: Loaf
Email: None
To: All the Premies
Subject: Ant Farms, Parkinson's Law and the Queen Mother
Message:
I have just had a momentary thought as to how carefully this forum must be being read by EV internationally, by how many people, and what a great game it must be to lift a stone and find all sorts of creepy crawlies gnashing their teeth and bearing arms.

I am sure that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of PWKs or PAMs who lurk here from time to time, just for their own enjoyment - but it is to those who have a service to do in monitoring the activities of the exes that I should like to say a special 'hello'.

From having done security/guest reception over years - and knowing the intensive culture of briefing and debriefing, co-ordinators, planning and policy initiatives, teamwork trainings... I don't think the ex premie org(anisation)could possibly overestimate how much pleasure they/we are giving to so many people.

There is nothing like righteousness to give the self esteem a boost.

It must feel great to be at home (or at work), having practiced, read your first class stuff (especially if you are able to read other peoples- Rajaji !) - and then log on here, and start making notes as to in what direction the threads are going, what are the concerns being raised (not only for security issues, but aspirant farming issues too)

I wonder how many peope are reading this now, in a 'professional' capacity.

I wonder how much paperwork/manhours can be filled with the growth industry of net watching/PR/security/aspirant question anticipation ? Is there a limit ? We are spawning and creating(as in Parkinson's Law) an entire middle management service sector !

The devil finds work for idle hands.

I am sure that there are the unlicenced vigilante Premies as well as the civil servants - and the PAMs. I wonder if the Royal (Rawat)household log on for a giggle.

I have no idea who is out there listening - and so talking to you all today, cannot feel far from being Queen Elizabeth II - and giving a speech to the comonwealth. At least M knows who he is talking to. (himself, chiefly).

But it is peculiar for one to be addresssing so many people in different parts ofthe world, many of who one has not had the opportunity or pleasure of meeting face to face.

So on that thought, one will straighten one's tiara , and wish you all a long, happy and fulfilled life, wherever you may be.

Happy 100th Birthday Mummy.

And may God bless you all.

HRH Loaf

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 08:36:21 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Loaf
Subject: Ant Farms, Parkinson's Law and the Queen Mother
Message:
Here, here! God bless her Majesty and all who sail in her.

I have that most excellent book, 'Parkinson's Law' and as you know, the primary law is that work expands to fill the time available for its completion.

Since premies have nothing to do other than watch Maharaji's videos once a week and do a bit of participation at weekends (if they're in a team), there's ample time for them to get down to the real work of dissecting this place.

We are giving them important work to do and should not balk at our responsibility. If it wasn't for us, the premies would have to try and meditate or watch another video. And God knows, they've had their fill of that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:43:09 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Happy 100th to the Queen Mum!
Message:
Boy, for 100, the old girl looks great.

My grandparents on my Mother's side, in the US since the Revolution, but of stout British stock, had a framed picture of the King and Queen when they visited the US in a tour in the late 30s. My grandparents went all the way to Washington DC, to see them. I remember seeing that picture when I was a child.

The Queen with her dark hair looking very beautiful in the picture. She outlived my grandparents by a long shot, who would have been about the same age.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 22:51:48 (GMT)
From: Lurkex
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Happy 100th to the Queen Mum! well.........
Message:
Have you read Kitty Kelley's book 'The Royals?' It's fantastic, and the kind of book you wish someone would write about the ex-Holy Family. It has extensive historical research and boy, the shit those assholes have been up to is only paralleled by... well you know which other assholes.

And the 'dear old Queen Mum' gets shown as the queen asshole.Never really cared about people.

And in the end, that is what we are complaining about here, although there are a million strands to discuss. The chilling realization that someone that we had set up as benevolent and loving to us, a protector, someone worthy of our whole lives, in fact, didn't really love us at all.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:10:43 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Lurkex
Subject: Sir David's Law
Message:
I think that comes with the job of being a monarch. I mean, monarchs usually have a reputation for being cold and uncaring. That's nothing new to Britain and our monarchs. We know the dear old Queen Mum is as hard as nails underneath and rules the Winsor firm with a rod of iron.

But I think that monarchs have to be that way. They are made that way from an early age. Look back in history at King Henry VIII and his daughter, Queen Elizabeth. Both ruled with an apparently cold and often ruthless hand and yet both were very popular with the people when the going was good.

They both had scandals and sent people close to them to their deaths by the axe. However, neither of them would have survived as monarchs if they had not been so ruthless since the slightest sign of weakness would often start an uprising and possible revolution.

Before I mentioned Parkinson's law - well here is Sir David's law;

A power vacuum is only filled by those possessing the qualities to seize that power.

That is also true for democracy. The qualities needed to seize power are ruthlessnes and determination to succeed at all costs. Power does not go to people possessing a weak stomach and it does not fall into the hands of the faint hearted.

And for this reason, the people in power are often not very nice people. It is unavoidable and also logical.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:46:15 (GMT)
From: Lurkex
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Are you one of them?
Message:
Since you are Sir Dave, do you belong to the corrupt powerful nobility? How are you dealing with this much power?

I always get a good larf at yer posts, cor blimey!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 09:29:00 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Lurkex
Subject: Are you one of them?
Message:
Like I told her Maj only the other day, if we don't occupy Buck House (The Palace) then it will become full of smelly tourists and other common people all gawping ignorantly at all those fine, priceless works of art.

Anyway, I'm off now to polish my armour...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:56:56 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: The power behind the throne
Message:
The Queen Mother looks like a dear old lady and let's face it, to get to 100 and be as active as her is an incredible achievement which is most unusual. But people who know her say that underneath she's a woman of steel and is the real power behind the Royal Family and the Queen.

She still rules the roost and all Royals are subservient to her. She is the Godmother of 'The Firm', which is what the Royals call their organisation. If the Queen Mum doesn't like something - it is discarded. Nobody ever goes against her.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:57:20 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: You live a long time too if...
Message:
You had reptile genes, the old snake !!!

Say you love Natas...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:09:08 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: -
To: Everyone
Subject: anyone get k in Oz in 7o's? nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 10:36:11 (GMT)
From: Aussie ex
Email: None
To: sam
Subject: anyone get k in Oz in 7o's? nt
Message:
Yeah, I did, but I'm not 'out' here. Do you want to get in touch? Is there some way I can contact you in a less public space?

AE

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:21:17 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Goodnite Mickey, Donald, Goofy....)))
Message:
An eight-year-old boy approached an old man in front of a wishing well, looked up into his eyes, and asked:

'I understand you're a very wise man. I'd like to know the secret of life.'

The old man looked down at the youngster and replied:

'I've thought a lot in my lifetime, and the secret can be summed up in four words

The first is think. Think about the values you wish to live your life by.

The second is believe. Believe in yourself based on the thinking you've done about the values you're going to live your life by.

The third is dream. Dream about the things that can be, based on your belief in yourself and the values you're going to live by.

The last is dare. Dare to make your dreams become reality, based on your belief in yourself and your values. '

And with that, Walter E. Disney said to the little boy,

Think, Believe, Dream, and Dare.

Found at: A Quiet Place for the Mind

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:37:16 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Goodnight individual thought?
Message:
I like what you posted, but Walt Disney Inc. has corrupted 'children's literature' without any concern except for the big buck and the 'American Dream', and all 'thought' has been reassuringly pre-packaged.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:08:46 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Thank you so very much, Stonor
Message:
I like what you posted, but...

Stonor if you really liked what I posted, why did you have to put your big but in the way. I mean, really!

BTW, if you really think Walt Disney Inc. bastardized the American Dream, just think of the job Elan Vital Inc. did on it. Okay?!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:33:30 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Sweet Dreams, Joey!
Message:
Joey, just think of the number of people that Disney reaches and affects as compared with EV, OK?' Get the 'bigger' picture?

Don't let the bugs bite!

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 06:44:19 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Sweet Dreams to you, Stonor
Message:
Stonor, now YOU get THIS picture.
I'd rather be reached and affected by Disney, than by EV, ANY DAY !
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 13:36:51 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: PS re: Sweet Dreams to you, Stonor
Message:
Don't let the bugs bite!

I slept pretty well last nite, Stonor.

The only bug that bit was you, but then again, you're just such a lovable little buggie....:::)))

Have a great day, Stonor!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:53:39 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: FA's -- did you know that Daneane is blocked?
Message:
Hi guys,

Just got email from Daneane who, apparently, was blocked at the same time some scoundrel who shares her ISP was. Do you know anything about this? Anything you can do for her?

Thanks,

Jim

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:29:21 (GMT)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: FA's -- did you know that Daneane is blocked?
Message:
Ok, I'll sort it out. Sorry Daneanne - expect to be back on board shortly.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:33:07 (GMT)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Try again now.... (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:46:32 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Well? What about Dettmers? No Comments?
Message:
Hey you guys, I noticed there was not one comment on Mr. Michael Dettmers and his continuing silence in the public arena about his former master, nor even to mention some of the stuff he said to all of us during the time he was Maharaji's right hand man. Like this particular piece of self-esteem-destroying, cult-think:

That is the vow that we say to Maharaj Ji when we receive Knowledge; that's the acknowledgement that we make, and that's about as simple as the qualifications are. They're not that we have to be great yogis, that we have to be detached, that we have to be all of these things that we think we need to be in order to be realizing Knowledge. But just to recognize that we are weak, that we are ignorant, and that we are filled with the impurities of this world, and that it is that Love and that is that Grace that Guru Maharaj Ji bestows upon us that can take us beyond it, that can take us beyond all of those limitations.

We just have to keep recognizing that he's always here and always with us.

Okay, Michael, someone whom the premies respected because Maharaji had selected him to be a major honcho, and whom we believed knew what he was talking about with such conviction because of that and because of his close proximity to the Perfect Master, says that we are weak, ignorant, and 'full or impurities of the world' and that Maharaji is 'always with us.'

I'm sure Michael now has a new understanding that this is all total nonsense, but I'm sure Michael also realizes how damaging this kind of indoctrination is to people living self-actualized lives, especially because Michael realized at some point, apparently not as of the time of the Poconos though, that Maharaji indeed wasn't god, wasn't 'always with us' and couldn't 'save us.'

So, I ask this question again. Don't any of you other people, like me, who fell for the things Michael is saying here think Michael has an obligation to come out publicly and clarify things and set the record straight? Am I the only one who feels this way?

Do you think Michael should be given an indefinite free ride here?

Jim, for example, why aren't you saying anything about this? Is this the twilight zone? I don't get it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:32:05 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Well? What about Dettmers? No Comments?
Message:
I think all of the premies who affected the lives of the many in this way have a clear responsibility to retract everything which they said, publically.

Myself, in my own small way did inform the people who I'd convinced that Maharaji was something special, that he was just another fake. I told them that I'd been deluded when the subject of Maharaji ever came up.

The programming lasts for years, decades even. There are many people walking around with the seventies programming still in their heads. It takes a long time to dismantle it and requires the help of people who used to know Maharaji well, to speak the truth.

Failure to do so reflects badly on them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:49:09 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: I Agree, Dave...
Message:
Seeing other people, who we listened to and believed were having 'that experience', come forward and tell the truth about what was really going on, and what they think about it all now, is very powerful in helping people undo the programming.

That's why I agree with you that premies who have become ex-premies, especially if they were initiators, honchos or people like Michael Dettmers, have a moral and ethical obligation to come forward and aid in that process.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:46:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Me not say anything? Are you kidding?
Message:
Joe,

I posted the thing, for god's sake? What? I have to say the obvious all the time? Sheesh!

Actually, I emailed Mike a week or so ago and asked him what was happening. He'd said all along that he was going to do something, just not sure what. Around the time of the MRC letter he said he was going to make some effort to contact Maharaji and take up some of these accountability problems with him. Or something like that. (I'm sure I'm mischaracterizing this one way or another. These matters are oh so delicate!)

When I last talked to Mike the EV FAQ had just come out and he shared my disdain at the outright lies, one after another, that run throughout. Like I say, he was going to do something, jsut not sure what. I told him that I was wary of him doing nothing today, nothing tomorrow and ultimately nothing ever if for no other reason than the fact that Michael no longer follows the third commandment ('Do not put off until tomorrow what you can do today').

Mike asked for a bit of time to think, a bit of space, and I gave him that.

Then I emailed him asking what's what but he never got back to me. Mind you, to be fair, for all I know he's out of town, busy as hell, sick as a dog, swamped at work... who knows?

Then, after I posted this old Poconos shit I sent him a copy of my post, but I still haven't heard anything.

Like I say, the guy could be on holidays.

Or maybe he's just kind of thinking ........

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 06:02:24 (GMT)
From: Bill...dettmers the LIAR
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Me not..... dettmers shared your distain??thats BS
Message:
Dettmers is such a liar.
I dont believe a word of his.
His posts here were deliberate attempts to sway us with fraudulent 'inner circle' revisionist history.
I for one think his posts reveal enough to make me strongly suspect that his involvement has been a lot more than his claim to have not 'seen' m in person 'in a few years' implies.

I guess a liar like him would look negatively at the FAQ when you pointed the stuff out to him but the FAQ is small white lies compared to dettmers huge deceits he tried to pull off here.

If he contacts his partner in crime, the lord rawat, he will more than likely offer his services to rewrite the FAQ in a more deceitful way and that is not helping anyone.

What is he going to reccomend? He is hardly in a position to lead anyone to honesty about this subject.

How about reposting the dettmer posts for a dissecting party.

Dettmers didnt say one goddamn truthful thing in all his typeing here. he didnt answer anyones questions, and anytime he ....oh,
there is just too much to bring up tonight.
Even his supposed apology about the ashram was delusional. and was also a worthless fraud. Although some here were heartened by even that fetid offering that hinted (faked) of a sincere impulse.

By the way, he also didnt answer the questions about his stealing money during the years he ran the money operation for the lord of the universe.

I am glad the forum angels left the inactive file like it is, thanks, I got the chance to read it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:25:04 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: Joger02@aol.com
To: Jim
Subject: Me not say anything? Are you kidding?
Message:
You did post his satsang, but what I didn't hear from you was any comment on his total lack of participation here. I think it's also time to talk about my emails with him.

I told Michael I would lay off discussing him on the forum to give him time to approach Maharaji personally. He said he might do that, but agreed with me that there was just about as much chance as a snowball in hell that Maharaji would ever change his ways based on an appeal about what was the right thing to do.

The MRC letter makes it clear that Maharaji has no intention of responding, in other than the lies on Elan Vital, to a reasonable request that he have some integrity and do the right thing. Frankly, I think there are few premies or ex-premies who are surprised about that, given Maharaji's total inability to accept responsbility for anything in his entire life, from what I can tell.

I told Michael that I would do that, but that it was imperative to me, that there be a limited period of time, and that if Maharaji does not respond, he would go public and discuss, openly, his involvement with Maharaji, why he left, and all the rest. He promised me he would. Months passed, nothing happened, and we all kept our mouths shut here, including, I'm sure to the astonishment of everyone, you.

Then, I had a series of emails with him again, after refusing to talk to him on the phone and concerned because nothing was in writing (I have the emails if you want to see them), he completely renegged on his promise to me, and said he had no intention of doing that, didn't know what he was going to do about any of this, if anything at all, and was basically unresponsive to my position that he had a moral obligation to be of assistance to people still in the cult, as well as to people trying to process what the hell it was all about now that they are out.

So, I personally had a problem remaining silent any longer, and so, I took your posting of his Poconos satsang as a time to state it.

There is one other thing that has caused me to lose trust in him that I am currently having a problem about whether I should go public with it or not. I think at some point I am going to have to, but it involves other people, and I'm just not sure at this point. But for me, it's a big problem.

So, I think we should forget the behind-the-scenes discussions with Michael and bring everything in the open, and there is more to say about that. But it doesn't appear that requests for him to do the right thing are getting anywhere. That's my opinion, if anyone has any other perspectives, I'm certainly open to being convinced.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:11:39 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Me not say anything? Are you kidding?
Message:
You said>>>'There is one other thing that has caused me to lose trust in him that I am currently having a problem about whether I should go public with it or not. I think at some point I am going to have to, but it involves other people, and I'm just not sure at this point. But for me, it's a big problem.'

