Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 20:59:31 (GMT)
From: Oct 13, 2000 To: Oct 20, 2000 Page: 5 Of: 5


Jerry -:- Politcs and Palestinians (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:03:24 (GMT)
__ jondon -:- Maharaji Politcs and Palestinians (ot) -:- Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:49:20 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- What do you think of this article, Jer? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 20:19:41 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- A decent synopsis -:- Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 04:39:02 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- 'Process this' -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:32:47 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- 'Why do we keep rewarding violence?' -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:42:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- 'Why do we keep rewarding violence?' -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:43:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Just shows how little you know about this, Jer -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:25:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Actually... -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 17:00:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Actually, youre dreaming (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:48:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Stonor -:- Actually, Jim, aren't we all dreaming? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:03:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Whatever -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:29:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ JohnT -:- Civil War -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:58:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- That's faulty reasoning, John -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:16:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- That's not reasoning at all, Jim -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:31:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Hm, maybe that's what I should have said -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:38:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Show how much you know about this, Jim -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:45:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Don't bullshit me, John -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:51:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- more -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:57:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- I don't think you've read this thread, Jim -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:06:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- No, I've read it -- I just disagree with you guys -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:16:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- No, you don't get away with that -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:33:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- You don't get away with that either. -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:04:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What exactly does that question mean? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:28:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You got your answers, john, where are mine? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 16:58:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- FUCK OFF JIM. -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:30:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- After having a coffee -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:53:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- FUCK OFF JIM. -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:44:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- What exactly does that question mean? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:32:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- And here's an even BETTER question or two! -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:33:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- A little more 'parity of esteem', John? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 18:21:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- And the farce continues -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 18:26:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- So you won't answer the question? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:51:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jerry -:- So you won't answer the question? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:39:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Bin Liner -:- So you won't answer the question? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:13:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Answer the question on parity of esteem nt -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:05:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Don't read my mind Jim -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:56:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Fine, don't try to fudge things -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:12:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- What? Are you insane?? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:19:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yers, John, sure. Anything you say -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:30:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Thanks for that! -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:40:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What a helpful sentiment! -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:53:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- When Israeli mobs attack... -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:15:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- You're missing it -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:16:09 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- Get informed at -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:11:23 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- And read what are they fighting about. -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:15:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- Here's another take on the causes of the fighting -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 13:48:34 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Politcs and Palestinians (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:38:48 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Oh no, you really think that? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:14:16 (GMT)
__ __ Jethro -:- How true -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 12:54:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ JohnT -:- Reality check -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 13:43:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- But why did Arafat back down? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:00:59 (GMT)
__ __ AJW -:- You can't be serious Jim -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 09:25:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- What utter bullshit -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 11:44:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- What utter bullshit -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:17:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- It happened here -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:04:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ Mel Bourne -:- He IS serious ... Anth -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 11:04:05 (GMT)
__ __ JohnT -:- I really think this -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 09:04:05 (GMT)
__ __ Helen -:- Oh no, you really think that? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:54:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ AJW -:- Clinton -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 11:32:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Helen -:- Clinton -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:31:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- 'Arafat could call it off with a word' -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:45:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Helen -:- 'Arafat could call it off with a word' -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:15:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- but how can he? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:29:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- It is out of Arafat's hand now. -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:54:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- Oh no, you really think that? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 04:30:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Salam -:- Oh no, you really think that? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 05:52:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yes and that's exactly why Islam is fucked -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 18:15:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ john -:- Oh no, you really think that? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 04:02:53 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- Yes, I do -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:39:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ Bin Liner -:- Yes, I do and further thoughts -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:11:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ ExTex -:- My 2 cents worth -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 08:31:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Off-the-rack bullshit, ExTex -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:45:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Empty abuse, Jim -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:49:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- 'Abuse'? Oh my god! Call Social Services! -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:20:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- 'Abuse' = insulting or coarse language -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:46:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Salam -:- My 2 cents worth -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:01:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Salam, That was a TERRIFIC POST!! (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:16:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- typo -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:40:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ ExTex -:- PS -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 08:41:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- Roots of the conflict:Sacred Sites, deadly dispute -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:13:59 (GMT)

Jim -:- Michael -- hit the back button! -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:14:02 (GMT)
__ Rob -:- Here's a tip I learnt -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:52:12 (GMT)

