Jean-Michel -:- First glimpse on a major archeological discovery ! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:29:26 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- Zut Alors. Ou sont mes papiers? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:08:20 (GMT)

__ __ Jean-Michel -:- Ok, I confess I've stolen all your illegal tapes -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 11:24:43 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- Makes me wonder about Satpal then -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:36:05 (GMT)

__ __ Nigel -:- Hindi speaker - how about 'Ratty Ji'? - UK Mole? -:- Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 10:41:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Hey, UK Mole?????? (Or are there any Indian exes?) -:- Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 21:03:29 (GMT)

__ __ SB -:- Makes me wonder about Satpal then -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:46:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Makes me wonder about Satpal then -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:52:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ G -:- How were Prem and Satpal shown the techniques? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:13:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- The truth is that 'k and the 4 techniques' are His -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 09:00:55 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- The truth is that 'k and the 4 techniques' are His -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:47:28 (GMT)

__ Brian -:- First glimpse on a major archeological discovery ! -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:02:59 (GMT)

__ __ Happy -:- a guess -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:08:48 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- another guess -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:39:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Happy -:- re: another guess -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:14:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- re: re: another guess -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:45:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- more guesses -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 19:06:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Anon -:- more guesses -:- Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 09:05:35 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB -:- Radhasoami -:- Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 17:29:30 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- re: -:- Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 12:20:53 (GMT)

kmdarling -:- IF I DON'T REMEMBER HOLY WATER WHAT ELSE... -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:15:23 (GMT)

__ Jean-Michel -:- Still owning some of this wierd stuff! Anybody? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:19:18 (GMT)

__ __ JB -:- Still owning some of this wierd stuff! Anybody? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:53:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- JB, did you see the light on saturday night? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:15:55 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- Water under the bridge. -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:16:20 (GMT)

__ Susan -:- IF I DON'T REMEMBER HOLY WATER WHAT ELSE... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:07:19 (GMT)

__ G -:- WHAT ELSE... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:22:18 (GMT)

__ __ Angry -:- WHAT ELSE.../This is really absurd -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 12:05:56 (GMT)

__ __ BJ -:- WHAT ELSE... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:07:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ mantis -:- WHAT ELSE... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 06:04:23 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ BJ -:- WHAT ELSE... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:03:24 (GMT)

__ __ __ G -:- Bog Prashad? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:15:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ BJ -:- Bog Prashad -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:11:52 (GMT)

The Birthday Goddess -:- Happy Birthday Jean-Michel ??? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:01:27 (GMT)

__ Robyn -:- Jean-Michel -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:15:45 (GMT)

__ __ Jean-Michel -:- Feeling sorry for fallen goddesses! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:20:16 (GMT)

__ AJW -:- Try Again Goddess. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:07:06 (GMT)

__ __ Robyn -:- Try Again Goddess. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:06:51 (GMT)

__ __ Ms K -:- Happy Birthday, Marianne? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:53:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ the birthday goddess :| -:- Happy Birthday, Marianne!!!!!!!!!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:10:32 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ AJW -:- Happy Birthday, Marianne!!!!!!!!!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:05:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Thanks to Everyone -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:33:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ cqg -:- Happy birthday ...why didn't you tell us? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 21:34:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Happy birthday ...why didn't you tell us? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 22:05:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Robyn -:- Thanks to Everyone -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:57:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- Happy birthday -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:21:01 (GMT)

Angry -:- It's All Fatso Ji's Fault! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:25:06 (GMT)

__ SB -:- It's All Fatso Ji's Fault! -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 05:02:34 (GMT)

__ Robyn -:- It's All Fatso Ji's Fault! -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:27:21 (GMT)

AJW -:- London Latvians Meeting Minutes. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:01:57 (GMT)

__ JHB -:- London Latvians Meeting Minutes. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 18:23:20 (GMT)

__ Robyn -:- London Latvians Meeting Minutes. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:22:14 (GMT)

__ __ AJW -:- London Latvians Meeting Minutes. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 15:47:56 (GMT)

__ __ __ Robyn -:- London Latvians Meeting Minutes. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 15:56:18 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ AJW -:- Goddess, we wouldn't have you any other way. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:16:14 (GMT)

__ Marianne -:- London Latvians Meeting Minutes. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:49:37 (GMT)

__ __ Jean-Michel -:- London Latvians Meeting` confession -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:53:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ cqg -:- How much for the negatives?...blewwwwwrrr -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 11:51:41 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ AJW -:- The negatives? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:01:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ cqg -:- Remind me not to do all the talking next time (nt) -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 19:38:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Remind me not to do all the talking next time -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 19:52:04 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ cqg -:- Wot me guv? It takes years of practise. -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:14:29 (GMT)

Jim -:- My own post on RE -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 22:51:04 (GMT)

__ ZZZ -:- Get Over Yourself -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:08:01 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Do I know you? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:55:08 (GMT)

__ Runamok -:- Clarification but oh what a bore -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 20:24:09 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Funny you should say that -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:27:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- How about this, Run? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:46:33 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Runamok -:- Do this on Bravenet or not at all -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 01:11:05 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Why? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 01:37:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Runamok -:- Why? People object to the use of this forum. -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:04:49 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Shut up, you hypocrite -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:52:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cqg -:- I really DON'T want to take sides... but ... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:12:03 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I really DON'T want to take sides... but ... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:23:58 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cqg -:- I really DON'T want to take sides... but ... -:- Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 20:42:27 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Just answer this, Run? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 01:59:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- And where were YOU then, Katie???????? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:53:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ VP -:- Some LONG winded thoughts -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:01:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I'm sick, nothing better to do, so here goes -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:41:51 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- The Sopranos are over, so here goes -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:23:26 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- Correction before going to the basement again -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 05:38:18 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What I want? I want to sleep with your wife -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:34:07 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- You'd like her, she's a tall blonde -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:51:06 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You'd like her, she's a tall blonde -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:53:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- Romance cancelled on account of tornado -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 05:25:30 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- A Great Post, VP!!! -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:35:24 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ A Customer -:- Thanks VP -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:28:28 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- Thanks A Customer -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 13:16:09 (GMT)

__ Powerman -:- My own post on RE -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:49:51 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- My own post on RE -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:53:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ Powerman -:- My own post on RE -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:03:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jim -:- My own post on RE -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:23:10 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- I've had to rename my post on RE -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:11:25 (GMT)

__ __ Mr D -:- Time to call it a day -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:10:21 (GMT)

__ __ __ Selene -:- Time to call it a day -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 03:11:10 (GMT)

__ __ __ retired warhorse -:- Time to call it a day -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:02:30 (GMT)

__ __ __ michael -:- what the? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:39:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mr D -:- what the? Uh??? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:51:56 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- Holy Cow! They blocked me, What a surprise. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:37:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ hey! -:- Holy Cow! They blocked me, What a surprise. -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 03:32:00 (GMT)

michael -:- a little about why I bother to read this stuff -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 18:47:56 (GMT)

__ cqg -:- a little about why I bother to read this stuff -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:40:17 (GMT)

__ __ michael -:- singing songs and carrying signs... -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:51:22 (GMT)

__ __ __ cqg -:- FunADmental??? -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:29:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ michael -:- FunADmental??? -:- Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 02:34:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ Helen -:- Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 23:42:38 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ VP -:- Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 18:21:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:51:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Robyn -:- Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 13:28:36 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- V-D Day greetings -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:42:25 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ BJ -:- Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:21:53 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:16:58 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Little Yiddish Grandma -:- Little Yiddish Grandma's thoughts of the day -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:41:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ micahel -:- Little Yiddish Grandma's thoughts of the day -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:40:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Shalom, Grandma! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:48:00 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ LYG -:- Shalom, Grandma! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:06:12 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ BJ -:- Shalom, Grandma! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:32:20 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Ms. K -:- LOL, LYG! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:54:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ michael -:- named my daughter Shrisada! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:11:50 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Minnesota Housewife -:- Well know, Shoshanna is a fine name -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:48:34 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Robyn -:- Well know, Shoshanna is a fine name -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 13:40:11 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JB formerly BJ -:- Well know, Shoshanna is a fine name -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:57:18 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- Can your husband teach me to ice fish? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 18:15:52 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Minnesota Housewife -:- Can your husband teach me to ice fish? -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:02:16 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ VP -:- Oh, god I need a drink -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:54:43 (GMT)

Jerry -:- Jim the Intimidator -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 17:59:49 (GMT)

__ Scott T. -:- Talk to the foot -:- Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 06:29:01 (GMT)

__ Testing -:- testing (nt) -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:09:58 (GMT)

__ Jim -:- Jerry the Impaler -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 18:43:14 (GMT)

__ __ Jerry -:- Jerry the Impaler -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:31:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- For Jerry the Impaler and Sir David ONLY -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:56:59 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- You're right -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 21:42:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- No, YOU'RE right -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 22:23:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- No, YOU'RE right -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 23:26:24 (GMT)

__ __ Sir Dave -:- I'm not Anglo-Saxon -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:08:40 (GMT)

__ __ __ Jim -:- Reader's Digest version for David -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:39:47 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Reader's Digest answer for Jim -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:53:31 (GMT)

__ __ __ Sir Dave again -:- Mind you, Jim... -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:33:15 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ Mu -:- a 'real buddhist' just wouldn't care :-) -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 20:20:01 (GMT)

__ __ michael -:- Jerry the Impaler and Jim the Reamer! -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:01:19 (GMT)

__ __ __ Mike -:- Mike, the idiot! (this Mike, not you michael :-) -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:09:29 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ michael -:- who me? i idiot too! :-) -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:28:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ Mike -:- YES and YES.... Shannon was hot! -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:45:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ michael -:- YES and YES.... Shannon was hot! -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 20:06:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sister Mary Elizabeth -:- Gird thy loins with the word of God!! -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 23:15:37 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Satan's little soldier -:- I'm sorry sister..... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:33:08 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ michael -:- Gird thy loins with the word of God!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:15:17 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sister M.E. -:- I will whack you w/my ruler!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:56:24 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ michael -:- I will whack you w/my ruler!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 04:30:39 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sister M.E. -:- I will whack you w/my ruler!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:00:43 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ meeky -:- I will whack you w/my ruler!! -:- Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:43:01 (GMT)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cqg -:- How much to rule me with your whacker? (nt) -:- Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 18:56:04 (GMT)

la-ex -:- press packet from jw/jean-michel -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 17:11:53 (GMT)

__ lox -:- press packet from jw/jean-michel -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:22:54 (GMT)

__ __ Trixie Starlight -:- LOX! When I Lap Dance you are supposed to..... -:- Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:58:18 (GMT)

__ la ex to la ex - Over! -:- press packet from jw/jean-michel -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 18:58:38 (GMT)

__ __ Jim -:- now THAT's funny! -:- Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:09:12 (GMT)

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:29:26 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Everyone Subject: First glimpse on a major archeological discovery ! Message:

Thanks to Anth-the-archivist, I now have a very precious old Indian booklet published by DLM in he early 60s. This booklet named ‘Antidote to Nuclear Bombs’ has been saved by him some 20 years ago in the ruins of the Unity Schools’ Divine Library. Anth was not aware of the value of this booklet’s content. I’ve just spent 3 hours deciphering this stuff, and I’ve come to the conclusion that at that time, Shri Hans was not mentioning ‘4 techniques’ anywhere in his teachings. He was only talking about Shabd Brahm, like all the Radhasoami gurus. Which confirms the rumour saying that the famous ‘knowledge’ and its ‘4 techniques’ is something that appeared in the late 60s or early 70s, as those are clearly mentioned in DLM’s literature of that time. A very important question now arises: Prempal was very young at that time, and I don’t believe that the ‘4 techniques’ package has been initiated by him. The question is: who’s decision was it to make this package ? This will be a very exciting issue to investigate, and I'm sure we'll get the answer to that important question in a near future. The recent past shows that it's been only a matter of time and research to find all the stuff we've already found on our ex-master well hidden past. We'll find answers to that new question. Of course the whole document will be available online in a few days. Please be patient. It's not in a good shape, I don't know if you can imagine what bad Indian paper looks like after almost 40 years, including 20 years in Anth's dusty 'archives'!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:08:20 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Zut Alors. Ou sont mes papiers? Message:

So that's where my library disappeared to at the weekend. I thought your bag was heavier when you left. All it contained was wine when you arrived, and we drank all that. I thought one of my kids had climbed in to stow away to Paris- but it turned out to be my precious library of cult dirt. Cultbuster UKs letter (above) would be a worthy addition to your site, if you can find a place for it. There's a can of worms wriggling around with that name change stuff. Take care abientot Anton le Parisien/Latvian/Irish/English/Citizen of the World (got there in the end).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 11:24:43 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: AJW Subject: Ok, I confess I've stolen all your illegal tapes Message:

of Rawat's conferences. You shouldn't have them, they shouldn't even exist ! I've burned them and thrown them out of the window in the train taking me back to France ....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:36:05 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jean-Michel Subject: Makes me wonder about Satpal then Message:

JM, This raises questions, doesn't it, about whether Satpal, himself, has maintainted the four-technique recipe. Why would he if he's back in India, doing the Indian thing? One might expect that that plus his interest in distancing himself from Prempal might have driven Satpal back into focusing on Shabd Brahm and the more traditional Radhasoami bullshit. I think that if any of that were true, it would be helpful to isolate m's 'ageless wisdom' as a fleeting, arbitrary mix of Indian spiritual 'allsorts'. Again, too bad no one hear speaks Hindi. Satpal's interviews are just waiting to be checked out over on his web site.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 10:41:47 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Jim Subject: Hindi speaker - how about 'Ratty Ji'? - UK Mole? Message:

Remember the (presumably) Indian guy, Ratty Ji, who gatecrashed Satpal's gig in Bolton, UK, about eighteen months ago? Took those photos, and was going to do some translations. It was 'UK Mole' who posted to the forum about it. (I think both merry pranksters must live fairly close to me but I don't have a clue who or where they are.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 21:03:29 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Nigel Subject: Hey, UK Mole?????? (Or are there any Indian exes?) Message:

Yes, that's right. But we never saw the translations, did we? Doesn't the entire subcontinent and/or Indo-UK community have a single ex who speaks Hindi? I'd love to hear how Satpal sells it now.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:46:16 (GMT) From: SB Email: None To: Jim Subject: Makes me wonder about Satpal then Message:

Can it be printed from Satpal's site? Or the interview is just audio? If we can get it printed, I know somebody who can translate it for us. Can't look myself right now. can you answer? S

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:52:16 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: SB Subject: Makes me wonder about Satpal then Message:

It's a long Real Player movie clip. Actually, there are several clips there, two of him being interviewed and the rest of his wife, I think, and some other 'mahatma's. All in Hindi.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:13:25 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: Jim Subject: How were Prem and Satpal shown the techniques? Message:

I wonder how Prem and his brothers were shown the technique(s). Prem claims that his father showed them when Prem was 6, right? Prem is 42 now, so that would have been around 1964. Here's a question, how do you think the various forms of meditation evolved? I mean that as a serious question. I wonder if they started off in a more down-to-earth form, e.g. someone followed their breath and it calmed them down (and maybe made them more aware of their consciousness, which I think occurs naturally when one is calm vs frenzied). They might have then been spiritualized, conceptualized, glamorized, and made more extreme. I found some links about the 'kechari mudra' or 'nectar technique', it seems to be a yoga position. Someone posted that there was a bai would didn't show it. Years later, Prem radically changed it. Suspicious. Shortly before 'receiving Knowledge', I read 'Be Here Now' and got the idea that I should be able to experience 'God' as a inner divine equivalent of the four senses of sight, hearing, taste, and touch. I wonder if the mahatmas knew about this book. Maybe that sounds too conspiratorial, I don't know, could have been just the general fad going on. I wonder, if bats had a Guru (the Batguru), would they be shown 'divine sonar'? Here's one link about the kechari mudra, it a very way out there. Here's another link about it. Yoga may have evolved from mere healthy stretching to a more extreme and conceptualized form. What do you think? Maybe people just don't know when to leave well enough alone.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 09:00:55 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: G Subject: The truth is that 'k and the 4 techniques' are His Message:

Hey G ! We've already gathered quite a bibliograpy on this very interesting issue. Maybe you should check this on my website: The Meditation Techniques according to ancient Hindu Scriptures The closest package I've found is Mishio Kushi's (another cult by the way) 12 meditation techniques package. His 12 techniques include Rawat's 4 techniques. There is a very liklely scenario: the Rawats got their 1st western disciples in India in the 60s. Maybe one of them had been M. Kushi's disciple, and suggested to mataji or prempal (or maybe even hans himself) to package shabd brahm this way for the westerners. The way 'shabd brahm' is taught (and has been for more than a century) to Indians is something very foreign to westerners. The 'Five Names' and the whole theory that goes along with this is very much foreign to western culture. Hans was definitely VERY ambitious, and I have no doubt he has been able to try this. No doubt 'knowledge' and the 'four techniques' (patent pending) are concepts invented by the Rawats, even though they very likely stole this from someone else !

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:47:28 (GMT) From: JB Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: The truth is that 'k and the 4 techniques' are His Message:

Jean-Michael, Somewhere alond time ago I found pictures of people doing the techs. Color pictures even of a cross section of the tongue in the proper position and all. I can't find it now. (I write things down now). Would you happen to know where that was? With easy instructions how to get there? Thank you, JB formerly BJ

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 00:02:59 (GMT) From: Brian Email: brian@tigerriver.com To: Jean-Michel Subject: First glimpse on a major archeological discovery ! Message:

Interesting stuff, JM. Wasn't there some guy posting here a while back that was an Indian devotee in the early years? Maybe he could shed some light on it. I remember hearing a story told by Fakiranand that Hans showed some guy the light technique on a bus once. (Said he could send him 'beyond 3 worlds'.) The literature that you have might only be stressing the breath technique due to it's target audience (whoever that was). I'm curious to see what you find out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:08:48 (GMT) From: Happy Email: None To: all Subject: a guess Message:

I have a copy of the 'antidote' booklet myself. It appears from Hans ji's various other papers that he stressed the 'Light technique' as much as the 'Word'. (He also called his mission the Divine Light Mission...) The Word technique, btw, is well-known all over India and sometimes referred to as the 'baby pranayama', due to its simplicity (for instance in the well-known book 'Why I am a Hindu', can't remember the author). It is also equal to the Word technique practised by the Sikhs (read Guru Nanak, for instance). He might have learned it from the Sikhs, or, in fact, anywhere. The 'Music', Hans ji must have picked up from the Radhasoamis. The kechari mudra again from somewhere else, until now unknown source. Kechari is usually considered the most 'secret' of all techniques. My more or less educated guess at this moment: Hans Ji was the one who made up the 4 technique package. Probably techniques that he himself liked, but picked up from different sources. Not from one 'guru' of his. And, actually quite smart of him to teach several meditation techniques rather than for instance just a mantra. Greater chance that people would find at least one or two techniques that they liked. One thing I sometimes wondered: Hans Ji admired Kabir and quoted him often. Maybe he picked these four in order to make his package remind of Kabir, who talked about the Word, Light, Nectar, and Music? It seems almost undisputable that there has been no direct lineage between them, but he made it appear that way?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:39:39 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Happy Subject: another guess Message:

Hans was teaching shabd (light) and nad (music) like the other Radhasoami gurus, and also the Naam (or sat-nam, panch naam, so-ham) like them too. There is nothing different in this booklet from the other Radhasoami gurus' teachings and literature. Do you agree with me? I own one of Kirpals books, and I think I can find equivalents in Kirpal's book to anything he says reg meditation. My guess is that the whole concept was a bit difficult to grasp for westerners, and he made 3 techniques out of this, adding khechari mudra, which is definitely his specificity (3 + 1 = 4). I consider that technique a good help (as a yoga technique) focussing one's mind to meditate. Can we credit this to Mr Rawat (father or son?). But maybe he just stole it from Mishio Kushi (I like that idea) ....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:14:11 (GMT) From: Happy Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: re: another guess Message:

Yes, I always thought he got the 'Word' or Naam, and the Shabd Brahman ('Sound' or 'Music') from the Radhasoamis, since they teach them, I wasn't sure whether they taught the 'Light' too, but it sounds reasonable. (However, remember the Singh Rawat family's eagerness to establish a lineage to Totapuri...) The Word technique is really all over India, I'll see if I find some nice quotes for your site, I have the 'Why I am A Hindu' book somewhere around. There's a nice, long description of the technique in it. Did you know by the way that Paul Twitchell, the founder of Eckankar, was a disciple ot Kirpal Singh, too? They got into a dispute later on, but Twitchell actually visited him and wrote letters to him referring to him as his 'master'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:45:38 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Happy Subject: re: re: another guess Message:

Yes, I've read lots of stuff on this. And you'll find a good analysis on this on my website BTW. From what I understand of the original Radhasoami initiation, Shabd has 2 aspects (light and sound). Then Naam is taught at another moment during the initiation session. Hans did split the initiation in 3 techniques at some point, and added the 4th one. I'll try to illustrate this booklet's content making a parallel with what Kirpal says in his books. There is nothing to indicate any difference from Kirpal's teachings at that time. And then you have this other booklet dated 1970 (Satgurudev Shri blabla) where 'knowledge' and '4 techniques' are clearly mentioned. My opinion is that it's very likely that some 'change' happened in-between. If you read what Sitaram said, he also mentioned DLM packaging its teachings a certain way for the westerners.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 19:06:00 (GMT) From: Happy Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: more guesses Message:

Your guesses are as good as mine, and digging like this, I guess sooner or later we'll find out when Hans Ji (if it was he, but I think so) put together the K4 package. Anyway, 'shabd(a)' literally means 'sound' in sanskrit, so it can't possibly include the light technique, I think. Rather, it may include both the music and word techniques, if anything. In shabd yoga or nada yoga (same thing), you stick your thumbs into your ears, using a yoga-danda as support (also called a hamsa-danda, danda means literally 'staff', i.e. a yoga-danda is what premies used to call a beragon), and listen to whatever sounds you hear. Sounds familiar...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 09:05:35 (GMT) From: Anon Email: None To: Happy Subject: more guesses Message:

Don't forget that Radhasoami scholar David Lane commented that Shri Hans Ji was not only a follower of Sarupanand (Advait Mat lineage) but also 'was initiated by Sawan Singh' who was a very famous Radhasoami Master at that time. Their techniques included the Light, Music and Name. They even taught that, during the music technique, initiates should only listen to sound coming from the right. This was of course something that was taught by Shri Hans and Maharaji. I was instructed in this detail by Mahatama Khrishnasucanand in my Knowledge session in 1974. A 'must-read' on this subject is Radhasoami Reality by Mark Jurgensmeyer, ISBN 0-691-01092-7 (pbk). It is quite the most complete, recent study of the movement.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 17:29:30 (GMT) From: JB Email: None To: Anon Subject: Radhasoami Message:

You're so informative pls continue to contribute. JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 12:20:53 (GMT) From: Happy Email: None To: Anon Subject: re: Message:

Thanks for the suggestion - I'll try to get hold on the book.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:15:23 (GMT) From: kmdarling Email: darlingwave@aol.com To: Everyone Subject: IF I DON'T REMEMBER HOLY WATER WHAT ELSE... Message:

DON'T I REMEMBER? I've started a new thread to bring this fascinating subject back into the active section (whence it was pushed by less-than-fascinating long arguments!). I just read a thread about Holy Water, charanamrit. To refresh your memory, ashrams or good travelling premies would have a bottle of water that had had HIS feet dipped in it. We would then 'concentrate' it by diluting it and take a sip or a spray after Arti. Like several other exes who posted, I had completely forgotten about this daily ritual despite six years in ashrams and six more years going to satsang every night. How could I have forgotten? What else went on that I have blocked? Did we eat nose-hair clippings? Refresh our complexions with homeopathically potentiated MJ sweat? If you were a premie in the charanamrit era, did you remember about it before reading this? If not, be afraid, be very afraid! Love Kathryn Darling

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:19:18 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: kmdarling Subject: Still owning some of this wierd stuff! Anybody? Message:

Well I guess I'm the holiest among the exes.... There lies my power! I guess i'll have to store it in a secure place. Well, I have a good door, and an alarm system ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:53:32 (GMT) From: JB Email: None To: Jean-Michel Subject: Still owning some of this wierd stuff! Anybody? Message:

Well, I'd be into Christian relics if there were any around I could get my hands on. Did you hear they're going to try and canonize Pope John XXIII in Sept. Someone (nuns) put a small peice of the sheet he died on on a fellow sister very ill and after a vision of the pope saying she'd be alright she was big time instantly healed. Yes, I eat that stuff up. JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:15:55 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: JB Subject: JB, did you see the light on saturday night? Message:

after the k review? Too much Light? Or was it the Polish Vodka?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:16:20 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: kmdarling Subject: Water under the bridge. Message:

Hi, I remember when our boys were small, my wife occasionaly used to add charanamrit to the lentil soup. When the kids got a bit older and more sussed, they used to remind us about it at really embarassing times, like when someone was round for dinner of something, 'Mum, didn't you used to put Guru Mariachi's bath water in our dinner?' Cringe cringe glow red deny everything run and hide, come out when everyone's forgotten again (Kathryn, why did you have to remember? Isn't it all water under the bridge now. I'll feel uneasy all morning now. Maybe I should go and drink a teaspoon of tap water for old times sake.) Anth the drank so much of the stuff if I'm not pure by now it doesn't work. (It doesn't work by the way.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:07:19 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: kmdarling Subject: IF I DON'T REMEMBER HOLY WATER WHAT ELSE... Message:

It is strange. The best way to remember this stuff I think is to go to JM's site to the songs section. Music and smells seem to evoke memories like nothing else. I am fascinated by my minds ability to remember songs I have not heard for 20 years. Don't you just love to be free to use the word mind when appropriate. Do you think the word is still taboo among premies? Do you think they read it and snicker ' all those ex's use their minds all right' ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:22:18 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: kmdarling Subject: WHAT ELSE... Message:

Prashad, or blessed food, given out after darshan, was one thing. I remember after a program, thinking about the flowers around the stage, how they must have been infused with 'His' vibe, just from being around 'Him'. If I remember right, premies would want to keep them as souveniers (sp?). Also, getting a letter that 'He' signed. It was as if it were made of gold. Basically anything he touched, excluding premies, was cherished as holy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 12:05:56 (GMT) From: Angry Email: None To: G Subject: WHAT ELSE.../This is really absurd Message:

I know someone who smokes cigarettes who was given a used cigarette holder(used by Maha)for their birthday. Needless to say this premie was blissed out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:07:47 (GMT) From: BJ Email: None To: G Subject: WHAT ELSE... Message:

Bog Prashad - Still have quite abit from a back stage program I think may have been in Baltimore in early 80's. Did back stage security all night. Have it in a baby food jar still. Also pepples from his helicopter pad that he walked on. The best was drinking tea from the pakaki flowers fr his lay {garland thing} fr the Krishna days and him dancing. Other things too but might give my identity away. BJ

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 06:04:23 (GMT) From: mantis Email: None To: BJ Subject: WHAT ELSE... Message:

open your mouth and close your eyes - guru's gonna give you a big surprise!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:03:24 (GMT) From: BJ Email: None To: mantis Subject: WHAT ELSE... Message:

Sounds like receiving communion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:15:16 (GMT) From: G Email: None To: BJ Subject: Bog Prashad? Message:

What is Bog Prashad and what are pakaki flowers?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:11:52 (GMT) From: BJ Email: None To: G Subject: Bog Prashad Message:

Oh, sorry. As I recall Bog Prashad - pronounced w/ long o - prob sp wrong,- was something from his own plate - food or drink - like from his glass even. Pakaki flowers were the little white flowers the Hawaiin premies sent to make his 'mala' (now I remember the name) A freinf got some flowers afterwards and went around the ashram very late at night waking up certain people she thought could appreaciate what it was. I got high for sure. Did I mention at class night in high school when others were getting awards for most likely to succeed I got an abstract painting for being the most unusual? No,huh? BJ

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:01:27 (GMT) From: The Birthday Goddess Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Happy Birthday Jean-Michel ??? Message:

Dear JM, Read below, my post to Anth regarding my poor performance in my goddess duties. I am not even sure it is your birthday but have made a feeble educated guess! God knows I don't want you and Anth to turn into mice before I ever get the chance to meet you! I am not all that fond of mice! :) Last nights festivities were a great way to celebrate I am sure. I am not so into the m thing as you may realize but I think you are a kind and good man and Happy Birthday to you! If it isn't your b-day please pass this along to it's rightful owner! :) If I am to keep this postion I am going to need help, obviously! So could you all tell me when your birthdays are and or notify me BEFORE the big day so I can make it look good and planned! :) Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:15:45 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: The Birthday Goddess Subject: Jean-Michel Message:

Dear JM, Well be honnored as the second receipient of an official Un-birthday! Otherwise and forthwit to be known as your internet birthday! Just another date for me to forget!!! I am just now removing my shopping list for my drive home from work, from my bra where I will record your internet birthday, should we take bets wether I will remember it a year from now!! If I don't lose the list when I go tanning today it just might work! :) Sour cream JM's unbirthday...Feb, 13th Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:20:16 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Feeling sorry for fallen goddesses! Message:

I won't turn you into mice, merely give you a good k review, if we first share some good Polish Honey Vodka. I've showed the light to 3 exes at the same time yesterday night, they had a wonderful experience, and I think next time I'll try 4 at the same time. My birthday is on april 4th, and I intend to have an international party in Paris for this very occasion. I'll give more details in the future.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:07:06 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: The Birthday Goddess Subject: Try Again Goddess. Message:

You are obviously vibrating at such a high frequency that us lowly beings are out of synch with your divine tremors that they are going right over our heads and causing kinks in the birthday/time/lawyer continum. In you mercy, you have given Jean-Michel an internet birthday too, increase the power and aim the birthday bolt at an aeroplane heading towards Southern Ireland. Antonia the Birthday Auditor.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:06:51 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: AJW Subject: Try Again Goddess. Message:

Dear Antonia, Shit! How can I do my work with that melted goddess gown! Don't think I am just spacing out my birthday duties, imagine this is my whole life!!! I have become someone who has stacks of papers, unopened mail, tax forms all over, in bags and piles. It is a mess! I need all the help I can get! So, if you don't mind my asking why would you and JM, and no one else become mice if I didn't get this right? At least the birthday girl in en route and this will be all sorted out, except for the permanence of the error, recorded forever here in print! :| Love, Robyn the fallen goddess, does that make me a she-devil

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:53:00 (GMT) From: Ms K Email: None To: AJW Subject: Happy Birthday, Marianne? Message:

I'm guessing, but Anth's given so many hints that I think I'm right. So glad Brian and I got to talk to some of you last night: Marianne, of course (you go, girl! - even when you weren't on the phone, I could hear you over the bar noise!), J-M (hope you like the vodka as much this morning), Anth, and JHB (really good finally getting to talk to both of you.) We're coming over there soon. It sounds like too much fun to miss. I have been in London once, but it was for Guru Puja 1973, so you can guess how much I actually saw :). Oh yeah... Happy Birthday Marianne! Love, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:10:32 (GMT) From: the birthday goddess :| Email: None To: Ms K Subject: Happy Birthday, Marianne!!!!!!!!!! Message:

Dear Marianne, Well now let's say it with confidence! HAPPY BIRTHDAY MARIANNE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a way to celebrate your Birthday!!! Hope you weren't to hung over getting on the plane so early! Hope you didn't have to make use of that barf bag so graciously supplied to each flying passenger! Love ya, Roybn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:05:11 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Happy Birthday, Marianne!!!!!!!!!! Message:

Happy Birthday Marianne, Hope you got home OK. Thanks for a great night. Anth (don't forget, money in my account by Wednesday or the photos are up on the net).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:33:52 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: AJW, |Robyn, Ms K Subject: Thanks to Everyone Message:

My birthday was yesterday, sunday the 13th. Thank you all for the birthday wishes. John started giving me free wine around 12:30 am after I announced my birthday, so I got a very early start on celebrating -- as if I needed that last 3 or 4 or 5 glasses.... |Thank you, John. Attending Latvian night for part of my birthday was just about the best gift I could have gotten. Yes, it was a rowdy night. CQG was the best behaved of all of us, right, Chris? Anth really got rid of the Spanish woman for John (see thread below). There was lots of talk, lots of laughter, and a fecking grand time had by all. Anth, J-M and I went back to Anth's and finished off the fabulous Indian food Anth had prepared for dinner. I put my bowl down, put my head on the couch and heard the fellas tiptoe out. They graciously escorted me to the train which took me to Stanstedt airport, then returned me to Ireland. My husband is headed to London at the end of the month, to retrace my footsteps, before arriving in Cork. The fellas (& an unnamed girl) have promised to care for him when he arrives. He's a bit wilder than I am! Thanks Nigel, Lee & Charlie & kids, Anth & you know who, J-M, Chris, John, for one of the most memorable weekends of my life. Love you all, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 21:34:38 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: Marianne and Jean Michel Subject: Happy birthday ...why didn't you tell us? Message:

Happy birthday, you and JM, why didn't you tell us? I know, it's 'cos you wouldn't have had to buy your own rounds. P.S. What Spanish woman? (you don't mean the one on the banknotes do you?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 22:05:15 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: cqg Subject: Happy birthday ...why didn't you tell us? Message:

Chris, Marianne DID tell us, and we all bought her drinks, don't you remember? J-M didn't tell us because it wasn't his birthday - you haven't been paying attention again. John. PS. I don't believe your story about Sasha being ticklish.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:57:08 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Thanks to Everyone Message:

Dear Marianne, Glad you had a great weekend and that it was your b-day too! What a celebration! I wouldn't have imagined it could be any less! Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:21:01 (GMT) From: Happy Email: None To: Marianne Subject: Happy birthday Message:

Happy birthday to you, Marianne! It seems you all had a very exceptional get-together in the Latvian pub ... I feel envious. And I could need a good k review! The last one I had was by the gooroo, and it was not so god. I mean, good.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:25:06 (GMT) From: Angry Email: None To: Everyone Subject: It's All Fatso Ji's Fault! Message:

I've just completed a historical look at this forum. My conclusion is simple. The internal bickering here is at its worst when the former Lord of the Universe is not doing his job. It appears his divine plan is to just be a fat greasy fellow and only play guru on tv as needed by his bank account. I had a dream recently that he had a major program in the West and everyone in the crowd woke up finally. They all started chanting, 'Crazy Prem!, Crazy Prem!' If only....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 05:02:34 (GMT) From: SB Email: None To: Angry Subject: It's All Fatso Ji's Fault! Message:

What a good dream!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:27:21 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Angry Subject: It's All Fatso Ji's Fault! Message:

Dear Angry, Wouldn't it be nice if your dream was telling the future! :) Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:01:57 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Everyone Subject: London Latvians Meeting Minutes. Message:

Hi, Just to let you know that the London Latvians met last night, with special international guests. A most convivial time was had by all. I think it went something like this. Zelta, Zelta Zelta, Vanilla Vodka (REPEAT). The final touches were put to the plan to overthrow the cult and take over the world. Sometime after midnight, Brian and Kate phoned us up and we shouted things down the phone to them. Then Marianne phoned her husband, and we all shouted across the bar how young Marianne looked to him. Chris gave out the honoroury past their sell by date calendars. Then we drank a toast to Robyn. Then, the bar staff went home and left us the keys to the bar. Then we took in turns to be Latvian bar staff. Then, the highlight of the evening, Jean-Michel gave us all a knowledge review at 2.30 am. The we decided to call Robyn on the phone, but the communications co-ordinator couldn't find her number and John couldn't find the phone anymore anyway. Then John put us in a taxi and sent us all home. And we all lived happily ever after. Anth the Fuzzy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 18:23:20 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: AJW Subject: London Latvians Meeting Minutes. Message:

What a great day - Watching Leeds United beat Spurs, and then hearing that Manchester United had lost 3-0. Followed by a mad 3 hour dash down the M1 to London (about 200 miles) to meet these strange people. The funniest bit for me was when I was speaking to Brian on the phone at about midnight, and telling him that apart from the exes there were two small groups of Latvians in the bar. He replied that it was nice of us to allow Latvians to drink in the ex-premie bar:-) Thanks everyone for making it a very enjoyable and interesting evening! John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:22:14 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: AJW Subject: London Latvians Meeting Minutes. Message:

Dear Anth and all, I just read all the posts of those up and around, so far. I wish to god you had my number, damn! I talked to my friend in England, and ex also, last night and said if I ever get over there we'll have to go to the Latvian Culb, even asked him if he knew it! I told him when I thought of you all there I had a physical feeling in my heart, kind of like I use to have when I heard Steve Perry's voice. :) Just by meeting Marianne I felt somewhat closer to being there, maybe it's a psychic thing! :) Tried astroplaning but was grounded. :( I never ever got a k review either, could have used the pointers. :) Glad you had a good time, how could you not! :) Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 15:47:56 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Robyn Subject: London Latvians Meeting Minutes. Message:

Hi Robyn, We just saw Marianne off to the airport. (I'm getting worried about your neglect of your 'Goddess Duties', quick, check your book before her silver gown turns to rags and Jean-Michel and I turn back into mice). Anyway, it's been a really good weekend. It's great to meet up with what was once a three letter acronym, or double barrelled christian name. John,as always, was a fantastic host at the Latvian club. The sessions where they've given us the keys to the bar usually contain at least one person crashing through the limits of socially acceptable behaviour, in one or another, and he always deals with whatever crazy situation transpires with impeccable judgement and diplomacy, be it the arrival of royalty in the bar, or people who's feet have forgotten where the floor is or whatever. (You can plug me for the dirt in an email Robyn, but we've got pictures- which should be developed tomorrow, and if certain parties don't donate heavily the Latvian Hospital for Mentally Stressed Mammalian Pets, certain reputations could end up destroyed- if you get my drift.) So, next time Robyn, we'll have your phone number. You were conspicuous by your absence (As were Jethro and Hamzen. Where were you, you miserable middle-aged burnt-out ravers you? I can guess- and it's not a pretty picture.) Take care, Anth the Ricolaseemstohelpthehangover.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 15:56:18 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: AJW Subject: London Latvians Meeting Minutes. Message:

Dear Anth, Shit, car is running, I wanted to leave for work at 10! I sit here with coat and gloves on and with the woodstove blazing it isn't pleasant! :) I am addicted. I can't even find my god damned birthday book and was thinking I need to resign, don't you people think someone else would do a better job!!! :) Since I know your birthday is October 6th, it must be JM's so I'll just take a chance and post it before I go. My whole Birthday Goddess get up is a mess, the halo won't stay in place and the gown is full of stains and was hung to close to the wood stove and was aparently made of some sort of flamable material, I caught it before it went up in flames but it has a kind of melted, hard plastic quality to it now! Love, Robyn theifIhadaRicolamaybeI'dfeelbetter :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:16:14 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Goddess, we wouldn't have you any other way. Message:

...because we know it's all your divine game and you're just playing with us really. (Aaagh. I'm getting a flashback. Hang on a minute.) That's better. Now, where was I? Ah yes, Robyn, we love you just the way you are. You're our favorite Goddess. It doesn't matter if you get the birthdays wrong, it's all your lila to...(Oh no here I go again) Er, look, er, somethings come up, and er... I've gotta go...where am ?... who put those microphones in my hat?...how did my wife get the walls to bend in time to the music...why is that policeman knocking at my door...no...don't shoot...aaaagh............. Robyn, phew, I had some kind of blackout. Better go and lay down. anth the had as a matter. ps. have you wished Marianne happy birthday yet?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:49:37 (GMT) From: Marianne Email: None To: AJW Subject: London Latvians Meeting Minutes. Message:

I cannot improve on Anth's post. It is an entirely accurate report of our evening together. I declined the knowledge review however; since we know, as an attorney (Hi Powerman), I already know everything! What was really funny was that some guy showed up in the bar at around 2:30 am and said he was a criminal defense attorney from Wales. It turns out he's acquainted with a British attorney who does death row cases in Louisiana and is a friend of mine. Anth now suggests that this guy was actually the attorney for EV who showed up to listen to our plans for world domination. Love, Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:53:17 (GMT) From: Jean-Michel Email: None To: Marianne Subject: London Latvians Meeting` confession Message:

I gave a k review to exes at the same time ! 1 with my left hand, and 2 with my right hand !! And I`m having a hrd time with Anth`s british keybord .... More details tomorrow ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 11:51:41 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: Jean-Michel et al Subject: How much for the negatives?...blewwwwwrrr Message:

Honey-flavoured vodka, Porteris and lager WILL mix ; (but where do the bits of carrot come from?) ... until the next time.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:01:25 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: cqg Subject: The negatives? Message:

Hiya, Hows the hangover? The film is off to be developed tomorrow. Hopefully they'll be up and jpeged before you can say, '...no...that's not the lawyer who posts on the forum is it? She'll get into trouble for that. It looks very dangerous. And who's the fat long haired bloke standing on the table behind her, stripped down to his underwear, splashing beer everywhere and singing a song in his own version of made up Latvian? The one with the cartoon Buddha tattooed on his arse? No....didn't he used to teach Maharaji's children. Poor guy, he needs professional help. Ah.. how the mighty are fallen. Let that be a lesson to you premies. Jai Sat Chit Anand.' Have a good trip home. Your shoes, coat and shirt are still down by the river, where you left them. We managed to get rid of that Spanish woman who was trying to kill you, around 4 this morning. Fortunately they got the fire out themselves and the fire engine wasn't needed, and obviously, the building wasn't destroyed. We took the number plates off the car before the police arrived. And what do you want us to do with the weapons and that sack of £50 notes, with the Queen's head on both sides.? Anth the Your Secrets Are Safe With Me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 19:38:10 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: AJW Subject: Remind me not to do all the talking next time (nt) Message:

nt (honest!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 19:52:04 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: cqg Subject: Remind me not to do all the talking next time Message:

Chris, I did remind you but you said that's just the way you are....:-) Anyway, I heard a rumour about one of our party laughing alone in their bedroom after the festivities. Do you know anything about this? John

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:14:29 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: JHB Subject: Wot me guv? It takes years of practise. Message:

Wot me guv? It takes years of practise. (Sasha does tickle, doesn't she?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 22:51:04 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Everyone Subject: My own post on RE Message:

Just posted this on RE: I just thought I'd say hi seeing as how this is probably the only chance I'll get. Privacy rights don't exist in a vaccuum. While I recognize that anyone's entitled to meet with whomever they wish, whenever, however, all that, let's not forget that this forum is not exactly an autonomous entity. It exists as a subgroup of the regular forum and as a part of the entire, internet-based ex-premie community. If something said here bears on the name or reputation of someone in the ex community at large, I think the group's privacy rights are tempered by the rights of that person to defend himself, if need be. Ever since this forum's existed, Run has used it to slag me incessantly. As I've listed on F5, but as you can see even better if you just read his posts, pretty much at random, you'll see that he's advanced this nasty theory that I'm a bullying, cult leader, an abusive authority figure or cult-like proportions, a bad person who he's equated at various times to murderers, rapists, assassins, thugs, etc. My favorite post, which I couldn't find, was the one where he compared me to a Vietnam fighter pilot dropping napalm on little kids. Run has told one, bizarre story of his own valiant efforts to stand up to my evil ways, an effort that's only earned him more 'flames' which, you can see, he wears on his shoulder as badges of honour. And never, throughout any of his continuing diatribe, has anyone said one word in my defense. So, please, forgive me for thinking I had some right to defend myself. Ask yourselves if you'd have done anything different if you'd been villified so consistently in such extreme terms. I don't think any of you joined this particular group just to gossip about the other exes. Besides Run, I mean. I don't know exactly what you want to get out of this private conversation that you can't get on the forum but, yes, I realize, that's not my problem. But what is my problem, though, is allowing this kind of ugly gossip about me to go on and on in 'sworn secrecy'. I ask you, is that fair? I srue don' think so. What ever happened to the other principle, the one about a person's right to defend themself? For example, Run posted a lie about me here. He said I'd posted under a number of false names when I was blocked on F3. That, my good friends, is a lie. Now is it a good thing or not that I learned of that lie and can now respond? Maybe you don't care but I sure do. So, despite Run's encouragement that you all not hesitate to 'name names' here, I suggest you really think about some real, fair parameters for your private, confidential discussions. I also suggest you consider whether or not Run is the appropriate man for the job. I think he's amply demonstrated that he's not. He's got a very determined agenda that has nothing at all to do with the special issues that confront new escapees from the cult. That's my opinion, in any event.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:08:01 (GMT) From: ZZZ Email: None To: Jim Subject: Get Over Yourself Message:

Nobody cares! ZZZ

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:55:08 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: ZZZ Subject: Do I know you? Message:

Like I don't remember ever talking with a ZZZ before. Knew a ZZ back in highschool. And there's a XXX shop down the street. But ZZZ? Doesn't sound familiar. So are you someone I know? Someone whose opinion should mean anything at all to me?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 20:24:09 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Jim Subject: Clarification but oh what a bore Message:

Dear historians and forum researchers, Jim posted briefly on AG under other names. Katie outed him accidentally, thinking you wouldn't mind. I never considered it malicious on your part and never implied it was. This was when you had been blocked on F3. I forgot I had mentioned it, because the post bore no controversy (in fact it was to clarify that Jim doesn't post with pseudonyms- that it had only happened once).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:27:52 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Runamok Subject: Funny you should say that Message:

Nice to hear from you, Run. Okay, here's what actually happened. Brian and Katie blocked me from F3 because I expressed dissatisfaction with how they were handling the Joey/Mary/Barney mess. Brian warned me to say not a single further word about it on the page. I did and he blocked me. Anyway, he didn't block me for long. However, the whole thing left me with a bad taste in my mouth and I had no interest in posting here at all for some time. During my hiatus, though, someone emailed me -- or I found, I can't remember -- two articles about Jonathan Cainer (the popular English astrologer who started Enjoying the Last days of the Kult. I wanted to share them with you all but I didn't want to start posting again. So, what I did was post them anonymously with aboslutely no commentary. Katie, recognized my browser and made the point of saying 'hi, Jim.' That's what happened. Actually, when I said I'd never posted anonymously I'd completely forgotten about those two articles. Sure, they were posts, I won't quibble with that. I was wrong. Shoot me. It wasn't until I'd asked Laurie to confirm my own recollection that I'd never posted under an alias that she reminded me of those two posts. I guess I might have forgotten because I didn't actually say anything myself in the posts, I just put them up. But it's interesting to now here you say that: Jim posted briefly on AG under other names. Katie outed him accidentally, thinking you wouldn't mind. I never considered it malicious on your part and never implied it was. This was when you had been blocked on F3. I forgot I had mentioned it, because the post bore no controversy (in fact it was to clarify that Jim doesn't post with pseudonyms- that it had only happened once). when, in fact, your actual post on the PRIVATE, CONFIDENTIAL SUBSET OF FORUM FIVE -- the post I would never have seen if someone hadn't been so kind as to leak me the password -- was this: Heller did post under aliases quite a bit after he was blocked from F3. The original guidelines on ex-premie.org (which I gather do not exist anymore) asked that people post under a single name to avoid confusion, but did not require that the name be one's legal name. Are you actually asking anyone to believe that this secret post, where you say that I've 'post[ed] under aliases quite a bit' and in violation of the forum guidelines, besides being completely wrong was not intended to imply that I'd acted 'maliciously'? Furthermore, what in the world is anyone to make of your lie that you'd said that it'd 'only happened once'? Is that what 'quite a bit' means to you? Most interested in your reply if you care to answer directly for a change.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:46:33 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jim Subject: How about this, Run? Message:

Here's how the PRIVATE, CONFIDENTIAL SUBSET OF FORUM FIVE thread actually went. Katie, was replying to Cynthia who was wondering if 'Powerman' was me. She thought that maybe I'd been blocked or something (as I wasn't around in late December and most of January) and she thought Powerman and I might be one and the same. In her reply, after talking about other unrelated matters, Katie said this: BTW, Jim Heller is VERY proud of the fact that he never posts under an alias! Don't know who Powerman might be. You, then, Run posted this: Heller did post under aliases quite a bit after he was blocked from F3. The original guidelines on ex-premie.org (which I gather do not exist anymore) asked that people post under a single name to avoid confusion, but did not require that the name be one's legal name. So tell me again how your aim wasn't once again to slag me, only this time with lies that I would never have known about and could never defend myself against. How confident should I be knowing that you guys are hosting this secret welcome wagon for new exesm knowing that this kind of shit's going on? You know, Cynthia doesn't know me from Adam. So she's going to hear all this kind of obivously malicious stuff, your protests notwithstanding, and I wouldn't even know about it! You guys are fucked with your RE. The whole idea of a private secret forum where you can talk about others is bullshit. You want to email gossip and lies, hey, isn't that what email was created for? :) But a private forum, and especially a private forum with someone like you running it, forget it. It's a terrible idea. Why? People can't be trusted. None of us, unfortunately, and YOU in particular!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 01:11:05 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Jim Subject: Do this on Bravenet or not at all Message:

Yes it was unmalicious. And the wording of those posts was such that you sounded like you had been posting regularly (you know like several posts that day or two). OK, you had forgotten. It's really not the most important thing in the world. I know you're a lawyer and you're trained for this, but I don't want to spend hours and days researching your past posts. The wording was poor, but in fact I was trying to tell the person that you wouldn't be posting with the pseudonym. I agree in the importance of some of the issues you have raised, but frankly you have distorted this one to the max. I am willing to discuss this on bravenet (exes only) but right now their server is down. I've asked this before of you while you were arguing with me (to move off of this forum). Maybe you could relinquish to me on this instead of assuming everything I do or say is conspiratorially aimed at you personally (because it is not). And, Thanks for breaking in, Jim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 01:37:43 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Runamok Subject: Why? Message:

Why should I move this anywhere? Is it getting in the way of birthday greetings, London Latvian Meeting Minutes, Shp S&M sessions or discussions's about God's foreplay? Or is it that you know that you've been caught yet again in a lie? Yet again, Run. Yet again. Of course you'd want to move this anywhere! How embarrassing this must be for you. Maybe what you'd really like is to just cut back to you PRIVATE, CONFIDENTIAL SUBSET OF FORUM FIVE where you can put whatever secret spin you want on whatever. Sorry I can't join you there. But, anyway, what's your latest bullshit? This?: Yes it was unmalicious. And the wording of those posts was such that you sounded like you had been posting regularly (you know like several posts that day or two). What a mother-fucking piece of shit you are! CHRIST!! First, the 'wording of those posts' was no wording at all, asshole! I simply posted the newspaper articles about Cainer without any commentary at all. So what the fuck are you talking about? You posted this: Heller did post under aliases quite a bit after he was blocked from F3. The original guidelines on ex-premie.org (which I gather do not exist anymore) asked that people post under a single name to avoid confusion, but did not require that the name be one's legal name. for one purpose only: to give the impression that after I was blocked from posting under my own name I somehow found a way to sneak back onto the forum under fake names. You had absolutely no basis for saying this other than to make me look like the kind of person that would do that. Just to make the point that that was not a cool thing to do, you added the bit about the guidelines I supposedly violated. And you say that wasn't malicious????????? You're nuts. Absolutely nuts. Talking to you is exactly like talking to a premie. You have no interest in the truth. None.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:04:49 (GMT) From: Runamok Email: None To: Jim Subject: Why? People object to the use of this forum. Message:

The guidelines didn't relate to AG's policies anyway. You think everything is about you, but it really isn't. You're attempting to make a false context out of nothing. It's as if you claim to read my mind. I've tried to be my most confrontational on this forum because it's face to face. You know that because you've read the posts here and on RE, even tho you were breaking in. You've skirted the issues of private correspondence over, as well as avoided discussing your original disdain for the existence of a recent exes forum. When you distort something out of ignorance, it's one thing. But when you repeat your own assumptions about me as facts, there are some expectations that might be appropriate to a public forum which are absent here. I've seen two people say that '(your) claims must be true, because I've seen them so many times', but they've actually seen you repeating yourself, not any confirmations. Is rational thought about wearing others thin?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:52:53 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Runamok Subject: Shut up, you hypocrite Message:

Last time we did this, you tried to pick a fight with me on the basis that I'd publically revealed some things I'd been told in email. But when I asked you if that wasn't exactly what you'd done to Gerry -- asked you again and agian and again -- you were too cowardly to answer. You STILL haven't answered that one! Remember?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:12:03 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: Jim Subject: I really DON'T want to take sides... but ... Message:

I thought you lawyers were thick-skinned types? Can you imagine what it feels like to be accused of a REAL crime!??

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:23:58 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: cqg Subject: I really DON'T want to take sides... but ... Message:

Chris, I get your point. What I'm objecting to is the insidiousness of it all. Run hosts this private, confiedntial but official forum wheer he bravely recounts his war stories fighting the evil ogre, would-be cult leader, me. And who's there telling him or any new exes there that this ridiculous? No one. It's only a fluke that I happened to know about this at all. But I do and no, I'm not too thick-skinned for that kind of shit. Would you be?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 20:42:27 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: Jim Subject: I really DON'T want to take sides... but ... Message:

Jim, a thought has just occured to me. Now what was it? Oh yes. Run's antagonism towards your good self could be better vented against the Maha-raspberry, no? Why don't you, (or I - or anyone else for that matter,) post under a handle similar to that (i.e. Maha-whatever) with some telling home-truths about what he's likely to think of us exes? Channel that anger, man! (since Run's done a runner, apparently).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 01:59:19 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jim Subject: Just answer this, Run? Message:

The wording was poor, but in fact I was trying to tell the person that you wouldn't be posting with the pseudonym. How in the world does this: Heller did post under aliases quite a bit after he was blocked from F3. suggest that I wouldn't post with a pseudonym? Simple question, calls for a simple answer. How?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:53:40 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jim Subject: And where were YOU then, Katie???????? Message:

I just wnat to point out that Katie, who knew that Run was full of shit, said absoltuely nothing in reply to his post on RE. The fact is, Run's posted all sorts of weird shit about me there and not a single one of the participants has protested a single word. Katie? You knew this wasn't true? Why did you just let it lie like that? Did you care what impression Cynthia might have of me? No, of course not. How trustworthy are you, Katie? My answer? About the same as any of the rest of us. No better, no worse. That's why RE's a terrible idea.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:01:25 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: Some LONG winded thoughts Message:

I hope you don't mind if I butt in, Jim. You have asked for community input several times, so my guess is that you won't mind. You know I have a lot of respect for you and that is one reason I am gonna take the time to talk about this whole mess with you. First of all, I would prefer to e-mail you about this privately. I have alluded to this fact before Hell, I would like to tell you who I am, call you on the phone, have you to my house for a visit--all of it--because there are things about you that I like and I think we have a lot in common. You are creative as a writer and musician and I am an artist. And I also like your no-nonsense approach to things and your sense of humor. I also like the fact that you have always been civil to me even when we haven't agreed on something. You have told me before not to trust you with my secrets and also told me that my secrets annoy you, which is fine, you have a right to your feelings on this, of course. I do want to say that I feel Katie IS trustworthy because she knows who I am and as far as I know, she hasn't told anyone, just as I asked her not to. (Except when she and I discussed telling someone and I agreed to it) In fact, there are several people here whom I have entrusted with my identity and so far they have proven to be trustworthy. I have wanted to tell you a thousand times, but you said not to tell you, so I haven't. No big deal other than it gets in the way of some things. I know whoever wants to find out who I am probably could if they tried hard enough. (If they can crash RE, they can do anything!) But if anyone was to post my identity here, it would end up hurting THEM more than me, most likely. Again, this kind of thing speaks to character. I like to think I am trustworthy. I am certainly not perfect, but my friends know they can count on me and trust me to do the right thing more times than not. Jim, some people were talking about you behind your back and that sucks. Yeah, it's gotta hurt. I sure as hell wouldn't like it myself if they were trashing VP over on recent exes. It would hurt my feelings. But I gotta tell you, I know for a fact that is NOT why recent exes was set up originally. Katie set it up to HELP recent exes, not to trash you or anyone else there. That Run gossiped about you on recent exes, well, that was wrong. He DID get found out and maybe he is suffering a bit of embarrassment and chagrin over this. Ironically, he did something akin to the thing you do that he hates so much(flaming and gossiping--there's not much difference IMO) It's almost like the joke is on him, especially if you stop directing it back onto yourself, you know? Why are people not as outraged as you are about what Run said? My guess is that we have heard most of it before. I am pretty sure that Run has said most of this stuff about you to your face right here (except for the part where he accused you of using aliases) It hasn't been that surprising to everyone. Yes, it's still hurtful to you. Anyway, it speaks to his character a lot more than it does to yours AND Mike is right that most of us here are not that easily influenced. (Nice point, Mike!) We can make up our own minds about what a person is like and what we believe and do not believe. We ARE all forming our own opinions about the two of you--you and Run. That is another reason we aren't getting too freaked out over this. I am not a part of RE, but I have to say that people can have any club and exclude anyone they want to exclude. Yes, it hurts when we don't get included in something in life, especially when our friends DO get included. Maybe that is one reason you don't like RE? That would be natural. In one post, you said you wanted the support of the ex-premie community on this. To get people's support, they have to LIKE and TRUST you. Most people like people who are kind to them---NOT fake, not just say what they want to hear, but KIND--there is a distinction. It is possible to be honest AND kind at the same time. The two cannot always co-exist, but what I am trying to say is that honesty that crosses over into the area of cruelty may not always be the best choice. BUT, again it is up to you what you are trying to accomplish--what your goals are and what is most important to you. Is it to always speak the truth uncomprimised, no matter what, or is it to have friends and the support of other people on a more personal level? Sometimes in your face honestly is a good choice but sometimes it hurts people and nothing else is accomplished from it. It is the wise man who can make the distinction between when to use this and when not to. When is it a useful tool and when is it being misused? Don't look to me to be this wise man! This is an issue I struggle with constantly in my real life, so I know of that which I speak. My big mouth has hurt a lot of people and gotten me into some trouble, all for the sake of 'honesty'. I am learning. Is making my point more important than my friend's feelings or our relationship? These are heavy things to weigh but important for me to think about. Do you agree? I like you Jim and I think you know I do. If I didn't, I wouldn't be discussing this with you. I hope to do this kind of stuff by e-mail in the future-- Maybe some day. With respect, VP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:41:51 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: VP Subject: I'm sick, nothing better to do, so here goes Message:

Hi Veep, I've been home sick for the past few days so that's how I've got all the time in the world to bleat over this. Veep, am I missing something or haven't you already told me who you were, where you live, that kind of stuff? Yes, I've always had a problem with anonymity (although I well understand that circumstances sometimes absoltuely require it). The fact is, I've been entrusted with all sorts of secrets and guess what? Some of them are still secrets! Really! :) Look, I appreciate your input. I honestly do. And you may be so right about others quiety forming their own opinions and all that. Like, why can't I just relax and trust others a bit, right? Perhas I can answer that. When someone leaked RE's password to me and I started lurking I found that most of the threads were about F5 and how people conduct themselves here. Most of the comments, as you can imagine, were the typical 'anti-flame' stuff which, as I've explained, I think is facile out of context with the much better question of honest effective communication. Here's my point. I posted a number of Run's posts to show how pre-occupied he is with that subject and with his bizarre premie-like theory that I'm some sort of abusive authority-figure approaching ersatz cult control of my own. My point, Veep? My point is that not a single one of the other participants in those discussions ever said a word otherwise. In fact, many of them, people I used to consider friends, supported Run in his obsession. (Check out the quote of Mike's I posted after he said he never even reads posts about other people. It's below as Care to tell the truth, Mike?). So what I saw, which is what you'd see if they gave you the password, was a lot of threads where I was villified in almost comic book terms. And, again, no one disputed a single fucking thing. Katie? John? Selene? Mike? None of them. And who were they talking to much of this time? New people, people like Cynthia, people like SB, people who didn't know shit about the history of the forum or the exes there. So did I care about what was being said? You're damn right I did. Veep, if someone was calling Joey a 'dirty jew' there, or JW a 'fag' and either of those two found out would you tell them to relax, don't worry about it, peopel can make up their own minds? I mean, it might be a whole different story if I saw people challenging Run on his shit but, like I say, nothing but silence and often even agreement. Here's an example. Those of us who were here for the whole Joey/Mary/Barney fight know that at some point Mary was caught having lied to too many people and was pretty well driven away as a major game-player and provocateur. Who knows what the reality is behind all her stories and who cares? Not me. But there was one thing that happened that completely confirmed for me that she was a liar. She told me something important quite emphatically in email. Then she later denied it in public, denied ever telling me that and, when I confronted her with the actual quote she demurred 'I'm pleading insanity'. Fine, whatever. Bye bye, have a good one. Anyway, Mary starts inching her way back on to the forum and I posted a warning that she was trying that she was trying to do that and, on the basis of all the trouble she'd caused before, she shouldn't be allowed. Okay, Run, who never really understood the whole story even at the level I did, jumped in to say that was unfair. Fine, he's entitled to his opinion. But then this: Run takes it over to RE and starts posting about how ddeply ashamed he was to see the absolutely evil way I dealt with Mary. Here's my point, Veep. Katie was there for that discussion. If she didn't agree with me at that point she knew damn well why I did. But did she ever post anything in response, maybe something to the effect that there might ahve been more to that situation than Run knew or appreciated? No, of course not. Why bother? So there was yet another issue Run could distort about me, to new people, which I wouldn't even know about if some RE 'manmot' hadn't decided to break the rules and violate their secret handshake. So who exactly am I supposed to trust, Veep? Katie, who, as you've seen, will bend over bakcwards, making absolutely absurd arguments rather than call a spade a spade if, in this case, it means calling Run on his shit? Who? Who's running RE in such a way that I should feel it doesn't affect me in the least? Let me remind you, RE is billed as a subset of Forum Five. That sounds pretty offical to me. I feel like someone who belongs to a church in which there's a private, members-only club that meets weekly and which is sworn to secrecy. The guy who runs the club has been known to claim that he he thinks I'm a cult-leader in the making. No one else who's part of that club have ever said as much but then they're going to his meetings, listening to his shit and, I now understand throguh various sources, never taking issue with his screed. The problem is, they can't really tell me about any of it because they're all sworn to secrecy. And I'm supposed to want to remain part of this congregation? Would you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:23:26 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: The Sopranos are over, so here goes Message:

I just finished watching The Sopranos--my favorite show. Can you believe I would like a show with all of those 'fuck yous!' in it--ha ha! No, I never told you who I was. You posted a post once here called 'Don't tell me your secrets' (Not the exact title, but pretty close) where you basically said that no one could trust you and how people better not tell you any secrets. You've said this more than once. I never said you couldn't keep a secret--YOU did. My basic point was that I thought Katie was trustworthy. Maybe she didn't stick up for you with Run about that Mary shit because she was just plain sick of talking about it. Not everyone is as tenacious as you are. I'm not saying that is a bad trait, simply that not everyone shares it. I'm sorry no one stood up for you on RE. Look, I am just telling you what it looks like from the outside looking in. From where I sit, Run has egg on his face. You exposed it and probably killed RE in the process. What more do you want to accomplish? Do you want to change Katie, Mike, Selene? Discredit them? I am sincerely asking what it is you want--not being flippant. You don't have to relax if you don't want to. I wasn't saying that. I was just saying that it doesn't look so bad from where I am sitting. I know that's easy for me to say, right? No, I guess I wouldn't want to be part of that congregation. Like I said before, it would hurt my feelings, too. I can tell you what I want. A cold drink and a hot bath and a little nook nook. Off for that and I'll be on-line later tomorrow afternoon for a while. Take care

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 05:38:18 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: VP Subject: Correction before going to the basement again Message:

When I said 'No, I wouldn't want to be part of that congregation', I meant if they were talking about me. (If I were in your shoes) I was being hypothetical, for the record.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:34:07 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: VP Subject: What I want? I want to sleep with your wife Message:

Let's see if that'll get him? Hey Veep, you still here? Just kidding, of course. I've never even seen your wife so how could I say? :) No, seriously, I don't want there to be any secret, private forums. I think the idea's bullshit as has been proven already in spades. Next, I'd like Run to deal directly with a few things. He sneered the other day that he wasn't duty bound to answer questions 'my way' and muttered some stuff about social classes. I think we have to all answer shit directly and honestly. No, it's not okay to start stuff and then evade comeback. All the premies do it because their position's so unbearably untenable they can't afford to do otherwise. The rest of us should expect better from each other and ourselves. In that respect, I don't adhere to this there are as many styles of communicating as there are people in this world idea. If that were the case there'd be no such thing as honesty and we'd never be able to talk about anything. That's basically it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:51:06 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: You'd like her, she's a tall blonde Message:

with long legs and a brain to go along with it. Intelligent women are the sexiest--don't you think? And you gotta love a woman with a strong sex drive... A buddy of mine went to an Ivy League school and there were secret societies there. You could be enrolled in the school, play Lacrosse, be on the Dean's List, but maybe they didn't ask you to join the skull club... even if your buddy or his room mate was in it. It happens. But it looks like RE is gone or going. So that is probably accomplished. You know I'm with you on the 'don't start something then evade the discussion' part. You aren't going to be able to change people, you know. I'm learning this the hard way myself (I'm hearing the music to 'You can't always get what you want' by the Stones playing in the background...)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:53:59 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: VP Subject: You'd like her, she's a tall blonde Message:

Hey Veep, email me right now, if you can at: heller@bc1.com I'll tell you why in a sec.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 05:25:30 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Jim Subject: Romance cancelled on account of tornado Message:

Sorry but I have been in the basement waiting out a tornado warning. Then it went to a tornado watch, so I came up for air, but now it's a warning again. Well, back to the basement in a minute. No nook nook for me tonight. Gotta turn this machine off again. Too bad because it looks like the gang's all here! If I e-mail you, how do I know my name won't appear here, BTW? Gotta run

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:35:24 (GMT) From: JHB Email: None To: VP Subject: A Great Post, VP!!! Message:

You expressed my thoughts and feelings on this issue very well. Thank you. John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 02:28:28 (GMT) From: A Customer Email: None To: VP Subject: Thanks VP Message:

I'm really impressed by your sincerity. It does us all a lot of good to see that. Even though I don't know who you are, you are someone I like because the 'real' you comes through in your posts. I can tell you're a good person. I'm glad you come here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 13:16:09 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: A Customer Subject: Thanks A Customer Message:

That was very nice, A Customer. I'm probably not as good a person as you think, though. I have to confess that I have talked about people here in e-mail before (just ask CD) I guess this is human nature, though it isn't ideal. Now-a-days I try not to say anything behind someone's back that I wouldn't say to their face, but in weaker moments I have broken that rule. I try to be sincere but I also believe we shouldn't always say everything we think about someone out loud--whether it is to them or behind their back--especially in a public forum. Either way it can be hurtful. Anyway, that was very nice what you said and I appreciate it. Thanks again, A Customer

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:49:51 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: Jim Subject: My own post on RE Message:

That was pretty dumb, Jim. What did you expect to gain? I'll bet everyone over there has already heard your protest. So just about now, anyone who didn't already have an opinion about you is probably wondering what your thing is. Is it possible you're out of control? Is this a compulsion? Is it like a client in the courtroom blurting out his claim of innocence when it isn't his turn to speak? You know how the jury reacts to that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:53:19 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Powerman Subject: My own post on RE Message:

Why was it dumb? Sorry, I'm not with you. The fact is, RE was changing servers today or tomorrow and I wanted to, at least once there, say what I thought. Come on, what was so dumb about that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:03:29 (GMT) From: Powerman Email: None To: Jim Subject: My own post on RE Message:

It was dumb because: 1. Anyone who thinks you're a creep still thinks it, because you crashed their party. 2. Anyone who doubted you're a creep, now has less doubt about it because you're making such a big deal about something so meaningless to them. 3. Anyone who had no opinion at all probably thinks you shouldn't be posting there without permission. 4. The number 1 reason it was really dumb is because when you complain about someone being offensive, and you're offensive in the process, you lose credibility, your complaint loses credibility, and... you shoot yourself in the foot. Dumb. Very unlike you, Jim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:23:10 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Powerman Subject: My own post on RE Message:

Okaaaaaaaayyyy ... ahem, let me see here. Alright, okay: 1. Anyone who thinks you're a creep still thinks it, because you crashed their party. Well they already knew I'd crashed their party. I'd even posted some of their party favours here. So no new harm there, I think. Plus, they're moving. They're in boxes already to go somewhere new tomorrow. As my post said, I was just posting this one little memo. But, maybe, you're right. Oh well. 2. Anyone who doubted you're a creep, now has less doubt about it because you're making such a big deal about something so meaningless to them. Here I think you're wrong. These guys make a very big deal about flaming and all that shit. That's all they talk about, at least if Run's involved. So I was posting about something that should interest them, the rights of non-participants to learn about and defened themselves against scurrilous slander. This, my friend, is a related but nontheless brand new topic! How do you know they'll find it 'meaningless'? Would you if you'd been spending the last little while gossiping over there and one of the gossip subjects pops in and asks if this private, but semi-official gossip pit was fair? If it were me, I'd find it interesting. Maybe some of them will too. 3. Anyone who had no opinion at all probably thinks you shouldn't be posting there without permission. Well I address that in my post, don't I? I think it's absurd to think that this kind of invitation-only but again semi-official (it's banner reads 'A subset of Forum Five') gossip fest should be off bounds to anyone who's the subject of ongoing slander there. Now you say that anyone who had no opinion would decide that I shouldonly post there with permission. That's assuming, of course, that they found no value in the argument set out in the post itself. I hope you're not the only one who finds my ponits so worthless. (And i hope that they start slamming YOU for the next few months as a cult leader, etc. That they start telling bald-faced lies about YOU for a change so that we can then discuss the propriety of posting a response. ... not really. But you get the idea.) 4. The number 1 reason it was really dumb is because when you complain about someone being offensive, and you're offensive in the process, you lose credibility, your complaint loses credibility, and... you shoot yourself in the foot. I don't think my post was offensive in the least. Showing up there to post it might be seen as such by some but, for reasons already stated, I disagree. If Forum Five has a subset that discusses Mr. X -- at length and in the extreme -- I would always say that Mr. X should have a right to know what's being said and respond if he wishes.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:11:25 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jim Subject: I've had to rename my post on RE Message:

The new name is now: Read fast before Run removes again Obvious reasons.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:10:21 (GMT) From: Mr D Email: david@xyzx.freeserve.co.uk To: Jim Subject: Time to call it a day Message:

Time to get rid of this recent exes forum or have another moderator. Having read all the verbiage (well some of it) that's being written on the recent exes forum which has kindly been revealed to us here, I think it really should be renamed The Runamok Forum as it clearly has nothing to do with coming off a cult but everything to do with Runafrock. It's fine for Runablock to have his own secret forum which is password protected and only available to an elete few. Nothing wrong with that and he can slag off Jim, me and anyone else he wants to, in the privacy of his own Paradise web. But I don't think it should be an official ex-premie forum, just like the AG forum is not 'Official'. And why do we need this recent exes forum anyway, when I have already set up The Only ex-premies Forum which is for ex-premies only. All premie posts are deleted and the posters blocked. There's no password and it is free for any ex-premie to use. I'll even let 'not quite ex-premies' use it or people who are just having doubts about Maharaji, use it and will also delete any flaming or unsavoury posts from ex-premies who are insulting to such waverers. So what do you think? Rename recent exes as The Runanock Forum and make my own Only ex-premies Forum official. Don't all shout at once.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 03:11:10 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Mr D Subject: Time to call it a day Message:

I don't agree with the insults but the idea of putting it over to ex's only isn't bad. What are the objections?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:02:30 (GMT) From: retired warhorse Email: None To: Mr D Subject: Time to call it a day Message:

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% This is a great suggestion, Dave. Honest to god, I think this solves the problem. You're a genius !!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:39:31 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Mr D Subject: what the? Message:

I tried to connect to the link you provided. Why doesn't it work? Say, if one wanted to piss off and get rid of someone on the forum, would it work to flame them? Let's see, hmmm. Maybe, someone could go to the trouble of pushing someone else's buttons. Over and over and over and over again? Maybe. Seems like a lot of work. Maybe. I had thought about looking into the RE sometime ago. But didn't. I thought that I could get all I needed from this forum. For the most part I have. What was/is the point of a forum specific to recent ex-premies? Is it gentleness, a deeper level of understanding, sympathy, openness, uncritical listening, a place for healing and recovery? That would be good. If it has become a forum for one individual's slant on healing or a pissing match between two or more people, that might not be so good. Perhaps it has migrated away from its purpose. Maybe you should shut it down. Just thinking in print----- :-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:51:56 (GMT) From: Mr D Email: david@xyzx.freeserve.co.uk To: michael Subject: what the? Uh??? Message:

I can't shut down the recent exes forum because it's not my forum but Runafrock's. My forum is The Only ex-premies forum which is different. And the link does work. Just try it again. But your comments about pissing matches etc are right on. It's not needed and of no use to people exiting a cult.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:37:17 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jim Subject: Holy Cow! They blocked me, What a surprise. Message:

Can't imagine why.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 03:32:00 (GMT) From: hey! Email: None To: Jim Subject: Holy Cow! They blocked me, What a surprise. Message:

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% hey!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 18:47:56 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Everyone Subject: a little about why I bother to read this stuff Message:

I use this forum to let some things go, to share my experiences with the old mahahaji cult, to benefit from others' experiences, to share how I am healing, to get a laugh, to share a laugh. I have been fortunate to renew old friendships with some people I loved from my premie days. That has been a real blessing for me. I have also made at least one new friend here. It is someone that I now correspond with on a regular basis. I just don't bother to delve into those threads that appear to be pissing matches between whoever and whatever. They,IMO, should be taken offline or be on the AG. I don't see how an argument (for example) between Jim and Run helps people to heal from cult abuse. No, I am not telling Jim or anybody else what they can and cannot post or say. I do check the start of a thread to see if there is anything there of interest to me. If there is, I'll read most of the posts. If not, I just skip it. I have noticed that some threads do go on and on and on and on and on and on and, well you get the idea.... I have noticed that sometimes we take confrontational threads and posts rather personally. Why? The person whose buttons we have pushed is not in the same room with us. Sometimes they are in Great Britain - and we know that the English are different;-). We do not have to convince anyone of our position. Though it often seems that we should. I have been 'yelled at' on this forum. That's ok. I have found that when people yell at me they may be right, I may be 'full of shit' or haven't really thought the issue through. I do not take the yelling personally. Sometimes I am surprised by it, but, again the 'yelling' is electronic not face to face. Oh, I do have at least two 'alter egos' that I use on the forum. One of them I use when I want to be a little silly. The other I use when I want to be a little pisser! No, Jim, I won't tell you who they are. You may guess, if you care to, but I won't tell you even if you get them right. I have already posted my birth certificate identity. So, when you see michael posting it is Michael A. Read. I was an active premie in Portland, OR, from '72 to about '76 and started tapering off '77. Mahahaji just starting looking more and more stupid to me as I grew older and more life experienced. I am currently working on my premie journey. It is starting to read a little like science fiction. If it hadn't happened to me, I probably wouldn't believe it. I have noticed that premies post here quite a bit. That's good. They appear to be trying to justify thier devotion to youknowwhoji. I don't care. They can give all of thier money, love and life to m if that is what they want to do. It's thier addiction. They (each one) will have to hit rock bottom before they decide to start living a more realistic life. Besides, I have two alter egos to use to mess with them. I know that I have no power to rescue anyone from his/her addiction to anything. Only that person can do it once they admit that m is just a con artist. Enuff said on that for now! So, when I post as michael or as one of my alter egos, I will not take angry responses personally. WOT (waste of time) I will look to see what is of value to me, don't we all? Peace - and Love - michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:40:17 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: michael Subject: a little about why I bother to read this stuff Message:

Nice one michael, let's hear it for common sense. As for the personality clashes, could it be ... and this is just a guess mind you, that (dare I say it) of all creatures on this earth, the ones who have the greatest problem with being SEEN TO BE IN THE WRONG are ... are ... ... m'lud, may we seek counsel?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:51:22 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: cqg Subject: singing songs and carrying signs... Message:

Funadmental fundamentalism is justifiably justifiable..innit? I remember singing the songs and carrying the signs. God was here doncha know? HE gonna save us all! Just surrender the reins of your life! Whew, was I a sucka! Or what? Today, I'm a bit of a zen realist. Hoohah! Here's me arse m'lud. 'ave a whack? Thanks - michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 20:29:11 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: michael Subject: FunADmental??? Message:

Yuz, we was suckers, ... ...as for your ass... pass. p.s. ... dig Robert Crumb?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 02:34:29 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: cqg Subject: FunADmental??? Message:

R Crumb - wierd but funny! I saw a biographical special on him and his family. They were all twisted genius's. Thanks for the pass. Hate bruises anyway.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 23:42:38 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: michael and chris Subject: Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie Message:

I agree with you two completely. I try to find what is of value to me and try not to get too caught up in threads where people are arguing with one another anymore. I find that it doesn't help for me to throw myself into the fray. And I get too hurt when told to 'fuck off' For the sake of humor I offer this. Top 8 signs that you were a baby boomer premie 8. You named your children names like 'Rainbow Tofu Sunflower' 'Crunchy Granola Rainbow Birkenstock Flower' or 'Karma' or 'Lotus' & they have since changed their names out of dire embarrassment. 7.. You ate massive amounts of ice cream during 'space-outs' & then felt guilty because all the sugar and 'mucus' was interfering with your 'experience.' 6.. You worked at so many jobs in between festivals that your resume & bank account kept you on a treadmill of poverty. 5..There are information gaps in your knowledge of world and domestic news such as Ronald Reagan's entire presidency. 4.. You were a householder or ashramite, if you were somewhere in between you felt quite out of it. 3. It seemed perfectly normal to you to drive 1000 miles in a beat up car with 5 other people you barely knew, some of whom were really really strange, and also sleep in a hotel room with the same people. 2. You find yourself singing arti and rocking back and forth at the weirdest times like when you are really sleep deprived and stressed and your mind blips back to the old days. 1. People in their 20's are fascinated by everything you went through and look up at you with big adoring puppy eyes as if to say 'That is so cool! Your life has been SOOOO interesting! You are SOOOO lucky!! I wish I had a guru (sigh)'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 18:21:15 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Helen Subject: Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie Message:

Helen that is hilarious. Don't forget that we thirtysomethings think you are cool, too (number one) You have two generations of adoring admirers--too funny. Number 8 and number 3 are my personal favorites, hitting close to home. Peace, VP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 21:51:19 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: VP Subject: Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie Message:

I realized I must have sounded pretty stuck on myself when I used the word 'adoring'. Ithink what I meant is just this feeling that younger folks idealize the tumult of the 60's and 70's. You know what I mean. Anyway I am glad it struck your funny bone. Helen Still a hippie!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 13:28:36 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Helen Subject: Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie Message:

Dear Helen, I know JUST what you mean about adoration because of our hippie/guru days! My Mary Kay 'representitive' :) (I only buy the hand cream, really), and other women I know from that group always ask me to tell tales of the old days. They sit around me and look with those puppy eyes! To funny. These Mary Kay parties aren't your run of the mill, the liquor flows and the ricola burns. :) No wonder they have 'puppy' eyes. :) Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:42:25 (GMT) From: Helen Email: None To: Robyn Subject: V-D Day greetings Message:

I've noticed that those home parties do good business when the participants' get a little liquored up!! I like Mary Kay stuff alot, that and Burt's Bees lipsticks are the only ones I like, plus both don't test on animals. HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY DEAR

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:21:53 (GMT) From: BJ Email: None To: Helen Subject: Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie Message:

Oh I had to print this it was so cute.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 01:16:58 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Helen Subject: Signs of Being a Baby Boomer Premie Message:

Hi Helen, Long time since I said hi, so I thought I'd shout one out to ya. Hope things are well. How's the little yiddish grandma? I bet she'd have a thing to say about all this bickering, eh? Oy!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:41:29 (GMT) From: Little Yiddish Grandma Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Little Yiddish Grandma's thoughts of the day Message:

Hi Jerry, Yes Little Yiddish Grandma gets a gazink in her ganektagazoink when these boys argue so much. I can hardly squeeze out a bowel movement anymore, I had a quadruple bipass a month ago, and they are arguing about who said vat about who...OY, LIFE IS TOO SHORT BOYS, believe me! Okay so Run doesn't like Jim and it annoys Jim and Jim vants to grab him by ze balls, and so and so forth! I say they should both be glad they still have their balls at all!! I vas young once too and thought I would never get old, but when my Stanley died (God rest him, he made my life a Shangri-La as you know, Jerry), I realized life was too short for all this kvetching and testicles-grabbing! OY! Growing old sucks, Jerry, as you know. That elderly man here in the Hebrew Retirement Home, the one who was such an excitement for me, he passed on to the creator a short time ago. But let me tell you for a short time it vas fun to hav zat little fling. Okay I have to get off this internet now, but blessings on your head and may you do the mitzvot of praying for Little Yiddish Grandma, Shalom

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:40:37 (GMT) From: micahel Email: None To: Little Yiddish Grandma Subject: Little Yiddish Grandma's thoughts of the day Message:

Oy! yes those boys are a real pain in the toocas! Shalom! Sometimes I just feel like a lamed wufnik.:-) Be kind to strangers, right Grandma? You never know when you might be entertaining an angel!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 14:48:00 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Little Yiddish Grandma Subject: Shalom, Grandma! Message:

Thanks, Grandma. You always put things in such perspective. Hahaha!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:06:12 (GMT) From: LYG Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Shalom, Grandma! Message:

I'm glad you could get a little perspective from an old woman! What good is life if we can't laugh a little ,eh? Okay now it is time to go to the kosher deli to get some rugalesh for my little grandchildren are soon to come to see me. They are my nachas, that means my joy!! Shalom Jerry Helen sends her love too (she's a Unitarian you know, but she's really a Jew deep down) She might be in NY this spring or summer she will email you!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 17:32:20 (GMT) From: BJ Email: None To: LYG Subject: Shalom, Grandma! Message:

I agree w/ Ms K.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:54:47 (GMT) From: Ms. K Email: None To: LYG Subject: LOL, LYG! Message:

More, more... we NEED you on this forum!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:11:50 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Helen Subject: named my daughter Shrisada! Message:

Got the name in a dream! A premie, who spoke some Hindi, said it meant Her Eternal Grace. She wanted to change it in the third grade. Seems the kids were calling her 'Sawdust'! So she used her middle name, Kathryn, until her junior year. Then it was back to Shrisada. We called her Sada for short. She made me a grandpa three years ago! She named her son Shoshawn! The masculine form of Shoshanna! My younger daughter is named Serena. Can you guess that maharaji was not a part of my life by then? I love your post. So true! I just don't sing arti anymore! Twameva mata, twameva bundu! How'd that go again? No, don't answer that! :-) Peace - and Love - Michael the old hippie/premie/boomer ;-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:48:34 (GMT) From: Minnesota Housewife Email: None To: michael Subject: Well know, Shoshanna is a fine name Message:

Isn't Shoshanna that cute little town over by the Walmart? Over near the Muskehannakee River? I don't beleive we've met dear, I never was a premie or anything like that, dontcha know, but I started coming here to help me get my life back after I was shunned by Our Lady of Perpetual Blandness Church--see, I had this affair with this fellow, Jahn Janhson and was trying to find myself and all. I started realizing just how hypocritical people can be about their religions and now I have truly started to dedicate my life to the true teachings of Jesus. ANyway these people here are the best bunch ya can ever find,so supportive and all, you betcha!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 13:40:11 (GMT) From: Robyn Email: None To: Minnesota Housewife Subject: Well know, Shoshanna is a fine name Message:

Dear MH, 'An old man and an old woman are sitting in a nursing home and the old man says 'I bet you can't guess how old I am.' The old woman says 'Okay, unzip your pants.' The old man unzips his pants and the woman sticks here hand in and plays around for a minute, she pulls her hand out and says 'You're 89.' The old man looks at her incredulously and asks 'How did you know that?' The old woman says 'You told me yesterday! Well, I thought I was copy/pasting your line about the little town near Walmart which was hysterical. Anyway I loved this 'Laugh of the Day' so I'll leave it. Seems a good place for it. :) Thanks for this thread everyone. It is great! :) Love, Robyn