Me>>>So let me get this straight Joe.You are threatening to expose things Michael has shared with you in confidence unless he plays ball and blows the whistle on Maharaji,who apparently he considers his friend.That's dispicable!
I wonder,when the final bullet has been fired and you've accomplished your goal of completely trashing the name of Maharaji,true or otherwise,how much of your own integrity wil be left standing?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:28:03 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Bullshit
Message:
Absolutly NOTHING Michael disclosed to me was IN CONFIDENCE. Let me just set that straight. I would never have agreed to that. What I agreed to do was DELY discussing any of it, to give Michael the chance to approach his old boss without him knowing he was talking to me and other ex-premies. The delay period is now over.

I am not making any threats to anyone; the troubling incident I mentioned was something that made me question what Michael might do. But I have made absolutely no promises to anyone about what I might decide to talk about.

All we have to do to 'trash' the name of Maharaji is to remind people what he actually did and said. The pictures, in particular, are worth a thousand words.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:10:35 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: I guess honor would be too much to expect
Message:
Absolve yourself as you must but if Michael has information he wanted to share he would probably do it.If you take a 'spill the beans or I will' stance when he is not prepared to do so then that amounts to extortion,unless of course he was aware of those terms and was ok with it.But I suppose he can speak to that,and if he was under an illusion he would be treated honorably that's his problem.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:43:03 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: O
Subject: I guess honor would be too much to expect
Message:
...but if Michael has information he wanted to share he would probably do it.

Of course he has information, damaging information-information which if brought forward would very much advance the process of exposing m for all he's worth and help spark an IRS investigation of m and the cult.
Problem is that because Michael played such a key role, at such a high level and for so long in m's organization, if the IRS investigated, Michael himself would become a subject of investigation, and that obviously scares the shit out of him.
It would take an individual of conscience and great courage to come forward under those circumstances and courage and conscience aren't adjectives to be used in describing Michael Dettmers these days.

Dettmers has already been pushed out of the inner core of m's Pamdom, already set up for the fall if the awful day of an IRS investigation ever happens. His only goal in communicating with the exes participating on this forum would be to soften our righteous anger at the cult, weaken our sense of togetherness with a divide and conquer strategy, and finally lull us into inaction.
And I'm not even sure how much of that is because he genuinely likes or even respects m. It's simply because he needs to save his own ass.
If he had some conscience and courage, he'd get himself a really good lawyer and come forward to speak the truth.
The title of your post is actually quite apropos, not vis a vis Joe or anyone else here, but in terms of Dettmers himself.

'I guess honor would be too much to expect.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:20:47 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: I guess honor would be too much to expect
Message:
You said>>>'Of course he has information, damaging information-information which if brought forward would very much advance the process of exposing m for all he's worth and help spark an IRS investigation of m and the cult.'
Me>>>You got something to back that up or you just blowing smoke out your ass.

You said>>>'It would take an individual of conscience and great courage to come forward under those circumstances...'
Me>>>You mean someone like you Joey?Are you the example of conscience and courage we should all be following?Or just a legend in your own mind.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 03:28:05 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: O
Subject: I guess honor would be too much to expect
Message:
You said>>>'Of course he has information, damaging information-information which if brought forward would very much advance the process of exposing m for all he's worth and help spark an IRS investigation of m and the cult.'
Me>>>You got something to back that up or you just blowing smoke out your ass.

Common sense is all one needs to arrive at the conclusion I expressed in my post. You know it, but you won't admit it.

You said>>>'It would take an individual of conscience and great courage to come forward under those circumstances...'
Me>>>You mean someone like you Joey?Are you the example of conscience and courage we should all be following?Or just a legend in your own mind.

Now if that's all you can say, you proved my point. I'm done with you, asshole.
Needless to say, 'I guess honor would be too much to expect' from you as well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:22:41 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Bullshit, again O
Message:
Michael didn't tell me anything that hasn't already been discussed here by many other people. Plus, Michael never once ever asked that anything he told me not be talked about, and he talked about it with more people that just me. Don't be such a drama queen about this.

As I have said, I am not interested in the dirt on Maharaji and his personal life. What I would like to see, and what I would be interested in, would be to see Michael talk about how he came to the understanding that he did, that while I think he likes and respects Maharaji personally, he stopped believing Maharaji was a 'master' who had anything to teach him and he didn't want to follow him anymore. You know, how did Michael get from saying what he did in the Poconos, in which he talked about Maharaji as an being who is 'always with us' to no longer believing that. The interesting and helpful information would be about Michael as a human being, not a characiture of Maharaji.

That's what is important here, in my opinion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:13:32 (GMT)
From: O
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Bullshit, again O
Message:
You said>>>'As I have said, I am not interested in the dirt on Maharaji and his personal life. '
Me>>>Give me a f--king break Joe.You are the biggest gossip queen on the forum.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 00:35:00 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Yeah, but what are you?
Message:
As far as I can tell, you are also just as interested in reading dirt as anybody else. Why else are you here? It certainly isn't to convince anyone of anything, that's for sure. This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, dear.

Premies are the very biggest gossips about Maharaji of any people I have ever heard, and you are a liar if you say different, because I know.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:15:09 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: O
Subject: Bullshit, again O
Message:
O-can you please explain to us, what is the purpose of your arguing with Joe?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:42:03 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Me not say anything? Are you kidding?
Message:
My interaction with Michael parallels yours. Same thing, really. I feel like I've bent over backwards in several respects, letting him foist his particular jargon on me (sorry, Mike, but even then I told you how little patience I have for special language for non-technical matters), giving him privacy and time to mull over his actions and, most importantly, taking his calls! Hey, I'm a busy guy....

But, unlike you, Joe, I did get the feeling that he was at least trying. Trying what I don't know. Maybe just trying to buy some time or give some false impression of concern or agreement. I don't know. The few posts he made here were so disappointing vis-a-vis coming to terms with the heart of the issues I must say I hoped he was just warming up. But then, what do you know, his car seems to be back in storage.

But let's be fair about this, huh? He really could be caught up in something else a bit right now. I mean what if he was just about to say or do something and ... hm, it doesn't sound too likely as I type it and you read it, does it?

I have to admit that he has something very fundamental to deal with and that is his own revisionism, forget about Maharaji's. Mike said, in no uncertain terms, that he was trying to encourage Maharaji to become, well, something of the vague, empty 'master' he is today. Now that's not my cup of tea but that's beside the point. Point being that he was trying to deconstruct the God myth way back when.

But read Dettmer's satsang from the fall of '77. I don't thiiiiiink so! So what about that, Mike? Come on, brother, let's have a little Satchitanand on this, shall we? That was vintage grovel speak. The results might different but I doubt you'd find anything more fanatical in any cult anywhere. This 'Catholic period' stuff was the real thing and Dettmers, contrary to how he might like to remember himself, was trading in it wholesale.

So then sadly, this and Michael's reluctance so far to do anything but promise to think about doing something raises a little doubt, yes it does. And are we supposed to continue to take his word about anything? About the 'intervention' that he claims was not about alcohol, for instance?

This is a sad, sad day in the developing ex-premieship of Michael Dettmers. I jsut hope we hear from him soon.

And, yes, I'd love to know what that other issue is you're talking about? Email me?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:02:12 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Me not say anything? Are you kidding?
Message:
No Jim, Michael was clear to me that he didn't know what, if anything, he would do, in complete contradiction to his earlier statements to me that he was going to do something and do it SOON, and asked that I just hold off talking about him on the forum, until then, and I agreed on the condition that he would go public. I think it was the idea that if Maharaji knew he was talking to us Momnots, he would never get the 'audience' he wanted. So that completely changed. It wasn't because he's busy remodeling his house that he hasn't done anything, I think he no longer thinks he wants to, can or will.

I get the same impression as you that Michael sincerely wants to do SOMETHING to work through this, and he freely admits that Mahraji is deceiving people into worshipping him, but he has a lot personally to work through, I'm afraid not the least of which is he own, personal involvement in the cult, the businesses and such. I don't know exactly what that is, but I suspect it's part of what is going through Michael's head.

I also think Michael still holds onto a gossimer thread that his old pal Maharaji, whom I guess he developed something of a close personal relationship with while Maharaji and Marolyn we having marriage problems, might just do something with some integrity once and for all, maybe if Michael could just convince him, maybe by carrying on the dispute he and Maharaji had when he left, that Maharaji had to tone down the god and devotion stuff or was headed to being an irrelevent footnote in history. This of course, has proven to be a foolish idea in my opinion, and I no longer want to be part of the charade.

But as I told Michael, my committment to all this, to the extent I have one, isn't to Maharaji or reforming or tearing him down. I couldn't care less what happens to Maharaji or what he thinks. My concern is for the people who are following him, have left but still hold on to the idea that he is their savior, and ex-premies who are trying to put their lives back together. Those are the important people in my opinion.

I know how hard it was for me to get out of the Maharaji cult, with little or no support, and I have always felt that those years I wasted following Maharaji might be put to some positive use by telling the other side of the sordid story of Maharaji and his cult. I keep hoping that Michael will see that as something he can contribute as well. I think he really could.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:16:08 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Joe and Jim
Subject: Explanation owed to premies and exes alike
Message:
Jim and Joe: I told you guys that Michael Dettmers would NEVER, EVER own up to any responsibility for his role in the cult. I am not surprised at all that he has failed to post here or to do anything in response to the MRC letter or to EV's list of lies.
He's still deep in his own denial, just like Joan Apter and all that garbage she spewed at Jim, about how we were all responsible for our own reality when we were involved with Rotwat. For Michael Dettmers to tell what he knows about M and DLM/EV, he would have to confront head on his own responsibility for the thousands of lives that were damaged by involvement in the cult. He would have to think about us little ashram peons, the folks who went without underwear, necessary medical care, and sleep, among many other things, so that Rotwat and the honchos could enjoys lives of luxury. He would have to think about how we sacrificed so that he, among other people, could end up owning companies started with premie slave labor that made them lots of money. There are so many contradictions in the kind of behavior that he engaged in versus what M was ostensibly espousing that I would be amazed if he were to allow himself to admit these things publicly, no less on this forum.

I DO think we are all owed a full and complete explanation about what happened with the cult, with our money, about just how Rotwat got so wealthy (I'm talking explicit details here), and that Dettmers owes it to us. I just think the guy is too ego involved, and still has some sick, twisted attachment to Rotwat that he can't find the strength within himself to do it.

I am pretty pissed about this topic. I think Dettmers just strung you guys along, like the old days. I think that your efforts, and those of others who talked to him, are highly admirable and laudable -- so please do not misunderstand. I just think the guy was a total jerk for doing what he did in the cult,that he lied to you about his intentions, and that he pulled another fast one on us again. I have absolutely no respect for him at all.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:49:43 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: In Defense of Dettmers
Message:
Marianne,

I don't think it's quite that simple, although I can see it appears that way. Michael Dettmers is sincerely trying to come to terms with his cult involvement and how to proceed, I really think he is. He told me things about Maharaji and his involvement that he probably wouldn't have, if he was just 'stringing us along.'

I think I should also say, that Michael Dettmers was actually INVOLVED in WRITING the MRC letter that is currently on the Internet at www.openlettertomaharaji.org. I mean, he actually helped write the letter, although I don't think Michael knew it was going to end up on the Internet or that the MRC was going to take out the advertisement in the Boston Phoenix in June, at the time of the Boston program. And I think the letter accurately reflects what Michael believes.

I agree with Jim, that Michael just isn't sure how to deal with all this, and in many ways is like many of us were when we began to seriously think about our involvement in the Maharaji cult and how we incorporate all that into our lives today. And of course, Michael was in a very different cult that most of the rest of us were. I think in many ways he is kind of out of touch with the ways ordinary premies, ashram premies, community premies, and the rest, actually lived, what we believed, and how it messed up our lives.

I don't think Michael suffered most of the stuff other premies did. Indeed, it appears Michael's involvement was a career boost for him. So, he may fee that he, personally, didn't lose much during the years he was helping Maharaji do what he did. On the other hand, there may be things that happened to him in the cult that are more damaging than what happened to many others.

But, again, I don't think Michael was in any way deceptive, just kind of 'floating' and going through a lot of changes about all this. And I hope he sorts through it all. It's just that I couldn't just remain silent about what was going on.

Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 06:25:46 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: What search engine picks up that open letter?
Message:
sfdg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 15:56:10 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: What search engine picks up that open letter?
Message:
Just go to www.openlettertomaharaji.org

As you can see, I too am skeptical of Dettmers.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 02:55:28 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: What search engine picks up that open letter?
Message:
Hi Marianne,
I keep trying search in Yahoo and GOto an Infoseek and...
and I get 'no results found'
If You typed it right, I copied it right, but I cant get to it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 03:48:04 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: Here's the MRC bullshit, bill....
Message:
...and please don't puke.

Imo, it's a load of crap. A cult set-up to allow m to get away scott-free. No mention of the real issues such as the cults sexual abuse, material abuse and m's abuse of power. No mention of compensation to the victims. No mention of means of future accountabilty for his organization to comply with.
And we exes are expected to take this shit seriously.

BUT WHAT IS talked about is alot of la-dee-dah irrelevant crap.

I'll let you decide for yourself

**********************************************

MAHARAJI RESPONSIBILITY CAMPAIGN
MaharajiResponsibilityCampaign@hotmail.com

June 9, 2000

Dear Mr. Rawat a.k.a. Maharaji,

We are concerned premies, former premies, and the families and loved ones of both. We are writing to request an honest dialogue with you regarding a number of unresolved issues resulting from an important period in our lives - - a period in which you played a crucial role.

When you first came to the West in 1971, you presented yourself, by your words and your actions, as 'Perfect Master,' a divine being worthy of devotion and worship. Your devotees, in turn, signed over trust funds, gave you extravagant gifts, literally kissed your feet, and approached you with unmitigated awe and reverence. You also threatened your followers with dire circumstances that would befall them should they ever stop practicing your teachings, known as 'Knowledge,' move out of one of your monastic ashrams (prior to when you summarily closed the ashrams in 1983), or even entertain doubts about Knowledge or you. Thus, you created a climate of fear that ultimately limited your followers' personal development.

We, especially those of us who call ourselves former premies, accept our responsibility for allowing ourselves to be led to believe in you as one worthy of worship and devotion. However, you also have a deep moral responsibility to address these issues and to explain publicly your motivations for your behavior, to take responsibility for your actions, and to explain the steps you are taking to ensure that worship of you does not continue or recur. We also feel you have a responsibility to dissuade, without equivocation, your current followers from the notion that you are a more perfect human being than they themselves are.

Some of your former followers feel that Knowledge has some value. Others consider it a quite ordinary set of meditation techniques. We feel, however, that the most honest way to teach Knowledge would be to dismantle all things that are cult-like about your organization, especially the notion that you are a divine being, that you are worthy of worship, or that you have special powers. In fact, we suggest, if you want to continue to teach Knowledge in the 21st century, that it would be brave and revolutionary for you to demonstrate real leadership by dismantling and purging all of the cult-like aspects from your organization and your leadership role within it.

Specifically, the first step should be to honestly address the past by taking full responsibility for presenting yourself as a 'Perfect Master,' worthy of worship and devotion. All familiar with you know that you were groomed from childhood to play this role. Nevertheless, you are now 42 years old and have been an American citizen for almost 25 years. The time has long since passed when you should have openly declared that your claims about your divinity, made as an adolescent and as a young adult, were simply not true. The honest declaration of your errors, and admission that you are a human being with all of the qualities and flaws that constitute the human condition, would undo much of what is most cult-like about you and your organization. It might even earn you the respect of the world outside your organization in a way you have never dreamed possible.

While we are aware that you have initiated certain changes to eliminate some of the Hindu trappings of your organization, we are very concerned that you continue to reinforce in your followers the belief that you are divine. For example, as late as 1997, you allowed your followers to line up and kiss your feet in Australia. What other conclusion can one reach about a person who allows his followers to kiss his feet? Moreover, based on our interactions with your current followers, many of them, especially those who received Knowledge in the 70s and 80s, still believe you are divine. Since they are predisposed to believe this, you are in the best position to dissuade them, not just by your words but also by your actions.

We believe that such actions would benefit your stated aim of teaching Knowledge to anyone who is sincerely interested. With the advent of the Internet, your ex-followers are now communicating in significant numbers with each other and to others about you and your past. We believe that this extensive interest is due mainly to the fact that you have failed to address these issues and put them behind you. Until you do so, they will continue to haunt you publicly. We are already seeing many people who were interested in Knowledge lose interest when they read about your past on the Internet. They are disillusioned because that information was not disclosed to them by you or your instructors in the aspirant process. As more people become connected to the Internet, this process will only accelerate, significantly undermining your mission.