Michael Dettmers -:- My responses to your additional questions -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:03:24 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- Thank you, Michael -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:24:22 (GMT)
__ __ Katie -:- P.S. to MD and all re empty posts -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:27:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- P.S. to MD and all re empty posts -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:46:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Brian -:- re empty posts -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:08:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Katie -:- Salam, I have the exact same picture in my head!nt -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:50:30 (GMT)
__ SUCHABANANA -:- NO Talk? DLM REVENUES,ASSETS,M EXPENSES,TRANSFERS? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:35:06 (GMT)
__ janet of venice -:- 2 empty posts-is someone jamming you?? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:10:03 (GMT)
__ Michael Dettmers -:- 3rd try re above -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:07:19 (GMT)
__ Michael Dettmers -:- My responses to your additional questions -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:59:03 (GMT)
__ __ hamzen -:- Really appreciate your honesty and openess, -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:22:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ Michael Dettmers -:- Really appreciate your honesty and openess, -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:57:18 (GMT)
__ __ Cynthia G. -:- Thank you -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:08:11 (GMT)
__ __ Susan -:- the power of validation -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:13:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ Helen -:- Susan, Michael -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:51:41 (GMT)
__ __ Joe -:- Wow... -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:57:43 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- You're a godsend, Michael -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:40:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ ham -:- And fits exactly all the other descriptions of him -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:59:05 (GMT)
__ __ Bin Liner -:- My responses to your additional questions -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:18:50 (GMT)
__ __ Don't worry -:- Text will appear in a little while, by his grace. -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:09:07 (GMT)
__ janet of venice -:- wheres the text? i was highly interested -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:15:13 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Obviously he's got nothing further to say -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:19:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Mike, it looks like you tried again but..... -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:07:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ janet of venice -:- try this as safety measure -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:19:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- try this as safety measure -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:14:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Tonette -:- Or is all else fails..... -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:35:55 (GMT)

Q/Way/Q -:- The 25 Dragons/The master dragon/RU sure? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:08:11 (GMT)
__ Joseph Campbell -:- The legend of Q and Prem Pal - final chapter -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:31:46 (GMT)
__ __ Jerry -:- lol -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:31:58 (GMT)
__ Way -:- The 25 Dragons/The master dragon/RU sure? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:33:00 (GMT)
__ __ Q -:- Moi? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 20:52:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ janet of venice -:- Moi? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:34:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Way -:- the key to the secret language is... -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:43:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Q -:- lazy hopes -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:38:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ jof v -:- lazy hopes -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:22:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Way -:- some confusion here -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 18:36:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- lazy hopes -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:22:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- Fred være med Dere mystery solved... -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:40:11 (GMT)

cq -:- Help - any AppleMac clone users out there? (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:32:03 (GMT)
__ hamzen -:- From a 7.5.3'er -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:26:12 (GMT)
__ suchabanana -:- Help - any AppleMac clone users out there? (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:10:38 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- Thanks Swamiji, I owe you a drink! (nt) -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 16:35:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ Stonor -:- Hey cq! -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 17:01:55 (GMT)

Zen -:- Gracias por tu Translation al Forum Spanish (nt) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:22:36 (GMT)

Cynthia G. -:- Outing People -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:17:00 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- Outing People -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 08:15:06 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Outing People -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:35:31 (GMT)
__ __ Cynthia -:- Thank you, Sir Dave (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:43:29 (GMT)

Joe -:- George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 17:59:46 (GMT)
__ Helen -:- George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:03:17 (GMT)
__ Katie -:- I don't get it either, Joe (ot) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:59:49 (GMT)
__ janet of venice -:- -- I don't get it (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:05:15 (GMT)
__ __ comix relief? -:- Holy Joe Lieberman Invokes the G-Word ... -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:12:00 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Not bad paragraphing, Janet. Not bad (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:32:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ j of v -:- Not bad paragraphing, Janet. Not bad (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 05:56:03 (GMT)
__ Jerry -:- George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:21:29 (GMT)
__ __ Mickey the Pharisee -:- I think that Molly Ivins came up with 'Dubya' nt -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:20:17 (GMT)
__ __ Helen -:- George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:14:00 (GMT)
__ __ Joe -:- Dubya -- and a Poem re George Dubya -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:48:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ Cynthia G. -:- I think George Dubya is a stupid as a stump (nt) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:36:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ ExTex -:- I think George Dubya is a stupid as a stump (nt) -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 10:04:49 (GMT)

Yves -:- To Jim about your last post to Weirdo -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 17:50:31 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- To Jim about your last post to Weirdo -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:48:27 (GMT)
__ __ Yves -:- Mussolini issue -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:04:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jerry -:- Mussolini issue -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 05:34:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Yves -:- I don't know, I just imagined -:- Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 14:59:41 (GMT)
__ __ Yves -:- About number 4 -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:59:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ Tonette -:- Her name is Navlata not Nevlata -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:06:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Is Hindi a real language? -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 17:18:34 (GMT)

Joe -:- EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:56:10 (GMT)
__ Daneane -:- EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 20:28:26 (GMT)
__ __ Elan Vital -:- Thank you Daneane -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:00:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- O hope you're saving these -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:24:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Elan Vital -:- Thank You -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:07:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Curious George -:- Great sense of dry humour - must be a Brit -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 06:06:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Daneane -:- Mighty right(nt) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:41:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Susan -:- BRILLIANT!!!! (nt) -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:16:43 (GMT)
__ __ Selene -:- hey Daneane this one IS all about you -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 20:42:03 (GMT)
__ la-ex -:- EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:34:38 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- M should consider merging with Scientology -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:04:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ DeProGram Anand Ji -:- M should join the million family march -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:59:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- That's pretty damned funny (nt) -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 20:00:21 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- That's amazing -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:57:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ la-ex -:- That's amazing/video copy and another point..... -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:48:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Bin Liner -:- That's amazing/video copy and another point..... -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 01:14:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- And I used to think that the LORD thing was weird -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:15:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- May your dream come true. NT -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 17:27:37 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:23:21 (GMT)