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 14:57:18 (GMT) From: JB formerly BJ Email: None To: Robyn Subject: Well know, Shoshanna is a fine name Message:

Really good one Robyn - I'll be using it :) JB

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 18:15:52 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Minnesota Housewife Subject: Can your husband teach me to ice fish? Message:

No offense, but it looks boring on television. Snowmobiling is much more my style, but I heard that in order to do business there in Minnesota ice fishing is where it's at! (We do golf here, but I guess that is out of the question in the frozen foods section of the country) Any help you can lend is appreciated, VP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 23:02:16 (GMT) From: Minnesota Housewife Email: None To: VP Subject: Can your husband teach me to ice fish? Message:

Sorry VP, ice fishing is something I have never done but my hubby's really into it, doncha know! It's a guy bonding thing, they sit on their cans for hours bundled up like bears, drinkin' beer, and they are in hog heaven!! Didya ever see that 'Grumpy Old Men' movie?!! Loved it--lotsa ice fishing scenes there. The second one was a little far-fetched I thought, that SophiaLoren would fall for Walter Matheau. ALthough ya never know, that hostess on QVC is married to a real old guy who looks like an ogre. Now what were we talking about--oh, ice fishing. You strike me as more of a big city guy, the more sophisticated type, being into the arts and all. Now I lean more towards the arts myself, I think I told ya I crochet those dolls with the big skirts, to disguise your bathroom tissue. And my cooking is famous here in Minnehaha Twin Rivers Moosehead Falls, you betcha!! I even am having one of my cookbooks published by QVC Press!! It's called 'You Can Cook Using Canned Foods and Cheese-its' Katie would really like it! YOu bet! Now what you might not realize about Minnesota is that our golf courses are really something! You betcha! Of course you can only play 3 months out of the year. Gotta love winter up here, ya know! That's kinda part of the old Minnesota package. A friend of ours, Hilda Larson, went a little crazy from the snow, she just walked into the snow nude one day and was found down out in her garden trying to make it grow, wearing nothing but her gardening gloves and straw hat, there was 6 feet of snow on the ground. She became a snowbird after that, has a little condo down in FLorida she goes to int he winters. I just work extra hard to stay positive and I do hit the sherry a wee bit during those winter months! It's cheaper than a psychiatrist!! You betcha, dontcha know! okay, got to get my green bean casserole in the oven for tonight's dinner, okie dokie!! Take care and god bless ya, dear! T

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:54:43 (GMT) From: VP Email: None To: Minnesota Housewife Subject: Oh, god I need a drink Message:

I'll never survive there. VP Laughing my ass off, and crying, too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 17:59:49 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Everyone Subject: Jim the Intimidator Message:

For the past year and a half, I've been reading people complaining about Jim this, Jim that, and I haven't heard an argument yet that had any spice to it. The truth is, the boy's got a lot going for him up in the noggin, and many of us have benefitted immensely from it. He has a way of shaking people out of their reverie, at least those who are willing to be. Listening to lightweights talking about Jim 'abusing' his intellectual prowess is one of the more pathetic arguments I've heard on this forum. Hey, if the man has got you by the you know what and you don't want him to squeeze, you'd better holler 'Uncle!' Because the boy will sqeeze. I've had mine squeezed on a couple of occassions, myself. I take that back. I realized the man had me by them, so I hollered uncle before he could. I ain't no dummy. Maybe the problem with you folks who don't holler is that you're just too stupid to. Would you get in the ring with Ali? Have a foot race with Carl Lewis? So, if you decide to mix it up with the man, don't cry when he starts pummelling you. Throw in the towel, instead, dummy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 06:29:01 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jerry Subject: Talk to the foot Message:

It's your logic of submission that's just so damned stunning. --Scott 'if it sinks it's not a lifejacket' Talkington

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 10:09:58 (GMT) From: Testing Email: There is nothing to fear ,only Fear itself! To: Jerry Subject: testing (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 18:43:14 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jerry Subject: Jerry the Impaler Message:

Hi Jer, You mean you don't think I'm an irrational, obsessive, assassin, naplam bomber, murder, rapist, cult-leader, abusive auhtority figure, bully, mahatma, Captain Quigley, Warner Erhart, shrieking at 145 decibels, fomenting hatred (oops -- made that last part up. Must be feeling sorry for myself or something.)? You don't think that I pummelled Shp mercilessly then kicked him when he was down and unconscious? Too much. Jer, what's your opinion. Should I give a shit about having Runamok running this secret, private RE forum where he says that kind of shit and no one disagrees? Our englsih brethren seem to think it matters not. Maybe it doesn't. What do you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:31:40 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jerry the Impaler Message:

Well, I did say, on one occassion, that you were kicking Shp while he was down. But damned if he didn't just keep coming back for more. As for Runamok, I don't have access to RE (not really interested in having it, either, though I am a recent ex, myself), if he is using the forum as a platform for denigrating you, he shouldn't be, and you're right to have your say about it. Who the fuck is Captain Quigley?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:56:59 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jerry Subject: For Jerry the Impaler and Sir David ONLY Message:

Here's a repost of what I clipped from Run's posts over on RE. These are highly confidential posts, don't forget. INTERPOL has been alerted that I've leaked them and I can't vouch for your legal security should you get called upon. Morally, of course, I don't have a leg to stand on. This was an extremely confidential discussion that had nothing to do with me and I am, of course, a very bad apple for peeking let alone sharing this. But I guess the old premie in me doesn't die that easily and I jsut felt like I had to 'share' something, so here it is. Remember, not a single person ever challenged Run on any of it. Okay, since no one believes me, here are some samples: Personally I think we blew it with Shp and sent him back to M with our own arrogance, but I could be overestimating. It could be overkill on my part. You might remember, I kinda took the lead in saying Shp was up to no good. I am still fairly comfortable with most of that (maybe not 100%), but when Jim decided to weigh into the fight and show who was boss, eventually I got disgusted. At first it was interesting to hear Jim's points. Then.. it was like seeing someone knocked down and not moving. Only bad guys stomp the head in and that's the kind of thing it was with 'idiot', 'fuckyou', 'moron', etc. Here's one taht refers to 'threats against Mary'. That's me he's talking about. Mary tried to disrupt the forum and I warned everyone that she was about to post again: Being relatively thick-skinned myself, and having cut my teeth in the forums as a 'heavy' (remember when I took on Shp, for example), I don't think any of the flamers really enjoy it when it turns on them. The whole idea is to out-tough all takers. When people stand up to it, they get hurt too. The trick is how to stand up to it and not become it and it's tricky. I'm still trying to walk that line. When I was arguing with Shp and Jim was stepping in, I really couldn't see the point in cadencing with 'fuckyuou' and 'idiot' and 'wimp' and all this stuff. ESPECIALLY when I was actually criticizing Shp's points. If I actually wanted him to consider my points, I had to maintain a modicum of civility so there was a way to connect. Some of the threats that surfaced against Mary really made me feel ashamed to be associated with the forum. While your (Michael) discussion of Ger earlier as 'going through a lot' did make me stop and think (and admire you) I wonder if that is ultimately the best view. (But it is definitely worth something.) Here's another: To Michael, I personally think Ger blames me for running Jim off and is at least in part making him howl for blood. I have no idea if that is true because I cannot speak for Jim. I was feeling like Jim had taken the bullying thing too far and that the FA's were not able to control threats (even tho they are technically against the rules). So I did go after Jim sometimes. And he has been gone for the longest period that I have ever seen in years of posting on the forums. and another: The thing that really gets me about flames on F5 is that when people are totally provocative and start telling me to fuckoff or whatever they do (I could write f***off but I don't think that's really necessary), it's like you're getting mugged in a deserted alley. My own stratagems for 'standing up' to flamers is based on the lack of emergency response that is the norm Honestly it shocks me sometimes and makes me wonder about the ultimate value of doing this. AND I really can't enter a thread without getting flamed SEVERELY at this point. So I can't try to stand up to it when I see it because it will absolutely get worse and not better. Who says assasination isn't effective? and another: What is it that makes it so hard to intervene when someone is flaming? It's impossible to tell anyone to just cool it.. what is up with that? Really seems pretty warped. Not a minor prob but a MAJOR prob. Gets up there with cult behavior. and another: As far as 'what is flaming', when people post stuff like 'fuck you you asshole' I would call it flaming. I'm not a prude. I can 'fucking' write 'fuck' but it doesn't accomplish a whole lot. Currently, I've got 'FUCKYOU RUNAMOK' and 'LISTEN YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE from Roger (among many others). Something like that is so blatant (sometimes is huge red letters from Roger but there's more to it. There are real issues behind the disagreements but by the time the language has gotten there the issues are going to be extremely distorted at best. I try to deal with the actual issues and have a sense of humor about it (and that's why and how I respond). But is it worth it? If I don't respond, does it imply acceptance of allegations that accompany it? Maybe it doesnt strike people as an issue at all (and that really is how people act most of the time- like it isn't happening), but I think there is something really wrong with what is going on and the apathy that accompanies it. I know people ignore in the hopes that it will go away. I grew up in New York and was taught not to talk to people who tried to start conversations with you on the street. The end result was weird. People having conversations with themselves a lot. A disjointed environment where crime could and would actually be ignored as 'none of my business'. I don't want to support or help build a world like that, even online. and another: I don't post on the main forum fairly often for fear of provoking a free-for-all. But I find a lot of it pretty sick to be honest. Very hateful and sarcastic in an infantile way. The sarcasm can be funny but gets thin with the constant barrage of it, and especially where it exists in order not to deal with serious issues or to obscure facts and issues. Trying to say anything about any of this on F5 undoubtedly will cause a fight (at least if I say it). and another: I am interested in the topic of communication and aggression. Some people have suggested to me that we're still looking for abusive authority figures and that we have people who are more than willing to do get verbally abusive on the forum. You know, like we didn't get enough of that from M'ragey. It seems to be in flux now. I don't see that kind of behavior as being acceptable, but I also still am shocked at how verbally violent some people can be without a huge, consensual outpour against them. and another: I have posted quite a bit about guidelines on the main forum. I started posting about it as webmaster (well ass't webmaster) and continued some afterwards. I was met with derision by a few and some discussion by others. People seem turned off talking about. Are they scared of the reaction that I get from some hardcore flamers? Don't want to get in the crossfire? I wonder. It seems appropriate to deal with shit as it comes up. Instead the forums seem to have a sweep it under the rug kinda attitude. I personally think the flaming thing has become a permanent issue which won't go away. It was exciting sometimes 2+ years ago to see some of the ex versus premie fights but they became so routine. They became the worst of our culture: wrestling, Springer, etc. and felt very staged, like these TV events. Then the arguments spread to our own group. IMO, Katie would balance a lot of it out by spending large amounts of time consoling bruised premies (or something like that). But Katie and Brian are justifiably trying to pass the torch to others and things have not been the same. So it may be boring but I think talking about guidelines and forum shit (as in the stuff that hits the fan) is good, albeit sometimes tedious. I also think it is necessary to name names. I cannot usually decipher posts that attempt to deal with these issues but will not name someone's name specifically. People may have issues with me on some of this stuff. I don't think a discussion with disagreements has to be a food fight. and another: The thing is that flaming stuff is the best PR that M'ragey has. THAT's why I perservere. Otherwise I would just split. I do have a life (and have been out a long time) and can easily do without Gerry (or whoever) giving me a hard time. But other people get hurt. I'm relatively thickskinned (not that I enjoy it) and certainly don't object to anything you're saying. There really is a tremendous need. There are tens of thousands of people, by my estimation, who would like some kind of support or networking with ex-premies. Certainly thousands. and another: The problem IMO is that when there are verbally violent posts which are not just fuckyou's but worse (we've seen threats online and more), I see very few people, if any, object. You know the stories of rapes and muggings which are witnessed by large numbers of people? That's what it reminds me of. As real an issue as censorsip. About premies posting. I think for the 'main forum' (if that is still for real) it's better to edit, delete or block them. Ultimately, if we are going to talk to them, it shouldn't be a big fight scene. If it's our forum, we can make rules, but we just have to keep a few for ourselves. Basically, no exes spend time on CD's forum. They are coming to us. The reason is to discourage fighting not to censor them. If we had more energy, we could start a forum or chatroom just for interacting, but we don't right now. That's why my opinion seemed to changed. It's really one opinion, that we should deal with them when we are up to it, but deal with our own biz first. That's in keeping with my mentality that it's healthy to talk about the forum and issues related to it. Does that start to make sense? The prob with fighting incessantly with premies is that if they are continuous lurkers (and quite a few are) then they are expressing a need to split M'rage by being present. Deleting or blocking posts would be better than fighting for THEIR self-respect. But as long as we have the same problem amongst ourselves it wouldn't work. and another: I am not making a value judgement about the premies, but the dialog seems to have degenerated a lot. It's so Springer most of the time. Maybe this is changing, but exes posting on AG seem to have an evolutionary imperative to reestablish dignity (it's ironic but true) to people who get trashed so routinely. That ultra-heavy anti-premie thing is straight out of the cult itself. It's 'heavy satsang' pure and simple. It makes us look like shit and it's always the result of a very small number of people inflicting their view on the rest of us. I wouldn't be surprised if we've scared the press off if they make it to the forums. and another: Heller did post under aliases quite a bit after he was blocked from F3. The original guidelines on ex-premie.org (which I gather do not exist anymore) asked that people post under a single name to avoid confusion, but did not require that the name be one's legal name. and another: When Shp first came online, he always tried to give satsang and would pepper any non-satsang with 'go with the flow' type BS that was obnoxiously straight out of satsang hell. I use to fight with him all the time but still could not understand Jim's obsession to tell him (and others) to 'fuck off' and all that. Seems really childish to me but at the time I was making more efforts to coexist with this strongarm mentality. Things as they are started to develop around this time. They're were numerous premie spammers. 'Quasi-premie' (from Malibu) spewed garbage for 8 or more hours at a time, completely making communication impossible. It's arguable that current squabbles do trace back to premies, and they certainly were a part of the scenario as it developed. Personally I think someone like Shp has a lot of dissatisfaction with Mirage and is seen about the same by Elan Vital as he is by exes. I also think that some kind of strict no-satsang guideline (or something like that) would work if the posting against premies wasn't so vicious. These things are arguable and I'm not even sure where the best place is to discuss it. I've considered discussing this stuff on Dave's premies only forum, but I'm a little burnt on all the stuff that has been going on to do it right now. I guess we really need a flame-free forum for everyone, but all we have the energy for right now is recent exes. And if we did expand, the first step would probably be to do it for all exes. But I have to basically agree with you. and another: People who have posted on the forums for a long time also no me as a strong, anti-Miragey ex who fought. I fought with Shp for weeks when he posted satsang repeatedly. Jim's characterization of the people who are tangling with him as being somehow a coffee group is a slur, aimed at 'housewife' kinds of stereotypes that simply aren't true. Jim's claim to fame (and it is a claim not fact) is that he was the 'first' person to ever post about Miragey on the Internet. Sorta like saying Christopher Columbus discovered America. and another: Personally I think if you are talking about someone (i.e., Jim or Mary) you should just say their name in this forum. If someone can get me up to speed on existing guidelines for this group, I would appreciate it. The only stuff that Jim posted was pretty vague. When people share email, it's hard to completely separate posting and email for confidentiality. Katie has posted some stuff about me simply because she forgot it was a confidence- and it wasn't that important otherwise she would have remembered. Likewise if someone said to Jim that I was bummed about being flamed when he posted that I was writing that on this forum, it's really nothing to get excited about. Unfortunately, it's a way of dominating the conversation and I consider it bullying/