Besides clarifying your role, we suggest that you transform your organization so that it becomes the first 'former' cult in history to institute safeguards against ever becoming a cult again. For example, members might receive a text outlining the characteristics of cults and mind control and how to recognize them. Such a text could become required reading before you agree to teach anyone. We believe this would make your followers more independent, with greater opportunity for personal growth. Perhaps your teachings might have value, on their own merits, without a cult-like belief system. You have a great opportunity. We urge you to consider it.

This is our challenge to you. We request that you step down from your pedestal and join your brothers and sisters in the human race. Find your place among us. Treat us as equals with the love and respect you always claimed you had for us. Be one of us. It would free us and those premies still trapped in worshipping you. It might free you in many ways as well. There is so much to be gained by everyone.

Please respond to this letter by stating your commitment to achieving the goals described herein, and by creating a forum where an honest dialogue can take place. Of course, no response from you to this sincere, respectful and reasonable request will be seen as a response in and of itself.

Thank you.

Maharaji Responsibility Campaign
MaharajiResponsibilityCampaign@hotmail.com

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 06:04:44 (GMT)
From: bill
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Here's the MRC bullshit, bill....
Message:
Hi Joey, thank you for posting it.
Dont know how I managed to miss it till now.
I have to print it and digest it a few times.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 11:52:06 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: bill
Subject: kewl bill, look forward to your comments (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 17:22:46 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: In Defense of Dettmers
Message:
Hi Joe -
I really liked your post. You know Michael Dettmers far better than I do, of course, but from the outside looking in, I agreed with a lot of things you said:

You wrote:
I don't think it's quite that simple, although I can see it appears that way. Michael Dettmers is sincerely trying to come to terms with his cult involvement and how to proceed, I really think he is. He told me things about Maharaji and his involvement that he probably wouldn't have, if he was just 'stringing us along.'

The fact that Michael would actually have long talks with EX-premies, and that he would actually post on the FORUM (where he got quite a hostile reaction) says a lot about him. These things definitely set him apart from other former PAM's, in my opinion, and I respect him for doing both. As far as I can see, all other former famous PAM's have just given ex-premies the brush-off - sometimes politely, and sometimes not.

You wrote:
And of course, Michael was in a very different cult that most of the rest of us were...I don't think Michael suffered most of the stuff other premies did. Indeed, it appears Michael's involvement was a career boost for him. So, he may fee that he, personally, didn't lose much during the years he was helping Maharaji do what he did. On the other hand, there may be things that happened to him in the cult that are more damaging than what happened to many others.

I agree that some of the PAM's, initiators, etc. did undergo more damaging things than the rank-and-file premies, although they were privileged in other ways. But can you imagine the degree of indoctrination and programming at that level? Not to mention lasting loyalty to Maharaji, which a lot of these people seem to have.

I know J-M has written quite a bit about this high-level indoctrination, and I know that I didn't even come close to going through what he went through, or even understanding what he had gone through, and thus had far less baggage to discard before becoming an ex.

When Michael posted on the forum before, he got a lot of flack because of things he had said and done in the past, primarily BECAUSE he was such a public figure in the past. Almost all of the rest of us are exempt from this kind of criticism, because no one kept track of what we did or said back in the old days. My feeling is that he should be allowed to post like any other ex - or person 'on the fence' (which I guess he is), and not be subjected to a war crimes tribunal. I am sure other people will disagree with this, but this is how I feel.

I respect Michael for even trying to come to terms with his involvement, because I don't think many people ever do (otherwise you'd have far more exes - and far more former PAM's - posting on this forum). But I am sure there are issues of betrayal and loyalty - on BOTH sides of the fence - to deal with.

You wrote:
But, again, I don't think Michael was in any way deceptive, just kind of 'floating' and going through a lot of changes about all this. And I hope he sorts through it all. It's just that I couldn't just remain silent about what was going on.

I hope he sorts through it too, because I'd like to hear what he has to say, and I think it would benefit other people greatly. Maybe he could start with his rebuttal to the Elan Vital FAQ's - I would LOVE to hear that.

Take care, Joe,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:26:01 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Exactly Marianne, you nailed it, good job (nt)
Message:
nt needed
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:11:08 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Comments
Message:

But just to recognize that we are weak, that we are ignorant, and that we are filled with the impurities of this world, and that it is that Love and that is that Grace that Guru Maharaj Ji bestows upon us that can take us beyond it, that can take us beyond all of those limitations.

That was just a rationalization of Mr. Rawat not delivering the goods as promised in his portrayal of the character 'Guru Maharaj Ji'. 'GMJ' talked about how 'Guru' means he who takes you from darkness to light (or did he say 'can' take you?). If that were true, how could we still have been weak, etc.? Dettmers said 'bestows upon us', so we should have already been taken 'beyond all of those limitations'. Ahh, but the word 'can', not 'does', but 'can'. It's like when a stock is being hyped and 'up to' is used, as in 'The company can make up to $100,000,000. (but might make $0, 'up to' just means not more than) This was a classic case of blame the victim (still is). Yeah, 'GMJ' could but didn't because we were too full of shit (you know, those impurities).

I can hear the dialog, a premie, if they could, complains 'But miragy, you said you'd show me God.' and Rawat replies, 'Hey, I said 'could', not 'would', you're too full of shit. You have to give me a lot more money, time, and adulation, then maybe I will.' What a con.

Yes, Michael should set the record straight.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:59:46 (GMT)
From: Gregg
Email: None
To: G
Subject: The Proof is in the Pudding
Message:
And you're right, G. The pudding was shit.

Sure, premies felt great, sometimes, especially in the presence of the Great One. Then, it was like that mantra which some of you may have heard of: 'My Mommy and I are one.' This mantra is said (by shrinks) to bestow inner peace upon the chanter. The effect, is, of course, to return one to that state (0-6 months?) in which one feels at one with one's mama.

But returning to an infantile oneness with the universe does not make one a functional adult.

Maharaj Ji never fulfilled any of his promises. He lulled his followers into lullabyland. Period. He never taught us to live and love and work and understand.

He should be ashamed of himself, but that is unlikely.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 20:46:15 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim- ..a word please
Message:
The other day I posted a post that included astrological reference.
You made a comment for me not to go there.
I thought to myself here he goes again.
There were two parts to my reaction. One was there is Jim, same old thing, dissing astrology.
But that did not bother me as much as the fact that you:
Put yourself in the position of hall monitor by saying 'Dont go there'.
Jim, by posting that comment on the forum - I think you can discourage another form of debate and criticism of Maraji.

Whether it is you field of reference or not , any one of the 'new agers or astologers or yogis or any other of the motely crew of new agers' may want to find their own reasons why Maraji is a fraud WITHIN THEIR OWN SET OF REFERENCES'

So I think that you should confine your hall monitor tendencies to the premies that want to defend maraji- and leave the exs room to converse on the forum about Marajis new age fraud without interference from you.

There may be a dozen exes here lurking who are flaming new agers or cming from different spiritual paths and I think that your behavior on this can send a message that those type of discussions are not welcome.

PS if your comment the other day referrred to my suggesting that Mahah needed to be goaded, then disregard this.

no need to comment

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:12:40 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: mishkat@gateway.net
To: Zelda
Subject: Zelda, I LIKED your post
Message:
I found it fascinating. I don't 'believe' in astrology per se, but the systematics of it really interest me - I love learning new classification systems for ANYTHING - and I have seen it well-used as an intuitive tool (or starting place) by some therapists. (It also makes for some great inside jokes, or shorthand when referring to certain people.)

If you have an e-mail, can you e-mail me sometime? Thanks.

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:03:07 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: How patronizing, Katie
Message:
Let me see if I understand this time. You don't believe in astrology. That must mean that, though you're probably reluctant to say it, you think that people who do believe in it are simply wrong. So here's Zelda, blithely chattering away as if astrology's real -- as if it's not even controversial, in fact, if you read her first post -- and you're 'enjoying' it? Is that like a cultural relativity exercise or something? A practise session in being 'non-judgmental'?

How sweet.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:45:00 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Go flame some premies for a change, Jim! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:57:17 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: How patronizing, Katie
Message:
You are one sick man.
stop before you have a toxic reaction to yourself
Rampant Cynisism is a disease of the emotions.

here is where you take that as meaning- that I am saying you should not be cynical about astrology.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:05:27 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Zelda, Jim and Jerry +
Subject: All of you, a word please.
Message:
I don't have the time to pull together everything on this topic at this moment, but I read Zelda's initial post (and enjoyed it, if for nothing less than its 'fit') and also read Jim's response and was, like Zelda, disappointed in the 'small/close-mindedness' of his 'absolute authority' response.

Let me let an expert speak, as I am not an expert in this field. From this site sentienttimes (And I have just begun this particular search recently.)

As an astronomer, I cannot at all understand what the distances between stars has to do with celestial influence. It's true that the twelve zodiacal constellations are arbitrary combinations of stars at different distances that appear as constellations from the Earth's point of view. But so too are all the interactions of all the planets, asteroids, and the moon. If astrology is just an imaginary, symbolic system, why refer to celestial motions and events at all? Why not make Tarot cards out of Astrology and the 12 signs or throw yarrow sticks like the I Ching?

Finally, as a scientist I would have to refute Mr. Wrobel's claim that because the stars are light years apart and light years away they cannot possibly have any physical influence or effect on us on Earth. Even if we discount the theory of celestial resonance (the morphogenic fields of Rupert Sheldrake), there is compelling scientific evidence of the effect of distance cosmic events on Earth. To cite one dramatic example: In 1987 a star went supernova in the Megellanic Clouds (Supernova 1987A). Detectors on Earth picked up 16 neutrinos that passed through us, and the Earth, on their way out from this explosion. Not only was the Earth impacted by a celestial event outside the Solar System, but this explosion took place outside our galaxy over 100,000 light years away! The stars that form the zodiacal constellations are less than 50 light years away.

What I mean by all this is that I don't think it serves astrology to justify how unscientific and irrelevant it is that the Western System does not acknowledge precession. I am urging the astrological community to do just the opposite. Embrace the gifts of astronomy and allow those gifts to refine your astrological practice. There are many ways that astronomy can make astrology more powerful, accurate, and effective. We can take the first step by accepting, utilizing, and adopting precession.

William Georgevich
Director, Windowpane Observatory

I can, and will, post more on this topic, even as a non-expert, because I, like Zelda, believe that there is something in this stuff that has persisted for millenia of human existence, and because astrology is the mother of 'modern' astronomy no matter how you cut it.

Stonor

PS: Try a search on Rodney Collin.

(and love to you Zelda, will be in touch this week)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:29:59 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: All of you, a word please.
Message:
Duh, how does genetics and environment figure into all of this? Does that have anything to do with my personalty and physical characteristics, or is it all written in the stars? Stonor, test after test after test after test has been performed in the scientific community to either validate or debunk astrology. Time and again it has been debunked. Doesn't that mean anything to you? Here's a letter that was published, in 1975, signed by 186 scientists in an attempt to alert the public to their findings concerning astrology:

We, the undersigned -- astronomers, astrophysicists, and scientists in other fields -- wish to caution the public against the unquestioning acceptance of the predictions and advice given privately and publicly by astrologers. Those who wish to believe in astrology should realize that there is no scientific foundation for its tenets... It is simply a mistake to imagine that the forces exerted by stars and planets at the moment of birth can in any way shape our futures. Neither is it true that the position of distant heavenly bodies make certain days or periods more favorable to particular kinds of action, or that the sign under which one was born determines one's compatibility or incompatibility with other people

And the caveats just go unheeded, again and again. Why? I'll tell you why....

Give me that oooold magical thinking
Give me that oooold magical thinking
Give me that oooold magical thinking
It's good enough for me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:43:51 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: All of you, a word please.
Message:
Only trouble is, astrology is based on where the constellations were four thousand years ago. They've moved round in the sky since then and modern astrologers have not taken this fact into account when making their computations.

It's not scientific, if only for this reason.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:19:29 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: All of you, a word please.
Message:
Hi Sir Dave,

I think that your point is, to some extent, what the discussion is about in that text, which was written by an astronomer AND astrologer. As I posted, I am not an expert in this area, and I think as Zelda is also trying to say, neither is Jim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:19:03 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: That man, my dear, is a complete fool
Message:
Where do you get them, Stonor? And do I really have to explain the many ways his 'argument' is simply a joke? Come on, please! This is getting painful.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 17:22:17 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: cheeze! ALL A YAS -are not getting it so far
Message:
Just got in from the crystal healing expo at the Library.just kidding

Sheesh-cant you guys concentrate? here you are gallopping of in all directions and yet the one point I tried to bring out is left behind.

What I was trying to say is that Jim should stifle himself and allow the people who do believe in Astrology, Crystology, Iridology or any other ology to DISCUSS MARAJIS CULT BEHAVIOR IN LIGHT OF THEIR FRAME OF REFERENCE.
sorry about the capitals cnsider them italics.
sheesh

do you see that as different from debating about the validity of astrology???

My point is that noone here has the right to sweep discussion to the side if people want to discuss the cult in light of astrological references.

sheesh people are allowed to discuss size of penises and dont get told 'not to go there'

It is rude to cut in with dissing remarks and sniping about astrology.

At least try to acknowledge the point of my post you blockheads.

peace and rosy light around your throat chakra

XXXZelda

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:53:34 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: A fuller explanation of y YOU don't get it, Zelda
Message:
What I was trying to say is that Jim should stifle himself and allow the people who do believe in Astrology, Crystology, Iridology or any other ology to DISCUSS MARAJIS CULT BEHAVIOR IN LIGHT OF THEIR FRAME OF REFERENCE.
sorry about the capitals cnsider them italics.
sheesh

do you see that as different from debating about the validity of astrology???

My point is that noone here has the right to sweep discussion to the side if people want to discuss the cult in light of astrological references.

Zelda,

Murky language like what you've got in caps up there isn't very helpful. What does 'in light of their frame of reference' mean? It sounds kind of pretty but does it mean anything? In particular, does it mean 'protected from criticism'? Because, if so, that's ridiculous. You can't have a discussion worth mentioning on those terms.

And no, talking about Maharaji in the way you did, premising your points on the assumption that astrology is real, is not different than debating the validity of astrology. Not if someone wants to challenge your premises, that is.

I said 'you don't want to go there' not because I'm afraid of discussing astrology. Far from it. Rather, I thought you probably weren't up to defending your beliefs. Most people into astrology and the like aren't. But no, I'm not trying to tell you what to say. You want to discuss astrology, go for it. Just don't be surprised if you get laughed at.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:38:55 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense .......
Message:
they want, Zelda.

And I'm also free to comment. The protection you seek ain't coming, Zelda. Hardy har har!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 23:43:48 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense .......
Message:
Jim you are being a bully.
What if people want to discuss something you dont believe in.
are you saying that you cannot accept that your imput is not invited or wanted??
Why cant you just be quiet UNTIL the subject turns to whetr astrology is valid or not?
What happens is that you tend to intervene and derail the conversation with your clatter about whether astrology is valid, believable ect AS IF YOU ARE A POLICEPERSON IN CHARGE OF WHAT IS DISCUSSED or That your imput is needed or requested.


Dont be such an edsel about this. There are probably fence line premeis who could be spoken to in new age, spiritual or astrological term - who would leave Mahah quicker if you werent such a republican about subject matter.


This aint your forum jim. There are not signs saying 'only Jim approved lines of debate permitted.'

of course there is no protection here for me- but on the other hand your interuptions and unasked for critism can and does stifle discussion on this.

I am sure you are mature enough to be quiet and observe an exchange without putting your two sense in.

I find it interesting how you get all free speachy when you are asked to be quiet.

by frame of reference I mean a frame of reference. such as the frame of reference of astrology.

you know stuff like he is a sag by the old astronomical calculations but by modern calc. he is a scorp.
and what aspects are tucked away to fuel HIs megalomania and bullheaded bulliness.

stuff like that jim.
why cant you just let us talk.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:31:44 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense .......
Message:
Jim you are being a bully.

Are you kiddin, Zelda ? He's being a pussycat here. You should hear the messages he leaves on my voicemail. Sheesh!!

What if people want to discuss something you dont believe in.
are you saying that you cannot accept that your imput is not invited or wanted??

Common Zelda, you know Jim won't come right out and say that.
He'll just act it out.