Steven Quint -:- Another Interesting Link -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:06:12 (GMT)
__ cq -:- You can ask God a question there -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:16:10 (GMT)
__ __ j of v -:- ok. been there, did that. whats next -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:43:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- There can be only one place left to turn ... -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 12:02:57 (GMT)
__ Jean-Michel -:- Another Interesting Link -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:57:16 (GMT)

jondon -:- Question RE: Satellite Videos -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:39:31 (GMT)
__ JTF -:- Question RE: Satellite Videos -:- Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 16:39:02 (GMT)

Salam -:- Is this how Amoroo will look like? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:12:37 (GMT)
__ Bidouc -:- Is this how Amoroo will look like? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:15:31 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- Is this how Amoroo will look like? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:21:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ Bidouc -:- Is this how Amoroo will look like? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:24:31 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Salam -:- Is this how Amoroo will look like? -:- Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:40:58 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- How are they? -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:16:05 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- oops, typo: Who are they?..nt -:- Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:17:45 (GMT)


Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:03:24 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Politcs and Palestinians (ot)
Message:
There's a lot of news these days about the current, never ending crisis in the Middle East. One thing that, as an American, I find myself particularly disturbed by, is the stance American political candidates are taking. It seems to me, somebody who is modestly informed, that the problem you've got going on over there is your standard 'we're oppressed, we're tired of it, we taste freedom, and, goddam it, we're going to fight for and get it!' I'm talking about the Paestinians and their cause. I don't see how any American can't sympathize with it. Yet, candidate after candidate, both Republican and Democrat, is lining up one after the other to declare:

I support Israel
I support Israel
I support Israel....

ad infinitum. The only reason I can see for this is that there are a hell of a lot more Jewish voters in this country than there are Palestinian. I find this disgusting, and very transparent on the part of our politicians just what their priorities are. Anything for a vote.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:49:20 (GMT)
From: jondon
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Maharaji Politcs and Palestinians (ot)
Message:
Why does'nt Maharaji, who professes to practice the teachings of Peace, go over to the two warring sides and give em all the Knowledge so that they will become peaceful? I'll bet he flies as far away from that airspace as possible. The little chicken shit.

jondon

Hey Maharaji, practice what you preach.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 20:19:41 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: What do you think of this article, Jer?
Message:
'A colossal tragedy'

Alexander Rose
National Post

Enric Marti, The Associated Press

HOW THE LAST BEST CHANCE FOR PEACE WAS LOST: In front of a mural depicting the struggle of the Palestinians for Jerusalem, a boy holds an Islamic flag at a rally in Gaza, yesterday.

WASHINGTON, D.C. - It was premature for a summit bringing together Chairman Yasser Arafat, Prime Minister Ehud Barak and the United States to discuss an Israeli-Palestinian peace, Bill Clinton told reporters on June 14. That same day, Mr. Barak publicly described how 'we cannot negate a Palestinian's right to dream about his Palestine,' spoke of the need for compromise and agreed to release three Palestinian terrorists from Israeli jails. Almost immediately, Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, rejected Mr Barak's prisoner-release scheme: 'We don't want goodwill gestures from the Israelis ... They can keep their goodwill gestures for themselves.'

Three weeks later, President Clinton announced a summit was to be held at Camp David -- where Egypt and Israel had signed a peace treaty in 1978 -- scheduled for July 11. Only hours before he departed for the talks, Mr. Barak narrowly survived a no-confidence vote in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, after three right-wing parties defected from his coalition government over his policy of making expansive concessions to procure 'peace and security.' Likud opposition leader Ariel Sharon was particularly exercised that the Prime Minister would give away too much for too little at Camp David, simply to bring home a peace agreement. For his part, Mr. Barak quoted Menachem Begin ('The difficulties of peace are better than the agonies of war') and reiterated that 'a painful compromise is required ... not only by ourselves, but also ... the Palestinians.' Most strikingly, Mr. Barak went further than any previous Israeli leader in making plain his desire to see a Palestinian entity come into being: 'The State of Israel does not wish to control you and your future. We want good neighbourly relations with you based on respect and liberty, on broad coordination, on shared interests, and on a separation that will allow you and us to maintain independent identities.'

At the summit, the Israelis proposed handing more than 90% of the West Bank, which was captured from Jordan during the 1967 war, to Mr. Arafat's Palestinian Authority. The Palestinians, however, demanded that Israel withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, meaning that 100% of the West Bank and all of east Jerusalem (which includes the Old City, site of the Western Wall, the sanctum sanctorum of the Jews) would have to be relinquished. Palestinians argued that the Old City also contains Haram al-Sharif, the third holiest site in Islam.

Moreover, Jerusalem was intended to serve as the capital of a future Palestinian state. To Israelis, partitioning Jerusalem was unacceptable. Not only would the Western Wall fall under Palestinian sovereignty (before 1967, the Jordanians had behaved despicably towards synagogues and Jewish cemeteries, the tombstones of which were used to pave the way to army latrines), Palestinian troops would be situated there.

