Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum III Archive # 22 | |
From: Aug 14, 1998 |
To: Aug 31, 1998 |
Page: 3 Of: 5 |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:19:26 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Everyone Subject: Your destiny awaits, Red Heels Message: I was able to translate the following from the French forum. There's a very interesting conversation going on there about Maharaji's probable retirement. Here's what one guy said: 'I intended to mention about a very important premie, who at a recent meeting with Maharaji, said that Maharaji was talking about preparing the ground for the next master who could be a woman, in his opinion. This possibility made the premies tremble! To imagine it, the idea of leaving Maharaji and to have him replaced by a woman. Not! What a horror! 'But which woman? Maharaji is already tired. Is it the hour of his retirement? But with the guarantee that the dolce vita will continue, of course!' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 03:16:12 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: I like the subject line... Message: Is this for real? Is it from a reliable source? Do you think it could be wadi? The last question was meant to be silly. :-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 03:46:51 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Mike Subject: I like the subject line... Message: Reliable: I think so. She's a spanish ex, and has plenty of premies friends really involved in EV. As you know, premies can't help but talking of things they 'should NOT' be talking about, specially in countries like Spain !! The rumor has also spread here in France ..... so ? I still wonder how premies will react to this. They do already react, the fanatics are more fanatic than ever. Clinging to their faith .... that's very sad to see. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 03:50:52 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Another Message: JM: ' Another bumpy ride provided to you free of charge by the perfect hamster of our day, Prem Pal.' What a guy....he he he. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 11:17:01 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: Secret knowers Subject: Common knowledge Message: Gentlemen, I think you run the risk of being too ironic for your readers. If they weren't at Long Beach in 1997 or haven't seen the video, they may not know that Maharaji shared his opinion with 9,000 others. I'll try again. Passing thru Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 11:22:25 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Second post. Message: I have had trouble posting more than once in a session. The problem seems to be fixed. PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 12:30:17 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Passing thru Subject: Second post. Message: Are you using Internet Unexplorer? I've noticed that after a while it just gives up the ghost and you have to shut it down and re-open it again in order to post properly. I have a funny article somewhere, about what the president of General Morors had to say about Bill Gates and Microsoft. I'll post it here when I've found it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 16:17:05 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: A problem? Message: Sir: What version of the explorer are you using and with what operating system? If you are having trouble with an older version, I can send you a newer version. The problem that you just described doesn't happen to me. I use several platforms with NT, Win 95 and Win 98. Each platform has three different versions of IE loaded on it. I haven't experienced a lockup of that variety, yet. I'll be glad to help, if I can. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 16:52:08 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Mike Subject: A problem? Message: I've had the same problem using Netscape Navigator on a Mac. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 20:43:15 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mike Subject: A problem? Message: Thanks Mike. The main reason why IE locks up is because of the outdated computer I am using. It's a 1991 386 antique. I need to get a more modern computer before that damn Bill Gates invents another windows version. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 04:09:31 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: A problem? Message: Sir: Ahhhhhh. Yes, that can be the problem. Unfortunately, I can't help with that one :-) Well, if/when you do an upgrade, I'll be glad to assist in any way I can. Sorry I couldn't be of more help this time. -Mike Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 04:14:23 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mike Subject: An Addendum Message: Sir: one thing I can quickly suggest is to keep your 'internet temporary files' folders fairly clear. If you are using an older system, you 'may' be having a hard drive space problem. When that folder gets big (or reaches any limit that you have set), IE gets real flakey. If that doesn't help, then it probably is the actual intel instruction set that is being used (e.g. 386 vice 486\pentium). Give the above a try and let me know how it goes. -Mike Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 08:23:07 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Mike Subject: Upgrading PC Message: Upgrading from a 386 to a Pentium can be a messy business. They're different architectures, the 386 based on ISA and the Pentium on PCI. A Pentium 133Mhz or 166Mhz probably has some ISA slots for transferring over the video adapter and internal modem, if you have one. But you're definitely going to have to buy new memory, the pin structures are completely different. Even if you can transfer over the video adapter and modem there's still no guarantee that they'll work. My advice to anyone who's upgrading from a 386 is to just buy a new computer (the most powerful you can afford) minus the monitor. It saves a lot of grief. Believe me, I've been there/done that. No fun at all. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 11:31:38 (EDT)
From: Bobby Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Upgrading PC Message: >>>the 386 based on ISA and the Pentium on PCI. ISA and PCI are motherboard slots, not the processor itself. Some memory may be ported over, like SIMMS. However you will want much more memory then was common on the old 386's. You may want to move the old hard drive over to the new computer. Agreed, upgrading machines can be a big hassle. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 13:09:56 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Upgrading PC Message: ISA and PCI are motherboard slots, not the processor itself. Yes, unless you buy an earlier Pentium model, say a 133mhz or 166mhz, it's not likely you're going to find any ISA slots on it. Today's models are strictly PCI. Some memory may be ported over, like SIMMS. However you will want much more memory then was common on the old 386's. Sir David has a 1991 model. SIMMS back then were all 30 pin. Today, they're 72 pin. Yes, you would want at least 32MB in your new machine. You may want to move the old hard drive over to the new computer. That depends on the size and speed of the hard drive. What you might want to do otherwise, is copy all of your personal data files to floppy disk, and just re-install the programs to the new hard drive (provided you have the original installation programs), then copy back your data files. They generally don't take up much room. I've done this sort of thing on a dozen occassions, Bobby. For 7 years, I was a PC support technician. I know only too well what a hassle it is to upgrade an antiquated machine. If David has a brand name model, like an IBM, Compaq or AST, there's a possibility that there's a way to upgrade with a minimum of despair, if those companies have made allowances for this dramatic an upgrade. But if it's your standard clone, you're looking at a nightmare, maybe even an impossibility to upgrade it. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 14:16:04 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Correction Message: I'm not sure about there not being any ISA slots in today's models. I haven't been a technician for over a year and haven't dealt much with computers, lately, on the hardware level. I'm just assuming, given the nature on how rapidly the technology changes, that ISA is no longer supported in today's PC models. I could be wrong. Still, the performance level has got to be much greater using a PCI slot than using an ISA. I myself have a Pentium Pro 150. The only ISA card I have in my machine is a Roland SCC1 sound card. My old ISA video card has long been replaced by a PCI one. The improvement in performance is massive. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 14:25:26 (EDT)
From: Bobby Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Correction Message: I do machine upgrades too. I believe all motherboards have both ISA and PCI slots. I just got a new motherboard and processor within the last six months. There were three ISA and three PCI slots. Even some new cards, like winmodems are ISA. This insures compatibility. If David has an IDE hard drive he might want to install it on his new machine. I think the IDE's were around in 91. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 19:19:41 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Hard drives Message: If David has an IDE hard drive he might want to install it on his new machine. I think the IDE's were around in 91. Yes, they were, but like memory, the standard size of a hard drive in '91 was much less than it is today. I recently upgraded my own hard drive to 4GB. It cost me a little over 200 dollars. I don't know what that is in pounds, which is how I'm assuming Sir David would pay, but it's relatively cheap if you're squabbling over whether to transfer an old hard drive to, or include a new hard drive in, a new machine. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 12:01:48 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Upgrading PC Message: Jerry: I wasn't suggesting a chip upgrade, but rather that the 'instruction set' of the 386 is pretty antiquated and that, by default, the type of upgrade you suggested is the only viable answer. I agree, the chip replacements are pretty much bogus. At some point, even if you get them to work properly, they will 'bite' you. Until he can afford to do that, I thought he might check to ensure the temp files weren't maxed out. That has been a known problem even with NT systems. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 13:25:04 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Mike Subject: Upgrading PC Message: ...Until he can afford to do that, I thought he might check to ensure the temp files weren't maxed out. That has been a known problem even with NT systems. I didn't know that, Mike. In all my years as a PC support technician, whenever a computer would 'give up the ghost' or freeze as we say it here, 9 times out of ten I would just reboot and pray. I've read about and tried all sorts of solutions for preventing computers from freezing, collaborated with other technicians, but for the most part, we just reboot and pray. But you may be onto something here. Sir David should give it a try. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 14:50:03 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Common knowledge Message: PT: I have seen the video, but I do admit that I didn't hear him, talking about this. I'll look again. Thanks. A question: How do YOU feel about a changing-of -the-guard? This isn't a rhetorical question, I really am interested in premie response to this possible event. Having been a premie, I am well aware of the bumpy rides we had received in the past. Made bumpy by the fact that we thought he was LOTU. What do you think? I could understand that it would be fairly meaningless to anyone that thinks he is just a 'meditation teacher,' BUT to those that think he is LOTU...hmmmmm. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 10:28:03 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: Mike Subject: Common opinion Message: Dear Mike, I can't imagine Maharaji retiring from something he enjoys so much and does so well. But we all have to go sometime.In my case I'm 10 years older than M so he may well outlive me. I don't consider M to be LOTU or a meditation teacher. He showed me something wonderful and keeps encouraging me to enjoy it.As such I am very grateful and wish him a long and happy life. PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 11:54:36 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Common opinion Message: PT: Fair enough, thanks. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 03:10:38 (EDT)
From: bill Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Uncommon sense Message: hello Passing thru. What's your latest view of life? also, Perhaps you care to comment on the two major trends in humans, those that think conciousness has a self-aware part independent of humans and those that don't think so. How about coming around on weekends. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 10:39:55 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: bill Subject: Bill me Message: Hello Bill, I've held the same view of life since the day I was born, I just want happy. As for your conciousness question, it doesn't make any difference to me? PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 12:59:42 (EDT)
From: bill Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: It's a freebie PT. Message: Good answer PT. What is the route to happiness? Certainly there are approaches and certainly you know about many, have you distilled a refined set of actions or approaches to life that helps you or all basically accomplish that goal in spite of the challenges that come in all forms? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 20:47:03 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: bill Subject: It's a gift. Message: Dear Bill, This is probably not the answer you'd prefer but....when I go within what I experience is something that is 100% me and its calming, its intriguing and its always there. So I like to do it and it gives me a great alternative to a world that is often boring, dissapointing and inconsistent. The end result is that I put my faith in me and not to rely on the world and that does make me happy. PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 03:41:55 (EDT)
From: Bill Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Agreed, but from whom? Message: Actually PT, I prefer exactly your type of answer. Straight as you see it. Perhaps when you were young you might have looked at the early morning dew to a rising sun and felt the fullness and attitude that opened the door to joy that a child is geared to do. Of course the dew/sunrise is circumstancial, but if things are now 'often boring, disappointing and inconsistant', then maybe it is human nature that is the culprit. For all our individuality, we are bound by human nature and so are all the others around us. Either it is a flawed design, or we aren't hip to the ground rules. I think you are smart to be able to state your post as you did, it is not too far fetched to think that how you often find life to be is a direct result of your fundamental view on life. Some think it is all an illusion and so just make it what you want. So why the hard reactions that come out of you to others when you wish it was different? It is how you percieve this life and others and the corresponding attitude that end up makeing your world. When you said it is 100% me, is that your final logic on the subject? Or are you open to the possibility that when the krishna scriptures say 'identify with the divine', krishna was misquoted? And that although many people have decided to assume divinity, that they still run headlong into the reality of the design of human nature and life and they end up just still being themselves. If you have embraced a view that it is 100% you, and that you have faith in you, I don't see in that there is any place for the 'master' except to perhaps tell you that the breath is 100% you and to only have faith in your self. I think you might agree that belief is very capable of putting walls between people and that the design of human nature is telling us something by that. Like, maybe we got it wrong? Maybe we were told wrong? Maybe reality is a bit different than the theology we got. Another quality of children is innocence. Courtesy of human nature and the intelligence that seems to operate in life. Of course we get so smart we presume that we are just about the leading edge of intelligence on earth and the 'oneness' or 'infinite' is a unconcious pool that we are smart enough to draw our creativity from, but we know there is no other pockets of self awareness but other living humans and we read the papers and hell, we are at the tipity top. But why the pesky repeated boring inconsistancies? Can't be us, can't be a signal to wake up, can't be a helpful hint from the 'oneness' pool of unconcious, personalityless, intelligence that we are the brilliant leading edge of. Hmmm? There is something to be said for 'not relying on the world'. Not all of it is good. I have seen where someone, Maharaji, was given a task (by some accounts), by his father to take information 'to the world'. His efforts and marketing approach ran headlong into human nature and he is still stymied by the dissapointing results of a very big effort. 'Not relying on the world' in his case translated into not respecting the world. The hardest blow was his mom's death and although humility and learning happened as a result, it didn't wash him clean to the core because he still clutches to the hindufied approach his father used that perhaps was useful in india culture but is actually fantasy theater in reality and completely a backwards step for 'the world' and human nature to take. and we are evidence of the refusal to buy into the hindu marketing of a godhead that doesn't believe in god himself. Does he have the courage to strip himself clean and just do a job? No, because it takes more than courage, it takes facing reality and at the very '100% me-faith in me' level, it takes facing reality and letting go of the ladu of a religion that he clutches to that he doesn't even believe. If he doesn't want to rely on the world, why rely on guru-style hinduism? What merit is there in hinduism that it should add one more person to it's ranks? I read your post where you said you were grateful to get the knowledge about the breath, well maybe shri hans didn't give you the hinduism and ask you to spread THAT to the world. Even if he did, that doesn't give it validity. In the same way that buddha was confused about life in thinking that this was a place of suffering to escape from as soon as possible, you are wrong that life is 'often boring, disappointing and inconsistant'. But that is good news. Have a good week. PT. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 07:37:14 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: Bill Subject: In the eye of the beholder Message: Dear Bill, There is a lot in your post I don't understand or agree with. But to expand on '100% me', my life force is the most 'me' I've got. It has been unique in being with me every day of my life.Unlike friends, possessions, ideas and dreams. It is a gift of enormous potential.But regretably not enough for most people. And the fact the Maharaji has shown me a way to derive pleasure directly from it, is another great gift. It is only because I get so much pleasure and understanding from experiencing it that I see the so called acheivements and priorities of 'the world' as being boring and transitory in comparison. But I'm not saying that there is no pleasure to be gained elsewhere but after 25 years of enjoying this simple experience with its profound ramifications, no other activity comes close. And, of course, I am still free to enjoy what the 'world' has to offer. PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 13:19:37 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Life force Message: But to expand on '100% me', my life force is the most 'me' I've got. It has been unique in being with me every day of my life.Unlike friends, possessions, ideas and dreams. It is a gift of enormous potential.But regretably not enough for most people. What is this life force thing that you're talking about? Is that love, mercy, compassion, things like that? Because 'life force' seems so impersonal, so without soul, so empty of anything desirable? It sounds like it comes from the head, not the heart. Am I too hung up on semantics here? All the years that M would talk about listening with your heart, was he really speaking from his? If so, how come mine never responded to him? Could it be that he was really full of shit and my heart knew it? I think M just played off of my deepest longings but was never really capable of fulfilling them. And I suspect that you're just kidding yourself that he's fulfilled your's. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 18:48:28 (EDT)