What happens is that you tend to intervene and derail the conversation with your clatter about whether astrology is valid, believable ect AS IF YOU ARE A POLICEPERSON IN CHARGE OF WHAT IS DISCUSSED or That your imput is needed or requested.

Yes, we've all observed that, haven't we now?

Dont be such an edsel about this. There are probably fence line premeis who could be spoken to in new age, spiritual or astrological term - who would leave Mahah quicker...

Then they might just end up deciding that it's far better to stay in the cult, than leave it on account of those ex-premie astrological wacknuts.

... if you werent such a republican about subject matter.

Speak'n about Republicans Zelda, I'm convinced they chose the wrong Bush to run for president. I think Dubya's mom Barbara would probably make a better president. I mean, doesn't she look alot more like George Washington than he does??

This aint your forum jim. There are not signs saying 'only Jim approved lines of debate permitted.'

of course there is no protection here for me- but on the other hand your interuptions and unasked for critism can and does stifle discussion on this.

Zelda, deep breath in, deep breath out. Say to yourself, 'I am good enough. What I have to say is worth saying. I will not be stifled!'

I am sure you are mature enough to be quiet and observe an exchange without putting your two sense in.

Oh Zelda, honey...I just love your typos! They're sooo adorable !!

by frame of reference I mean a frame of reference. such as the frame of reference of astrology.

Zelda, that's deep. Very deep. Thank you for hallucinating that for us.
Boy oh boy! I don't know if I can go on from there. I'm just going to have to stop now and give myself some time to digest all of this.
But Zelda, you feel free to express yourself here.
By all means, please feel free.


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 07:53:20 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense .......
Message:
Joey

it wasnt a typo

I dont think I get your humor.
You sound sarcastic in the latter part of your post
but we have been here before.

best leave it at that
either we miss-read each other or we just dont like each other.
Correction-you seem to have issues with me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:08:36 (GMT)
From: Daneane
Email: None
To: nonsense
Subject: Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense .......
Message:
How could I resist an invitation to spout off whatever nonsense I want?

My guess is that there are a lot of Forums elsewhere in which to champion astrology.

Even a semi-newcomer as me knows this Forum ain't for the thin skinned.

I've grown to appreciate that, really.

I think M uses valid thoughts and ideas in deceptive and self-serving ways.

I think to look at him in any 'frame of reference', be it astrology, Jim bashing, Hindu tradition or baseball statistics; ultimately its gotta come down to me thinking through it and me deciding its validity, logic or bullshit.

As such, I think reaming him or supporting him based on some other system is asking for trouble. At least I found that in my personal experience.

What I saw of the cult was just too happy and obedient. I'd rather read exes fighting it out or telling me to fuck off, than welcome some crap I might spout off with warm fuzzies all the time.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 08:04:33 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Daneane
Subject: Everyone's free to spout whatever nonsense .......
Message:
Hi Deneane

nice to hear a fresh voice.
Its been alot of legal stuff and penis stuff lately- so I chimed in with some astrology and youd think I took a star off the flag.

BTW I wasnt championing astrology. I was talking about Mahaha's astrology.
I dont need to defend astrology.

There are quite a few forum posters who are into all kinds of 'new age' stuff and noone feels the necessity to champion any of them here just because it is obvious that there are critics.

Jim just tilted the orbit of the discussion cause he doesnt believe in it and he likes to spar.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:20:15 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Are you SURE you're not Cynthia?
Message:
Well yer at least one of the minor alters then, right?

Blockheads? BLOCKHEADS ??? HOW DARE YOU !!!

Personally Zelda, I'd rather talk about sex than astrolgy. What was yer point again???

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:31:53 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: dammit
To: gErRy
Subject: Are you SURE you're not Cynthia?
Message:
gErRy gErRy gErRy

a thousand times no who in the flippin heck is Cynthia

what do you mean minor alters

does that mean minor alter-ego??Hmmmmm?

gErRy I have quite a string of alter egos in my resume but you should know me well enough that I would never name one of them with a name containing a 'Y'

Such would rob the 'Z' and 'X' of the limelight they disserve.

shiff humph

Z

PS
sex is astrology you barnyard blockhead

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:25:51 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: That man, my dear, is a complete fool
Message:
Why Jim, are we in such intense discussion right now, you might ask yourself, as I do ask myself always? Because there is an intuitive potential value to this discussion? If not, why not just ignore my post, as you usually do?

Please do explain, with your superior wisdom, why his argument is a joke.

And why is it so painful?

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:55:33 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: And what's in it for me?
Message:
Stonor,

I could, I guess, explain the obvious to you. But who pays me to do this? Time is money, you know. Even the ancients knew that.

Look, the guy's a fool. Adn no, it's not just his mention of Rupert Sheldrake. That's extra. It's his inability to see astrology for what it is: a very childish (by today's standards) attempt to cope with the unknown. Solar storms and major intergallactic phenomenon may most certainly have some efect here on earth. What in the world does that have to do with astrology? Absolutely rien. Nada. Nothing.

It's like phrenology, the now-laughable but once-popular 'study' of people's head shapes and their effects on personality and character. Granted, having your frontal lobe removed by a forklift in a warehouse accident will affect your personality if it doesn't kill you. That doesn't mean that one can decipher personality from the shape of one's skull. In fact, that analogy is far too generous to you and yours because, in that example, the accident really does affect the personality, albeit for none of the reasons mentioned in Popular Phrenology. But cosmic phenomenon have NEVER been proven to have any effect whatsoever on personality -- and yes, I'm included full moons and tidal cycles, claims to the contrary having been handily debunked. So there you go.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:15:44 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Self-centredness?
Message:
Really Jim, you are grabbbing at straws now. I realized a long time ago that I cannot be an expert in all things. That's why there are different people with different interests and different areas of expertise. Human beings are potentially a team. If I have a legal problem, I find a good lawyer, if I need to learn something, I try to find a good teacher or expert in that field. If I have a health problem, I try to find someone who can heal me. Wouldn't you do the same? Be open Jim, that's a means towards learning, plain and simple. I know that I CAN NOT have all the answers unless I am 'whatever-it-is'

But I know that you weren't always, or will remain to be, so self-centred (ie.'What's in it for me'). And I think I might understand why you are so now.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:26:20 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Not to change the subject but ....
Message:
What kind of expertise does your author have in astrology and how valid is such expertise? What's the basic knowledge base he's relying on? Beside superstition, I mean.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:31:26 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Not to change the subject but ....
Message:
I am a novice in this field of expertise, as you are yourself. I am not 'God'. I don't have all the answers, do you? I don't pretend to. That was Zelda's point, I think.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:31:30 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: You're evading the question
Message:
I'll ask you again:

What do you think constitutes 'expertise' in astrology? Where does it derive from? What's the actual knowledge base any so-called astrologer can hang his hat on that can withstand even the slightest scrutiny?

No, it's not enough to say that astrolger X studied with astrolger Y and has read all the collected works of astrologers A, B and C. What is the fundamental basis of their so-called knowledge?

Hint: there isn't one.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:56:54 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: YOU are the one evading the issue. (NT)
Message:
YOU are evading the issue. (NT)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:44:16 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Bullshit, Stonor
Message:
I'm not evading the question in the slightest. You are.

You asked me if I was an expert in astrology. I challenged you to explain just what that might be. A point of clarification, if you will. You avoided answering twice now.

See, the problem with my simply saying that no, I'm not an expert in astrology is that the statement, to my ears anyways, suggests that there are such things. So please clarify yourself. Are you talking 'expert' as in someone who knows how to divine truth about people in the world via astrology or simply 'expert' in the same way someone can be an 'expert' in a game like Dungeons and Dragons. Not that there's any truth value to it but they're just good at playing the game.

I'll concede that the latter exist but who cares about that? But the former? Someone who can really use astrology or who understands how astrology can really tell us something true about life? Forget it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:42:07 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: It's intense because Mercury is in retrograde...
Message:
Hi Stonor,

Glad to see you got yer software problem ironed out. I guess you missed the great Shp debates a while back. I even created the Sheep Channel just to give Sandy his own bully pupit. He was really something back then. He's learned alot from us, unfortunately he still clings to his faith with the conviction of a religious zealot (which, of course, he is.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:55:58 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: gErRy
Subject: It's intense because Mercury is in retrograde...
Message:
But of course, GeRrY, you realize that you haven't addressed in any intellible way the issues in this thread in this particular post of yours, and missed/avoided the entire point?

But thanks for saying hello. I haven't gone even one iota closer to trying out those tapes we talked about a while back - my holidays aren't long enough!

Hi to Patty!

And do let me know if you ever plan a trip in the direction of Montreal.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:36:25 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Gerry
Subject: Let me withdraw part of my last post
Message:
This part:

And do let me know if you ever plan a trip in the direction of Montreal.

You were the one who asked Brian if he had taken a stupid pill a little while ago. I'm really sick of these needlessly abusive posts, and yes, Jim is usually much worse than you.

I'm sure you couldn't care less anyways.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 00:43:46 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: jeez you really know how to hurt a guy...
Message:
Show me where my post is 'needlessly abusive.'

And you're wrong, I DO care. Sheesh. Times two. After I spent all that money on tickets, too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:06:59 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: You're just too sensitive(insert sarcasm emoticon)
Message:
Actually, I was extremely impressed that yours was the only civil post I got last night in this thread. But I was referring to your one to Brian of course. Don't most of you exes wish that someone had tried to pull you out sooner? There was enough premie-bashing in that thread without bashing the most compassionate post there, and I really think that Brian deserves much better for all his efforts.

And don't worry about the tickets - they won't be wasted. There are a lot more interesting things to do in Montreal than meet me!

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:58:06 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Uh, (duh) what was the question again?
Message:
Oh, something about Jim scaring off new agers, I think. Or limiting the discussion to Jim's frame of reference? Why should anyone on a discussion forum be intimidated by Jim or anyone else?

Some people's frames of reference are really wacky. Does this mean I should 'respect' them? No,I think people's ideas should stand or fall on their merits. And people who persist in their magical thinking, like shp, deserve the scorn heaped upon them. Maybe that will shock them out of their delusions. It works for me.

I really am having a tough time figuring out what this thread is all about. I would appreciate some clarification if I'm way off base here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:11:57 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Some people are more sensitive to verbal abuse...
Message:
Some people are more sensitive to verbal abuse than you are, obviously. It upsets me even when it's not directed at me personally.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:09:13 (GMT)
From: George Dubya Bush (Shrub)
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Retrograde? My Mercury's in the garage!!(NT)
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 05:35:26 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: George Dubya Bush (Shrub)
Subject: Bliss is a Mercury in the garage!!(NT)
Message:
vvvv
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:08:49 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: About astrology
Message:
The most telling tale I've heard about astrology is that a scientist will lose all credibility if so much as one test in a hundred shows his hypothesis to be wrong, but an astologer gains credibility if only one chart in a hundred proves correct.

Fancy that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:04:53 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: About astrology
Message:
ho now then
exactly who when where and what are you quoting ect ect ect.

back this up with references you reptile you !!

Facts man facts not hearsay from some coffee shop pundit.

Zelda the Jimmied
:)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 10:52:08 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: About astrology
Message:
Zelda,

I don't remember who said it. I read it in a book, somewhere, recently, but can't recall who was being quoted. It doesn't matter. It's just an overstatement, anyway, to stress the fact the amount of debunking an astrologer is allowed to withstand as compared to a scientist. A scientist would never withstand the amount of failed experiments an astrologer does and still have his hypothesis taken seriously. It's a wonder that astrology is still taken seriously, in this day and age, given that fact. Let's face it, when it comes to true scientific srutiny (if that means anything to you), astrology, if it wasn't so pathetic, would be laughable the amount of times it has tripped over it's own feet.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 20:41:07 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: About astrology
Message:
Hi Jerry

Because it is rare to read a comment on this that is a level headed criticism, I wanted to reply.

However the subject of real debate on this is such a ball of string I cant see it happening on the forum.
I also would need to be able to concentrate on a two way cnversation and I am not disciplined enough not to get drawn into reading interloping comment.
Besides I dont have the time.

As a general stab at it:
Newspaper or womens magazine colums touting 'tall dark and handsome is on your horizon but mind you pay your bills~
is not astrology-and whenever this kind of a conversation starts that is usually the first thing to establish.
A rough comparison is a toy laptop computer for kids cannot be considered to be computing. But to a third world person living in a grass hut it may be presented as such. this analogy is full of holes but it was the first one that springs to mind.

The next thing that comes out of a debate is that to the lay person, the astronomical charts used in the newspaper type of astrology are based on how the heavens were 9 million years ago.
Yep.
But an astrology geek will use modern astronomy charts to calculate. This results in a total revamp of the commonly accepted dates for the beginnning and ending of a 'sign'
Ie a May 5 birthday is not a Taurean it is an Aires.

lets see, the other thing that is usually part of an opening discussion is the new/full moon activity, well documented by police departments and psyche units for decades.
These statistics are not meant to uphold astrology, but do illustrate the effect of increased gravity/lunar activity on human behaviour.
By a strain of the imagination, perhaps you can picture that astologer would be working on the assumption that all of the planets have concentric pulls and twists on human perception.

THeres more,such as everyone shares traits, so one persons chart can 'ring a bell' to another. True
As for the newspaper columns, sometimes I think the editor uses a grab bag and inserts whatever under the list of signs for the next days edition.

These days people are so messed up I rarley use astrology anyway. I just figure everyone is crazy untill they prove otherwise and that seems to work fine.

It was refreshing reading your nonflame reply.
Oh ya I think it really is signifiicant to know who made the ccomment you quoted. Continuing with the anology, it could be the local missionary who lives in the sheet-iron hut who is there to convert the native in the grass hut-making a comment on a world book encyclopedia article that they tore out of the book for use in the outhouse.

If I bow out of this conversation now, please know that it is because it is very involved and I dont have the time or smarts to do it justice so dont want to continue, all of what I have just said is only an amatures reflections. the best test of astrology is to get a really reputable one to do your chart and play around with it like one would a new gizmo AND make your own observations of people.
Astological charts are only a map not a script to follow.

Hope you understand besides an astrology debate is not the purpose of the forum. I had begun with inviiting comment on the cult from astologers- a different thing altogether.
Now I think I see some vultures circling.
Zelda

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 21:38:48 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: About astrology
Message:
Zelda,

I'll only say that the astrologers that have been debunked are 'professional' astrologers, ones who actually draw up a personal chart based on the information you provide them. These have been the targets of scientific scrutiny, and have consistently failed those tests. I'll cite one of them here. This is from the book, How To Think About Weird Things; Critical Thinking For A New Age:

In a study published in Nature, physicist Shawn Collins gave thirty prominent American and European astrologers the natal charts of 116 subjects. For each subject, the astrologers were given three personality profiles... Although the astrologers predicted they would be able to select the correct profile over 50 percent [ a scientist would be expected to get it right 100% for his hypothesis to withstand scrutiny] of the time, they chose the correct profile only 34 percent of the time, which is how good anyone should do if they were guessing.

In his book Flim-Flam, conjurer James Randi, turned skeptic, claims to have been 'fiddled' by an astrologer with a 'glowing horoscope describing a paragon of virtue and steadfastness'. Unbeknownst to the astrologer, Randi provided not his own birthdate, birth hour, and birthplace, but that of a convicted and hanged rapist. It was a devious tripup to be sure, but I think it drives home the point. Astrology is not to be taken seriously. I think it was in this particular book that I (think I) read the quote under debate, but I can't find it. But, again, does it really matter? Anybody could have said it. It's purpose was not to provide actual data, but to drive home a point; and no, I don't think it was by a missionary trying to convert the natives before he went out to the outhouse to wipe his ass with it. A bit of an exaggeration, there, yourself, eh, Zelda?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:28:24 (GMT)
From: Michael
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: About astrology
Message:
St. Augustine on Astrology:
(discussing his meeting of Vindicianus, a physician to the emperor Valentinian)
“...From my remarks he discovered that I was addicted to the books of those who cast horoscopes. In a kind and fatherly way he advised me to throw them away and not to waste on that nonsense the care and labour required for useful matters. He told me that he had himself studied astrology so far that in his early years he had intended to take it up formally as a way of earning his living... nevertheless he had given up the subject and pursued medicine for the simple reason that he discovered astrology to be utterly bogus. Being a serious minded person he did not wish to make a living out of deceiving people.”