Conflict quickly centred around Jerusalem's future status. At one point, Mr. Barak proposed devolving some Palestinian suburbs of east Jerusalem, which could be used as the site of Mr. Arafat's capital. While remaining nominally under Israeli sovereignty, Mr. Arafat would enjoy full municipal control. In return for this concession, Mr. Barak wanted to keep some settlements in heavily Jewish-populated areas of the West Bank. After nearly a week of negotiations there were signs of modest progress on mostly unimportant matters. On matters of substance, such as Jerusalem's status or eliciting from the Palestinian leadership a statement promising to 'end the conflict' against Israel after a peace agreement, the two sides had not even inched closer together. By July 19, Mr. Barak was threatening to leave the summit, claiming that 'the Palestinian Authority is not prepared, simply is not prepared, to reach an understanding to reach a peace agreement with Israel.' The wording in his statement was noteworthy: He did not say the Palestinian side was unprepared to 'reach a peace agreement,' but that it was unprepared even in the first place to 'reach an understanding' to reach a peace agreement. Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestinian politician close to Mr. Arafat, in turn accused Mr. Barak of going 'to Camp David with inflexible, intractable positions.'

However, during the talks Mr. Barak had already recognized a Palestinian state covering most of the West Bank and Gaza, and accepted tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees as part of a family unification program. He even agreed to consider an unofficial American proposal to share sovereignty over east Jerusalem but leaving the subject of control over the Old City up in the air. The Palestinians rejected the proposal out of hand. Later, it was reported that Mr. Barak had offered Mr. Arafat a degree of control over Muslim and, somewhat oddly, Christian holy sites in the Old City. One Israeli newspaper columnist observed that Mr. Barak had 'gone further than perhaps he thought he would before he came here.'

At this time, Mr. Arafat enjoyed the support of the Arab world in his refusal to step back from the Jerusalem issue: A typical editorial (in al-Khaleej, a United Arab Emirates' newspaper) commented: 'an agreement [with Israel] which does not include a clear Palestinian sovereignty over east Jerusalem is the worst failure ... it is the betrayal itself.' King Fahd of Saudi Arabia and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt urged Mr. Arafat not to accept a deal which did not give him total sovereignty over at least east Jerusalem. Ms. Ashrawi accordingly added that because the suburbs 'were ours anyway,' Jerusalem must be shared, with full Palestinian authority over east Jerusalem, including the old city. The 'municipal control' proposal, which would have provided Mr. Arafat with a functioning, administrative capital and continued to allow Muslim access to the Haram al-Sharif, was dismissed as 'unacceptable.' Mr Arafat upped the pressure during the talks by ruling out even a partial peace deal that would have left the intractable Jerusalem issue to a future summit and declared that by September 13 -- agreement or no agreement --the Palestinian Authority would issue a unilateral declaration of independence.

Hoping to defuse the tension, the summit's hosts scheduled a baseball game, showed Mr. Barak (Israel's most highly decorated soldier) around the Civil War battlefield at Gettysburg, and invited Mr. Arafat to have tea at Madeleine Albright's nearby farm. Mr. Barak's mood mirrored Gettysburg's sombre atmosphere; an Israeli source told Reuters that he was 'in a very gloomy mood' despite the optimism shown by Mr. Clinton that a deal could still be salvaged.

On July 25, the peace talks ended after Mr. Arafat formally rejected an amended American proposal to give parts of east Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority because it did not entirely satisfy his demands for control over the Old City and other religious sites. It later emerged that Mr. Arafat had also rejected out of hand an American plan to establish a US$30-billion international fund to resettle Palestinian refugees in a new Palestinian state. Instead, he demanded that the millions of refugees must settle in Israel proper; this issue was 'non-negotiable.' As Israel's population is only about five million, adding millions more in one fell swoop would cause collapse.

A somewhat edgy Mr. Clinton, said one senior administration official, viewed the proposal 'as a fair resolution, a fair, carefully thought out agreement over who should do what, where ... It was an amalgam of all the various proposals, and the president said he would not even take it to Barak unless Arafat accepted it, because Barak had already moved more than the Palestinians.' There is evidence that Mr. Clinton was furious at Mr. Arafat's intransigence. In coming days, he threatened to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv (George W. Bush had promised he would do this in mid-May) to Jerusalem and sternly warned the Palestinians against issuing a unilateral declaration of independence, which entailed walking away from the peace process. In that instance, 'I would review our entire relationship.' Mr. Barak told reporters, 'Arafat was afraid to make the historic decisions necessary at this time in order to bring about an end to the conflict.' Mr. Arafat, for his part, told a Saudi Arabian newspaper, 'peace, stability and security cannot be restored to the Middle East without the return of Jerusalem to full Palestinian authority and as the capital of the future Palestinian state.' To observers, it appeared that Mr. Arafat had actually become more extreme and intransigent over the course and aftermath of the Camp David summit.