From: Diz Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Life force Message: Hey Jerry That head/heart thing. Personally, I think the dicotomy is problematic. I'm keen to find a more integrated approach to life. And feel I've done so over the years since I left MJ. I too was 'pushed' to leave by an increasing sense that the whole scene, even including the experience of K (which for me was very beautiful, in its own way), was leaving my heart cold. MJ told me that 'real heart' was only that bit of me that responded to K and him - a tautology of some sort here. But these pesky bits of heart, that didn't seem to accept that they were unreal, kept pushing their way through. There was heart that loved my kids - even though they sometimes did and said things that I didn't like. There was heart that delighted in other human beings in all their inconsistencies and frailities. There was heart that responded to nature. I've found that my appreciation for the love and beauty in 'the world' has increased exponentially since I left MJ. I can now enjoy such little aspects of my life, of things I see around me. I don't put this down to not practicing K - I do still meditate some - I put it down to the fact that I'm not operating from a philosophy which subtly devalues the small, 'soul' aspects of being alive. Actually, I don't think experiencing 'spirit' is necessarily antithetical (I think that's a word) to enjoying people etc.: given the right context, they could be complementary. Another reason I left MJ was because I didn't find what he said useful in my search for integration of spirit and soul. (I'm using Thomas Moore's terminology here - am I right in assuming from your post that you're familiar with it?). Rather the reverse. All of which isn't to say that I didn't also have logical reasons for leaving MJ - I certainly did. But it wasn't just that. Best wishes Diz Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 20:23:09 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Diz Subject: Life force Message: MJ told me that 'real heart' was only that bit of me that responded to K and him - a tautology of some sort here. But these pesky bits of heart, that didn't seem to accept that they were unreal, kept pushing their way through. Yes, indeed. Oddly, while I was trying to grasp what M was saying, my heart was taking me in all the directions he didn't want me to go, towards my family, the woman that loved me, friends I trusted. And they're all pretty much gone, now. I left them all behind on the pathway to glory, which I never did find, of course. But I'm starting to get my act back together, slowly but surely. I'm letting some family back in that I didn't lose complete touch with, and I'll just take it day by day, try to be more of a human being from now on, REALLY listen to my heart. . Another reason I left MJ was because I didn't find what he said useful in my search for integration of spirit and soul. (I'm using Thomas Moore's terminology here - am I right in assuming from your post that you're familiar with it?). Actually, no. I've heard of Thomas Moore, but I'm not familiar with his work. When I say soul, I'm talking about that deepest part of you that gets moved by those things you find most beautiful, that when you're stirred there, your life suddenly has purpose, so that, that moment your in is good enough for you and you don't wish to be somewhere else. I hope that makes sense. I don't know how to say it any other way, just now. Anyway, I wish you many such moments, Diz. That was a very nice post of your's. It did my heart good. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, Aug 26, 1998 at 07:32:35 (EDT)
From: Diz Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Life force Message: Hey Jerry Sounds like a good enough definition of 'soul' to me. If you ever want to check out Thomas Moore, the book I've read is called 'Care of the Soul'. I liked it because it validated those bits of heart that I felt MJ didn't encourage, helped me reclaim aspects of myself and of life that I'd neglected during my premie years. He doesn't reject the spirit aspect of things - I'd put meditation in this basket - but he does argue for giving more earthy elements their due. Hope your journey back to family and friends, old or new, goes well. Hey, feels like quite an adventure, this coming home to oneself. Enjoy. Diz Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 02:07:11 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Live it up Message: Dear Jerry, My definition of 'life force' is that energy that keeps me alive. No life force, no life. So it is extremely personal. More personal than anything else I can think of. And in my experience it has many desirable attributes. Simply associating with it gives me a deep feeling of contentment, it feels so natural and right. It does give me peace, it does encourage joy and I do believe that it has given me a greater capacity to love. PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 15:03:31 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Quaint superstition Message: PT, When you die will that be because the 'life force' decides to leave? Is that how you think it works? And, if so, do you figure that it's right there, your good friend, taking care of you step by step until it doesn't. Caput! Finito! Ha Ha ha HAHAHAHG --cough-!! gasp$$% HA HA HA HA !!!! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, Aug 26, 1998 at 22:15:08 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: Quaint superstition Message: No, you goof! There's no Caput or finito, remember? PT is going to 'meld' with that thing which keeps him alive. (I can't figure that out either though.) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 19:58:49 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Bill Subject: Agreed, but from whom? Message: Thanks for your post, Bill. I think it points out some major problems that premies have with life. I for one was looking for a 'safe harbour' when I sought knowledge. But to buy into the concept that there is a safe harbour inside, yet not 'outside' is to buy into quite a frightening duality IMO where one continually runs between the two. Since I believe it is a false premise, there really is no peace to be had in this belief system, because the two can never be reconciled. Might as well give up on the world, or, give up on knowledge. These days I am focusing in a similar way to what you alude to, to being 100% 'real' as much as I can be, and I'm trying to let go of a belief system or systems that makes me very unhappy. And if there is no truth in duality there is nothing to reconcile, I can just reach into my/the 'oneness' and hopefully start to realise some 'answers' or at least a better way to live. Thanks again for your thoughts. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 01:22:37 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Sir David Subject: A retired perfect master? Message: Maharaji is already tired. Is it the hour of his retirement? Doesn't a master have to die (I mean leave his body) before he's replaced by his successor? If he merely retired and was succeeded, wouldn't that make 2 perfect masters in the world at the same time? Didn't M say that there can only be one? How could he possibly be considering retirement? Maybe he's more tired than you think. Maybe he's planning on leaving his body. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 10:50:10 (EDT)
From: Passing thru Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Not so retiring Message: Dear Jerry, I guess this thread demonstrates what happens when you get things second hand. For the full, unexpurgated, plain English version of what Maharaji said, get the 1997 Long Beach video (Saturday morning event?). PT Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 13:37:48 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Passing thru Subject: Not so retiring Message: Dear Passing thru, I've seen enough videos, thank you. Outside of being spellbound by M's charisma, I can't say I've got much out of them. I'll take your word on it that he's not retiring. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 00:21:05 (EDT)
From: Brian Email: brian@ex-premie.org To: Everyone Subject: AnnaMaria responds (sort of) Message: Maharaji's long-suffering aspirant, AnnaMaria, seems to prefer the Feedback form to the Reply Form. I'll post this for ya, AnnaMaria, but you have to post anything further to the Forum yourself. You called me a Jesus Freak.... or said I sounded like one and I just wanted (Jim) to ask him where did he say this as I am unables to finding it and is that such a 'bad thing' was that supposed to make me feel bad? Jesus......... what I have hear of him was about love and peace and that is not a 'bad thing' Love to you sweet brother, AnnaMaria Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:01:16 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Brian Subject: A SERIOUS Jesus Freak Message: I had written her the following: Ana Maria, I read your letter that you sent to the ex-premie web site and I marvel at your thinking. First, do you actually believe that all of the ex's,make that all of the people who have left Maharaji over the past twenty-five years, don't know what they're doing but that you, who's never event tried his stupid 'knowledge' do? How arrogant!Maybe you should think a bit about cult programming and about how much you've had to suspend your own critical faculties over the last four years in order to accept Maharaji's foul gruel. Below is a link to the page dedicated to the other fraud artist in the family, or at least one of them, his older brother, Satpal. As I said on the page, you sound just like a Jesus freak. Jim' So she replied: 'You aare tthe only arrogant one Jim, please allow some love to flow in your heart and FEEL it!! YOU will be happy your life will be happy please accept my love as your sister, I forgive your anger as I knowit comes fromm pain and love heals pain and Maharaji is LOVE ok? Love from your sister, AnnaMaria' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 03:47:48 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jim Subject: A SERIOUS Jesus Freak Message: Jim: You've got to admit that she is sweet. ( I mean that in the kindest way). Since she is reading the posts, I think she will come around. I think she is 'searching' and coming up empty. It may take a while... But, she is thinking or she wouldn't be here. Ya know what I mean? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 10:08:58 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mike Subject: 4 years? That's nothing! Message: I remember the old Indian stories that the Mahatmas used to tell about the guy who was kept waiting for knowledge all his life until he was an old man. You know the story. A devotee served the master for ten years in order to receive knowledge. After ten years the master emptied the contents of the toilet over his head from an upstairs window. The devotee got really angry - no knowledge. Ten years later after continually serving his master, the devotee was sweeping the path outside the master's home when splosh! Another bucket of toilet contents was emptied on his head from the master's upstairs window. The devotee merely shrugged his shoulders and carried on sweeping - no knowledge. After ten more years of loyal service the devotee was an old man, crippled with arthritis but still sweeping the path beneath his master's window every day. Suddenly the over-ripe contents of the toilet were once again emptied onto his head by the master from the upstairs window. The devotee got down on his knees and thanked his master for this wonderful prashad (gift) and exclaimed how he didn't deserve it - the master gave him knowledge. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 17:39:11 (EDT)
From: Gail Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Oh Lord, don't throw excrement Message: head. I am insensitive and would not understand the beauty of your message. I remember that story really well. Of course, the intent of that was to make us all realize how unworthy we were to receive K. It reminds me of the Wayne's World movie. The two start pranaming to the rock group and shouting, 'We're not worthy. We're not worthy.' After all, what normal human being would not be grateful to have the Lord's bodily waste's dumped on his/her head. I should have smelled a rat way back. Or should I say, the little shit. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:27:41 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mike Subject: I don't know, Mike Message: Mike, A LOT of people die believing all sorts of stupid things. Life just isn't long enough for some. I've got no reason to believe that this woman who is SO gullible will ever see through her folly. None. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 16:33:04 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jim Subject: I don't know, Mike Message: Jim: you have a point. I guess I'm just an optimist... yeah, right. Seriously, you have more experience on the forum than I. Do alot of premies drift by, leave a message and depart? Or...do they stay awhile ? I think if they return, they are either masochists or having some serious doubts about the cult. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 17:06:28 (EDT)
From: hamzen Email: None To: Mike Subject: I don't know, Mike Message: Annamarie sounds young, sweet & innocent, she reminds me of myself at 18, life has a tendency to alter that. It also sounds like she is experiencing something to me & at least partially attributing it to maharaji, I don't believe she'd have the bottle to come on this site otherwise. If she was trying to convert people surely she'd come on the forum. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 20:32:36 (EDT)
From: TD Email: None To: Brian Subject: Thanks AnnaMaria... Message: ...for making it so easy to see what a total turnoff premiedom is. We need more like her at the introductory events. Can you imagine AnnaMaria saying to a newie: 'Take your seat sweet brother. The video showing the man who defines Love is about to start...' They'd leave the room in droves! I reckon even the big M himself would shudder reading this response. Creepy. I really welcome these kinds of posts on the forum, because when I was a lurking wavering premie, the really crappy programmed responses like this from the premies did the total opposite of what their author intended I'm sure - that is push me further away from premie BS in much quicker time. SO, here's my advice to premies who post on this website and who don't want to contribute to the further defection of wavering premies: 1. Leave out gushy mushy flowery language. Say what you need to say directly and succinctly. 2. If you find yourself in a debate with exes, follow it through and try and answer all the questions asked. If you get confronted, and just don't answer, the exes (without much effort) are the easy victors. 2. Try and not just regurgitate a satsang you've heard and pass it off as your own experience. Remember, we've all heard a zillion satsangs ourselves, so we can all tell a Big M description from a programmed premie one. There you go sweet premie brothers and sisters, a little help from one of your ex-premie buddies, or is that ex-premie enemies - I never know what to call ourselves nowadays... Adios, TD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 20:37:18 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: mbvictoria@hotmail.com To: Everyone Subject: The 'US' cult Message: I have followed the debate below with some interest and would like to offer the following observations: 1. My initial posting was designed to convey a perception (not necessarily the facts) of how the US action may appear to a considerable portion of the world's population who do not live in the US. 2. I think it's a moot point as to whether Clinton has timed his military responses in order to get his personal affairs out of the media, or whether his public political 'weaknesses' are being exploited by his foreign political opponents. Such debate is really a matter of opinion coloured by which side of the fence you are on 3. Most of the subsequent postings reflect on the protection of US citizens from terrorism, the merit of the retaliation, etc, etc. As most the posters above are American it is understandable that you would see the issues from that perspective and quite rightly so. However, conspicuous by its absence is any comment on the protection of US economic interests in the area or on the issue of how strongly the US is strongly influenced by Israeli foreign policy. These are the issues that I believe are at the bottom of the whole 'terrorist' question and appear to be consistently ignored by the American public at large. 4. I do not think that any one will argue the fact that the US has a disproportionate amount of the world's wealth and economic power and uses it huge military capacity to protect and maintain this situation, however, there is considerable world-wide resentment at the way the US likes to 'police' and protect as what it sees as important to these interests. 5. The US is generally perceived as a caricature of John Wayne (US marshal) coming in with all guns blazing (fighting for the Good?) and only asking questions after the event. (collateral damage? how many civilian lives? Did the validity of the death toll outweigh the necessity of action?). 6. There does not seem to be any respect for the sovereignty of other nations (eg. invasion of Grenada). Can you imagine what the reaction of the American people and government would be , say, if the British had firm evidence that there was an IRA factory in Chicago making chemical weapons to use in Northern Ireland and then launched a surprise missile attack (impossible, I know), without prior consultation, on the this factory? 7. Do the American people realise how their government supports openly authoritarian governments who have notorious records of human rights abuses? 8. There is certainly another view of the way the US conducts it's affairs in the world other than that pedaled out to the US populace by it's government and it's world dominating media influence. There is a huge hypocrisy that the US is indulging for itself that is exponentially far more sinister in real terms than M or K, and I think American ex-premies should be indignant about that and not fall for the cult like patriotic brain washing that they have been victim to from birth. God saves us all from the 'US' cult !! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 21:16:38 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Wind bag Message: However, conspicuous by its absence is any comment on the protection of US economic interests in the area or on the issue of how strongly the US is strongly influenced by Israeli foreign policy. These are the issues that I believe are at the bottom of the whole 'terrorist' question and appear to be consistently ignored by the American public at large. Would you please spell out just how much the US is influenced by Israeli foreign policy and how it all ties in with the 'terrorist' question? This should be interesting. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 23:55:56 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jim Subject: Wind bag Message: Jim: He won't because he can't. Unless, of course, he's going to resort to more open-ended cliches. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 00:50:00 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: mbvictoria@hotmail.com To: Jim Subject: israeli wind bag Message: 'Would you please spell out just how much the US is influenced by Israeli foreign policy and how it all ties in with the 'terrorist' question?' Why Jim, don't you know? Through, Jewish lobby groups in the US of course... Jeez, and I thought you wre bright! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:10:38 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: israeli wind bag Message: Through, Jewish lobby groups in the US of course... Jeez, and I thought you wre bright! Okay, I get it. The U.S. supports the evil, jewish state -- is virtually hypnotized into doing so by the sinister kikes, their banks, film industry and Seinfeld reruns -- and thus falls out with the Islamic fundamentalists, their otherwise, natural friends. Something like that? Come on, Mel, your allegation is pretty strong. You're observing 'how strongly the US is strongly influenced by Israeli foreign policy. These are the issues that I believe are at the bottom of the whole 'terrorist' question and appear to be consistently ignored by the American public at large.' Why don't you tell us all about this, the 'real' cause of terrorism? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:43:11 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: israeli wind bag Message: Not at all Jim, I don't perceive a Jewish conspiracy as you would seem to imply. Please read my response to Selena below about the Palastinian question and how the Jewish state was set up and the flexible definitions of terrorism. There were plans in the thirties for the Israel to be set up in the Kimberley region of North Western Australia but for some reason it did not go ahead. What a pity, the world might have been a far safer place today if it had. As you would also be aware Jim, the is inconstitency in the US policies of 'occupation' in the middle east. United Nations sanctions were applied to the Isreali occupation of territory acquired in previous military engagements in similar ways that the sanctions were applied to Saddam. The US enthusiastically took up the iniative to implement these sanctions against Iraq on the UN's behalf but has not applied any pressure, especially militarily on the Jewish state to meet the UN sanction that apply to the occupied territories. You're an intelligent man Jim, you must see the obvious inconsistency in US policy and certainly the major Arab powers are well aware of it . You tell me ... 