(After telling of how the father of his friend Firminus and a friend had placed bets on the future of a slave and Firminus, whose stars were the same, yet the slave remained a slave while Firminus lived the life of the elite)
“For one of these charlatans who make money out of astrology, and whom I now wished to attack and with ridicule to refute, might resist me by arguing that false information was given either by Firminus to me or by his father to him. I therefore gave attention to those who are born twins. Most of them emerge from the womb in succession at a brief interval of time. They may contend that in the realm of nature this interval has considerable consequences. But it cannot be recorded by human observation and noted in the tables that the astrologer will inspect to give a true forecast. Moreover, the forecasts will not be true. Someone inspecting the identical tables ought to have been able to say that Esau and Jacob would have the same destiny. Yet things turned out differently in each case. Therefore he would be giving an incorrect prediction. If his forecast were correct, he would not predict the same destiny; yet the stars he studied were identical. Therefore a true forecast is based not on art, but on chance.”

Even people in the Fifth century knew that astrology was “utterly bogus,” to quote Vindicianus.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:09:28 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Oh, you want to talk about astrology, huh?
Message:
Zelda,

Astrology's bullshit. Plain, simple unadulterated bullshit. And you know that, at the very least, a large number of people here think so. Yet you offered an astrological 'analysis' as if it never occured to you that there was, at minimum, some controversy on the subject. Why? What's with that, Zelda?

No, I say that you're the one who's trying to start something with that shit. You knew all along that, if not me, someone would challenge you for saying stuff like:

Sag constructs a force field of good natured benevolence for the public eye. The fact is that they are very good natured naturally so that is easy.

or:

The great thing about Sag is that they are master at perfecting a mirror image of themselves and label it as the other persons problem. This can make them violently angry ESPECIALLY if a third party is there to wittness their justified anger.

The presene of the third party/s is a key factor. they do not like to loose face. The third party is the premie masses.

Gumanji fits this profile to a T

didn't you?

So what's up? You want to argue about astrology or something? Why not just say so?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:28:33 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim needs Aromatherapy
Message:
Its a mystery how you can have such brains and yet be so simple.

There are 3 differnt categories here.

1 The first one mind you - a post I made in reply to someone . In it I spoke of astrology and would have thought in a public forum that I could exchange comment with others that may be astologers.
When I read the forum I dont assume I am part of every conversation.

2 Another category which should also exist- namley arguements aganinst astrology as you have in this thread. Ie evidence of historical debunks ect ect. All very healthy stuff.

3 another category in which people conversing in the first conversation may wish to join in the spirit of debate with the critics.

But you slammed into the thread when I posted and told me 'not to go there'.
Who are you to say something like that??
Noone but a critic of astrology, who wants to do just that.

Overall , you have been a rude bully who wants his own way with this and you know it.
Surely I am allowed to talk shop with other astrologers about the cult.

Just as I am sure you feel free to talk shop with other bullies about mind control in the cult.

You went off track with your first reply to me and you have been busy defending your position since then.
Asking me if I want to argue about astology.
No.
You do.
so find someone who wants to argue about it with you. If not there are plenty of people here who agree with you so have some fun with it.

Let those of us who want to have a thread with Astrological shop talk have our fun with it.

it is not a threat to you.

yer just lookin for some fresh meat.
go take a lavender bath.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 03:03:35 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Zelda
Subject: Basil might be better for Jim!
Message:
Sargeant Zelda SIR!

Sorry I didn't do better last night SIR! Will work to improve SIR!

Actually, you're probably right about the lavender, and the bath. I like the image I get in my head, and with the way I visualize Jimmy from his posting 'style', it's hilarious! It has certainly had a positive effect on my state of mind already - talk about power of suggestion! Have you checked out Rodney Collin at all? Fascinating reading.

I'll be emailing you tomorrow.

Love Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 08:20:50 (GMT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Basil might be better for Jim!
Message:
wassa matter with you fella-cat got your email?!!

Keyboard duty tonight for you you blistering barnacle.
left! right! left! right! left! right!

at ease

basil oh ya I forgot about basil.
its for hate isnt it??

Hes too thickheaded for the fair lavender.

perscripiton is basil/green chili bath with a mustard/copper oil massage -complete with dried linseed swatchings.

hemp sheets

barry manilo

like treats like- right?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:29:18 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Oh, you want to talk about astrology, huh?
Message:
There could be some correlation between personality and month of birth but even if there was, it wouldn't necessarily be anything to do with where the stars or planets were and the only way to prove or disprove it would be through statistical analysis.

For example, are there more aggresive people born in July and are there more wildly extovert characters born in August? I don't think anyone has ever done any serious research on this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:38:48 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Oh, you want to talk about astrology, huh?
Message:
For example, are there more aggresive people born in July and are there more wildly extrovert characters born in August?

Well, I guess that explains why I'm such a wild and crazy guy !

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:39:08 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Could, shmould, Dave
Message:
Dave,

There could also be some correlation between the second last letters in peoples' names and their artistic skills but why in the world would one ever think so? No one's done that resarch either but I'm comfortable in saying that unless someone presents some basis for taking the hypothesis seriously, it's not worth entertaining.

Astrology is no different except for one thing: a lot of people have taken it seriously over time. However, not a single one of their reasons stands up to any scrutiny. It's really just silliness. Yes, that's right. All those pretty coffee table books, the whole industry of astrology make-believe, all of it. Empty of truth value. Good for entertainment only.

Right, Jonothan?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:31:19 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Searching for Correlations......
Message:
This is what I think, as if anyone should care.

I think there is some kind of a genetic tendency in humans to try to find patterns and explanations for why they and the external world are the way they are. And, to a lesser or greater degree from one person to the next, there is a strong tendency to want to believe any pattern or explanation presented.
Astrology is one pattern of explanation.

Maharaji's explanation of the pattern between your evil 'doubtmaker' mind and your 'loving' heart is another. Again, a strong tendency among some people to believe it and hold onto it, because it explains away some of the ambiguity and seeming arbitrariness of life, and ambiguity is very troubling and uncomfortable to some people. Fundamentalist Christians, in my experience, are REALLY uncomfortable when told things aren't as simple as they think.

Anyhow, I think Mortimer Adler did a study in which a room full of people were told that an astrological chart was being done for them. Later, he handed out the charts to these people and asked if the characteristics described applied to them. They all agreed they did to a very remarkable degree. Then he had them had the chart to the person behind them. Turns out, the charts were all EXACTLY the same. There was only one. He's done this bunches of times with the same result. People try to fit themselves into the astrological analysis. They want an explanation, they want to fit in, they want an explanation, a pattern. It's a basic, fundamental human desire/need and people like Maharaji, and astrologers, in my opinion, benefit from that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:57:39 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: I agree wholeheartedly
Message:
I, too, have read some good arguments regarding our pattern-seeking tendencies and agree that there's a parallel between astrology and the cult in that sense.

Well, there's another pattern for you!

Mind you, sometimes the patterns are real, sometimes they're not. In astrology's case, they're not. In Maharaji's grace effect, they're not. In the parallel between the two as mental sand traps for people, they are. Go figure!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:10:29 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Don't go there, Jim
Message:
Jim wrote:

'There could also be some correlation between the second last letters in peoples' names and their artistic skills'

and there will be an army of people telling you there is a correlation between the two. There's numerology which as you know, can get very complicated with all the letters of your name, as well as your birthday, having great significance.

Personally, I prefer the 'science' of face studying. They say that people with big noses are generous and sexy. Well, I'm happy with that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:43:13 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Hey Dave, why don't we start shnozolas.com ? :)
Message:
Personally, I prefer the 'science' of face studying. They say that people with big noses are generous and sexy. Well, I'm happy with that.

Me too, Dave!

Heck, you're really making my day, today.

Thanks, man!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 01:25:43 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Hey Dave, why don't we start shnozolas.com ? :)
Message:
I'm your man. Let's see now - a bulging waistline is a sign of protectiveness and caring. Hair thinning on top is a sign of intellegence. Big ears are a sign of a good listener. A big mouth means you are a good speaker. I feel better already.

Actually I just made those up. But I did hear from an expert the one about big noses.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 03:47:46 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Hey Dave, why don't we start shnozolas.com ? :)
Message:
I'm your man. Let's see now - a bulging waistline is a sign of protectiveness and caring.

OK, I'll have to work on that a little. In the meantime I guess I'm just a selfish a little prick.

Hair thinning on top is a sign of intellegence.

Now there we go!

Big ears are a sign of a good listener.

I'll tell you, Prince Charles has nothing on me in the ears department.
Hey just ask Selene. I listen to her for hours on the phone and I love every minute !

A big mouth means you are a good speaker.

You bet. I still have my public speaking awards from high-school!

I feel better already.

You feel better?! I feel like I'm top of the world !
This is better than therapy, I'm tellin ya!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 00:56:53 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: oh oh now I am busted
Message:
There are folks here who want to 'protect' me from you doncha know Joey?
Little do they know....how bad my judgement can get, you are the least of my worries. uh.. I meant that in a good way, uh well...
anyway I am just looking through threads seeing who else has discussed me while I've been away. Sort of a hobby all of a sudden.
OK I'll shut up now.
Wanted to comment on the classic 'mango satsang' by our favorite Shroom above but don't have the energy to talk to premies or whatever that character is. Wanted to say, I HAVE experienced eating a mango. It's easy. You go buy one and eat it.
And we thought it was so profound when M spouted all that garbage in 72.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 04:36:30 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: oh oh,me and my big mouth...
Message:
...but according to Dave, that just means I'm a good speaker!:)
(And at 7and 1/2 cents a minute, I could go on forever, especially with you at the end of the line.)

There are folks here who want to 'protect' me from you doncha know Joey?

And I wish I could protect YOU from them, but I guess I can't. What a bunch of losers !
Mangos?
Pretty kewl to eat except when all those mango fibres get stuck in between your teeth. Talk to shroom about mangos? No way.
Talk to me instead.

and at 7and 1/2 cents a minute, I'll even pick up the nickel for the call ::))

Ok I'll shut up now, about the 7and 1/2 cents a minute.

Luv ya, Selenie

ps: That's 7 and 1/2 cents a minute CANADIAN :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 15:18:17 (GMT)
From: Mango Eater
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: with mango fibre stuck between your teeth? Not!
Message:
You don't get fibres stuck in your teeth if you know to prepare it. You have to it lie on one side and slice it carefully, starting from the stem, cutting as close to the pit as possible, then flip it over and do the same on the other side. Then peel it and trim off what you can from around the edges, and slice it into bite-size pieces. Tackle sucking what you can of what remains at your own fibre-between-the-teeth risk, but you will have gotten most of the fruit without resorting to that.

Sorry to interrupt.

Stonor, a mango lover who learned from South-American masters.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 15:53:49 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Four wrongs don't mkae a right
Message:
In a thread below, a chickenshit, illiterate premie named 'Hey' posted the following:

Hey perhaps you haven't realised who you were communicating with. Look ;you are on a mission . It's now part of your nuerolinguistic memory . What you are doing and the way you are doing it holds little appeal for me. It all looks tooooo familiar.
M has changed things.... radically .... and I am actually enjoying the changes. For years Guys like you hit me up with their smug ,patronising attitude. Well that's all changed. So I've now worked out where all the dissatisfied Honcho's have gone. Hell, there all here. On a mission . Can't be stopped. Truth .....Your head's in a mess Rob .
Reality is a lot simpler ><><><><><><><><><><>...till you die. What I like about this place is that like Jake and Elwood, you are on a Mission....for God??

(emphasis added just to put a cherry on it)

Hey makes a few mistakes:

1) Posting under a series of false names or, really, no names at all, in direct contravention of the Ex Premie Act (EPA) and all decency norms and civil conventions. He's already been booted out of here. Big fucking deal.

2) He joins Maharaji in his now-familiar if still jaw-droppingly unconsciousable scapegoating, blaming the past dedicated premies for acting like we were in a cult or something. He, like Dogg for example, never had the guts to really give himself; now he doesn't have the guts to really save himself. Maharaji pretends he never demanded what we tried to give and on and on and on. It's a confederacy of dunces, if you ask me.

So there are two mistakes. One the cult members, one the leader's. It's a special kind of harmony, a special way to get in sink.

3) He casts his bizarre infantile thoughts in either inappropriate religious terminology ('mission for God') or stupid new-age clap trap ('nuerolinguistic memory' [sic]). He needs a good bath and some formal education. Maybe some former honchos could put together a scholarship for this kind of idiot. No guaranteed results but think about the tax write-off, you clever former honchos, you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:37:59 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey diddle diddle....
Message:
You know Jim I have this uncanny feeling that was actually Catweasel. Very similar in-your-face approach and veiled aggression. Wasn't he the one that threatened you too, when he was about to visit the States, or am I thinking of someone else?

Actually the way he leapt in when he did made me feel like I'm beginning to hit a few nerves with this EV/IRS stuff. Time to increase the pressure and up the ante if that's the case!

Well thanks FA for cleaning out the poop. May as well take out the rest of my posts to Hey there as they look a bit silly out of context.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:39:39 (GMT)
From: The One you Despise
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Mad man
Message:
You are the ultimate Fascist
Point 1: Neurolinguistic Memory is not some 'fancy new-age clap' , it is a commonly accepted learning recognition system taught to most current Psychology graduates. As usual ,you ignorant,moronic abuse ridden fool , you are limited to your own paucity of learning.

Point 2: Popular culture- The movie 'The Blues Brothers' was probably the most well known Comedy of the late 20th century. It would seem it(Comedy) is something you struggle with. (Unless it's sadistic). Revisit it, you big ox and you may understand what was being said .
YOU ARE STILL STUCK THERE ,ON A MISSION.
You are nothing but a pathetic reactionary and YOU can't let go.The truth is you are a JOKE!If you were an X ,you'd be LONG GONE.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:55:02 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: -
To: all
Subject: Is HEY an Aussie?
Message:
I think he's Australian as someone said he also posted as Les Paterson who is an Aussie comedy character
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:16:38 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: sam
Subject: Hey is catweasel
Message:
As he alluded to several times in the thread below with Rog. His writing style is pretty unmistakable - ditto for his punctuation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:03:12 (GMT)
From: Felix the...
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Hey Catweasel? You reckon?
Message:
Rog? So I'm right.Fictional Rob is..... Easy peasey. Same literate style . Same punctuation . Thanks Katie
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 15:50:53 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Felix the...
Subject: Hey Catweasel? You reckon?
Message:
Hey cat -
Despite my (Freudian?) slip, I really don't think Roger is Rob (and have evidence to same, which cannot reveal because it was communicated privately). Definitely NOT the same writing style, nor punctuation. Don't honestly know who Rob is, and I doubt anyone else here does either.

YOUR writing style is unmistakable. I would apologize for outing you, but I don't think you're really trying to hide!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:05:14 (GMT)
From: Whiskas
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Hey Catweasel? You reckon?
Message:
Hah! Katie you may well be right. It's interesting how quickly some people forget - for all their blow and bluster. I always know that you are back of it all watching. No , I don't really try and hide.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:16:02 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Whiskas
Subject: Hey Catweasel? You reckon?
Message:
Hi Cat -
I know I'm right about the Rob/Rog thing. And, I too, can't believe people don't 'recognize' you (Felix, Whiskas, feline stoat, Miaow?)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 02:13:12 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Now you let the Cat out of the bag
Message:
So I was right huh? Well it's still pretty meaningless because I still don't know who Catweasel is, and really could care less, actually. I never socialized with premies and see no reason to start now.

As for me being Roger, well there is a regular ex poster here who has spoken with both of us on the telephone, and this person assures me we could not be mistaken for each other! Hope that clears that up.

As for you Catweasel, what can I say? One leg in the cult, the other in the loony bin. We really have nothing to say to each other do we? Enjoy the rest of your lives.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 01:38:45 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: naw Roger has more integrity
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:02:03 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: You would apologize for outing him?
Message:
Amazing. Absolutely amazing......
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:13:37 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You would apologize for outing him?
Message:
Sheesh, Jim, don't you have a sense of humor? It might help when dealing with Cat.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:24:44 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Sorry, I missed the joke
Message:
I actually thought -- I know this is going to sound crazy -- but I actually thought for a moment ... oh, I can't say it. It sounds ridiculous.

Well, okay..

I actually thought you were suggesting that Cat was entitled to hide his identity here. Hell, he's not even entitled to POST here, last I remember. So, sorry. I missed the joke. What can I say?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:40:11 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: The joke is...
Message:
That people are always wondering who he is in his various disguises when it's so OBVIOUS (at least to me), and he leaves little hints all over and they still don't figure it out.