At the end of July, the Palestinian leader proceeded to tour European, Arab and other capitals in order to accumulate a counterbalance to U.S. influence. He accused President Clinton of taking sides and falling for Israeli lies. Nevertheless, Palestinian spokesmen suddenly agreed 'declaring statehood in the designated time [i.e., September 13] is not a requisite,' though in the Arabic-language press, there was no such indication. The sudden willingness to compromise over the deadline may have been prompted by both Russia and China urging him to choose a more 'appropriate moment'; in the meantime, he should continue the peace process. The European Union, however, 'recognized the full rights of the Palestinians to declare their state whenever they decide to do so.'

On August 16, Mr. Arafat said he would 'reassess' whether to unilaterally declare a state in the absence of a peace agreement, the very act of which would immediately herald an Israeli response. The next day, his security chief in the West Bank warned that if 'there is no agreement, if there is no solution, and disappointment and loss of hope for the future lead to some kind of despair, I don't think the Palestinian people will raise the white flag' if the Israelis acted.

Two weeks later, at the very end of August, Mr. Barak again raised the possibility of Palestinian flexibility on Jerusalem's status. He was rebuffed by Palestinian senior negotiator Hassan Asfour, who stated that 'only talking about the fate of East Jerusalem' was a 'major new concession' by the Palestinian leadership. Indeed, an Arafat adviser, Nabil Abourdeneh, charged that the Palestinians would never accept 'anything less than Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem and the holy shrines in it and won't agree in any way to dividing the city.' Through this mouthpiece, Mr. Arafat was now implicitly claiming that Jews had no place in Jerusalem and that Palestinians had prior claim on its territory.

By September 6, Mr. Clinton was holding separate meetings with the Israeli and Palestinian leaders in order to find some common ground. Fanning out across the Middle East, Mrs. Albright and U.S. envoy Dennis Ross vainly implored Arab leaders to prevail upon Mr. Arafat to relax his stance on Jerusalem. Heartened by the weakness of Western leaders, on September 11, two days before the supposed deadline for a unilateral declaration, Palestinian negotiators called for more Israeli concessions in exchange for a 'postponement.' Israel was to relinquish sovereignty over a mosque in the Old City; accept all Palestinian refugees and withdraw to the 1967 borders. These demands were immediately rejected by the Israeli cabinet. In the end, Mr. Arafat postponed the declaration until at least November 15. It remains to be seen whether new conditions will be requested.

After Israeli-Palestinian talks briefly recommenced the day after the September 13 false alarm, a senior Palestinian negotiator said that now Mr. Arafat was unwilling to discuss ceding any part of the West Bank to Israel, as it would 'mean continuation of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.' This violated a concrete concession made by the Palestinian leader at Camp David. Mr. Arafat, however, had chosen his moment well: Mr. Barak was facing another no-confidence vote at the end of October, when parliament returned from its summer recess.

Even though the opposition parties were gaining ground, Mr. Barak was quoted as being willing to consider calling the capital of a Palestinian state Al-Quds (the Arabic word for Jerusalem) and saying that there could be two capitals next to each other. Moreover, President Clinton wished to leave office with a grand Middle Eastern peace deal under his belt. It may be speculated that the dovish Martin Indyk, the U.S. ambassador to Israel (who soon after had his security clearance revoked for using a laptop to store classified material), was advising Mr. Barak at this time to appease Mr. Arafat.

On September 17, 50 Palestinian schoolchildren pelted Israeli police with stones and bottles in the Gaza Strip. Ten days later, at the same junction, two roadside bombs exploded, killing an Israeli soldier. The next day, the Mideast talks in Washington broke up and Likud leader Ariel Sharon toured the Haram al-Sharif. No doubt aware that his action might cause controversy, Mr. Sharon said his motive was to demonstrate that 'the Temple Mount is in our hands and will remain in our hands. It is the holiest site in Judaism and it is the right of every Jew to visit the Temple Mount.' He was disappointed that the Palestinians had taken to insisting it was theirs --and that Mr. Barak was softening his position.

Dozens of police and Palestinian insurrectionists were hurt in the ensuing riots, which are continuing. Violence flared up in other parts of Gaza and the West Bank, leading to murderous clashes between Israeli security forces and illegally-armed Palestinian paramilitary troops (another contravention of previous peace deals signed by Mr. Arafat). In Syria, al-Thawra, a government newspaper, wrote: 'the armed struggle should remain in the memory as the sole route to peace.' On October 4, the Washington Post reported: 'there is evidence to support the claim by Israelis that the Palestinian leadership has orchestrated the militia, as well as civilians and armed Palestinian police in the rioting' for short-term political gain over Jerusalem's status.

Yesterday, Amos Oz, Israel's leading novelist and founder of the pacifist Peace Now group, mourned in the Guardian, a British paper: 'Mr. Arafat is a colossal tragedy for both peoples. He has allowed the newly created Palestinian authority to sink in corruption, and he has incited his people against Israel and against the Jews. Finally, he has initiated this recent burst of hateful violence, in an attempt to inspire a raging fury all over the Arab and Islamic world to start a jihad, a holy war, against the Jews.'