1. Why do you think there is this inconsistency? 2. Do YOU support this inconsistency? Now JIM, answer these questions without any reference to me at all in your reply. I know this might be difficult as alot of your debating style depends on verbally assaulting and personally intimidating your opponent. So answer these questions honestly Jim without any personal assault or intimidation Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 12:57:14 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: israeli wind bag Message: 1. Why do you think there is this inconsistency?< /i> Yes, of course there is. 2. Do YOU support this inconsistency? Yes and no. Israel's in a tough spot in terms of maintaining their own security. I have no idea what the anser is. As you know, I've long since given up any support for the jewish religion itself and don't have nay sympathy for the religious right in Israel. Still, I support the exisdtence of the country and note full well that the Palestinian's waged the initial war on Israel after the state's creation. It was only then that they were initally vanquished and lost their property. There was no expropriation before then. None. The arab world did nothing to accomodate them either after that first conflict or any time since. It's all about envy, spite, paranoia, hatred for its own sake and the perpetuation of an ugly mental virus even worse than christianity, Islam. I could go on but you get my drift. I don't condone Israel's settlement building but you're not going to to tell me that that's a justification for terrorism are you? Or are you? Besides, the terrorism was hardly stopped even during Rabin and Labour's much more conciliatory era. You tell me, how should Israel act? Tell me, as well, what safety does your plan gurantee for Israel? Tell me as well, why in the world are we talking about this here? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 22:43:32 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Terrorism Message: Jim, in response to some of your comments ' The arab world did nothing to accomodate them either after that first conflict or any time since' As you SHOULD be aware: Immediately after the declaration of the Israeli state, Arab armies from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan aided Palestine in attacking Israel. They lost that conflict and the Israelis also (as the spoils of war) acquired about half the area designated for the Palestinian state. Armistice agreements were then signed with these countries but no peace agrerements were signed because the Arabs nations did not recognise the existance of Israel (and it's only relatively recently that some of these countries are beginning to move in that direction). Then there was the 1956 war (with the considerable help of the French and the British) against Egypt. Then there was the 6 day Arab/Israeli war in 1967 which was catalysed by the border clashes with Syria and ended up involving Egypt and Jordan. Then there was the Yom Kippur War in 1973 again involving conflict against Syria and Egypt, which although won by Israel, had very bad effects on their economy pushing Israel to seek more help from the US. So much for your assertion that Arabs did nothing to 'accomodate' them (the Palestinian state? - in fact, there is no Palestinian state, and Palestinians have been waiting 50 years for the formation of one that was promised by the UN in 1947). About terrorism in the area. It is of course widely known that Jewish terrorism helped catalyse the formation of the Israeli state. Ben Gurion, Moshe Dayan and others were wanted by the British authorities for this reason. Jewish terrorism included things like booby trapping the bodies of British troops with explosives so that when their comrades came to retieve the bodies, they were also blown up. Of course there were all the other grissly activities associated with terrorism as well. These guys are now accorded the status of National heros. Be careful of hypocrisy on these matters Jim, so I will reiterate what I said to Selene on the 'definition of terrorism' '..... If you are a guerilla fighting for the goodies you are a 'freedom fighter' and national hero, but if you are guerilla fighting for the baddies you are a 'terrorist' '. You tell me ...who are the goodies and the baddies in this matter. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 16:58:10 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Terrorism Message: Mel: '..... If you are a guerilla fighting for the goodies you are a 'freedom fighter' and national hero, but if you are guerilla fighting for the baddies you are a 'terrorist' ' GOD I'm glad you're not a person with any decision-making authority! Semantics are everything, huh? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 05:17:57 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Terrorism Message: Scott I am appalled by the extent of carnage perpertrated by 'freedom fighters' or 'terrorists', to me there is really no difference. In my opinion they are all 'baddies', not because of their aims, but the murder they perpetrate to in order to achieve them. What I am trying to point is the hypocrisy of definitions which depends on whether a group sees themselves as the 'goodies/freedom fighters' fighting for nationhood, and their opponents, who see them as 'baddies/terrorists' for trying to over throw the status quo. ...and, no. Semantics are not everything, but they are useful to convey shades of meaning Regards Mel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 21:45:36 (EDT)
From: Selene Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: The 'US' cult Message: Hi MB I won't fit into the debate that is sure to follow in this thread, but I did want to tell you, not all Americans feel OK about this bombing. I feel horrible and I shudder to think about the 'why ' behind the scenes. Terrorism is awful, and so is what causes it. It may be that Isreal has political pull with the US powers that be. I wouldn't know. I just live here. I have felt awful for Palistine 'citizens' for quite some time simply because they are obviously out armed and out financed and I know the US is predominant in this and I know the Palistine people have felt terrorism is their only recourse. I never understood why someone could take over their land and feel like it was their right to do so. Still, this violence has gone too far, on both sides. But I am not informed enough about this. Most US citizens are not. But don't think we are all just blind patriots. It's not that simple. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 22:01:31 (EDT)
From: Selene Email: None To: Selene Subject: palestine (apologies) Message: My spelling is atrocious on line. I am sorry. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:15:40 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Selene Subject: Palestine and terrorism Message: Selene You have basically hit on the main cause of the problem, and certainly the US is not the only country to be blamed for the displacement of the Palestinian people. I guess the 'Allies' were after the WW2 because of the collective cultural guilt relating to the treatment of the Jewish people over 2000 years Christian conditioning (you know..... the 'us Christians blamed Jews for the death of Christ and so Jews should suffer' mentality). Unfortunately with typical colonial and imperialistic arrogance the local governments and populations were not consulted at the time, so their land was misappropriated by the Bristish and the other 'Allies' (like it is currently being is being misappropriated on the Westbank). The Palestinians and their Arabs supporters are understandably as mad as hell and the result is 'terrorism'. For these people a state of war already exists and has for a number of decades and when you are fighting against extremely well armed and nuclear forces for your freedom (US and Isael), international guerilla tactics are the only method of battle. It's amazing the definition of 'terrorism'. If you are a guerilla fighting for the goodies you are a 'freedom fighter' and national hero, but if you are guerilla fighting for the baddies you are a 'terrorist'. You tell me ...who are the goodies and the baddies in this matter. Having said all this, I am appalled that this situation even exists and certainly am not in favour of this war and the carnage that is involved. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 04:45:43 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Palestine and terrorism Message: 'The Palestinians and their Arabs supporters are understandably as mad as hell and the result is 'terrorism'.' They are as hell because they lost against against a very small declared jewish state in 1948(I suggest you look at tghe borders of the original Israel/Palestine dicision in 1948). The fact that Israel absorbed about 1000000 jewish refugees from most arab countries. is always ignored. The fact that most of the Palestiniains that left in 1948, did so because they thought it to be temporary whilst their arab brothers 'drove the jews into the sea' is also ignored. Israel has been far too generous(IMO), and may be the cause of their downfall. I could go on but I won't. Israel has had the cheek to become a victor ....oh by the way, you may be interested to know that Israeli premies who wanted to leave the army when they got K, were told by their guru to go back and do their duty. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 05:22:49 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: jethro Subject: Palestine and terrorism Message: Jethro What you say may be true, but it still does not justify the Allies in their 'wisdom', partitioning Palestine without local support and imposing an unwanted Jewish state in the area after a 2000 year absence. This is the source of the problem whether we like it or not, and military action by anyone is not the solution to the matter. Press reports indicate thatt he Israeli governemt is obviously over joyed by the US action in Afghanistan and Sudan. I think if we are not careful it will only be a matter of time before we are subject to a nuclear terrorist attack especially if matters like this remain unresolved.. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 06:31:35 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Palestine and terrorism Message: 'What you say may be true, but it still does not justify the Allies in their 'wisdom', partitioning Palestine without local support and imposing an unwanted Jewish state in the area after a 2000 year absence. ' Unwanted by who? It was obviously wanted by some because it is there. The main reason the 'Palestinian' problem exists is the refusal of their brothers to absorb them as did Israel to the Arab-Jews. The Palestinians have been used by the Arab states. The Arabs were happy to keep jews in the minority where they could systematically persecute them as they do many non-Muslim groups. 'This is the source of the problem whether we like it or not, and military action by anyone is not the solution to the matter.' The right to protect one's existance is a basic one. 'Press reports indicate that the Israeli goverment is obviously over joyed by the US action in Afghanistan and Sudan.' Amazing....so what's new. Everything America does is usually backed by Israel and the UK. The Arab states hide behind these 'terror groups'. I don't see that Israel has anyone to talk to. As I said they have bent over backward and have give a lot in return for nothing. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 09:43:02 (EDT)
From: Mel bourne Email: None To: jethro Subject: Palestine Message: 'Unwanted by who?' The local Arab and Palastinian populace - thats who. You speak as if a Jewish state has been in existence for centuries. It has not! and the Palestinians were MADE to give up their country against their will in 1948 to enable (by the grace of the wonderful allies) the displaced Jews to be settled in their territory. Israel had been disbanded as a nation state by the Romans 1900 years before. In essence there was a reclamation of territory made on the notion that this was the Jewish homeland claimed 1900 years after it had ceased to exist. The Palestinians were obviously annoyed at being forcibly displaced to salve the colonial Chritian concsciences. THAT IS WHAT THIS ARAB/ISRAELI CONFLICT IS REALLY ALL ABOUT - the legitimate ownership of territory and it's illegal acquisition based on dubious religious and historical precedent! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 11:44:13 (EDT)
From: jethro Email: None To: Mel bourne Subject: Palestine Message: 'The local Arab and Palastinian populace - thats who.' partially true. There were many who liked the jews giving life to the land and actually helped them. Many opted to stay in Israel and they are today Israelis. In fact many of the arabs go into the army. Israeli Muslioms do not have to do military service, but many volunteer. 'You speak as if a Jewish state has been in existence for centuries.' Do I? It is one of the newer states, which is rthe best example of a civilzed society in the Middle-East. ' and the Palestinians were MADE to give up their country against their will in 1948 to enable (by the grace of the wonderful allies) the displaced Jews to be settled in their territory. ' Untrue, go visit Israel and ask all the Israeli Arabs why they are there. 'Israel had been disbanded as a nation state by the Romans 1900 years before.' Well it's about time they regrouped. 'In essence there was a reclamation of territory made on the notion that this was the Jewish homeland claimed 1900 years after it had ceased to exist.' There was always a Jewish presence in the land...and many othre groups resided there. When the jews started to there on mass during the last century and this, they bought land although I am sure that there some instances of land being taken away from Palestinians but not nearly as m uch as arab propaganda would have us believe. When Palestine was partitioned, jews were in the majority in the area declared as Israel(Jezreal valley). The Palestinians were stupid not to declare their own state then(IMO). 'The Palestinians were obviously annoyed at being forcibly displaced to salve the colonial Chritian concsciences. THAT IS WHAT THIS ARAB/ISRAELI CONFLICT IS REALLY ALL ABOUT - the legitimate ownership of territory and it's illegal acquisition based on dubious religious and historical precedent! ' Clearly that is your opinion and your belief. Are you as pationate about te massacre of Palestinian jews who live in what is now Jordan, or the Adenese or Iraqi or Syrian jews? Here is part of an article that may interest you. The world, including the Jewish world has overlooked a fact of historic importance. In 1892, Baron Edmonde de Rothschild - also known as the “Famous Benefactor” bought 80,000 dunam of the Golan Heights from Arabs for the purpose of settling them with Jews. The fact was revealed only recently in an Israeli publication; but since the revelation occurred during the leftist Peres government, the facts were suppressed. Here are the facts around this sensational revelation. Golan Heights, called “Bashan” in the Bible was awarded by Moses to the tribe of Menashe (Deuteronomy 3:13) as part of Biblical Eretz Yisrael. During the last century it was a totally barren area, populated only by small pockets of Arab tribes who moved in and out from Arab countries. In 1892, Baron Edmonds de Rothschild bought the area between Damascus, Mt. Hermon and the Golan Heights with the central town being Daraah. The Arab seller was Ahmed Sasha Pasha. This purchase was confirmed many times, including by the Turkish authorities who controlled the country in 1892. It was also confirmed by the French High Commissioner under whose sovereignty the land fell after World War I. In 1929, the Rothschild family registered the land in the name of their private business company PICA. In 1942, some faint attempts by Arabs to claim the land failed totally. In 1957, Baron James de Rothschild transferred the deeds to the land of the Jewish National Fund (Keren Kayamt) and from there to the Land Office of Israel and to the government of Israel. All deeds and other documents were transferred to Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs through an irrevocable power of attorney. The Rothschilds made the transfer to the State of Israel with the explicit proviso that the land should be used for Jewish settlers. Baron de Rothschild, in his lifetime, tried to encourage colonization of the Golan Heights by Jews but failed at that time. When negotiations with Syria commenced some years ago, members of the Labor Party approached the late Prime MinisterYitzchal Rabin with the demand that the recognition of the Golan Heights as Jewish territory should be raised with the Syrians. However Rabin shrank from pressing the claim. He missed an outstanding opportunity to press his claim on perfectly legal contractual grounds. That was a terrible mistake, because by reminding the world that the Golan Heights have been Jewish land for over 100 years, there would be no point in negotiating the “return” of the Golan to Syria, since it was not Syrian anyway. This discovery would place the status of the Golan Heights in an entirely new light. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:02:09 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: jethro Subject: Bad thinking, Mel Message: 'Press reports indicate that the Israeli goverment is obviously over joyed by the US action in Afghanistan and Sudan.' Mel, you're starting to sound as dumb as Chomsky. That is, you first argued that the real story was the great INFLUENCE Israel had over U.S. foreign policy. Now your evidence seems to be that they really LIKE it. Aren't you mixing up the cart and horse here a bit? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 21:42:08 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Bad thinking, Mel Message: No bad thinking on my part, Jim, but maybe on yours..... If you hadn't noticed, I prefaced my post with 'Press reports... ' and these reports clearly indicated that the Israeli government was entirely supportive of the recent US action. Maybe the reporters are guilty of bad thinking, but then they are notorious for reporting the news accurately and without bias, aren't they? (eg the US press coverage of the Gulf War) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 15:24:31 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Don't play dumb, Mel Message: Mel, What is this? You're pretending to not know the difference between supporting something and causing it to happen? Come now. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 05:28:56 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Don't play dumb, Mel Message: Jim, I'm not sure that I follow your point here... I've stated that the press reports indicate a considerable degree of Israeli support for the American action in Sudan and Afghanistan. I did not say that the reports indicate that the Israelis convinced the US or 'caused' this incident to occur. Maybe you would care to elaborate, Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 16:52:35 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Oh no you don't! Message: I've stated that the press reports indicate a considerable degree of Israeli support for the American action in Sudan and Afghanistan. I did not say that the reports indicate that the Israelis convinced the US or 'caused' this incident to occur. Bullshit, Mel. This is what you said: However, conspicuous by its absence is any comment ... on the issue of how strongly the US is strongly influenced by Israeli foreign policy. These are the issues that I believe are at the bottom of the whole 'terrorist' question and appear to be consistently ignored by the American public at large. The clear import of your original statement is that the 'real story' behind terrorism is the great influence Israel imposes on the U.S. Now you're pretending that all you meant was that Israel supported the attacks. Don't play games. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 05:14:10 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Oh yes I do! Message: Thanks for your clarification of the point, Jim There is no evidence or reports that I have heard about that Isreal applied pressure for Clinton to make the assaults on Sudan or Afghanistan alleged terrorist positions.So, no,, I do not beleive Israel to be the cause of these incidents. However, I beleive that, historically, the apparent 'collusion' by Israel and the US on matters relating to the Israeli/Arab conflict has been a cause for the tension that have erupted in Arab/Palestinian terrorism. Had Israel not been placed in the region, I strongly believe that we wouldn't have the tensions that we now have, except maybe for ongoing terrorism from Zionists in the area similar to their pre 1948 campaigns.This is where I was coming from when I made my original statement. Incidentally, I would'nt be surprised to hear that the average US guy did not know that the Zionists had ever indulged in an terrorism campaign in Palestine to establish their Holy Homeland. I hope this covers the point and clears me of the charge of 'playing dumb' Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 14:45:22 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: So then why did you say it? Message: Come on, Mel. All that's left, then, is for you to admit that you were full of shit when you talked about the 'real' factor underlying terrorism being the the 'strong' influence Israeli foreign policy exerts on U.S. policy. Look how you're fudging! First you say all that, now you talk about the 'apparent collusion'. You're full of shit, Mel. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 21:13:46 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jim, you are becoming tedious Message: ....in the extreme, and I am getting bored responding to such an obvious idiot I was trying to be polite using the term 'apparent', maybe it's 'real' after all. You are entitled to your opinion as to whether I'm full of shit or not, but you certainly come across as an apologist for the US/Israeli alliance, and do not seem to concede that this alliance has any relevance to the critical situation in the middle east regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state and the frustration on this issue which has inflamed terrorism. Indeed, in an earlier post, you even asserted that the Arab countries had done nothing after the 1948 conflict to help the Palestinians and have not responded to the post where I clearly listed the wars that various Arab states have waged against Israel. You also admitted in another post that that there is obvious inconsistancy in the way the US responded to United Nations resolutions about the Iraqi illegal occupation of Kuwait and the Israeli Illegal occupation of Arab territories, a commendable admission but only extracted after being gagged from making personal comments. As you usual, you continue to evade recognising the facts and demonstrate your prejudices on the issue. When confronted with your own inconstistencies and evasions, revert to personal verbal abuse. Jim have a right to your own views on the issue as everyone has a similar right, but.... I suggest that the purpose of debate is to test these opinions against the facts or other peoples opinions, revise them (if necessary) and get a new perspective on matters, learn to agree or disagree, but not revert to abuse if you are disagree (which seems to be your style). As I said earlier Jim, PLAY THE BALL, NOT THE MAN, maybe then you will gain more respect as a legitimate debater. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 21:56:13 (EDT)