Doubt you will stop him from posting here, honestly, but, as I said, a little humor might help.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:24:36 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Ha ha
Message:
Have to agree with Jim, Katie, I didn't sense much comedy in his posts to me below (now edited out). Why would anyone say they 'knew who I was' in context with the posts I'm making recently, if not to try to intimidate me into stopping? The fact that he actually thought I was 'Roger', who's real identity he does know, makes it all the more disturbing.

Loaf made an excellent post North of here (now THAT was real comedy) re the Queen Mother, in which he refers to 'vigilante premies'. I'm sure they exist and that this australian moggy qualifies as one. What people like him are capable of, I wouldn't like to say, but it makes me grateful for the Second Amendment.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:40:51 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: good grief Rob
Message:
Maybe you don't like his brand of humor, but I didn't get the feeling he was trying to intimidate you. In fact, I find your talk about the Second Amendment scarier than anything Catweasel wrote in that thread.

By the way, what makes you think Catweasel knows Roger's real identity? I do not think Roger would be very happy to hear about that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 04:59:39 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: good grief Rob
Message:
What do you find scary in the Bill of Rights? I think it is a wonderful document which serves to protect our freedom and democracy.

We can agree to differ on catweasel's intentions. I felt his attitude was threatening, and has been so on other occasions. Didn't he say something to Jim about coming to the USA for some kind of martial arts convention or something, and 'wanting very much to meet him (Jim)'? Perhaps I am confusing him with someone else?

Katie have you given serious thought to what might happen if something like an IRS ruling were to be made against Elan Vital and M., resulting in fines, dissolution or worse? Do you think all these 'vigilante premies' are just going to say 'oh well, c'est la vie'? If you find that kind of talk scary, well it is and with good reason. If you find it disturbing to discuss, I can appreciate that and will say no more, please feel free to have these posts erased at your discretion.

As for the other point, I can't comment, it was also communicated privately.

Take care.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 15:41:48 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Hi Rob
Message:
First, apologies for being cranky last night. Re the bill of rights: I get tired of hearing about the Second Amendment specifically, and I am sure you can understand why, even if you don't agree with me.

I am NOT worried about vigilante premies - and I think Brian, J-M, Jim, Joe, Joey, and other people who are OUT on this forum might agree with me. I worry a lot more about road rage, getting shot by a drunk deer hunter, and just general craziness. But I know some people here are worried about it, and I can accept that. I think that the longer you post here, the less you worry about it.

Re Catweasel - read his post below. In my opinion, his posts are MEANT to get a reaction out of you guys, and he succeeds in this. But I'm not afraid of him, and I don't think anyone else here should be either, although you may not LIKE him very much.

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:34:00 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Hi back
Message:
Likewise with the apologies (Jim's cringeing now, I can feel it), I guess I have jihad nightmares!!

I have always found catweasel to be more of a time waster than anything else. Never enters into a decent discussion, and now keeps popping up with a bunch of other dumb aliases. I guess he's kind of a forum mascot now, the office stray which everybody loves but nobody really wants to take home with them. Does anyone know who he actually is, or is he a phantom like me?:) Would take me about an hour to research and find out, if I could be bothered, which I can't.

enjoy your weekend
rob

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:59:47 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Hi again Rob
Message:
Jim will no doubt flame me to hell and gone for saying this, but if you actually try and talk to Catweasel like he's a human being, he will often give you a straight answer. (Witness his post to you below, actually.) He does this to me, anyway. Of course, I very much disagree with him about Maharaji, but his forum tactics (absurdity, mostly) can be quite effective, if only because of the reactions of ex-premies. Also, I honestly do think he's funny - or maybe I just like absurdity at times (although, as Cat knows, I dislike his continual anon flaming of Peter H.)

Dunno who he really is, and don't really care. Does it matter?

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:11:22 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Bolt the cat flap, honey!
Message:
Well yes I do recall having a chuckle at some of his stuff, but this latest episode as 'Hey' was anything but jovial until he was 'outed' as catweasel, then he changed his tune rapidly. Can't say I've any great urge to talk to him, as a human or any other life-form really, and like you, I could give a damn who he is. I get the idea he's an australian, and being as I don't know any aus premies, wouldnt have any use for the information anyway.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:28:34 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Bolt the cat flap, honey!
Message:
Hi Rob -
He was TRYING to tell you he was Catweasel the whole time he was posting the 'Hey' stuff - to me it was obvious. ('Catweasel', as such, is officially banned from the forum, thus the psueuds.) I would think that at least YOU would be able to understand this. I read all the posts, and read the 'hints', but didn't have the time or inclination to post (I get tired of posting 'Hey, it's Catweasel', and I am sure Cat gets tired of me posting that too.)

If you want to talk to him, switch to AG. Better get ready to talk about horse racing though! (Sorry, don't know the Aussie/English slang for that.)

TC,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:04:26 (GMT)
From: A good Mouser
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: A Cat at the Races
Message:
A Cat at the races is the nickname for an entirely unpredictable Racehorse..You know gets up and wins when you least expect it. We call having a bet on the races ' A flutter on the Neddies' or simply ' On the punt' It's always a great day for the mentally challenged. You have to trust your OWN judgement. OK, so see yah round. At the Track? Hollywood Bowl, Kentucky Derby??
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:20:53 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: A good Mouser
Subject: A Cat at the Races (OT)
Message:
Thanks for the info (finally I know what 'punter' means!). I have an aversion to gambling, mostly because I always lose. If I DID go to the races, it would be in Charleston, West Virginia - and I do not even know the name of the track. Kentucky Derby is not all that far away though - but the Preakness (I think? Baltimore?) is closer.

Hey, you have a good night (or good day?) too -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:54:44 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Other things on my mind
Message:
at the time, like doing some in-depth research on a few things, so I didn't feel him rubbing up against my legs and purring, I suppose. I'm rapidly losing interest in him, in fact, I don't think I'll waste another word...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 06:16:00 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: ps
Message:
I really don't have time to be distracted like this, I have a lot of research to do. Consider it part of my therapy. Can we drop it now, please. I think you know which side of the fence I'm on by now. Sheesh.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 15:43:49 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: ps to Rob
Message:
Of course we can drop it! And *I* believe you are an ex-premie, despite your mysterious demeanor :).

Again, take care -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:38:16 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: pps to Katie
Message:
Mysterious? Who, me?! You know my name and where I live, and if you've been talking with who I think you've been talking with, a lot more besides;)

hahaha

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:11:22 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: you are wrong
Message:
I don't tell tales out of school unlike you.

oh but this isn't about me.
some other 'she' must be out of town and in need of defending here on forum .
hhaahha I hope Brian NEVER deletes this tread.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 20:09:44 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: ps
Subject: and another thing for the record
Message:
do NOT insinuate I know ANYTHING at all about you.
You are quite careful to establish hotmail accounts with fake info. and keep all personal info. about yourself secret.
I don't know a thing and I doubt anyone here does.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:47:46 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: are you kidding?
Message:
You were supposed to live in Florida, and your name is supposedly Rob, but Roger Drek is supposedly named Roger and lives in Boise :). And all I know by talking with that other person is that you hurt her feelings badly. I feel bad about that, but can also see your side of it somewhat.

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:57:49 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: this is getting very OT, but
Message:
I wasn't aware I'd hurt anyone's feelings??? That's not good and I honestly don't know why that would be. She has my email if you feel like going into more detail, I can't remember yours. I just moved to Louisiana and I do know what Roger Drek's name is, but lets call him Roger:) Where the heck is Boise?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:02:37 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: also
Message:
Can you ask Brian to wipe all these out? Making the place untidy and too much info being bandied about.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:22:59 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: mishkat@gateway.net
To: Rob
Subject: uhhh...
Message:
Hi Rob -
1. Brian doesn't mess with the forum at all anymore. If you want no posts, then e-mail the FA's (they have my permission to delete any of my posts they want.)

2. Boise is in Idaho - where the hell are you FROM, boy :)?

3. That person is out of town, but you can e-mail me if you want - or e-mail that person directly. I'm not sure if I represented that person's feelings accurately, or if that person would have wanted me to say that.

4. If you are living in N.O., can we stay with you for JazzFest?

Take care -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:01:59 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: uhhh...
Message:
1. Oh they'll pass through soonn I suppose. Doesn't matter
2. I ain't from around here
3. I guess I will, but dealing with my estranged wife's emotions is about all I can handle at the moment, so let's keep it light.
4. Maybe, maybe. Just be the couch though, and I still sing arti at 6am:)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:14:08 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: uhhh...
Message:
1. C'est la vie (or like Daddy always said 'C'est la guerre.'
2. You ain't just whistling Dixie, boy!
3. Yeah, I understand - went through that about a year ago myself (husband, not wife).
4. Couch is fine, and don't care about Arti. Do you KNOW what hotel rooms cost then?

Hey, have a good night!
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:07:17 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Katie and whatshisface
Subject: so happy to provide some entertainment
Message:
geeezus Katie. Give me a LITTLE credit. My feelings are tougher than that. I don't get way down over some bushit artists scam - only mad at myself for listening to it;
HEY 'she has my email'
could go into the all time cliches with
'the check is in the mail'
and
'I promise I won't ....'

uh never mind :)

so gald I checked in here. gag.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:26:49 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Selene, I apologize
Message:
Sometimes I tend to say whatever is on my mind and regret it later - anyway, I am sorry! I do not (and did not) know what you were feeling, of course - and I do not know what happened - and I tried to make that clear in my second post in this sub-sub-sub thread.

Also, it wasn't entertainment, believe me.

Hope you had a good trip -
Love,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:45:45 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: had a great trip
Message:
Thanks!
Other than almost getting killed head on by some bozo (in ARIZONA!) in a Mercedes going the wrong way on the freeway!

It's a conspiracy I just know it. (kidding)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 04:50:36 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: It was probably my ex-husband
Message:
Was it a 1976 Mercedes? He can't drive all that well when he's not concentrating on it :).

Glad you had a good time - heard same from e/O/H.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 14:14:02 (GMT)
From: The Burmese Manx
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: ps: You are reading far too much into this Rob
Message:
Vigilante premies? God Rob ;what are you on? The time you mentioned with Jim was last year when I went to Canada to assist Aussie Rules football development in that country and attended a series of clinics with schoolkids and college undergrad's interested in our game. I offered to demonstrate to Jim whilst I was in Canada , the fine art of the Shirtfront , a magical piece of play well known to true affecianados of the game.
Now you have both gone and got all paranoid about that. Look I don't know ; maybe I should show you both a blind turn and pissoff. See yah, and Rob - English is a very strange language....It can mean totally different things in different places. Isn't that really interesting.
PS: Claiming to be an intellectual giant doesn't necessarily qualify you as one. But keep trying Mr Einstien.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:39:53 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: How about a group hug? (nt)
Message:
hhhhhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:07:15 (GMT)
From: Miaow
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You would apologize for outing him?
Message:
Only to you ,you humourless Jerk!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:59:52 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: sam
Subject: He's probably Amaroovian (nt)
Message:
ggggggg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 16:17:31 (GMT)
From: Angry EX
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: IT 's MAHARAJI'S FAULT!
Message:
Do you know Jim in how many of his videos Lard talked about the benefits of those 'changes'? How good has he brainwashed his followers to believe that he never did anything wrong? In how many ways Lard Maharaji has twisted his wrongdoings to look good on the eyes of his devotees? I could go on. In many ways!

When I read what premies write it makes me extremely angry because Lard is the bastard who screws premies' heads so much to the point that they make those kind of statements: They do so because Maharaji brainwashed them. They think that way because they were programmed to! Maharaji needs to be stopped!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 06:35:35 (GMT)
From: X
Email: None
To: Angry EX
Subject: such an angry lad
Message:
>When I read what premies write it makes me extremely angry because Lard is the bastard who screws premies' heads

Yeah, you seem to have screwed your own head a bit too tight.
Now that makes me mad.
Go drink a beer before you fall down.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 12:38:56 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: X
Subject: Can't drink beer anymore: It gives me an ugly skin
Message:
rash. I'm allergic to anything that is fermented. Maybe that is why I became allergic to lard's inflated ego! Hey Bro, thanks for your advice anyway.

Yeah, you seem to have screwed your own head a bit too tight.

Lard made it that way!! It was his gift to me!! As times goes by though,(I left your cult at the end of 1999) my head is regaining reasoning. mahalard had made it too tigh, I agree.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 20:55:54 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: X
Subject: you got a problem with 'angryex' being angry?
Message:
Take it personally do you?

then just be glad angry ex is being so reasonable. When you finally realise how you've been conned you will be so embarrassed by the way you bait people here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 02:05:22 (GMT)
From: X
Email: None
To: Lotus Eater
Subject: you got a problem with 'angryex' being angry?
Message:
Angry, huh. Great stuff. Not really. There are better feelings and motivations.

>When you finally realise how you've been conned you will be so embarrassed by the way you bait people here.

I am up in my years and have seen, read and heard quite a bit.
I have my own conclusions and will not be embarrassed.
Where is your true wisdom?
What do you really know about your life and death?
Easy to critique. Not easy to build something real.

Are you angry that Madonna redid 'American Pie'?
Anyways, got a party to go to, later.

X

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 16:55:18 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Angry EX
Subject: IT 's MAHARAJI'S FAULT!
Message:
They think that way because they've made Maharaji their saviour. If they say otherwise, they're lying, not only to us, but to themselves as well. Part of it is brainwashing, but part of it is wanting to believe all the lies as well. Premies need to believe that Maharaji makes only perfect moves. If there is any fault in his organization, he cannot be held accountable, or else the bubble will burst. Yes, that is brainwashing, but it's also a reflection of the premie's need to believe that the master is flawless, wise in every way. Yes, wisdom just oozes out of every holy pore. Maharji can be no less than that.

Any screwup in Elan Vital is obviously the fault of premies. It's a safeguard. This way you don't have to hold the master accountable for anything and can keep him high on the pedestal where you've placed him, where he can be idolized, and admired, and believed in. He's a sacred statue to be bowed before which must always be polished. No blemish can ever set upon him. He must forever remain sacred, untainted and pure -- just the way the motherfucker (M), himself, would have it, perfect in every way. He's done his work well with Hey. He's blinded Hey with his false glory, and hey, Hey likes it that way.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 16:34:23 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Angry EX
Subject: Stopping Maharaji.....
Message:
Angry, I agree with you about the programming that goes on, and it's a two way street. There is the programmer and there are the people who allow themselves to be programmed. For many premies, resisting the programming means questioning 20 or more years of their lives, their belief systems and their identities. The path of least resistence is just to slump into the vagueness, selective memory and a the power of positive thinking.

But I believe that 'stopping Maharaji' is really focusing on the wrong thing. Maharaji is just a fat guy from India with a good gig. Without his followers he is a big zero. So, what really is the antitode to Maharaji is innoculations of people who are considering getting involved, and antibiotics for those who are involved. And both those things are made up of INFORMATION. That's what is so great about what JM does, because he collects the INFORMATION in one place, gleaning from the records and the forum and making it available. Anybody who reads it gets a dose of the Maharaji antidote. Sure, there are still a bunch of premies terrified of even considering looking at the INFORMATION that's now on the net, but I don't think time is on Maharaji's side.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:50:02 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Stopping Maharaji..... GREAT post, Joe!
Message:
'There is the programmer and there are the people who allow themselves to be
programmed. For many premies, resisting the programming means questioning 20 or more
years of their lives, their belief systems and their identities. The path of least resistence is
just to slump into the vagueness, selective memory and a the power of positive thinking.'

Very, very well said.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 17:47:49 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Jim, Angry Ex, Jerry, Joe
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Gentlemen:

If I may interject something, something one might call 'new age' and others might call very old tried and true information...

I think it's OK to treat Maharjai like God as long as we treat each other like God too, in terms of love respect, honesty, sincerity, peacefulness, good will, etc in all our interactions.