According to a poll published on Thursday of 1,600 Lebanese Arabs, 70% do not want peace with the Israelis; 65% believe enough force should be used against Israel to 'destroy' it; and 78% say the conflict must continue no matter the result of the current violence. Most Israelis are now assuming Mr Arafat never wanted peace in the first place, and the only thing that will satisfy him is a war.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 04:39:02 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: A decent synopsis
Message:
Jim,

It might be true that all Arafat is really interested in is the annihilation of Israel, as is the sentiment of many Arabs. But that's not going to happen, and an independent Palestinian state, free from an Israeli presense, sooner or later, will come into existence. I can't see this not happenning. But not in Israel proper, as Arafat is demanding. He's crazy. As for his insistent demands on Jerusalem, I found out today in an article in the New York Times, that Arafat doesn't even believe there ever was a Solomon's Temple. Lots of Arabs, apparently, believe this. Maybe Salam can tell us more. So, why would he respect Israeli sentiments toward Jerusalem if he thinks they're lying about their own history?! Boggles the mind.

Let's see what happens in Egypt. And let's also see what happens with Arafat. Rumor has it the only reason he didn't call off the dogs of war is because if he did, and nobody listened, it would show just how out of control of the situation he really is. That's what the CIA is saying. And wouldn't THAT put mud on all the faces of these politicians who are holding him responsible? Thanks for the article. It covers some of those missing details I was telling you about.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:32:47 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: 'Process this'
Message:
Here's an editorial from Canada's National Post that I agree with:

Process this

National Post

There were more Palestinian attacks against Israeli soldiers and police yesterday, who defended themselves with force. But there was diplomatic rejoicing nonetheless, for while violence continues and peace is dead, the 'peace process' was revived. It looks like another 'peace summit' will convene in Egypt, as early as today. Perhaps Yasser Arafat will even sign a new 'peace agreement.'

That is the problem with the peace process. Too much process, not enough peace. Mr. Arafat is an expert at this game. He has signed a half-dozen peace agreements, but the PLO war against Israel is more deadly now than at any time since the first treaty was signed in Oslo, seven years ago.

The peace process has become a tool of terror, for it is camouflage for violence. All of the summits and treaties so far, from Oslo to Madrid to Wye to Camp David, have not brought peace or security or finality to the region's interminable problems. But they have allowed Mr. Arafat to masquerade as a peacemaker.

The peace process circuit is an important ingredient of the modern terrorist's public relations: This summer, when Mr. Arafat was accused by Amnesty International of horrendous human rights abuses against his own people he could laugh it off. After all, was he not the same Yasser Arafat who had won the Nobel Peace Prize, for shaking his foe's hand on the White House lawn?

In every negotiation, the only demand placed on Mr. Arafat is that he end the violence. In return, he has successively bartered for land, then for local political sovereignty, then for financial support and then for an Israeli-equipped police force. Every time Mr. Arafat violates the latest agreement, another summit is called. And because it is easier to put pressure on reasonable, democratic politicians than on terrorists, the 'international community' presses Israel to make more concessions. Mr. Arafat pockets these and offers again what he offered before: peace. And when it is expedient to break his word and rekindle violence to squeeze another concession, that is what he does.

This should not be surprising, for it is the standard operating procedure of violent men who can convince a peace-loving foe to sit down and negotiate. Neville Chamberlain returned triumphantly from Germany, brandishing Adolf Hitler's guarantee of 'peace in our time.' All the useless 'piece of paper' did was legitimize Hitler's deeds to that date and buy him time to build-up the Wehrmacht unmolested.

More recently, the 'peace process' has been substituted for genuine peace in Ireland, with Sinn Fein-IRA terrorists banking concession after concession until they were brought into the government of Ulster without relinquishing a single bullet or ounce of explosive.

That is the danger when the process becomes more important than peace itself. The United States, Canada, the UN and others so want to see peace in the Middle East that they have deluded themselves that somehow peace will come if only the process can be maintained.

So much political capital is invested in the process that peace itself is sacrificed in order to keep recalcitrant terrorists inside the process. The gruesome events in Jerusalem this week, in which a baying Palestinian mob lynched Israeli soldiers, are the result. Washington and the UN, Ottawa and Brussels must now admit Mr. Arafat is not a 'partner for peace' but a duplicitous enemy of peace. And they must act accordingly. A peace treaty is a contract, and the PLO has reneged a half-dozen times. Why is Mr. Arafat's word still treated as though it had any value?

As Henry Kissinger said, if a man is willing to kill you, he is probably willing to lie to you, too.

Mr. Arafat has done both -- his entire career is punctuated with killing and lies. He uses peace treaties the same way he uses Palestinian youths -- as expendable tools in his war against Israel.


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:42:15 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: 'Why do we keep rewarding violence?'
Message:
I also agree with this guy's editorial:

Why do we keep rewarding violence?

Appeasement only serves to amplify the mob's grievances

Norman Doidge
National Post

It is not in Canada's interest for there to be all-out war in the Middle East. Yet, the recent vote by Canada for UN Security Council resolution 1322, though designed to quell the Middle East war tensions, has only inflamed them. The UN vote, sponsored by Malaysia, an Islamic state, was overwhelmingly one-sided and anti-Israel, blaming all the violence on the Jewish state. The message Canada sent to the Middle East was that if you are Palestinian and you take to the streets with Kalashnikovs, Israel's Western democratic allies will reward you by denouncing her, if she dares defend herself. When violence is rewarded, it becomes logical to escalate it. It's simple behaviourism.