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 21:42:08 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: You're right Message:

I've got no qualms with Run expressing himself on how he feels about flaming, nor in mentioning the parties he finds particularly offensive, but to use RE as his platform for it is out of place. He should do it here. (Now excuse me while I swallow the document. Gulp. Chew. Gulp. Goddam this is a lot. Did you have to send this much?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 22:23:31 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Jerry Subject: No, YOU'RE right Message:

Next question, Jer, what should I do? I've already told Pman I'd probably just drop it. But I wonder. How am I expected to carry on communicating normally with all the people here who I know partake of those anti-Jim fests and never say anything in my defense no matter how weird Run gets? Could you? Would you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 23:26:24 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Jim Subject: No, YOU'RE right Message:

Jim, You've got a lot of repect, here, maybe more than you're aware of. If people aren't rushing to your defense, it doesn't mean that they're siding against you. Maybe they just don't want to get into it. And seriously, who that you respect do you think is partaking in any 'anti-Jim fest'? I doubt anybody. If you can let it drop, that's probably the best way. Usually works well for me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:08:40 (GMT) From: Sir Dave Email: david@xyzx.freeserve.co.uk To: Jim Subject: I'm not Anglo-Saxon Message:

I've never read anything on that recent exes forum. Since you must read it yourself to know what they're saying about you, why don't you copy and paste some of those posts here for everyone to read. Perhaps you already have but I haven't noticed. Regarding the stuff between you and Runawok, I haven't read any of that either. So I can't really comment but one thing I would advise, if you and Runacrock want people to read your posts is for you to keep them fairly short and succinct. If I open up a post and see tons of text, I usually don't bother reading it unless it's of major interest to me. Is it important? Well you know my philosophy; nothing here is too real, not enough to get hung up about. The Maharaji revelations are real but all the other stuff isn't to me but I understand that other people are more affected by it. Perhaps rightly so. Me, I'm really just a distant figure shooting from the hills. Nobody here really knows me. Perhaps I like it that way.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:39:47 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: Sir Dave Subject: Reader's Digest version for David Message:

David, I actually did post some of Run's posts from RE in a past called Some of Run's posts from RE. It'll show up in the inactive list pretty soon. In them, he accuses me of being all the things I mentioned above and more. No one ever disagreed with him. So, tell me, how would you like it if some of your forum 'buddies' were partaking of those private, secret, 'semi-official' discussions -- ones you'll never know about -- but which obviously shape the opinions of any involved? Indifferent? Yeah, I can do indifference. I can do apathy. Or I can be honest.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:53:31 (GMT) From: Sir Dave Email: None To: Jim Subject: Reader's Digest answer for Jim Message:

Jim asked: 'So, tell me, how would you like it if some of your forum 'buddies' were partaking of those private, secret, 'semi-official' discussions -- ones you'll never know about -- but which obviously shape the opinions of any involved?' My answer: I'd be angry and probably post the password here so that everyone else could read the stuff too. I'd also probably employ the likes of Rob and Catweasel to wreck the recent exes forum. So I think you've been very restrained and polite; all things considered.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:33:15 (GMT) From: Sir Dave again Email: None To: Jim Subject: Mind you, Jim... Message:

I did get very heated myself when Des Perado started lecturing everyone about how confused they were and how superior he was via his Buddist philosophy, over on The ANYTHING GOES forum. That's my natural aversion to be told 'how it is' by an ignorant idiot and also my natural aversion to Buddism and Hinduism, both of which I now hate with a vengeance. So I can understand some of what you've been going through.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 20:20:01 (GMT) From: Mu Email: None To: Sir Dave again Subject: a 'real buddhist' just wouldn't care :-) Message:

All those 'isms!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:01:19 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jerry the Impaler and Jim the Reamer! Message:

Well somemone has to be the stentorian orator! The problem is, as you may have noticed, that there is no way to 'win' against an emotional argument. Cool logic and objectivism are no match for the sword of righteous indignation! So, when you or anyone points towards the truth of mahahaji (and other guru/god cons) you must be a vicious tyRANT who just hates people happier than he is. Oh well, what ya gonna do? Peace - and happy happy joy joy! - Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:09:29 (GMT) From: Mike Email: None To: michael Subject: Mike, the idiot! (this Mike, not you michael :-) Message:

Hey, I wanted to play too...... :-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:28:08 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Mike Subject: who me? i idiot too! :-) Message:

Weren't you one of the other Mike's in Portland back in the seventies. If you were, didn't you have a crush on Shannon? :-) Also, if you were, I would love to see you again. Beer's on me! Let me know and I'll give you an email address to use.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:45:37 (GMT) From: Mike Email: None To: michael Subject: YES and YES.... Shannon was hot! Message:

michael: Yes, I did live in Portland and yes, I had a crush on the aforementioned individual of the female persuasion. Damned celibacy crap...... I actually took it seriously! Unfortunately, my leg IS flexible enough for me to kick my own butt...... and I did, regularly, until I met my wife...... Now, it doesn't bother me so much..... he he he :-) michael, I KNOW that I should be able to picture your face (back then anyway), but I just can't. I'm drawing a complete blank despite the utter familiarity of you name..... I KNOW that I know you! If it helps, I'm the guy who, with Scott T, drove down to the Palisades to camp outside M's palace on Sunset Blvd. He sent us to the SF ashram about a week later and we were in a K-session within minutes of our arrival. I know I told the story..... which everyone at satsang oooooo'd and aaahhhh'd over. I'm pretty sure you were there, then. Maybe you can picture my face from that description? he he he :-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 20:06:37 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Mike Subject: YES and YES.... Shannon was hot! Message:

Send me some mail at mareadba@yahoo.com and we can arrange to meet. I think remember who you are. Tall, dark and handsome? HAR de HAR. If it helps jog your memory, I married Diane Deimel in April of '75. Now divorced and breaking hearts!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 23:15:37 (GMT) From: Sister Mary Elizabeth Email: None To: michael and Mike Subject: Gird thy loins with the word of God!! Message:

BOYS!! It is unseemly for 2 nice boys like yourselves to talk about this young lady Shannon in that manner! It may make the other nice young ladies and gentlemen's private regions a quiver and engorged. We all have had our struggles with the temptations of the flesh and we do not need you bringing up this topic again like Satan's little soldiers!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 17:33:08 (GMT) From: Satan's little soldier Email: None To: Sister Mary Elizabeth Subject: I'm sorry sister..... Message:

I'm such a bad influence on michael..... here he asks a simple question and I fill him full of ...... well, you know. I think I should be more conscientious of what I say to him..... Thank you for pointing this out, sister..... (wicked he he he) :-) Respectfully, Soldier of Satan, Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 00:15:17 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Sister Mary Elizabeth Subject: Gird thy loins with the word of God!! Message:

Oh, Sister! You are so right. Will you administer punishment? Please? Please! PLEASE?!?! My naughty parts hurt so much! They must be released! UH! OH! THANK YOU!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 02:56:24 (GMT) From: Sister M.E. Email: None To: michael Subject: I will whack you w/my ruler!! Message:

I hate to do this you understand, but I do it so that I might better be a vessel for our Lord's infinite mercy. Pull down your pants--NOW!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 04:30:39 (GMT) From: michael Email: None To: Sister M.E. Subject: I will whack you w/my ruler!! Message:

Thank you helping to get it so straight! That's good. Yes. Yes. OHMIGAHD! I know I'll be bad again. I just can't help being such a naughty little sinner! Teach me to be better some more?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:00:43 (GMT) From: Sister M.E. Email: None To: michael Subject: I will whack you w/my ruler!! Message:

Come to my office at noon sharp. I will show my other, er 'instruments of mercy.' You are a very very naughty boy!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2000 at 16:43:01 (GMT) From: meeky Email: None To: Sister M.E. Subject: I will whack you w/my ruler!! Message:

Yes sister. I'll come in your office....I mean to your office.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 15, 2000 at 18:56:04 (GMT) From: cqg Email: None To: Sister Mary Elizabeth Subject: How much to rule me with your whacker? (nt) Message:

This is marketable stuff, sis ... How much? ;}

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 17:11:53 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: Everyone Subject: press packet from jw/jean-michel Message:

I was just wondering, has anything moved forward with the press packet I heard about a few months ago? I think I heard that JW and JM were working on it. I'm hoping it becomes available soon, as I think it would be a great 'one stop shop' for any interested aspirants and journalists, as well as managers of potential halls or hotels where m or premies might care to put on programs... I think there is plenty to choose from, from the existing sites online. Would you like some serious comments on which stuff we think might be appropriate for the packet? Thanks-LA_EX

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:22:54 (GMT) From: lox Email: None To: la-ex Subject: press packet from jw/jean-michel Message:

Here are some of my ideas for the press packet that will surely topple the most Reviled One. The child-care guidelines that were so so brilliantly smuggled out in J-M's underwear : 'Please do not encourage your child, but allow him/her to make the decision to attend based on personal interest.' Any reporter will clearly see the vicious, Stalinist leanings of these guidelines. The air-conditioning and usher plans for public 'events.' devastating stuff. The complete transcripts of the Joey/Mary McGraw/Barney dialogues. The complete transcripts of the delightful and illuminating Jim/Runamok repartée. Plato and Diogenes, please sit down. These conversations will surely live throughout recorded history. Perhaps a short film would be appropriate, 'My Dinner with Runamok.' All of Mary McGraw's fabulous corporate research, including Randy Prouty's address 3 times. The L. Margolis files, held in a numbered safety deposit box by Mr. R. Drek, esq. Palm Beach socialites hold the key to this whole conspiracy. The collected works on the subject of nasal drippings from Anthony Ginn. After all, what member of the press wouldn't like to feel they have a well-developed nose for news? The complete bar menu at the Latvian bar including preferred vodka beverages. Followed by rumors of what Maharaji liked to drink in the '70s or 80's and how hypocritical that was. All variations of the description 'fat,' that have appeared on this hallowed site. The name Christopher Quartus Giles repeated at every available opportunity, slowly and with a crusty, rich Queen's English accent. Imagine you're sucking on an especially tart Regal Crown sour cherry as you repeat this name. Repetition of this name gives us instant, top-drawer credibility. Immediately followed by Mr. Giles' jumbling memories of decades past. Time to expose Divine Sales circa '75. A warrant for the immediate arrest of Rich Neel, who was allowed to perform his songs whilst wholly unlicensed. Photos of Michael Dettmers, with and without his hairpiece. Jonathan Cainer's March 4, 1999 column on Virgos, which holds telltale clues to his later thoughts and movements. In-depth analysis of the word 'Don't', as relating to Maharaji saying, 'Don't hurt that guy, he doesn't know what he's doing' in 1973, connected to the Fakirinand Fiasco. With careful work, don't can turn into 'do' in the blink of an eye. Reporters understand that all too well! No admission of any kind when the reporter asks, 'So why did you follow him, then? There WAS no reason. Bring it back to snot and/or Jagdeo whenever possible. This should be our focus. The rest never happened. Or, if it did, it felt horrible all along. The collected sayings and wisdom of Powerman. Killer material! Selected (4 out of the last 327,418 threads) Jim Heller quotes on con-men throughout history. Starting with Buddha, Jesus, Krishna and Mohammed. Oh yeah, remember to mention frequently that many of the people receiving knowledge these days are from Africa, India and other places where they're not very smart and have no internet access, and thus are unable to avail themselves of information such as this, which would enable them to make truly informed decisions. The reporters will be right with us on that, since they know that white, English-speaking people between the ages of 39 and 53 are vastly superior to all other bipeds. These 3rd World people are clearly not equipped to judge matters such as this. Well, I feel this is a start. Let's get this material out and let the chips fall where they may. Are you listening, Palm Beach? We're on to you! Say it one more time...Christopher...Quartus...Giles

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 15:58:18 (GMT) From: Trixie Starlight Email: non To: Lox Subject: LOX! When I Lap Dance you are supposed to..... Message:

Concentrate!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 18:58:38 (GMT) From: la ex to la ex - Over! Email: None To: la-ex Subject: press packet from jw/jean-michel Message:

I cant hear you. this war zone is very noisy isnt it. sounds like the UK faction is obsured by civil war noise- oh wait that sounds like pub noise... If you have elements for a press packet- contact the guerilla force in calif. Times like these its every region for itsself. Maybe now we can get some work done . Heh heh heh maybe roger knows where they hang out. I think they are in Agoura - holding up in the house opposite the EV exec mortgage status citizen annex. # 779 is the one with the platnium hair and believe it or not its #994 with the shaved head. NO Lie!! tell ol roger 'heres mud in yer eye and la ex # 554 endorses a LA press release. Just shoot it over to whoever.' what the hell nobodys paying any attention . good luck brother/sister .Ill cover fer ya . No problemo now wheres my beer la ex to la ex over

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 19:09:12 (GMT) From: Jim Email: heller@bc1.com To: la ex to la ex - Over! Subject: now THAT's funny! Message:

good one

Return to Index -:- Top of Index