I think that is a big part of the trip, emulating the living example, not mimicking or parroting, but really realizing that when we are talking to or about another human being we are talking to or about another vessel in which the Infinite dwells, no better or worse than ourselves, but some more awake than others - and if you can hear my message between the lines here and not get too literal about the details - I think it would make Maharaji very happy to see all the premies treating each other and everyone in general with the same love and respect they treat him, and still respect him as the teacher. I think that would make him very happy. I think that is a fruit of Knowledge, as a matter of fact, to have love and respect for fellow beings, regardless of point of view. Disagreeing without being disagreeable, unless one really has a need to do so, then each has free will. Being respected for the divinity within us (namaste, anyone?) feels so good because it is the proper use of this creation and the creatures which house us human beings inside, and that is why things go bad between us when we don't. Everyone would be more efficient, effective, happy, creative, more productive, healthier, etc. I think that is one of the desired goals of a world of people permeated with the Knowledge of God, or whatever you want to call it. People getting along is a requirement to establish peace in the world. We all know it happens one-by-one and he has in fact been doing it. Just because you don't hear the buzzing doesn't mean there isn't any honey being made. I do not think it is his intention or wish to have the premies all be robotized, as he used to call it.

Scope out, guys. You have your head jammed up too close to the thing you are trying to grok. Frustrating, ain't it? Just loosen up and scope out a bit. I'm am just making a suggestion, and this is not meant to be any sort of subtle insult. Believe it or not.

With all due respect,
shp

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:40:39 (GMT)
From: De Pro Gram Anand Ji
Email: not given
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
I think you are trying to rationalize coming to the conclusion that Maharaj Ji is God (with a capital G) by stating that we all are essentially at our core spirtual beings. I don't think Maharaj Ji gives a shit how we treat each other he just want us to adore him and pay his bills. Wake up and smell the coffee, the Guru is a fake!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 12:50:31 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: De Pro Gram Anand Ji
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Keep telling yourself that. I don't happen to agree with you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:20:16 (GMT)
From: But
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: and what do you know? 0 (nt)
Message:
He needs to be 'god' or the trick doesn't work!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:05:37 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: No, that's not unreasonable, shp
Message:
That was a really, really good post, shp. You're absolutely right. In fact, we should all be treating everyone like god. Sorry, God.

You know, it reminds me of the satsang story about the saint and the dog. The dog grabs the saint's chapati (the bread, not the sandal) and the saint runs after him crying 'woof, woof, woof, woof' which, in dog, means 'Oh my Lord, let me butter it for you!' See, the saint saw god everywhere. In particular, he saw god in dog.

Now, can you see god in dog, shp? Because if you can, you're a very, very lucky fellow. Let's hear you now, shp. Come on, let's hear you try ....

woof, woof, woof, woof

Come on, shp, you're not even trying. Come on, shp, you can do it...

woof, woof, woof, woof

Shhhh-ppp! Come on, shp. Come on, boy. Woof, woof, woof, woof...

Hey, shp, don't slobber on me, boy. Down, shp.. Down, shp...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:34:18 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Does it take much effort to be that mean?
Message:
Or does it come as easy to you as it seems.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:47:46 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: 'Mean'? Give me a break (nt)
Message:
hhhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:36:52 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yeah, it was mean...nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:28:41 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: That's the worst post from you I've seen Jim (nt)
Message:
That's the worst post from you I've seen Jim (nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:54:32 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: I thought it was kind of funny, myself
Message:
You might start talking to shp that way, yourself, after two years of trying to talk sense to him. He is a buffoon, and deserves to be spoken to as such. His choice.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:28:33 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: I thought you both had more class.
Message:
i understand what you're saying Jerry, and yes, it is kind of funny in a 'slapstick' kind of way, but are you aware of studies on those who can only react to 'slapstick' humour? And there is a time and place for everything.

I disagree about the 'timing' here. And 'timing' is, if not everything, very critical in comedy.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:59:10 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Okay, I really am going to kill myself now
Message:
Stonor,

Give me a fucking break!

Shp's a lava lamp. You can watch him all you want but there's no reason to take him seriously. And believe me, Stonor, I've tried. I've tried and I've tried and I've tried. I've tried to talk with him

respectfully

-- what a mistake that was! He is a stubborn, bull-headed new-age know-nothing. He is impervious to reason and pompous to the max. Fuck him.

And yes, you're right. I have less class than you thought. Satisfied?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:42:40 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Talk about melodramatic! Give me a break!
Message:
Dear Jim,

I appreciate your frustration Jim, and believe me, I do understand it, so you're right- fuck him! Is that what you would have wanted looking back to when you were a premie? But, to be honest, although I've wanted to say 'Fuck them' about a lot of people, that's the easy way out, isn't it?

And Jim, you know that you have a lot more class than MANY - that doesn't mean that there isn't room for growth. Aren't you still alive and growing, like some of us, I hope? I think so. And your 'ideas' might change?

No, I'm not satisfied that you don't have as much class as I thought! I fucking know that you CAN do better! Not all of us have been through the same long trip with SHP that you have, so let other people deal with it and relax and have a Maudite.

I am not in competition with you.

Much LOVE,

Stonor.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:48:49 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Are you sure you're not a schoolteacher?
Message:
Stonor,

What do you mean by 'do better'? Are you actually suggesting that I talk to this idiot as if he was someone to reason with? About what? About following Maharaji's lead and seeing God in everyone?

Sorry, you lost me. Listen, you should understand by now that I loathe the kind of stripped-screw mind that shp has grown. I like the other kind. You know, the one that can reason and grapple with issues. Yeah, that's the one. Shp is a new-age ninny. I despise what he is. Okay, maybe that's not quite the right word but, forgive me, it's been a long day and I can't find a stronger one.

And no, no Maudite tonight. I'm working.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:11:58 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You know (fucking) well that I'm a schoolteacher.
Message:
Did you read my post? I know that you can. I know that you are in the top quarter of the Statscan stats categories of literacy. I did not suggest that you 'talk to this idiot as if he was someone to reason with' at all. Unlike most school teachers, I will not repeat what I've already written. READ it again.

I am working tonight too.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:15:19 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Well teachers shouldn't swear
Message:
Stonor,

Isn't the real issue here your inability to avoid swearing in public? You know damn well that children read this forum. Why just the other year Susan's kid posted something. So who knows how many are lurking and not posting? And you're what? Swearing and everything?

I don't knooooowww.....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:33:28 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Should lawyers swear? Double standard?
Message:
Isn't this fun Jim? You're finally talking to me. Swearing CAN work wonders in the right context, as I've learned from my (usually) adult students. And you know that your 'real issue' is a tangent, so get with the program Jim. All kids hear much worse than swearing on a daily basis.

Did you re-read my post? Again you disappoint me with your avoidance of the issue at hand.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:58:01 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Trying to change the subject back, are we?
Message:
I'm offended that you're detouring from my digression, Stonor.

How do you wear your hair?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:27:40 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I wear my hair the way it grows!
Message:
I wear my hair the way it grows, you relentless focusser upon irrelevant data! Give me your email address again and I'll send you a photo!, if you send me yours.

You assholes are so easily offended but frequently critisise premies if they digress from the topic at hand. Do you realize how fine the line is between premies and 'exes' is for this trangression at this moment, you obsessor about how an individual wears his or her hair? Of course you do, so ('!') off.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 13:22:39 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: ex-premie elitism is no better than premie elitism
Message:
Stonor:

My post title says it all. Jim is an elitist. All the rest, including his insulting and condescending demeanor, is details.
I too have respectfully tried to communicate with him to no avail. It's not just about Maharaji, but about how we here communicate our feelings about what we believe. Jim believes that he can be as nasty as he wants to be in the name of his superior intellect being so exasperated by his failed attempts to reach down into the mire of the lower ethers to enlighten me. Really, give me a break!

As for grappling with hard-to-grapple ideas, I am hanging in there with the idea that Knowledge is being spread in the world, that it is a very important component in the establishment of peace in the world on an individual level, and that despite the things that have happened along the way we both might consider as 'mistakes', that the original purpose is so heavy it's going forward anyway and I believe that anyone who was hurt along the way can find solace and closure if they sincerely want that and not some sort of sick revenge, as our friend Jim insists upon each time he posts. Try grappling with that one, if you really want a challenge. And then watch Jim prance around with little verbal witticisms, thinking he is the mental heavyweight. I'd rather be retarded with Knowledge than be Jim any day of the week. There are awarenesses more precious than the intellect can deliver. The part of God inside of Jim is bound and gagged and locked up in a closet behind the thorne of Jim's ego. Just look back at the thread and observe his little game. Maybe you like it, too. If so, bless you both. With regard to Jim, end of story.

What were we talking about...treating each other like God, right?

shp

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:51:28 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: Two wrongs don't make a right.
Message:
As a non-anything, I can say that I'm happy to be neither an ex nor a premie, but Jim is not the paragon of ex-premiedom, so I can't go along with your analysis. Jim is Jim. He was probably tirelessly (or tiresomely) propagating k as premie, so at least acknowledge that. Personally, I find exes (usually) FAR more capable of intelligent discussion than premies. And at least Jim is fun sometimes! And SHP, you don't need k to realize that this question of 'respect' towards other is as old as the history of humanity.

From (Roman. Cicero, De Off.I.vii)

'There are two kinds of injustice: the first is found in those who do an injury, the second in those who fail to protect another from injury when they can.'

The latter is why I stepped into this 'discussion' between you and Jim, and why I support the exes, not the premies. The former is what m is, IMO, 'guilty' of. Mother Theresa is surely a better example of a 'perfect' human being by your standards than m, could ever dream of. And that's only an obvious alternative to your choice.

And what is your definition of God? By my definition, I actually like Jim's example, but not the way he presented it to you. And in the real world, do you, or any other person you know including m, really treat everyone as if they are 'God'?

Stonor, the 'spiritual bastard'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 18:56:31 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Then go and have your intelligent discussions (nt)
Message:
sosososososososososososososososmart
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 14:10:19 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: Yet another word you don't use properly!
Message:
'Elitism'?

Well, shp, aren't we sounding a little stupider than even the normal shp this morning?

I had the good sense to leave the cult and that makes me an 'elitist'? Is that what Flat Earth Society members call the rest of us? Elitists?

You are a total, no make that total idiot. Is it 'mean' to tell you that? Gues what? I don't give a flying fuck. You deserve the deepest, most disrespectful ridicule imaginable. Maybe we should hire an expert. You pay, of course.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 19:47:24 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: waving off the insult contest, go away.
Message:
Jim said:
'Elitism'?
Well, shp, aren't we sounding a little stupider than even the normal shp this morning?

shp says:
The 'stupidity' is in your receiver between your ears. Maybe you should give it a good shake, or better yet, bang it agaisnt something not too hard.

Jim said:
I had the good sense to leave the cult and that makes me an 'elitist'?

shp says:
No, your arrogance and intellectual snobbery and all that other crap that we all (yeah WE) put up with here is what makes you an elitist.

Jim said:
Is that what Flat Earth Society members call the rest of us? Elitists?

shp says:
It's not about an 'us' Jim. It's YOU. Not all the ex-premies are elitists. YOU ARE FLAMING ASSHOLE OF AN ELITIST AND YOU HIDE BEHIND 'US'. NO, MAN. JUST YOU HERE AND NOW. You reveal your total cowardice by hiding behind and 'us'. What a wimpy, cowardly, overdeveloped-in-the-brain freak you are.

Jim said:
You are a total, no make that total idiot. Is it 'mean' to tell you that? Guess what? I don't give a flying fuck. You deserve the deepest, most disrespectful ridicule imaginable. Maybe we should hire an expert. You pay, of course.

shp says:
I am getting it from you and I pay by having to read it if I so choose. You know what? I don't give a flying fuck about your point of view either. All you want to do is get the blood pressure up and get the energy all in turmoil with your inflammatory words and insults, like in a courtroom (?), all under your choreography, so you can ply your wares as a word butcher on anyone who disagrees with you. You can package yourself anyway you want, but I've got your number. Your attempts to piss me off are wasted.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 16:30:54 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: waving off the insult contest, go away.
Message:
shp says:

No, your arrogance and intellectual snobbery and all that other crap that we all (yeah WE) put up with here is what makes you an elitist.

Isn't that you shouldn't have included WE?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 13:47:20 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: Great Post shp!
Message:
We clearly see Jim the same way. I posted something along these lines a while ago, as well as the 'back in highschool' too! But he got you again below like he got me on Thursday night. Any other ideas for how to deal with him? I've been trying to ignore him for the most part myself, but can't always manage.

And I really have to take exception to this, BTW:

I'd rather be retarded with Knowledge than be Jim any day of the week.

But I realize that my post to you was a bit reactive and I apologize for that - what I have to work on is not letting people push my buttons to the extent that it clouds my thinking or causes me to lash back to some extent.

Have a pleasant weekend!

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 22:21:57 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: You're a new age clown, shp
Message:
Everyone's laughing. Even the ones who think it's rude to point and say shit are laughing behind your back. No one takes you seriously. No one I know, anyway. You're in shpland, bozo. Have fun.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 12:28:03 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: and you are still in high school,
Message:
no offense meant to actual adolescents, most of whom pass through the stage you are stuck in and move on to maturity. So take your
peer games and sit on them. We'll see who laughs last.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:09:12 (GMT)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yet another word you don't use properly!
Message:
I had the good sense to leave the cult and that makes me an 'elitist'?

Just because you left the cult, Jim, doesn't necessarily make you a 'non-elitist,' either. You could have left out of your frustration in not making it to m's elite corps of impudent premie snobs. You know what I mean ?

Secondly, I find this statement of yours to shp to be totally ridiculous.

You deserve the deepest, most disrespectful ridicule imaginable. Maybe we should hire an expert.

We don't need to hire any outside help. We got you, Jim !!

And then to tell shp this.

You pay, of course

Now how the hell is he supposed to do that? shp needs his money for smart cards, satellite broadcasts, sponsorship programs...the list goes on and on !

Sheesh!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 16:28:29 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Yet another word you don't use properly!
Message:
Joey,

I must be an elitist if only because shp mouthed those words. Any deeper analysis, apparently, is itself elitist and merely proves the point. You got a brain? To shp, that smarts of elitism. He's trying to live his life on a simpler level.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:30:54 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Stonor
Subject: Then I must be doing something right (nt)
Message:
gggggg
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:03:56 (GMT)
From: gErRy
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Fuck, I thought Jim's response was hilarious, but
Message:
I'm a rotten mean fucker myself so that's no surprise, right?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:00:50 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: just a few more steps
Message:
and you too will get out from under. And this will happen for you: 'Everyone would be more efficient, effective, happy, creative, more productive, healthier, etc.'

Good luck, Lesley

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:55:14 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: why treat a major con-artist as God? (nt)
Message:
rtyeth
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:42:01 (GMT)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
shp says'- I think it would make Maharaji very happy to see all the premies treating each other and everyone in general with the same love and respect they treat him..'

You reminded of a Q & A session I was once at. It was in Rome circa 1977....and I swallowed it.

Q. Maharaji, what was your most favourite time of a past perfecr master?
A. In Krishna's time the devotees loved each other with the same same love that they loved Him.

The point here is shp that he said the right words but has never really believed it. His actions show that he has no respect or love for anyone other than himself and his own comfort.

Had he an ounce of love and/or respect for people he would have responded to peoples' pain and questions years ago and had you any love or respect for people you would have blown him out years ago....but there again you ARE emulating him as a living example.


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 21:59:19 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Jethro said:

The point here is shp that he said the right words but has never really believed it. His actions show that he has no respect or love for anyone other than himself and his own comfort.

Had he an ounce of love and/or respect for people he would have responded to peoples' pain and questions years ago and had you any love or respect for people you would have blown him out years ago....but there again you ARE emulating him as a living example.

shp says:
You want a perfect human (per your specs) to empbody the perfect Knowledge. Ain't gonna happen, not in the foreseeable future from where I sit. Anything I learn from a human being teacher, including Knowledge, will always be flavored in some way by the ever-developing and ever-evolving personality and consciousness of the teacher. This is what I have learned and this is what I accept at this point in my life. If you can disagree without being nasty, fine. If you must demean my position, go for it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:47:54 (GMT)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: Believe me when I say
Message:
that I wasn't being nasty. I was being realy polite.

You are in the same mindset as saibaba devotees who justify his interference with young boys as 'taking their karma'.

I hope you and the other 'premies' snap out of it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:59:57 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
shp says:
You want a perfect human (per your specs) to empbody the perfect Knowledge. Ain't gonna happen, not in the foreseeable future from where I sit.

Perfect is a very strong word and without rigorous specs the word has little meaning. What are your watered-down specs and according to them, do you think he's 'perfect'? Do you leave out moral qualities such as honesty out of your specs?

Anything I learn from a human being teacher, including Knowledge, will always be flavored in some way by the ever-developing and ever-evolving personality and consciousness of the teacher. ...