Now, empowered by the UN's authority, angry mobs have assembled throughout the Arab world, calling for the destruction of Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, and shouting anti-Western slogans.

It's raining paradoxes in the Middle East. The most mysterious is that the more Israel offers the Palestinians, the angrier they become. At Camp David, the most dovish Israeli Prime Minister in history, Ehud Barak, offered 99% of the West Bank to Yasser Arafat.

Barak offered to recognize a Palestinian state, and, in addition, did what was unthinkable for dovish Yitzchak Rabin. He accepted Bill Clinton's proposal to divide the Old City of Jerusalem into a Jewish and an Arab portion.

Then Arafat did what Clinton thought unthinkable. He refused Barak's offer, and insisted Israel give the Palestinians the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem and the Western Wall of Solomon's Temple. No prime minister of Israel could ever ascent to that without civil war. Talks broke down, July 25, 2000.

Immediately after -- long before Ariel Sharon's so-called provocative walk on the mount of Solomon's Temple, Judaism's holiest site -- Arafat began a campaign of violence. The campaign was officially announced in August, by the Palestinian Authority's Justice Minister, who stated: 'Violence is near and the Palestinian people are willing to sacrifice even 5,000 casualties.' The Palestinian Authority's Minister of Planning had said, in a taped interview: 'We decided to begin liberating our homeland step after step. We honour the peace treaties so long as the agreements are fulfilled step by step. If and when Israel says, 'Enough,' namely, 'We will not discuss Jerusalem,' we will return to violence. But this time it will be 30,000 armed Palestinian soldiers.' The goal is to whittle Israel down in stages.

Some explain Arafat's walking away from the table by saying he is a man who never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity, depicting him as inept. It's clever, but wrong. Arafat has been clear all along -- when speaking in Arabic, as opposed to the Western press -- that he doesn't want to compromise, as he made perfectly clear at Camp David. He doesn't want to compromise because he does not really accept the legitimacy of a Jewish state, just as many do not in what journalists often describe as 'the Arab street.'

It is these powerful images of the Arab street that fill our television sets. What is occurring there is a kind of emotional feedforward system. A feedforward system is the opposite of a feedback system. In a feedback system, like a thermostat, when the furnace raises the temperature to a certain point, the heat is turned off. In a feedforward system something is progressively turned on. This is what happens when a country mobilizes for war. One stimulus leads to another which amplifies it which leads to another which amplifies it.

An angry mob is emotional feedforward in action. Each expressed grievance gives rise to another. Anger is an emotion that is always looking for a justification. A mob will try to provoke the other side, often to justify its anger.

The box Barak has placed himself in is that Palestinian anger is amplified both by defensive Israeli shows of force and by Israeli concessions.

The Israeli right, under Benjamin Netanyahu, had long argued that the psychology of the Middle East is such that each Israeli compromise was interpreted not as a compromise but as a retreat: an admission of weakness, and guilt. After the admission of guilt, Israel was to be punished, and Arab honour avenged. The right's position -- which has new life in Israel now because Barak's and Clinton's policies of appeasement have failed -- has been that Israeli compromises would have to take place only when true democratic institutions had taken hold among the Palestinians, and when leaders stopped saying one thing to the West and another to the West Bank.

But Western minds do not fully get the idea that Arafat will not compromise. Western democracies are pleasant commercial regimes, with the tendency to think about disputes as they do about material things: Any difference can be split, like a pie, in two, or dealt with by negotiation. When Arafat and his followers speak of Holy War, they are not interested in material things.

Israel has been in this spot before, but not, as many commentators claim, in the days before the Yom Kippur War in 1973. The real comparison is 1948, when a UN resolution split the difference between Arabs and Jews, and divided the region into a Jewish and an Arab State. The Jews accepted the split. But the Palestinians rejected it, wanting the whole pie. It was at that point that encircling Arab armies attacked the Jewish settlement, seized Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish Quarter. This is precisely what the Israelis are afraid will happen again.

Israel, with all its imperfections, is the only true democracy in the Middle East.

Canadians, Americans and even Israelis have for a decade now promoted policies of appeasement. To do so, we in the West have had to refuse to acknowledge the profoundly anti-Western and anti-democratic sentiments driving the anti-Israel movement, so powerfully expressed in 'the Arab street.' It's time to ask why we don't feel ashamed to find ourselves siding with dictatorships in Iran, Iraq, China, Libya, Syria and the like on this issue. For these are times, in which, as the poet Yeats said, 'The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are filled with passionate intensity.'

Norman Doidge is a research psychiatrist and psychoanalyst.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:43:25 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: 'Why do we keep rewarding violence?'
Message:
At Camp David, the most dovish Israeli Prime Minister in history, Ehud Barak, offered 99% of the West Bank to Yasser Arafat.

Did he also offer to remove all Israli forces from that 99% of the West Bank, or was he going to leave some behind to police holy sites that Jews might want to visit? My understanding is this is a sticking point with the Palestinians. They don't want an Israeli presense in 'Palestine' (if such a state is ever going to exist), at all. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm right, they're right to demand this.