From: TD Email: None To: Whoever Subject: Another two shekels worth... Message: Initially, I didn't want to really get involved in this thread because of its irrelevance to the Big M, but the Israel/Palestine issue is something I've felt very strongly about since living and working in Israel for 5 months at a very key time. I was there from July 1990 (one month before Saddam roled in to Kuwait) until I was pretty well told to leave in December before the January deadline. Although not Jewish, I've always had a number of Aussie Jewish friends, some of who also feel strongly about how the Israelis are going about their 'settlement' of that part of the world. To me, criticising Israel is not criticising Judaism per se, or showing you're anti-semitic. I was so disturbed from what I witnessed while there and from what I learnt there, that Israel is the only country in the world I have said, that I do not wish to return to (and I had been in South Africa prior to apartheid breaking down!!). Being a resident of a country that has treated it's indigenous people extremely poorly and which is like a nasty festering wound for this nation, the legacy that Israel will be left with if it continues its expansion into Palestine will be extreme to say the least. (NB. Mel, I don't think the aboriginal communities would have taken too kindly to Israel being set up there! Have you read Flying Hero Class by Tom Kenneally about an aboriginal dance troupe who are on a plane flying to a gig when a Palestinian group hijacks the plane? Two displaced peoples on a flight together - very amusing and thought-provoking!) As I've blown my pseudo-policy of not posting about things that don't have anything to do with the Big M/DLM/EV, I may as well add that I also found disturbing the bombing of the embassies in Africa. Normally, you watch these things on the news and you're quite removed from them. Not this time! In 1989, a friend and I were backpacking around Africa, and each time we'd lob into Dar Es Salaam airport, we'd get offered a lift into town by Western expats who lived there. One lift was with a Texan woman who worked at the US Embassy. She invited us along to a party that night with the marines. So, with our passports all in order, we went along and drank Budwieser with all these marines and US diplomats in the backyard of the Embassy. I was amazed to see how many marines 'protected' a US embassy, but with the general feeling displayed towards the US around Africa, it wasn't so surprising that the US had upped its protection. To be truthful, the marines didn't provide me with much stimulating conversation, although I got to pat some of their crew cuts and then later on, a bunch of us went back to one of the diplomats houses who was a keen ham-radio buff. While we watched, he contacted someone in Russia, which was nice to see, considering glasnost and perestroika had just kicked in and that a US diplomat and a Ruskie could chew the radiowave fat. Anyway, I have no idea if any of those people who I drank beers with back on that summery night in Tanzania are dead, but the loss of a life is always a tragic loss of life... Todah rabah/asanti sana, TD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 10:20:55 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Palestine and terrorism Message: You have basically hit on the main cause of the problem, and certainly the US is not the only country to be blamed for the displacement of the Palestinian people. I guess the 'Allies' were after the WW2 because of the collective cultural guilt relating to the treatment of the Jewish people over 2000 years Christian conditioning (you know..... the 'us Christians blamed Jews for the death of Christ and so Jews should suffer' mentality). Do you actually think of the things you say before you say them or are you so swept away by your own brilliance that you'll say whatever comes into your head whenever it comes into your head? In my entire life, I can recall only one instance where somebody blamed the Jews for crucifying Christ, and I thought he was nuts when he said it. You seem to know a lot about what's going on in the Mideast these days and the events that led up it. I'm not as informed as you are, politics and world affairs basically bore me, but even for an ill-informed brainwashed American patriot, I am aware of the Palestinian plight and do sympathize with it. But this is something that needs to be worked out by the Jews and Palestinians, and as far as I know, The evil American colonialist war machine would like nothing better than to see this come about. As far as our retaliation against terrorist attacks, what are we supposed to do, just sit there and take it? I don't think so. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 22:56:58 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mel Bourne Subject: The 'US' cult Message: There's some truth in what you say. America, being an isolated superpower can forget that there's a big wide world beyond its borders. I remember the fuss over the Gulf war when the few American dead were brought home. Few American news channels spared a thought for the mass slaughter of the retreating Iraqui troops by the gung ho American fighter planes. And it was pure mass slaughter on a scale probably not seen in the two world wars. I could have understood (a bit) the slaughter of the beaten Iraqui troops if the Americans then went forward and invaded Iraq. But they didn't and it just seemed like killing for killings sake. Some British were also involved but they were under the supreme command of the US. I have heard some veterans say that they were not proud of the mass slaughter of a beaten army. Now if the British were to follow America's lead then we would despatch a few bombers to fly over Belfast and Dublin and bomb the shit out of them. After all, there are some IRA bombers there. But we live a bit to close to do that. America, isolated on its own continent, believes it is safe to bomb indescriminately over a few American dead. But Americans abroad will be in even more danger now. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 23:42:30 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: A slight correction Message: Sir: The 'reason' for the 'mass slaughter' was the fact that the retreating iraqi's were told to leave their guns and armor (tanks, etc) in place and go back in trucks. The iraqis decided to run for it in their tanks. They had not given ANY indication of surrender. They made a big mistake and paid dearly. When an army is beaten and wants the fighting to stop, they surrender and do what the victors say. They didn't do that; not even close. (Kind of a premonition of things to come from the iraqis, eh?) Sorry sir, yours is a very poor example of impropriety by the coalition forces. NO one there wanted to see that kind of carnage, despite what the iraqis visited on the kuwaitis. But until an army surrenders, it is still a viable threat. To put the threat into perspective: Iraq was the fourth largest armed force in the world (based upon men under arms). Guess who number three was? If you guessed the US, you win a cigar. China was number one and the Soviet union number two. Missiles and planes don't 'take and hold' land. The armed foot soldier does and they still had alot more of those than we did in the region. Until they surrendered, they were a VERY viable threat, particularly if they had their armor. Have you ever heard of 'falling back' and regrouping? (aka. tactical retreat) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:31:19 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mike Subject: A slight correction Message: The US bombers were not carpet bombing just tanks. They were carpet bombing retreating ground troops who had nothing but small arms firepower. There were hundreds of thousands of such retreating troops who were massacred by the carpet bombing. They were travelling in troop carriers, and anything which had wheels on. Your version of events is the one which your country's media gave you. Over here, I heard a very different story and many of the British people were outraged and sickened by this mass slaughter of conscripted ground troops. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:51:51 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: A major correction Message: Sir: You just said the wrong words...The media didn't tell me anything. You see, I FOUGHT THERE! This was MY FIRST-HAND version of the events. I spent a solid year there. Before, during and after the fighting. I was on the ground and DIRECTLY involved. Get it? DIRECTLY involved! By the way, troop carriers are armored vehicles and again it is moot point because they would not surrender. Troops running away isn't SURRENDER, it is retreat. It is MOST unfortunate that SO many had to die before Hussein woke-up and surrendered. After the surrender, the killing stopped. My original post stands! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 09:31:57 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mike Subject: A major correction Message: Well we are both right. And I'm glad that you obviously think that it was most unfortunate that so many Iraqis died. Thw original reason for me posting about this was the way in which it was reported in the US news media. A lot of fuss about a few dead Americans but very little sympathy for the thousands of Iraqis who perished. I know that we both realise that war is a beastly business but the way it was reported on CNN etc was that the Iraqis were not important. They could die in droves and it didn't matter, so long as our boys got back home. I'm not anti American but I do wish the American news channels would give a more balanced report of the horrors of war. In American's eyes they kicked Saddam's butt but in reality thousands of conscripted troops were massacred. They were obviously under orders not to surrender and their fate was already sealed. But it was a horrible one sided affair and the reality of that didn't get reported much. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:11:43 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Sir David Subject: American news. Message: I'm not anti American but I do wish the American news channels would give a more balanced report of the horrors of war. You're going to have to investigate who it is that really controls mainstream media here in the states, Sir David. From what I've heard, it's not a pretty picture. Names like General Electric and others I can't recall have been mentioned as the controlling forces of our media. They built America's military might. It's not likely they're going to say bad things about it. Fortunately, we do have a fair share of non-commercial newspapers and radio stations that are constantly putting putting pressure on the mainstream to speak the truth. Maybe it comes later than it should, but ultimately, the truth does come out. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 22:20:31 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Jerry Subject: American news. Message: That's fascinating information. Over here we have a similar force of the Rupert Murdoch empire but that controls the newspaper media. The inependant TV networks and the BBC are very independant and unbiased in their reporting. To the extent that durunf the Falklands war, the BBC was slammed by the Thatcher government for spending to much time reporting Argentinian casualties such as in the sinking of the Belgrano. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:16:51 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Cheap superiority Message: I'm not anti American but I do wish the American news channels would give a more balanced report of the horrors of war. In American's eyes they kicked Saddam's butt but in reality thousands of conscripted troops were massacred. They were obviously under orders not to surrender and their fate was already sealed. But it was a horrible one sided affair and the reality of that didn't get reported much. David, Do you remember how the whole thing went down? I mean without hindsight but tracking the war from the start? No one knew what that mad motherfucker was capable of, only that he'd threatened the 'mother of all wars'. Chemical weapons? Biological? Did anyone know what was going to happen? So he started it, he certainly had to be stopped (just imagine, for a moment, how the world community could have acquiesed to his occupation of whatever that country was -- oh yeah, Kuwait. In the circumstances that would have been impossible.) His troops got slaughtered. Big fucking deal. They were TROOPS. Armed assailants who didn't surrender. What would YOU have done if you were in charge? Let them all retreat, regroup and settle in to a couple of years of conflict? Meanwhile Saddam's working a little harder on the big question -- just what CAN I put in those SCUD warheads? Bullshit. Don't be so sanctimonious. Perhpas you should go back to talking about evolution, a subject you're really an expert in. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 21:50:03 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Jim Subject: Cheap superiority Message: I guess mass killings are a tradgedy, no matter what the circumstances. There was a difference in the reporting on CNN/NBC compared to other countries' broadcasts. I meant say that I hope the American people realised the horror of what happened and didn't just think it was good to kick Saddam's butt. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 14:16:44 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Another slight correction Message: Sir: Actually, from what my wife tells me, the news reports at home were quite vivid concerning the number of iraqis lost. She seems to remember, on several occasions, hearing the number 300,000. But, memories being what they are, that may be an over\underestimation. I didn't see the news myself, so I have to accept what she says on the media issue. However, the news media,often, had to wait for hard information from the pentagon and/or the president. Some reports may have been slow in coming due to that 'delay.' But please do keep this in mind, the iraqis visited horrors on the kuwaitis that were never really reported (VERY gruesome). The results of the iraqi 'visit,' I saw with my own eyes. Remember too, they rolled over kuwait like a steamroller. Kuwait had no significant ability to defend itself, either. The whole gulf war picture has to be examined as a total, not as pieces and parts. Is war ugly? YES. Do alot of people get killed? MOST EMPHATICALLY, YES. Would I like to see another war or see my kid (or your kid, for that matter) have to participate in another? MOST DEFINITELY NOT!!!!! I'm most assuredly NOT a 'hawk.' None of the military people I knew/know were hawks, either. As I said in another post: The military folks KNOW who is going to get to fight it, if there is one. BTW, thank you for your VERY CIVIL and thoughtful posts on this subject. I hope than none of mine, to you, were considered insulting or demeaning. If they did come across that way, please accept my apologies. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 22:00:45 (EDT)
From: Sir David Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com To: Mike Subject: Another slight correction Message: Well it's been an enlightening discussion and I've stood corrected in some parts. Also it's good to hear things from a Gulf veteren's perspective. The Gulf was was very auspicious for me but for a different reason. On the night we (USA & Britain) started bombing Bagdad, I found out that I was going to become a father, to my first daughter. A big night for me. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 04:22:40 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: Another slight correction Message: Sir: WOW, that was auspicious. CONGRATS (a little late...but sincere!) I, too have a young daughter. She's about 1 year older than yours. She is definitely the apple of my eye! Hey, dad-to-dad, has she used the 'flirting' thing with you to get what she wants (as opposed to the way she asks your wife?) You know what I mean, that absolutely heart melting smile and the rolling eyes.... he he he. Man, they're good.... he he he. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 14:22:11 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Sir David Subject: A slight correction Message: David, some years after the Gulf War, there have been a few documentaries by PBS and couple of other non-commercial production companies that detailed more of the carnage you mention. They showed footage of the carpet bombing of troops by B-52s, using bull-dozers to bury alive Iraqi troops, the bombing of the retreating armies from Kuwait. The footage is ghastly. These were things that were not primarily done by ground troops. It was essentially an air war and that's where it happened. I'm not surprised that most American and British troops on the ground didn't even see it. These documentaries also disclosed a lot of additional misconceptions that were created by the awful press coverage during the Gulf War in the US. One was that those supposedly accurate patriot missles missed most of the time. Of course, all of this came years after the war was over, and very few people were even interested in hearing about this old news, prefering to believe the fairy-tale, Nintendo war we were shown on television, as a result of the most censored dissemination of information in the history of a US war. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 20:51:38 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: JW Subject: A slight correction Message: JW, Did you see the special (PBS?) that recorded the firefighters and the clean-up crews after the gulf war? It was frightening watching the firemen capping the burning oil 'geisers'. The black smoke that hung in the air and turned day into night was one of the most horrible things I have seen. I wonder what the long term effects on the eco system in that region of the world will be? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 11:27:42 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: JW Subject: clarification Message: JW: You are right, it WAS ghastly. But, there needs to be some clarification on a couple of items: - Burying iraqi troops alive: JW, the iraqi troop bunkers were interspersed between LARGE mine fields. To go forward, the troops would have had to go around the bunkers and clear, literaly, hundreds of thousands of mines (and die doing it) or go 'over' the bunkers. The iraqi troops inside those bunkers were armed and would not surrender, therefore.... the rest is as you said. If you were a commander in the field, which option would you take? - You are right in saying that the combined air forces were responsible for the kuwait road. However, there were advance ground troops (specially skilled, if you will) that could SEE the action. Who do you think it is that 'paints' non-reflective targets or designates targets from the ground, when necessary? They can be alot closer than you may think, sometimes. - What you said about the patriot missiles is 'essentially' correct, if you mean hitting the incoming missile is equated with 'killing' the warhead. The al-Hussein missile has a design flaw that caused a bit of a problem for the patriots. Upon re-entry, they break-up. The patriot system, initially, was 'chasing' the bigger piece. Unfortunately, that 'piece' was the engine-section, not the warhead section. When the operators realized what was happening, they would manually override, but that is obviously NOT the optimum situation. Additionally, the warhead on the patriots has since been upsized to help preclude hits that don't kill a weapon. Remember, this was the FIRST time in history that ANY weapon had ever hit an incoming BALLISTIC missile, in combat (in other words, the first time it was tested under uncontrolled, and very unusual, circumstances). - This WAS NOT a nintendo war. People die in war and it will always be GHASTLY! My wife disagrees that it was prtrayed that way. She was scared shitless, daily. True, they didn't show the disgusting scenes that really only satisfy prurient interests. They really aren't necessary, are they? As you said, in an earlier post, I think the people of any country are well aware of what carnage means, they don't need to suffer from post-traumatic stress syndrome in the process of that understanding (IMHO). - I believe this will be my last post on the subject of the gulf war or terrorism, unless you have a particular question for me personally. Again, JW, I know that this issue is as contentious as they come. No one is going to 'change' anyone's mind on the subject. I do appreciate the fact that you and I have been very civil with each other, despite our differences of opinion. That means alot to me. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 14:12:21 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Mike Subject: clarification Message: This WAS NOT a nintendo war. I know it wasn't a nintendo war. But that's the way it was presented to the American people. I saw the reports and that's certainly the way it was presented. And that has been a continuing criticism of the way the war was covered by lots of other people, not just me. I watched the daily press briefings that Schwartzkoff and others presented. Nintendo war is a correct term if you ask me. The press wasn't allowed to cover anything else, so that's all we got. I think it was very misleading. By the way, Schwartzkoff, who has now become a darling of the right wing in this country, including the religions right wing, is an example of that old adage: 'Fat people who wear camoflage are kidding themselves.':) [Actually that was from a Herb Caen (rest his soul) column in the SF Chronicle during the war.] The al-Hussein missile has a design flaw that caused a bit of a problem for the patriots Well, again, the media reports during the war, lead to the the conclusion that the patriot was highly effective. It was only months after the war that the abysmal record of weapons was actualy revealed. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 00:59:08 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Sir David Subject: The 'anti-US' cult Message: Sir: I would like to ask a couple of questions concerning this statement, '(america) believes it is safe to bomb indescriminately over a few American dead.' First, how many dead people should it take to provoke a response? Would you feel the same if one of the dead were a relative of yours? Where oh where did you get the information that the bombing was 'indiscriminate?' The targets were VERY discriminate. Indiscriminate bombing would be like... well dropping bombs over the entire capital city of Sudan. Indiscriminate bombing would be like 'carpet bombing' the entire Afghan landscape. This WAS NOT indiscriminate bombing. It was very 'discriminate' , in that only those targets chosen were hit (despite the claims to the contrary that were later refuted). I know that you are not a US citizen, but how about some truth concerning this situation (not the same old generalizations and cliches). The way these old, oft-repeated cliches and sweeping generalizations have been appearing on the forum today. I think the only 'cult' that is showing itself here is the anti-american cult. Come on guys, do you really believe in a world-dominating-CIA-driven-rightwing conspiracy? Considering the security 'leaks' that occur in the US, do you actually believe that such a conspiracy could be kept a secret? If you do, you are truely deluded and brainwashed (by the Bash-the-US crowd). Think about it... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 19:36:43 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Mike Subject: For Mike-so very off topic Message: Mike, Thank you very much for your military service to our country. I do appreciate it. Even if I don't always agree with the government's motives or agenda, I do appreciate the men and women working in the military and that means YOU! A good friend of mine was in the gulf war, too. (Air force) He has been sick since he came home after the war. Hope you haven't had any such problems. Thank you again. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 21:05:18 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: VP Subject: For VP-so very off topic Message: VP: Absolutely no thanks are necessary. I consider it an honor to have served. One of the reasons that I never really brought the subject up before was due to the fact that I knew that it would likely be a very contentious issue within some groups. There are alot of folks from other countries posting here and I want to insult no one. But, this thread started out with quite a few inaccurate, sweeping generalizations about the US and its military. Well.... seeing as I was in the military for a significant period of time and had served in the middle east, I thought I might add some informed (e.g. first-hand) information. Unfortunately, if you've read the entire thread, you probably noticed that the thread rapidly devolved into the same old cliches and generalizations about the US, as well as some VERY personally offensive comments about me and my military service (e.g. I'm a murderer, etc). Like I said, CONTENTIOUS!!! Oh well... Live and learn. No, I don't suffer from the syndrome. I'm one of the majority that came back without any apparent after effects. I wish that had been the case for everyone. VP, thank you for YOUR obvious support of our military folks. Believe me, it means alot to the active duty guys. Please wish your Air Force buddy the best from me, too. Thanks, again. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 11:06:52 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Sir David Subject: The 'US' cult Message: I could have understood (a bit) the slaughter of the beaten Iraqui troops if the Americans then went forward and invaded Iraq. But they didn't and it just seemed like killing for killings sake. Some British were also involved but they were under the supreme command of the US. There was no interest in invading Iraq, just removing them from Kuwait, and removing the threat that the Iraquis would terrorize their neighbors again, as well as the oil fields. (OK? I said it, what the war was all about). If you'll recall, it wasn't just the western powers that united against Iraq, but their Arab neighbors as well. The original hope for Iraq was that they would become a powerful ally in the Arab world that would help maintain stability in that region, mainly by keeping Iran in check who we thought was the real threat in that region. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, all hope for that was gone. He had become too powerful and too dangerous. Quite simply, his mighty war machine had to be destroyed. He was given ample warning that this was about to occur but he defied reason at every turn and allowed the carnage to begin. The terrible slaughter of the retreating Iraquis was because they were retreating with their war machine which we were dead set on destroying. I'm sorry you feel that the British airmen were merely puppets obeying American orders. We feel that they were among the bravest soldiers that fought in the war. They had the mission of taking out Iraqui airfields which was the most dangerous undertaking any pilot was given. It requires low-level flying that only the most daring pilots would chance. Somehow, I don't think those brave pilots were thinking they were American puppets while missiles and bullets were coming at them from every direction. I think they were just happy to get out with their lives, those that got out, proud to have served their country. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:24:55 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Bravery... Message: Jerry: I couldn't agree with you more! The British pilots were superb and VERY professional. Thank you for expressing it so eloquently. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 23:20:40 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: There ain't no 'US' cult Message: MB: I take exception with your statement to wit: ' US has a disproportionate amount of the world's wealth and economic power.' It's not disproportionate. It is very propotionate. Wealth is directly proportionate to the effort made to acquire it. The US, if you recall, came back from a devastating blow in WWII, by its industrial might. That 'might' was built and financed by the US. US workers were the people operating it. No one expected or requested a handout. I know this is 'ancient' history, but it is indicative of the ability of any people with the 'will to succeed' to do so. Many countries have ENORMOUS resources that have yet to be touched (much more than the US EVER had). Why do you think that is? Is it a vast US conspiracy to keep the other guy down? Or could it be that the people of those countries don't care enough to try to succeed? I'm aware that the latter question could lead one to make a sweeping generalization. That's not my intention; it's just a plausible question. US-bashing is very popular these days. The US is an easy target, but you can't argue with success. NOTICE I DIDN'T SAY PERFECTION!!! What do you propose the people of the US do with their collective wealth? Work their collective asses off to become successful and then give it all away ? To whom? Who deserves it? What you appear to suggest with your statement above sounds an awful lot like a political system that fell apart a few years ago. That system didn't/doesn't work because it stifles anyone's desire to innovate or go the extra mile to succeed. They just do what they can to get by and nothing more (unless they have a gun pointed at their heads). By the way, the people of the US give a disproportionate amount of money, on a per capita basis, to international charities. How do you explain this? Yeah, I can hear it now, the US hasn't done anything good for anyone else in the world, ever. The US is the cause of all of the problems in the world. After all the US has been around since before the Middle East and Ireland started having problems... Wait a minute... The US is only about 220 years old and the problems in the Middle East started two thousand years ago. The problems in Ireland started...hmmm....Something doesn't compute here. MB, if you want to take the high ground, then do it by taking the high ground. Not by taking cheap shots at the US by using really 'old' cliches. In case you haven't noticed: RELIGION SEEMS TO BE PLAYING A MAJOR PART in these regional problems. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 00:42:05 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: Mbvictoria@hotmail.com To: Mike Subject: There ain't no 'US' cult Message: Mike Your a victim of typical 'US greatness' propaganda which has been pounded through your skull since you were born, your blind patriotism has distorted the way that you see your country's involvement on the world stage. I particularly object to your 'we are where we are because of hard work' line.... THIS IS DANGEROUS AND CULT LIKE THINKING America is where it is primarily because of it's military power and the trigger happy way it's prepared to use this power. There are hard workers everywhere, especially South East Asia where a lot of economies there have recently been wrecked because of the rampant and extremely hard working US currency speculators who have thrown millions into poverty (especially in Indonesia). If you and alot of other Americans could only shake of this 'mom and apple pie' conditioning in the way you have supposedly overcome your DLM programming, you might even see that the US 'culture' has subverted a lot of other world traditions and cultures and stripped these people of their historic identities. It 's small wonder these people turn to Jihad with a fanatical anger and zeal. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 00:52:54 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: I'm still waiting Message: Well, Mel? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:56:30 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: I'm still waiting Message: Jim I've responded above under the 2nd 'Israeli windbag' post and about 'terrorism' under my response to Selena - 'Palestine and terrorism'. I am currently awaiting direct answers from you posed in the former posting. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 01:39:33 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: How about some... Message: SPECIFICS. YOU call me brainwashed when you believe in a jewish, world dominating, CIA-driven, rightwing conspiracy that is somhow kept entirely secret in a country that 'leaks' security information to the press on a daily basis. The President can't flush his own toilet without someone in the press finding out about the event. You, MB, have been BRAINWASHED and are fully under the control of the 'US-bashers.' If you don't feel pride in your country, I feel sorry for you. I do feel pride in mine. I never said it was perfect. I never said that we haven't made some BIG mistakes (like our treatment of native peoples, etc). Wait a minute... I think YOUR country was guilty of that one, too. Get off your high horse, MB, it's only a pony. YOUR country has been meddling in the asian affairs for a long, long time. Blaming the US for problems that existed a long time before it existed as a nation is ludicrous (e.g. The Middle East). Blaming any nation for ALL of the problems of the world is equally rediculous. To answer your statement about using our military might to get what we want vice hard work: BULL! (I actually consider that statement to be pretty insulting, as well. I work damned hard for what I make, as does every other person I know). Yeah, like we pull an aircraft carrier up to the shores of another country and say, 'give me all your money!' Like we haven't done anything honestly. Gimme a break! The problem with your logic, MB, is that we DIDN'T HAVE ANY REAL military might for the first hundred years of our existence. Additionally, despite our apparently overwhelming military superiority, Saddam Hussein challenged us, as do other piss-ant terrorists. If the world is SO afraid of the US that it 'gives' us all of its wealth, how do you explain that? I suppose you think the US is 'the great satan.' If you do, who do you think you have been brainwashed by???? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 02:15:03 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mike Subject: How about some... Message: Think for a minute Mike Again, as explained to Jim, I do NOT believe in a Jewish conspiracy theory, there is no evidence that I have seen to suggest that there is one. I am simply expressing my outrage at the current attacks made by your country so as an American you should cop this outrage sweet.....but you are becoming incredibly paranoid and defensive in response and are demonstrating what seems a typical American 'my country right or wrong' mentality, as I said earlier, typical CULT THINKING ........Chill out, Bro Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 03:07:01 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: But Mel... Message: You see... it IS MY COUNTRY right or wrong! Whether my country is wrong or right, I still stand by it. If it's wrong, I try to change it, but it is still MINE. I am not really that upset. I just get VERY tired of people using the same old, old, old generalizations and cliches without specifics. Now for a little history: (1) I am retired military. I developed my OWN feelings and thoughts about my country and acted on those (e.g. joined the military and made it a career). This was during a time in our nation's history when it WAS NOT popular to join the military and be 'patriotic,' so you really can't put ME in the brainwash box. (2) I fought in three conflicts, including the Gulf War. So my thoughts concerning the Middle East are based upon FIRST-HAND experience, not the media version, whatever that is. (I was there before, during and after the fighting). I would NOT like to talk about the experience of combat, it is still a little fresh. (3) I have PERSONALLY seen the results of a terrorist attack and the indiscriminate nature of those attacks (other than the fact that it is aimed at a particular country's people). I find terrorists more repugnant than you can possibly imagine. To give you a 'clean' example: I don't give a damn what terrorists think, I don't give a damn what they want and I DO NOT believe they are part of the human race. They blew it when they became terrorists. Their 'rights' are null and void, as far as I am concerned. Now, that is a personal opinion, NOT an official opinion... OK? By the way, I'm not just talking about the Middle East variety; the above applies to all terrorists, in my book. (4) You called me paranoid...sniff...sniff...I'm Not paranoid, just cautious...he he he (paranoid laughter ensues)... OK, I'm better now. I guess, Mel, my main reason for responding to ANY post concerning the bombing was that it appeared that people were missing the point. A terrorist act was committed, americans (and others) were killed. More attacks were planned by that terrorist group. A self-defense response was sent to the 'known' terrorist group. That terrorist group had already declared war on the US long before these attacks occurred, so we are acting within our rights with reference to a declaration of war from another nation and/or group. If you don't think that some day YOUR country wouldn't be on their list of targets, think again. As I said in an earlier post: They don't like YOU, because you are not muslim. They want YOU dead because you are not muslim. YOU are an infidel. They don't want to reason with YOU and they don't want to talk to YOU. They grasp for any justification 'straw' they can find for their activities. I know that it is hard to understand how people can think like that, but I've BEEN THERE and THEY DO! Terrorists are the BEST evidence yet of the destructiveness of a cult and the ultimate cult mindset. These guys aren't warriors, they are murderers. You can take my word for it or not, but understand that my experience is firsthand, not media driven. If we (those countries that believe in freedom of thought and freedom of worship) continue on a course of inaction when terrorist acts occur, MB, we are sitting (read that: dead) ducks. This ain't paranoia, it's demonstrable fact.... MY HUMBLE OPINIONS CONTAINED HEREIN Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 05:01:28 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mike Subject: Mike.. no medals from me Message: I do not agree with your subtle differences regarding terrorists as murderers as opposed to warriors ( are not warriors also murderers? ) Do you expect me to respect you just because you have been in, not just one, but THREE theatres of war, unfortunately I have no respect for any one who CHOOSES to be a (warrior/murderer) in any conflict. I do, however, have alot of sympathy for conscripts for the Vietnam war because they were young and really were not old enough to make up their minds as to what they should be doing with their lives, and believe me , 30 years ago we had an excellent set up for Vietnam AWOLs who jumped ship in Australia to escape what they had not bargained for. We had networks of underground safe housing set up up through Oz so that these poor young guys could disappear and come to terms with who they were and what they had seen and done (they were in psychologically horrendous shape!). Some later returned to the US during the amnesty allowed by the Carter administration. Many of these then 18 -19 year old boys (now obviously middle aged) felt that although they had gone to Vietnam dazzled by the Star Spangled Banner they soon realised that they were an occupational force in a country where they were not welcome by the populace and who had to provide military support to a corrupt South Vietnamese Government. As you may recall, the thinking of US political leaders was that communism has to be defeated in Vietnam or the whole of south east asia would fall to the Communists, this was known as the 'Domino Theory'. The US defeat in Vietnam and subsequent history have clearly demonstrated that the Domino Theory was false, the region did not collapse to communism and, indeed the North Vietnamese were more interested in trying to establish national unity in their country without the interference of foreigners. So what's that much different now? Your government justified it's military exploits then, and is still doing so now.The point is that your Government justifies all these military incursions for it's own political and economic ends, lies to the American people time and time again about the issues and the relies on old campaigners like yourself to argue a deluded nationalism that supports them. In my opinion you have been duped, and as you admit, you CHOSE to involve yourself in your conflicts (so you are self duped as well).. I don't know how many people you have 'justifiably' killed in order to ensure your own survival and the survival of your nation's interests, but you sure do not have my respect in this matter. You used typically miltiary justifications in your response to Sir David about the massacre (and massacre it was), of the retreating Iraqi army in the Gulf crisis, so you would know that the 'Road of Death' was a completely one sided rout. Tell me, if you can, that that wasn't murder and how you can morally justify it without going into some kind of 'Pentagon/military speak'! (I do not - and many others would not - accept your justification that the Iraqis had not 'surrendered', they were fleeing for their lives- dammit! and still lost them in the process!) So, sorry, no medals from me mate! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:06:43 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Back to name-calling Message: Mel, you're an asshole. I hope one day you, too, get up close and personal with a few 'warriors'. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:48:10 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Jim Subject: Doesn't phase me Message: Jim: thank you. His little no-knowledge diatribe doesn't really phase me a bit. I followed the courage of my convictions and have so stated on this forum. It is a part of MY life, not his. I am proud of my military service and will not apologize for it (there is nothing to apologize for!). If it means that I will be a pariah with some... Well, so be it. I do think that I will not talk politics on this forum anymore because it detracts from the main topic. Very devisive. But anyway Jim, thanks. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 00:15:03 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Back to name-calling Message: What's wrong Jim? When the going gets tough you resort to name calling. Come on Jim your an intelligent man, step beyond your angry, new age 'inner child' urge to call names and play the ball, not the man! In my view Jim, the US struts an international stage parading it's military might far more disproportianate to that of it's opponents and I am an 'ass hole ' for debating this and other points with an ex US military man (who has made a cowardly retreat, I might add). Personally I think, debate like this can be very educational and alterantive points of view very intellectually stimulating. Don't you.....? It seems to me that you Americans become really paranoid if people disagree and argue with you, both as a nation and individually (in alot cases). Goes to show... the US cult programming is alive, kicking and very effective, even with you, Jim, even with you......... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 11:02:25 (EDT)
From: Jerry Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Cult? Where? Message: Goes to show... the US cult programming is alive, kicking and very effective,... I'm really a little distraught at your insistece on describing American's as being victims of cult programming. Doesn't a cult require an authoritarian figure at it's center? Who's that in the states; Clinton? If so, why are we currently making a mockery of him over his bedroom affairs? Do you think premies would do that to M over the Monica Lewis allegations? I don't think so. Back in the 70s we ran a president out of office because of his coverup of the Watergate scandal. Do you suppose premies considered dethroning M because of his enabling the escape of an attempted murderer? Do you think they will investigate further the allegations of criminal activities by his mahatmas? They wouldn't dare. If cult programming is raising your childeren to be proud of their heritage and ready to serve when their country calls, then it wouldn't be just the US that's guilty of it, would it? It would be every nation under the sun that's guilty of it, and that's what we are, Mel, a nation, not a cult. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 14:37:36 (EDT)
From: Bobby Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Cult? Where? Message: I agree with Mel. I think nationalism of any kind is a form of cult programming. I consider myself formost a world citizen. I am grateful for where I live and the relative comfort I enjoy but I no means consider myself in alignment with the values of America as portrayed in popular media. In terms of the prevailing American culture I am poor. I don't go along with the program, don't support it, and don't like it. I strongly dislike many of the features of this American culture such as corporate greed and bullying behavior in the world arena. I don't like the prevailing governments in general whether capialist, communist or fascist. As Allen Ginsberg sings in his song 'I don't like the government where I live' I don't like the government where I live, I don't like dictatorship of the rich...... No holds capitalism, no holds communism nyahhhh.. Everybody's lying on both sides nyahh, nyahh, nyahh! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 21:16:17 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Then Leave??? Message: Bobby: You said you are a world citizen. Here's a thought: If you don't like America, why not renounce your citizenship and move to another location that suits you? Just march right up to 'their' border and declare yourself a citizen of the world. I'm sure they will let you in right away. In the meantime, there will be space here for the people that are working their butts off to become citizens. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 22:03:44 (EDT)
From: Bobby Email: None To: Mike Subject: you leave Message: That old cliche love it or leave it went out 30 years ago during the Vietnam era Mike. I am happy *not* to have gone to Vietnam. I refused to be a part of that patriotic american war and spoke out about it at the time. I don't think like you but I have just as much right to be here as you do, or anybody else as far as I'm concerned. Actually the Indians were here first and were effectively massacred by patriotic Americans. Their religion was effectively outlawed until about thirty years ago. That's pretty relevant to me. I probably work harder than you do. Your work ethic is bullshit. What's the ratio of pay for corporate CEO's to the common working stiff? 200 to 1 (or something like that). 'Big corporation take over media mind. I don't like the top bananas that are robbin' Guatamala banks blind' - Allen Ginsberg Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 12:09:23 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Bobby Subject: How about we both... Message: Bobby: WHOA...WHOA...WHOA partner. First, I am not a corporate CEO. Second, I was refering to citizenship, not work ethic. Third, YES you do have a right to be here, but I think that there is a responsibility that WE ALL HAVE to fix it if it's broke. We won't be able to fix it ALL AT ONCE. Let's be realistic. But, maybe we can 'chip away' at the problems one at a time. The result will be better, no matter what we fix first. I don't like the 'love it or leave it' attitude, either. I prefer the 'try-to-fix-it or keep your mouth shut' attitude better. Basically, that comes down to the old cliche, 'if you aren't part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.' People that don't at least vote, don't have any room to complain when the wrong guy gets in any office. Fourth, I know that you don't think like me. That's ok, too. Isn't that supposed to be one of the founding principles? Fifth, I have been quietly working native american issues for MANY years. There are MANY native americans in the area where I live. I don't really deserve any praise for that because I have enough native american blood in my veins to be considered a tribal member. My great grandmother taught me much about it because she lived it. By the way, only certain ceremonies were ever outlawed (lakota sun ceremony, for example). Most of the ceremonies did and do survive intact. They were practiced quiety and privately by the respective tribes and, thus, were not subject to any significant public scrutiny. An example of this would be the Hopi Snake Dance ceremony. YOU will never see it, nor will you ever be invited to witness/participate in it (unless you happen to be native american). In fact, you probably won't even know when (time of year) it happens. By the way Bobby, even though I am retired military, I do respect the fact that you chose to not participate. I may not agree (if you dodged the draft), but I do respect that you followed the COURAGE of your convictions and put your foot down, even at the cost of prison time. How could I not respect that? It's almost the same as giving up your life. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 12:54:01 (EDT)
From: Bobby Email: None To: Mike Subject: How about we both... Message: OK Mike, I find in this latest post yours more to respond to, and find some common ground with you. re points 1 and 2: I wasn't implying you were a corporate CEO, I was responding actually to another post where you spoke about 'hard work' and what seemed to me the implication that most of those who are successful in the system are successful by virtue of their hard work and that this somehow is proportionate to the money they have. This I call bullshit. >>I think that there is a responsibility that WE ALL HAVE to fix it if it's broke. I agree and I attempt to fix what I see in the best ways I know. A good part of what I do for a living -- project coordinator for mental health consumer/survivors -- concerns these areas. >>>don't at least vote, don't have any room to complain when the wrong guy gets in any office The problem with voting of course is that there is so little real choice. I do vote. Mostly the only choices available are the proverbial 'lesser of two evils' choices. The only ones that play in the Washington 'hard ball' arena are those who are members of the team. The real issues are not addressed. What Native American issues are you involved with? I am not of the bloodline but have studied original shamanistic experience and am very aware of authenticity of experience issues. Authenticity is one area that I disagree strongly with some 'new-age' views. In my opinion I accessed the same realms that many other bloodline Native Americans went to in their vision quests. I went to the roots via my near-death and visionary experiences and have for decades been engaged in the real work of coming to terms with these experiences. You may or may not agree with what I say about my experiences. Some bloodline Native Americans may or may not agree of my 'right' to access these realms, but I assure you there are those that do agree as to authenticity of original experience transcending bloodline. I'm glad that you respect my choice as to military participation. I have several friends who participated in military service. Like you, I may not agree, but respect those who follow the courage of their convictions. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 15:23:32 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Bobby Subject: How about we both... Message: Bobby: Yeah, I thought you would understand my 'original' post to to be VERY facitious. Sorry, you took it seriously (that's why I put the brakes on...). It wasn't the intent. My sense of humor escapes people sometimes. It's a little dry. Anyway, I agree that sometimes the people we have to choose between aren't always the best (from our own points of view, anyway). I think that, at that point, we have to decide which 'battles' we are going to fight (e.g. what is the single most important issue I want this guy/gal to fix). If that individual is inclined to vote your way, then that's the one you want in office. Like I said, I don't think it's possible to fix everything, all at once (there are just too many persoanlities involved). But if we chip away at the problems one by one, politician after politician, then we will get it right at some point. It's definitely a long road and may appear that you are not moving, but eventually....problem solved. I think alot of people have a problem with the 'system' because it rarely gives INSTANT gratification (something we have come to expect). Our parents, and their parents before them, had more patience in the long run. I mean, look at the great depression. My parents and grandparents spent an enormous amount of their lives living in relative poverty, by today's standards, due to the depression. But, they did one thing that we don't seem to do very well: they set their own personal interests aside and selflessly tried to make it better for their children, even if it meant that they would never have the life that they, themselves, wanted. By the standard that they set during that time, we are the most SELF-ABSORBED people that have ever inhabited this landscape. All we are concerned with is our own PERSONAL gratification. 'I WANT WHAT I WANT AND I WANT IT, RIGHT NOW!' This applies to just about everything, including our asperations to get things fixed. We may THINK that we are doing it for others, but I tell you that if the words, 'RIGHT NOW,' are in the mind or spoken, then it's personal gratification that WE are 'really' looking for (e.g. 'look at me...'I' was able to get this done soooo quickly' or 'I made it happen,' etc,etc). Truely selfless effort on behalf of someone else is always VERY determined and, above all, patient. Just my opinion, of course. Bobby, as to the questions you had concerning the native american issues I'm involved with, I'll discuss some of those with you a little later. I see by your post, that you have some very specific interests in that area. Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to talk about specific rituals or practices that are an intrinsic part of any particular tribal belief system. I can, where I'm able, dispel myths about certain rituals, but I can't describe any 'real' ceremonies. I hope you understand. On the more 'secular' side, if you will, I can certainly talk about things that are happening in this region. But, again, I will save that for later because it has the potential of turning this post into a book :-) Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 10:32:53 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Bobby Subject: Cult? Where? Message: Bobby: I too consider myself a citizen of the world, even though I don't identify with global lawyer-capitalism. I'll bet, however, that you're more American than you think you are. Also, patriotism--like human interpersonal love--is one of those 'values' that enables people to overlook their personal selfish interests. With what would you replace them? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 11:30:54 (EDT)
From: Bobby Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: patriotic allegiance Message: >>>global lawyer-capitalism Interesting aside, in his last book, the Grunch of Giants (Grunch - Gross universal cash heist) R. Buckminster Fuller recommended that the American system be called Lawcap for lawyer capitalism. The lawyers tell corporate managers and CEO's where to put the money and then set about legitimizing the process. Many corporations fly the US flag out front but really are multi-national global corporations, most of their operations take place overseas. They posture as true patriots but really manipulate politics and legislation to get the best deals for themselves regardless of the consequences to others. ------------------------------------------------------------- As far as patriotism goes, my allegiance goes to the ranges of sentient creatures, including humans, and to the biosphere planet earth. I love the humans and other creatures and want to see them continue. Major threats to creature existence continue to escalate. Also I identify more strongly with diverse ranges of human culture than with my genetic history or cultural roots. My strongest personal identification is with Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism incorporates wisdom and compassion, the wild shamanic experiences I have experienced, and the unity of profound love. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 17:36:55 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Bobby Subject: patriotic allegiance Message: Bobby: For a take on what patriotism and interpersonal love contribute, and what the world might be like w/o them, see: Gauthier, David P. 1990. Moral Dealing: Contract, Ethics, and Reason. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Sorry to name drop. I realize I've been warned. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 10:16:24 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Back to name-calling Message: Mel: It seems to me that you Americans become really paranoid if people disagree and argue with you, both as a nation and individually (in alot cases). In the sense that 'American' refers to a US citizen, rather than a resident of either North or South America, Jim is no more 'American' than you. You're not exactly a keen observer are you? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 10:50:45 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Jim the Canadian Message: Scott Your right, it had slipped my mind that Jim was not 'American', thanks for the correction. Sorry to insult you, Jim Mel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:36:50 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: I don't want any Message: MB: If you think I was looking for medals or sympathy from you, then YOU are truely deluded. I don't need your meaningless personal approval for any of my actions. I don't care if you approve or not. My simple point is this: I WAS THERE. YOU were not and therefore ALL of your opinions are colored by the media coverage that YOU saw. YOU have absolutely NO idea of what you are talking about; just second had news-speak! You have NO military experience and would not know a retreat from a surrender under any circumstances. (and neither did the journalists). Those iraqis that surrendered during the conflict, were treated alot more humanely by their captors than they were by their own government. The key word was 'SURRENDER.' This will be my last communication with you on this manner. So rave-on mcduff... Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 23:53:01 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mike Subject: I don't want any Message: Well, if you want to close of communication and indulge yourself im memories of military glory, fine thats your CHOICE... Firstly I would like to remind you that Iam not American and therefor am not required participate in patriotic US flag waving on your country's military exploits and I am ENTITLED to criticize your country's involvement in any of it's affairs. Secondly , I am not ashamed of my views on the matter either, and they are not all coloured by the media as you suggest and I will tell you why.... 1.As indicated earlier.. I have had quite extensive experience in trauma counselling and support for American AWOLs in the Viet Nam era. Their experiences and anguish were nor relayed to me via the media. 2.. In my spare time I am also involved in the settlement of refugees from Bosnia/Croatia conflict, as well as Iranian, Iraqi and Vietnamese refugees, many of the former who are still trying to come to grips with their 'ethnic cleansing' experiences. All of these people have suffered immensly and it will be a long process for them to put together lives in a meaningful way. Their experiences are not conveyed to me via the media either. Mike ...Although I have not been involved in miiltary action myself I deal with the product of these situations and with the hurt and suffering of people who, unlike you, did not CHOOSE to be in the circumstances or conflicts they found themselves in but were victims of events beyond their control. Also, I still do not subscribe to the military significance of SURRENDER as applied to your country's wholesale slaughter of conscripted and frightened teen age Iraqi boys running away from the overwhelming might and technology of the US armed Forces. Under those particular circumstances I beleive there are other qualities YOUR country could have displayed, like MERCY and COMPASSION. Obviously Stormin' Norman did not CHOOSE to engage those particular qualities at this stage of the campaign. Also, you shouldn't blame the media so much, they did an excellent job of sanitising the Gulf crisis for civilian consumption, it was like watching sports commentators commenting on the state of play for a Saturday afternoon ballgame. They did an excellent job, not like those mongrel media reporters during the Vietnam war who told everyone exactly what was going on! As you indicated, I do not expect you to reply to reply to this, so thanks for your perspectives and I enjoyed the argument/debate. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 08:22:31 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: I don't want any Message: MB: And you called me a 'coward' in a later post below. Please read my response to that post before reading this one. If you still feel like reading this one afterwards, then please do. I will respond to the 'lack of mercy' charge in this way: (1) The troops in Kuwait were Repulican Guards. Conscripts were in iraq where they could be better controlled (read that: kept from deserting). Republican Guards are NOT conscripts, they are/were Husseins elite troops. The republican guards are the NICE people that lit all of the oil well fires and let billions of gallons of oil loose in the sea. (I guess that the good iraqis wanted to improve the environment, right?) Oh, yeah, this was ALL DONE during the time that you say they were 'running for their lives.' NOT! They had no intention of surrendering until they were pounded into submission. Unfortunately (and I do mean that) it required more pounding than it ever should. They would not accept defeat. So much for not being colored by the media, Mel. Second, You DO remember the Hussein attacked Kuwait first, right? You do remember that the WORLD told him to get out long before any military action was taken, right? You do remember that even a Russian Envoy made a personal visit to iraq to try to get them to leave kuwait, right? You do know that Kuwait was, and is still, a soveriegn nation that asked for our military assistance to get their country back, right? (Hint: the answers to all of the above should have been, YES). Ah, BUT... are you, at all, aware of what those republican guards did to the kuwaitis during their little occupation of kuwait (Hint: Say NO!) Because if you were truely aware and you still defended those iraqis troops, then I don't know what I can say.... This isn't media hype, Mel, but a first-hand account by someone that was there. (Remember during this short description, Mel, that YOU said that these very same troops were 'kids' running for their lives). Well, these 'iraqi kids' were some seriously sick kids, then. Here's a short list of what I saw with MY OWN EYES MEL: these 'kids' beat, raped and killed women and children; massacred civilians by the score; used heavy physical torture and maiming on civilians; planted thousands of debilitating landmines in school yards and parks (Yes Mel, It's a fact, I cleared quite a number of them MYSELF!); many civilians had been killed and maimed by those mines during the iraq occupation; these 'kids' target practiced on the city zoo animals; the list goes on and on, Mel. I did forget one particularly gruesome one, Mel. On a short patrol we came upon a guy strung up on a scaffolding with his hands tied behind his back. He had been tortured and maimed beyond my ability to describe it. His body was rotting (it had been there for weeks). Apparently left as a warning to unruly kuwaitis. We cut him down as soon as we saw him (paying little attention to our own personal safety; possible snipers) Upon doing so, a little lady came out of her house crying and screaming, 'thank you, thank you' and gave each of us a hug and a kiss on the cheek. (BTW Mel, that's the ONLY 'accolade' that meant anything to me. So screw your thoughts on military glory and medals. Who the fuck wants a damned medal?). This was, by no means, an isolated event. Scenes like this happened all over Kuwait. Instead of talking to those 'poor downtroden' iraqis, why don't you balance your thought process with a few kuwaiti conversations. Why don't you go visit kuwait and ask THEM what they thought of the coalition forces. After you do that, then tell me I'm only in it for the glory. GLORY MY ASS! The Kuwaiti people asked for and received help from a coalition of forces that were willing to lay down there lives to retreive kuwait. They were, in the aftermath, willing to lay down there lives putting out oil fires and clearing landmines from schoolyards and other public places. DO YOU, Mel, have any idea how many landmines were laid in schoolyards and public places? Why don't you ask a Kuwaiti, they will tell you. Don't preach to me about YOUR contributions to ending war until you look into the hearts of those you are profaning. Have you gone to Bosnia to help clear mines? Have you done anything else, besides bitch and complain, to end war? Better yet, have you done anything at all to insure that Kuwait's territory will never be violated by the iraqis, again? Isolationists don't end wars, Mel. Isolationists get wars started by inaction. Read the damn history books.... Go ahead and try to refute what I've said here, Mel. Your refutations are just regurgitated politically-motivated nonsense. I don't really care if you like me or not, Mel. I know what I've done and I am proud it! This really is my last communication concerning this issue; it's getting really boring. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:54:44 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Warriors Message: Mel: Prior to WWII the sight of a group of armed young men struck terror into the hearts of civilians. They meant, rape-pillage-murder. With the arrival of the American GI to the European Theater the sight of a goup of armed young Americans (and Brits) meant food, liberation and relief. There is a very definite, not subtle, difference between a murderer and a warrior, a fact that was brought out clearly in the trial of Lt. Calley. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 14:26:16 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Warriors Message: Scott: I'm just 'full' of thanks today. THANK YOU. In a very few words, you said it all. In those same few words, you also demonstrated that the US military doesn't countenance (and NEVER has) the kind of behavior demonstrated by Lt Calley. A very fine point, indeed. -Mike Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 04:26:20 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Liberating GI's and Warriors Message: Scott 1 My mother (passed on now, God rest her Soul), could tell you some stories about the 'liberating GI's' and their behaviour in Britain and Europe during WW2. Don't indulge yourselve in fantasies that your GI's actually behaved in the heroic way they are portrayed in your Hollywood war movies. War's a dirty and horrifying business, and it was for the female population of the 'host' countries during WW2. 2 The Calley trial, as is well known, was the US salving it's conscience internationally for not just his involvement in the Mei Lei massacre, but also using him as a sacrificial lamb for numerous other atrocities perpertrated by the US forces in Vietnam. As I have already said, I've heard horrendous stories from your AWOLs in what they've seen and done. This show trial did not wash with me and many others all over the world, but it has certainly made the US populace feel better in the thought that their country could now be internationally absolved of these kind of crimes. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 05:03:09 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: You changed the topic! Message: MB: I will discuss the 'new' topic that you just brought up: I WILL tell you why I broke off the discussions about the gulf with you. FIRST and foremost, YOU made it personal. You weren't discussing the issues when you equated ME PERSONALLY with a murderer. P.E.R.S.O.N.A.L. Get it? Then YOU say that I made a 'cowardly retreat' when I decided it would be best to cut off communications with you concerning a very contentious issue. It was to avoid turning this into a shouting match and making it anymore personal that YOU had made it, already. If that is what YOU call cowardly retreat and YOU think that YOU didn't make it personal, then YOU ARE BRAINDEAD. How's that for personal, you sanctimonious asshole. Who are you to judge anyone/anything ? Who died and made you god? We just unloaded one god (M), we don't need another to take his place. You weren't debating issues when you called me a murderer, my friend! You were making it personal. Then in the face of all of that: you have the unmitigated gall to call me a 'coward,' you bootlicking, lick-spittle. You will notice that I didn't mention that YOU, by harboring AWOL's, were seriously violating the laws of your country as well as mine (we have a status of forces agreement with your country, bozo). I avoided that topic, even though I disagree with what you did. I didn't make it personal by asking you 'how many black awol soldiers did you turn away' with your racisit policies. YOU WILL NOTICE that I just made a statement personal. I didn't blaim your government (well known for its mistreatment of native peoples), I blamed you. SEE THE DIFFERENCE? Did you take it personally? Did it make you a little angry (especially the racist thing?) Now, if YOU can take this diatribe like a man, you will stop the stupid name calling and we can become civil, once again. If not, then I have no more to say to you on any level. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 07:03:28 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mike Subject: Sorry, I'll change it again! Message: Sorry the topic changed.... Look, I have read both of the posts that you have made since you advised that you know longer really wanted to communicate with me and will comment as follows. I have a number of Aussie Vietnam veterans who are my friends and who (along with the AWOLs) saw things as horrendous as you describe, They know of my views and the role that I played at the that time, but we manage to resolve our differences and our extremely differing view points and actions, by respecting and trusting that we all have done our actions in good faith and 'conscience'. Now, you have followed what your conscience and sense of honour has dictated, and,I admit, I was deliberately pushing your buttons to probe the depth of your sincerity. I would add that I fully respect your heartfelt sincerity in the pursuit of what you consider to be your duty. But for me, my conscience dictates something different (not necessarily better), I believe that the preservation of life is the highest moral and ethical law and that war is 'evil'. This may sound terribly naive to you, but it is something that I have always believed in, and always will. I was well aware of the legal risks of my I took in my AWOL activities, but there was a definite need for it and I felt in all conscience that I was doing was right thing, and I still beleive that. At 19, I had my court case well prepared to support my status as a conscientious objector (on humanitarian grounds) to my possible conscription. I wasn't a draft dodger, I believed that the law would give me the opportunity to state my case and I fully expected to go to gaol and was prepared to do so. Fortunately for me, my number did not come up and I was not conscripted. However, an number of my friends were and have suffered (and still suffer) terribly as a result of their experiences. Although I have never witnessed what they (or you) have been through, I have a strong conviction that these are situations that no human being should have to face or be put through. My observations of my veteran friends, the refugees that I currently help settle and the AWOLs that I supported many years ago have merely confirmed my view point over the years. So, as you made your choice about your military career, I made a conscious choice about where I stood on these issues. I have no regrets about supporting the young US AWOLs, I could have gone to gaol for that, but so what, I do not think the beliefs I hold are illegal and immoral and I was prepared to act on them. Since then, as I have said, in my spare time,I have assisted in the settlement of a number of refugees and feel privileged to have been able to do so. War does create a mess in people's lives and in some way I feel a strong sense of duty to helping people overcome their war and conflict trauma as well as they can. Also, as a few people on this site already know, I work as an advocate for Australian Aboriginal communities and assist them with self development programs covering health, education and economic development. (Your racist remark didn't phase me... I am well aware of the degree of my own racism and attempt to keep it in check!) I come from a humanist and pacifist background, my parents having suffered terriblly in WW2 for their pacifist beliefs, yet still enlisting for non-combatant duties (refusing to carry weapons for self defense) in the British Medical Corps. They wholeheartedly supported my view points and actions. So, Mike, different people have different values and sometimes, maybe, aggressiive debate can bring these qualities and values to the surface. I hope you can respect where I am coming from even if you cannot understand it. Despite earlier posts, I DO respect who you are, the depth of your conviction and your commitment to that conviction. I hope we can agree to disagree, and generate a mutual respect. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 11:32:33 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Sorry, I'll change it again! Message: MB: Thank YOU! I must admit that I was not expecting a reply of this variety after my attempt to 'push your buttons.' I am very pleasantly surprised. I have, believe it or not, an incredible respect for those that want to see an end to war and/or are pacifists (I really don't like that word, I prefer 'lovers of peace'). I have never said that the military is for everyone or that war is glorious. WAR SUCKS! It is obvious to me that you very much believe in what you do and what you did. I may not agree with all of it, but I do respect it as 'who you are.' I VERY much respect your work with those who suffer the after-effects of war/conflict. You bet I can 'agree to disagree.' I will do that gladly. As to the 'racist' thing: would that everyone could keep theirs in check. I think most wars would disappear into dim memory if we could do that one thing. We've ALL got a very long way to go on that one. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 04:39:54 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Mike Subject: Cessation of hostilities Message: Mike So we have a peace accord - good, incidentally, I remember one of the AWOL boys was named 'Mike Love' (not his real name, but one he chose for himself for the time he was in Australia). When I asked him why he went to Vietnam in the first place he said 'to see what it war was like'. Funny, I've been thinking about him a lot throughout our argument, probably because your name's Mike. Anyway, have a good life and I hope you don't have any more war trauma. Mel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 11:46:29 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Thank you, Mel Message: Mel: This has been MOST interesting, to say the least. It's not a subject that I discuss much because it gets a little too up-close and personal for my liking. - So that guy joined 'to see what war was like'....hmmmm. Not much that I can say about that one. That is probably one of the best reasons that I have ever heard for requiring military folks to be at least 50 years old.... It's not practical, but it is a thought. I don't think a 50 year old individual would make that statement, do you? We've got to find some way of telling the new recruits that it isn't a picnic, it's not an ego thing, etc etc. Yeah, you can get some great training, but in the end, you have a purpose that you NEED to understand clearly (not thru rose-colored glasses). That's a hard tightrope to cross, I think. - I'm not sure if I told you, but I am retired from the military. Been there, done that! I AM having a nice life, thank you for wishing one on me, too (maybe it'll stick...he he he). Yes, there was/is some trauma involved, but I think that I am lucky in that regard. I haven't had a massive attack of post-traumatic stress (a little, but not overwhelming). I think that I've 'decompressed' pretty well, but I do give myself a reality-check, now and then. The fact that 'we' left as a unit and returned as a unit probably had alot to do with the successful decompression. I'm not a psychologist, so I'm only guessing on that one. BTW, the same to you Mel: Have a very happy life! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 01:56:06 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: The big bad world. Message: Mel: Concerning the liberating GIs, the fact that the perceptions changed so radically demonstrates that what was the rule had become the exception. RE: but also using him as a sacrificial lamb for numerous other atrocities perpertrated by the US forces in Vietnam. Mind explaining how this works? Calley paid for the sins of all Americans or something? How about, at least, a 'sacrificial goat' for heaven's sake? Well, it doesn't really matter. If it's American it must have horns, right? -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 10:15:54 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Sacrificial lamb. Message: Scott In his trial, Calley paid for his own sins, but was the proxy for the sins committed by other US military personnel which did not become exposed and go to trial. In this way the military were able to demonstrate their 'integrity' and restore the faith of the American public in them. The Mei Lei massacre was exposed by the media, and had the media not been there, it is highly likely that this atrocity would never have come to public light. The American military pays the media too much credit (sorry...blame) for it's defeat in the Vietnam war. True, the media, played a major role in public opinion, but the US had been pounding away at the Viet Cong for years and had realised they couldn't win, in fact they were considering using Nukes at some stages. (thank God they didn't). The military are absolutely paranoid of the media role in war reporting, so hence the 'ball game' reporting by the CNN during the Gulf crisis..... now THAT has horns on it! My problem is that I think that this whole process has become too slick, and people do not really know the truth about these situations, only whats presented to them by the leadership ( in Clinton's case he is a EXPOSED - forgive the pun - LIAR) and a tightly mussled electronic media. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 15:14:38 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: The big bad world. Message: Concerning My Lai and Lt. Calley, the military was determined to cover up the whole incident and not prosecute anyone for the mass-murder of civilians that occurred there. It was only the braver of a helicopter pilot whose conscience got to him, and who was roundly persecuted for speaking up, who exposed the incident publicly, that the trial ever took place. Even then, a major white-wash took place, and I agree with Mel, there was an attempt to push the whole incident under the carpet by just trying Calley. Lt. Calley just served a couple of years in prison and now runs a jewelry store in Orlando, Florida. I was always astonished by the incredible hatred many of the returning US troops had for the Vietnamese. Many said they were 'not worth saving.' I tend to be less critical of the actual troops, however. They were just young guys who were either drafted (didn't have the brains or the money to get student deferments) or they volunteered because they believed in the cause. They didn't know that an impossible, immoral cause it actually was. They were put in an impossible situation. And there was no real leadership from our political leaders, particularly Nixon, who ran on a platform of ending the war, but continued it for 7 years, despite getting reports upon taking office from the pentagon that the war was unwinnable. History shows that the US army basically fell apart in Vietnam, with rampant drug use, racism and even killing of superior officers. I think that was because no one could see what the point of the war really was, that it had any effect on defending one's country which was their goal through patriotic feeling, and that the war was unwinnable in any event. That lead to horrible morale and a real mess. 60,000 US deaths and millions of Vietnamese. Why? And I say this because I am patriotic. I think part of patriotism is pointing how when this country strays very far from its stated ideals, as we did then. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 16:24:05 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: JW Subject: Yes and.... Message: JW: You are correct, if my memory serves, about the events surrounding the Lt Calley issue. I think that the motive for cover-up has to be looked at, as well. The US military has NEVER approved of that kind of behavior, EVER! That incident was murder, pure and simple (YES, this coming from me). There are a number of articles (laws) in the UCMJ and the Manual of Courts Martial that specifically pertain to this type of incident. Those laws have been on the books 'since the beginning.' Non-combatants are non-combatants...period! Although that line was becoming a little 'grey' over there, it still doesn't excuse the wanton disrespect for life and the action that ensued. The only problem with executing those 'laws' is that it places the military in a very compromising position, politically (during a time when they could little afford any less support). Understand, I'm not condoning this, just placing a little different spin on it. Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about: Imagine if 'tailhook' had been a Microsoft company party, instead. Would anyone have noticed? Would there have been the same amount of 'outrage' displayed? Honestly, you would have to admit, most people wouldn't have even heard about it, much less care. But boyo, if it's the military, the media goes rabid! It doesn't matter how few people were actually involved in the 'tailhook' incident, the shame is applied to the whole military, as if we all did it. I can tell you from my point of view, that was an incredibly repugnant incident. If that example didn't clarify, try this one: A person robs a bank. The media knows who did it. If the person worked at Microsoft 10 years ago, the media NEVER mentions it. If that person were, let's say, a Vietnam vet, then here is an example of the byline, 'Vietnam vet robs bank.' Not, 'man robs bank' or some other byline. What the hell has the fact that this guy was a vet 30 years ago have to do with this robbery?????? Why was this information considered germaine to the story????? Why isn't it mentioned if he was a Microsoft worker (e.g. 'ex-microsoft employee robs bank')? This military-specific byline occurs all of the time. We were told when we joined that we were 'in the military 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.' Of course, that is true. But would you expect that to mean, 'for the rest of your life?' Even in matters that don't concern the military at all? The military takes heat from the media for people that have been out for 30 damn years! People they have no control over, whatsoever. Why? It's a damned good question. I know that if I were to commit a crime, the byline would be, 'Retired military member robs bank...' or whatever). Now, with that in mind and understanding basic human nature, is it any wonder why whitewashing occurs? Is it any wonder why they (the brass) are tired of ALL military members looking bad for the actions of a few? Is it any wonder? Hey, people are people and they will react incorrectly to 'threats' at times. Like I said, I'm not condoning it, it's WRONG, but that IS a possible explanation for the 'protect-mode' behavior. It's a no-win situation, no matter what you decide to do. Just my two cents worth...what do you think of it? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 17:13:16 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Mike Subject: Yes and.... Message: The only problem with executing those 'laws' is that it places the military in a very compromising position,politically (during a time when they could little afford any less support). Yes, it is a pesky problem when an organization is given the power to investigate itself. Like any other organization in a similar situation, the motivation to cover up and gloss over is very great. That certainly was the case in the My Lai case. And that isn't the only case. Imagine if 'tailhook' had been a Microsoft company party, instead. Would anyone have noticed? You bet they would have!!! Microsoft would have been sued for multi-millions and management heads would have rolled. Honestly, you would have to admit, most people wouldn't have even heard about it, much less care. I think this is complete bullshit. It would have been a large, class-action, well-publicized lawsuit. Microsoft's liability would be so great, and the bad press on the company so nevative, that the likelihood of something like that happening at Microsoft is approximately zero. I can tell you from my point of view, that was an incredibly repugnant incident. You can say that again! I frankly have never noticed that the media is anti-military. If you ask me the opposite is true. No, whitewashing isn't justified because you don't like the press the military gets. That's ridiculous. The military is an institution that people go into for patriotic reasons to protect and defend their country, and sometimes just to get some training they can't get anywhere else. It is paid for by the taxpayers, and they get to carry guns. Accordingly, there is a higher level of scrutiny involved in what they do. This is obvious and always has been, and the American public has a right to know what is going on, after all, in a democracy the military works FOR the people. Whitewashing isn't justified for any reason. Americans have the right to expect that the rules you mentioned are followed, whether they go into the military themselves, their kids do, or they are just represented around the world by the military. I think the average person is bright enough to understand the if some military people do something awful, it isn't assumed that everyone in the military does the same thing. I don't think you're correct at all that people project that kind of activity on everyone in the military. I know I don't. By the way, sometimes 'the brass' do some pretty stupid stuff too. Like that supreme commander of the navy in the pacific suggesting that those three marines who raped that 12-year-old girl in Okinawa a couple of years ago should have just paid for the services of some prostitutes and everything would have been fine. Clinton was absolutely correct in firing somebody in that position who would say something so monumentally ignorant. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 18:38:09 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: JW Subject: Wait...please Message: JW: ***COME TO REALLY THINK OF IT: YEAH, maybe my previous post was a bit stupid and didn't use good examples, but once in a while I like to try to understand what causes some of these dumb things, like whitewash, to occur. I thought I might be onto something.... maybe (read that: probably) not. PLEASE DO NOT, for a single moment, think that I was trying to 'justify' whitewash. 'Explain' it, maybe... Justify it, NO WAY! There is NO justification for whitewash/coverup. In fact, I think the people that do it, whether in the military or elsewhere, are COWARDS if not criminals. Ya tells the truth, ALWAYS! But there has to be a fundamentally 'human behavioral' reason for lying on that scale, especially when you realize that the coverups rarely seem to work (too many people know about it, etc etc). What the hell is it??? (Remembering that people in the military are people, after all). BTW sorry I used microsoft as an example. It's too huge! But, tell me, why is it necessary for the media to identify a criminal as a vietnam (gulf war, whatever) vet? It happens all of the time. What possible bearing does that have on the fact that some guy is a criminal? It's a heavy slap in the face for those that served and who are now law abiding citizens. In that vein, I do have to disagree on the media-is-our-friend thing. I've found the media to be pretty hostile, myself. But, that's my opinion and it DOES depend upon the slant of the particular news organization. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 21:55:40 (EDT)
From: JW Email: None To: Mike Subject: Wait...please Message: But there has to be a fundamentally 'human behavioral' reason for lying on that scale, especially when you realize that the coverups rarely seem to work (too many people know about it, etc etc). The reason is CYA. But I wouldn't be so sure that coverups don't work. After all, you only hear about the ones that DON'T work, you never hear about the ones that DO work. I never noticed that the media mentions someone's military service when someone is arrested as a criminal. If they do, it might be because of the ironic quality, like when a policeman is arrested for murder or beating his wife. It just seems ironic that someone who is supposedly trained to deal with difficult situations would get so out of control and be such slime. I did notice that the military record of Timothy McVeigh was mentioned quite a lot. Seems he was a bit of a fanatic in the military and remained that way when he left. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 19:32:18 (EDT)
From: Mike Email: None To: JW Subject: and I forgot... Message: JW: Your comment about CINCPAC (Commander-in-Chief, Pacific) is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. It was THE most embarrasing statement I think I heard ANY military person say in the years I was active. Jeez....that one stung. I couldn't believe he had said it. When I heard it......you could audibly hear the sound of my jaw hitting the floor. Then I got REALLY PISSED! You are totally correct that it was the President's duty to fire him. There was no excuse or justification for that statement, whatsoever. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:15:18 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: The American Ideology Message: Mel: You misapprehend what is going on in a fundamental way. The US, as a nation, is defined by a set of values (rather than an ethnic identity) that is fundamentally 'Lockean' in character. If you don't realize this then you don't understand the country and all of your judgments about it will be distorted. For instance, you have decided that the US is motivated by the economic interests of it's multinationals. The support of Israel probably has a great deal more to do with the fact that it is the ONLY Lockean country in the Middle East. Of course the CEOs of the large multinationals belong to the power elite, but they can and often are thwarted by the American Ideology. If that were not the case the US would be an oligarchy, like Brazil. Your conclusions about US support of authoritarian regimes is anachronistic. Tom Friedman recently pointed out that during the cold war all we cared about was what color your country was ON THE OUTSIDE: 'red,' or 'red, white and blue.' That standard has now been COMPLETELY reversed, so that what we are concerned about now is what's going on ON THE INSIDE, regardless of what color you are on the outside. Basically, the question is: Do you have a set of social and political institutions in place (including the rule of law) that can support globalization and maintain civil order? We generally do not support authoritarian regimes now for the simple reason that their institutional arrangements are usually too old-fashioned. In the Middle East, however, there is often not much to choose from, with the exception of Israel. You need a software update. -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 17:17:14 (EDT)
From: nigel Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk To: all Subject: The 'US' cult Message: I agree with some of what all of you have posted, but not with all of what anyone has posted on the middle-eastern issues. (But who cares what I think, anyway?) I'd like to divert the topic a little and pose a few questions: (1) Israel: What single thing divides two middle-eastern peoples of common semitic origins far more than territorial claims or questions of political sovereignty ever could? (2) N.Ireland: What single thing divides two peoples of common celtic origins far more than territorial claims or questions of political sovereignty ever could? (3) Bosnia: What single thing divides three peoples of mixed but intermixed ethnic origins far more than territorial claims or questions of political sovereignty ever could? (4) Kashmir: What single thing divides two peoples of common Indian origins far more than territorial claims or questions of political sovereignty ever could? etc... I wonder what - if he existed - God would make of it all? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 19:22:03 (EDT)
From: Scott T. Email: None To: nigel Subject: Nigel, Nigel, Nigel Message: Nigel: Re: I wonder what - if he existed - God would make of it all? He'd probably be saying something like: 'Well, I took this all apart so I could see what the heck was wrong. Now where did I put the instructions on how to get it all back together?' -Scott Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 04:21:37 (EDT)
From: bill Email: None To: nigel Subject: The british cult Message: Hi Nigel, excuse me for not posting as planned this weekend. back to you early after next weekend about the four points ect. by the way, Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 15:09:33 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: The 'US' cult Message: I think American ex-premies should be indignant about that and not fall for the cult like patriotic brain washing that they have been victim to from birth. God saves us all from the 'US' cult !! Are you serious, Mel? Who is the leader of the US cult? How does our 'patriotic brainwashing' explain the differences of opinions about our country as evidenced below in posts between Mike and JW? Did you read JW's posts? He doesn't sound brainwashed to me. Most Americans I know have very different opinions about politics, religion, and almost everything you can imagine. I can understand how you could be pissed off at the US and disagree with the US politics and actions. I am very glad I live in America, but I do not always agree with the actions the government takes. When you call us a cult...well, it is just amusing;) G-day, mate! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 10:44:47 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: VP Subject: An ex- 'US' cult member Message: At last...... an 'ex-US Cult' and an Ex-premie all rolled into one. Of course, I know there are alot of Americans who are not 'cult' members, but nationalism is pretty heady stuff especially when this intoxication is added to by being a citizen of 'the greatest country on Earth'. Really, as you have probably guessed, I'm trying to flush out nationalistic thinking and conditioning, because in my opinion they are very similar to cult thinking, certainly a lot more ingrained and subtle. And observing Jim's tactics gave me some ideas........ Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 17:41:44 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: You misuse the word Message: Mel, This is tiresome. As a current cult member you obviously have no appreciation for the real connotations of the word, 'cult'. Instead, as is so often the case with people of your, ahem, delicate condition, you bandy the word about all wrongly. I won't even begin to detail the many ways the word's misapplied. I'll leave that to you to figure out. Besides, I don't want to distract you from my other question which, as you know, I posted as 'No you don't!'. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 05:25:31 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: The last word Message: Jim Lets not split hairs about the use of a word, you and others around here know EXACTLY what my meaning is in the context of the above debate, so don't act dumb. By the way, what cult are you alleging I belong to, I'm certainly not aware of my membership to any cult. If this is another 'Jim' attempt to have the last word, it's pretty pathetic, mate. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 14:40:15 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: Wrong, Jose Message: Doesn't work that way, Mel. You simply can't use words willy-nilly any which way you want. And your cult? Why Daughters of the Revolution, of course. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Wed, Aug 26, 1998 at 06:06:27 (EDT)
From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Wrong, Jose Message: Thanks for the laugh...... : )> Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Tues, Aug 25, 1998 at 20:29:56 (EDT)
From: VP Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: The last word Message: Hi, Mel This came from the Webster's dictionary on the internet: Cult Cult (k?lt) n .[F. culte, L. cultus care, culture, fr. colere to cultivate. Cf. Cultus.] 1. Attentive care; homage; worship. Every one is convinced of the reality of a better self, and of. thecult or homage which is due to it. Shaftesbury. 2. A system of religious belief and worship. That which was the religion of Moses is the ceremonial or cult of the religion of Christ. Coleridge. I'm sure there are more updated versions of this definition. The connotation IS a bit different than this denotation. The connotation is more negative, IMHO. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 13:09:59 (EDT)
From: Check the new Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Satgurus' Photo Gallery Message: plenty of wonderful pictures of them at: Photo Gallery on my website , + Satpalji's official biography and sing m's praises at his feet (Lotus Feet picture) ! At His Feet Jean-Michel Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 18:37:14 (EDT)
From: Selene Email: None To: Check the new Subject: Satgurus' Photo Gallery Message: What a collection! I keep thinking I am looking at mug shots or pics of the mob 'family'. How could we have been so dumb? It's funny though sort of. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 1998 at 19:27:23 (EDT)
From: Laura Email: None To: Check the new Subject: Satgurus' Photo Gallery Message: I remmeber this type of photo from the Premwar ashram. Pictures of previous Satgurus lined the walls of the main meditation room. I thought it was so holy, couldn't believe my extreme fortune. And also remember wondering why the rest of the world didn't know about satgurus, how there was always one around for those of us sincere enough and worthy enough to receive Knowledge. I also rememember looking for a picture of Jesus in the line of Satgurus but never finding it. Why did I want to see Jesus in this line? Because gmj was always comparing himself to jesus. He told us to read a book called The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ. I think the book helped us (New York premies anyway) to validate gmj. Anyone remember this book? It talks about word and name as if they know what it is, and also talks about jesus having a master who gave him knowledge. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 03:40:41 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Laura Subject: Photo Gallery improved Message: It looks like you guys like those old pictures! I've reduced the pictures' files size using jpg instead of gif. The pages load much faster as you'll see. I have some more in store, wait wait wait .... Young Lord with crown and krishna outfit, you'll love them, and a rare one of Mataji ! can you believe it? Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 13:33:40 (EDT)
From: Jim Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Where's the permanent link? Message: Your pages should be permanently linked to thios site so that people can easily and consistently find all your stuff without any difficulty. I mean, OBVIOUSLY. Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sat, Aug 22, 1998 at 16:34:49 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Jim Subject: Heart link obviously! Message: with all my exes friends !!! I'm sure something is going to manifest ! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 01:57:56 (EDT)
From: Judith Email: None To: Laura Subject: Satgurus' Photo Gallery Message: Dear Laura Thanks for mentioning the Aquarian Bible, you are breaking through more layers of denial in me. I was quoted and told parts of that text when I was told about Maharaji (about 5 years ago). Later, I thought that premie must have been a bit nuts (just quietly). I had no idea it was part of 'the scene'. So that's why he was so sure about it. And, he was a bit touched. And very loyal. He told me the army who crossed the red sea all had Knowledge (one of those biblical wars anyway). I asked why, if they had Knowledge they would want to fight. He said it was like a holy war. Oh boy, how confusing and confused the mind can be. I'm sure for a lot of religious fantatics that illiteracy and lack of education must contribute to them being susceptible to certain belief systems. It's just ignorance, isn't it? And to assume that we can't learn anything by studying others who have already struggled with the same problems we all struggle with is just foolishness IMO. I was thinking today that in no way does Maharaji address how to live in this world on a day to day basis. And that is the hardest thing of all to do, and in the end that's all there is; the spirit inside is safe and warm, generally; it's the mind and the heart that have such a tough struggle! That's what I think! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 02:52:35 (EDT)
From: TD Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Satgurus' Photo Gallery Message: Thanks very much for this JM! Blows me away, especially that photo of the Big M. Why, oh why, had I never seen photos like this or read/heard Arti? Does anybody know which song is the revised Arti? I've got all the CDs... I feel like getting postcards of them all and standing outside an aspirant event in the carpark and handing them out to aspirants... Thanks again, TD Return to Index -:- Top of Index |
Date: Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 06:47:25 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: TD Subject: Satgurus' Photo Gallery Message: As it looks like you like it, I'll have a special gallery dedicated to Krishna crowns aaaaaand outfits in a few days. Hold your breath, you'll be surprised!! Return to Index -:- Top of Index |