It sounds like you are acknowledging that neither his personality nor consciousness are fully-developed or full-evolved. The big problem is that he stated otherwise and still does, except now he's sneaky about it. I can't see any way how the 'adulation' (see EV web site) that goes on is justified, given that he is in fact quite imperfect. It's idolatry.

Other things I take issue with are

1) The notion that the meditation techniques 'belong' to him and they are not anyone else's to 'give'.

How's that? He didn't invent them and even if he did, they wouldn't belong to him. Nor are they the 'property' of his so-called lineage, which has been shown here to be quite suspect. Many other 'teachers' of other lineages (or of no lineage) show the same techniques. We're not talking rocket science here, they're not hard to teach. Without the weird idea that there is some hocus-pocus mojo going on, this notion has absolutely no foundation. Now with 'auto-knowledge', one is asked to believe that somehow he can impart this mojo into the DVD so it can be transmitted. In the past, it was said that the touch of a full-realized soul was needed. But let's forget about that.

2) There is this nebulous, poorly defined thing called 'being ready' to receive Knowledge.

I was at Amaroo and saw Mr. Rawat tell people who travelled half way around the world to 'receive Knowledge' that they were 'not ready'. He didn't explain why. What exactly does 'ready' mean?

3) That Prem Rawat, even though an ordinary human being, can tell, and is the only person who can tell who is 'ready'.

Of course, in the past other people (but only people magically blessed by him) could tell, but not anymore. That's part of the 'rest' the pwkies are supposed to forget.

What, does he supposedly have some mystic power that us ordinary humans don't have, even though he's ordinary? What about all the people that he 'gave Knowledge' to who don't practice? What happened to his so-called ability to tell if they were 'ready'.

4) 'keeping in touch' with the same ordinary guy is necessary for the meditation techniques to have full benefit.

Nowaways, he doesn't come right out and talk about 'his grace', but that's really what this is about, isn't it? That is shown clearly by the posts at ELK, which have been edited 'for clarity'. The ideas 'that which you are looking for is within you' and 'you need to keep in touch' are contradictory.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:30:42 (GMT)
From: SB
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Very nice analysis G = Thanks (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:12:16 (GMT)
From: Elaine
Email: None
To: G
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Don't usually like to comment anymore - but -excellent,G.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 18:31:33 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Shp, you say some nice sentiments but the premise is screwed up.

No one has to be treated like a God, but treating human beings like human beings is a great idea. Maharaji is a human being who claims to be much more than a human being and expects to be treated accordingly. That is the problem.

I'm sure Maharaji might prefer that premies not treat each other as badly as they often do, as long as they don't give all their money to each other, and send it to him, being that he is so much better than anybody else, and deserving of all he gets and more.

But the day that premies, who remain premies, think of each other the same way they think of Maharaji will be a very cold day in hell.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:06:51 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Joe,
First, thank you for your civil vibe.
Second, I believe that the word 'human' comes from the Greek meaning 'divine'. So we are divine beings in gross material bodies to learn something here. Therefore, the thing you said about treating people like gods or human is moot.
It's the same thing.

As for premies treating each other badly, I think this is an unfortunate but true cliche has played and replayed down through history with students of this subject. That doesn't mean you or I have to participate in the cliche and fall into that behavior because so many others do. Did your folks ever ask you if you'd jump off a building if somebody else did? Same thing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 23:31:08 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:

Second, I believe that the word 'human' comes from the Greek meaning 'divine'. So we are divine beings in gross material bodies to learn something here. Therefore, the thing you said about treating people like gods or human is moot. It's the same thing.

The entry for human doesn't show that, not that that matters. Why do you use the word 'gross'? Perhaps matter is less material than we think.

I disagree that it's the same thing. Prem Rawat has not been treated like an ordinary human. People wouldn't drop whatever they are doing to travel half way around the world to listen to someone that they think is ordinary, nor would they sing 'You are the superior power in person' to him or kiss his 'Holy Lotus Feet'.

I also feel that you are taking great liberties with the word God. We're not talking about treating someone like 'a god', as in just another form of God, but as God. Charles Manson by your definition is 'a god'. Would you treat Charles Manson and Prem Rawat the same way?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 17:57:26 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So are you saying Maharaji is the 'living example' of in terms of love respect, honesty, sincerity, peacefulness, good will, etc ...

And we should emulate him?

Are you nuts? Haven't you learned anything from this website?

And what about atheists who don't believe in the 'divine within' everyone? How are they to act, oh wise one?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 18:19:01 (GMT)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Forget about GOD if you want....just treat people the way you would like to be treated by others and try to be understanding of the cause (eg.ignorance, self-hatred, unhealed hearts) when you are treated badly.
Respectfully, Carol
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 18:20:59 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Hi Gerry!

I do agree with SHP's general thesis that each human CAN be a vessel of the divine consciousness, and at very least might have some spark of the divine, as all creation does according to my concept, but most cult devotees I've known have looked down on anyone outside their particular cult, and even m has called those without a guru 'spiritual bastards'. The hypocrisy continues and it makes even my non-anything head spin.

SHP wrote:

'I think that is a big part of the trip, emulating the living example'

THE living example?!!!! That really is a 'trip'.

And Gerry, here's what Lewis Carroll has to say about atheists:

'...the most absolute Atheist may be leading, though walking blindfold, a pure and noble life'.

Stonor

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 18:17:26 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
shp,

Can you possibly be serious!?

This reminds me of the time I was with a friend of mine who is schizophrenic. I found him sitting on a curb. He told me that he was feeling bad because he had just inadvertently offended an elderly couple by showing them his ankles. I asked him to explain. He recited some verse in the Bible about showing someone your heel (by walking away) and offending them. He said he had accidentally showed his ankels (close to his heels) and that had offended the elderly couple and that was why they had walked away.

I asked him 'Can you possibly be serious?'

I realized that he was in fact serious (and seriously psychotic).

I feel the same way about your post. Are you nuts? Do you think any ex-premie who reads this Forum will be swayed in some positive way by what you have to say? Or are you purposely trying to make us all ill?

You must be seriously demented.

With all due respect,

Way

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:16:45 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: on being treated like God
Message:
Can your ankle example possibly be taken seriously by anyone other than those who basically (ex-premies) agree with you? No way, Way. This is just a way to associate me with some ridiculous story you just told. It reminds me of how the Republicans are trying to constantly associate Gore with Clinton and not let him emerge as himself on his own....not that I agree with either party. Nader is more righteous than all of them put together.

If you think I am seriously demented, you should not expect any rational posts from me. And if grandma had gonads she'd be grandpa. Your example is laughable.

And who said I am trying to 'sway' anyone? Can't a guy just have something to say? You know, an open forum of ex-premies, premies, anything and everything about Maharaji, like your Forum intro says? Why are you so paranoid to think that I am here to sway you or anyone?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 19:53:19 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: on being called 'Gentlemen'. Ladies? ... (nt)
Message:
wertrew
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Aug 03, 2000 at 22:19:52 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: on being called 'Gentlemen'. Ladies? ...
Message:
Dear cq,

No disrespect intended. I was specifically addressing the partricipants alreadly in on the conversation which were all male names and the Angry Ex. That person could be female. Sorry. I stand (sit) correctd.

shp

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 00:20:35 (GMT)
From: Lurkex
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: Premies, sibling rivalry and more...
Message:
Hi shp

I get that you're not obsessed with swaying us and I appreciate your communication tone.

I agree that all human beings contain the infinite and are worthy of respect in essence, although some people's BEHAVIOR is worthy of strong correction. MJ is worthy of respect as a divine human. However, his behavior has hurt a lot of people, in direct contradiction to the myth that he helps people. One part of his behavior that I find particularly toxic, which speaks directly to your thesis about his desire for us all to be equally human or divine, is the degree to which he has OVERTLY set himself up as 'more than' and allowed premies to denigrate themselves both psychologically and materially in their resulting 'less than' status. If you have any doubts about MJ having directly set up this mythology about his superiority, please read some of the archives and records on this website. He said it, not us; I heard him personally repeat statements of this kind for over a decade.

Premies in general don't treat each other well, although there are always exceptions and always blissed-out moments when kindnesses happen. But the general ambience when I was involved was chilly, and the most 'horizontally abusive' (premies treating premies without care) of any community that I have known, and I have been in over a dozen communities of different kinds before and after Knowledge. It's common that the way siblings treat each other reflects the way their parents treat them. If MJ were really modeling unconditional love, extreme respect, kindness and sacred honoring in his relationships with premies, there would be a trickle-down effect. The abuse and competition and literal dehumanizing behaviors between premies is a direct reflection of the way he treats people, especially those close to him, as well as the way the whole scene is set up. The real goal, not stated at first, but gradually indoctrinated (why else fly all over the world?) is to get close to 'the master', or somehow associated with him in reflected glory by being a honcho of some kind. And of course to go within inside. Straight to the boss or inside yourself, but by no means mess with middle management, all those other humans that are mostly a distraction from the path. MJ has said as much and these kinds of quotes from him were on this page only last week. The system is dysfunctional, a huge family revolving around a tyrannical, distant, hands-off father figure. And he comes from a family with sibling rivalry so mean and ugly it was taken to court, after all!

The premie world is definitely not the only place where people don't treat each other with the respect and kindness that is needed for a major shift on the earth. But it does suck in this regard, and is much more part of the problem than part of the solution.

Best regards to you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 18:43:14 (GMT)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: Lurkex
Subject: Premies, sibling rivalry and more...
Message:
I agree, mostly, with your comments, but I am not convinced that all the intent to deceive that is ascribed to M is valid. He overtly set himself up as he did because he believes in it, too, and believes he is IT, and doing the Job he MUST do, looking only forward and not back as we'd like him to in order to make amends. I think the only thing he believes he must be accountable to is to 'spread the Knowledge'. I wrote a letter last winter to him, referencing the golden throne (toilet seat) and the common vulgar request that he 'Shit or get off the pot!' If was not able to 'Bring peace to the world',as promised, he should join forces with the many spiritual and Humanitarian leaders who are also working toward this goal. Even though it seems he has made bad mistakes, I still see him as on the side of Light, not Darkness in this world.

Those of you who think I'm an idiot for saying that, spare the effort to tell me, I already know I've already been told. I also know I don't know everything, heck I might not know much of anything. I take responsibility for my ignorance and I strive to be honest and to remain unsure until I am sure!

There were many good points made in this thread. I am appreciative of dialogue that examines the issues from many angles.

And that God/dog post from Jim was not by any means the meanest! It was kind of funny and possibly even a zen style spiritual lesson for us all. Gee thanks Jim!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 13:18:56 (GMT)
From: shp
Email: None
To: Lurkex
Subject: Premies, sibling rivalry and more...
Message:
Hi shp

Hi Lurkex

I get that you're not obsessed with swaying us and I appreciate your communication tone.

shp: Thank you. I appreciate yours too.

Lurkex: I agree that all human beings contain the infinite and are worthy of respect in essence, although some people's BEHAVIOR is worthy of strong correction. MJ is worthy of respect as a divine human. However, his behavior has hurt a lot of people, in direct contradiction to the myth that he helps people. One part of his behavior that I find particularly toxic, which speaks directly to your thesis about his desire for us all to be equally human or divine, is the degree to which he has OVERTLY set himself up as 'more than' and allowed premies to denigrate themselves both psychologically and materially in their resulting 'less than' status.

shp: I don't see it that way, and I am quite aware of much of what the archives talk about, having received Knowledge in the late 70's. In a cosmic sense, I saw this whole thing as Maharaji's turn to be the representative for the Knowledge, whatever else he brought along with him. Much transition had to and still has to occur. Just cleaning out the basement kicks up alot of dust, so just think about all the mental and psychic crap getting kicked up as a teacher travels the world with the message and the energy of the common denominator - Knowledge - for all humanity. Yeah, he came on like all that and I bought it too. Sure got our attention, didn't it? I did not feel 'less' for who Maharaji said he was. I was releived as I am sure many were, that someone was coming along and taking on such a huge responsibility at such an early age and with so much confidence and calm. The self-denigrators among us already had that trait in them and would most likely have self-denigrated in a human relationship, a master-student relationship, a job or whatever. Let's not blame Maharaji for every wierd reaction to him that manifested in a premie or aspirant or even ex-premie...I don't think that's a fair call. Getting past 'position' for a minute, I heard him say many times that he wanted us to be where he was at, to have the same experience he was having...and I don't think that he meant living in Malibu and sleeping with Marolyn and being 5'2'. I think he's having some sort of very very high inner experience in the realm of Knowledge and where it leads one within, and I could sense the bliss coming from him, not from his expensive stuff. That was what it was about and still is.

Lurkex: If you have any doubts about MJ having directly set up this mythology about his superiority, please read some of the archives and records on this website. He said it, not us; I heard him personally repeat statements of this kind for over a decade.

Premies in general don't treat each other well, although there are always exceptions and always blissed-out moments when kindnesses happen. But the general ambience when I was involved was chilly, and the most 'horizontally abusive' (premies treating
premies without care) of any community that I have known, and I have been in over a dozen communities of different kinds before and after Knowledge. It's common that the way siblings treat each other reflects the way their parents treat them. If MJ were
really modeling unconditional love, extreme respect, kindness and sacred honoring in his relationships with premies, there would be a trickle-down effect. The abuse and competition and literal dehumanizing behaviors between premies is a direct reflection of
the way he treats people, especially those close to him, as well as the way the whole scene is set up. The real goal, not stated at first, but gradually indoctrinated (why else fly all over the world?) is to get close to 'the master', or somehow associated with him in reflected glory by being a honcho of some kind. And of course to go within inside.

shp: I understand and can relate to much of what you say. There is a need for growth and development and I believe it is happening. I think it takes longer to accomplush such when dealing on a golbal scale, too.

Lurkex: Straight to the boss or inside yourself, but by no means mess with middle management, all those other humans that are mostly a distraction from the path. MJ has said as much and these kinds of quotes from him were on this page only last week. The system is dysfunctional, a huge family revolving around a tyrannical, distant, hands-off father figure. And he comes from a family with sibling rivalry so mean and ugly it was taken to court, after all!

shp: Even if all of what you say is right-on, I still say and believe that the Knowledge is really what it is advertised to be and whatever adjustments, errors, and assorted other stuff happens along the way, it will all be footnotes or less compared to the establishment of Knowledge in the world. I don't believe that Maharaji ever acted with malice, even if some of his operatives did. That is a key thing for me, what a person's motivation is. I think Maharaji's motivation has always been to fulfill his father's direction to him, to take Knowledge to the world, at a time in his young life when a more fitting chore for him might have been to go to the store for a bottle of milk. He had to grow up. That is something we were not always aware of early on, nor did we really need to be if we had total faith and confidence in him and K at the time. I think focussing on his material stuff is immature and silly. If a master comes in rags he gets ridiculed by some and if he comes in riches he gets ridiculed by others. And I think that throughout all the east-west cultural meltdown and all the crazy stories about premies and mahatmas, what is going on as the main event - the spreading of Knowledge - far overshadows all of it. And this is not to say that individual lives are not important or don't matter...they most certainly do.

Lurkex: The premie world is definitely not the only place where people don't treat each other with the respect and kindness that is needed for a major shift on the earth. But it does suck in this regard, and is much more part of the problem than part of the solution.

shp: I have dropped in on two other websites that have information about other 'schools' I attended you might say.
The same kind of dialog is happening there as well. Child abuse became a harmful presence, fellow 'students' broke into factions and argue with each other constantly about the past and what it all meant, looking for every possible chink in the armor of the teacher, etc. What is happening on this ex-premie site is not unique. And premies have traditionally been at each other's throats since forever. It is written that Jesus used to have to break up squabbles over who was the greastest devotee, etc. I am hip to that. I have heard it said that when the doctor shows up, the sickest ones crowd him first and most furiously. When I was an aspiriant, I spent some time in Montreal. I premie lady who was like my spirit guide at the time was trying to console me because I was in Montreal and I wanted to be near the teacher whose Knowledge I sought. The lady told me that the most vicious premies (oxymoron?) he keeps closest to him, and I should be glad that I can feel the love from so far away and not feel like I am missing a damn thing because I'm not.

Best regards to you, too.

shp

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 19:20:54 (GMT)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: shp
Subject: You are nuts, Sandy
Message:
Fuckin'nuttier than a fruitcake. Go preach somewhere else you fucking lunatic.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 21:12:07 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: Lurkex
Subject: Great post. (nt)
Message:
asdf
Return to Index -:- Top of Index