Then Arafat did what Clinton thought unthinkable. He refused Barak's offer, and insisted Israel give the Palestinians the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem and the Western Wall of Solomon's Temple. No prime minister of Israel could ever ascent to that without civil war.

This I agree with. Arafat is asking for the impossible. But he knows this is what he has to do in order to win favor with Palestinians, and all Muslims. There's a very holy Muslim site in that quarter, where the prohet himself, Muhammed, is supposed to have ascended into heaven (I think I'm right about this. Again, correct me if I'm wrong). What would Arafat look like to the Muslim world if he handed this most sacred of sites over to Jewish control? It's a no-win situation. He can't gain control of it, and he can't relinquish control of it, either.

The real comparison is 1948, when a UN resolution split the difference between Arabs and Jews, and divided the region into a Jewish and an Arab State. The Jews accepted the split. But the Palestinians rejected it, wanting the whole pie.

If this is true, it's news to me. My understanding is there was no split. There was just a chunk of land handed over to the Jews, and if any Arabs happenned to be living on it, well, that was their tough luck, which is exactly what it turned out to be when they became second class citizens in an Israeli state.

Listen, the only solution I can see to this is when the Palestinians are given their own state, free of an Israeli presense, to sink or swim in it. Then, if they want to join in with the rest of the surrounding Arab nations to abolish Israel, it's their grave.

But Jerusalem? Ah, poor Jeruslaem... There will never be peace in Jerusalem. And never an agreement.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:25:50 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Just shows how little you know about this, Jer
Message:
Sorry, Jer, I normally have nothing but respect for your opinions. Why? Because they're usually grounded in at least some knowledge of what you're speaking but, more importantly, a sense I perceive that you have of how deep your knowledge is. That is, you usually seem to know and respect the limits of your understanding of something.

I don't get that impression at all with this issue though. So how much should I value your opinion?

Yes, the palestinians most definitely abandonded their homes and lands in '48 to await the destruction of Israel!

I say that every last word in Doidge's editorial is accurate. That's the history and that's fair analysis. And THAT's why I think you guys are all out to lunch. Sorry.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 17:00:35 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Actually...
Message:
The real comparison is 1948, when a UN resolution split the difference between Arabs and Jews, and divided the region into a Jewish and an Arab State. The Jews accepted the split. But the Palestinians rejected it, wanting the whole pie.

It's been a long time since high school, but what I remember really happenning is, at this time, any Arabs that were living on what was declared the new state of Israel were told to pack up their bags an leave their homes behind. No? Whatever. Any Arabs who were living where the state of Israel was declared got fucked, and there's been hell to pay for it since.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:48:26 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Actually, youre dreaming (nt)
Message:
hhhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:03:56 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Actually, Jim, aren't we all dreaming?
Message:
Actually, Jim, aren't we all dreaming of better pasts, presents, and futures?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:29:19 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Whatever
Message:
Jim,

I only know what I read in the papers and see on TV (or remember from high school, the couple of days I actually attended classes). I try to piece together a coherent understanding from that. I just think all of the campaigning politicians looked like ducks on a pond, one after the the other, quack-quacking for votes by declaring their support for Israel and condeming Arafat, when many reports are saying how unclear it is how much sway he has in provoking or stopping the violence. But, whatever, my opinion on the matter isn't the last word on what's happenning over there, or what's going to stop it. It's just an opinion based on a moderate understanding, as are all of my opinions. If you see no reason to agree with me, because you get the sense that I'm not sure of myself, I can understand that. I'm not. I'll be the first to admit that there's details that I'm not aware of, that could sway or strengthen my current outlook.

But like I said -- whatever.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:58:06 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Civil War
Message:
Norman Doidge, National Post: No prime minister of Israel could ever ascent to that without civil war.

So Israel is that close to civil war, is it?

Now, let me see, what do political leaders do when threatened with civil war at home? Is it to MAKE WAR on an external 'enemy'? No surely not. It cannot be that the most powerful (theistic) state in the region is held together only by making war on a common enemy.

That cannot be right.

It's unthinkable.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:16:35 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: That's faulty reasoning, John
Message:
You've got your cart before your horse.

Try again?

I'm going back to bed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:31:09 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: That's not reasoning at all, Jim
Message:
Reckon you need your sleep.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:38:21 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Hm, maybe that's what I should have said
Message:
You're kind of right, it really isn't much in the way of reasoning.

You wrote:

So Israel is that close to civil war, is it?

Now, let me see, what do political leaders do when threatened with civil war at home? Is it to MAKE WAR on an external 'enemy'? No surely not. It cannot be that the most powerful (theistic) state in the region is held together only by making war on a common enemy.

That cannot be right.

It's unthinkable.

as if to faceitously suggest that, just because one can imagine a scenario where an external enemy might help a government avert civil war, that that's the likely reason that Israel would 'make war' on their external enemy, the Palestinians.

That's confused thinking.

For one thing, no one's suggesting that the threat of Israeli civil war (however seriously one wants to take it) exists independently of this problem. It would have to to play into your suggested theory (i.e. war to otherwise avoid civil war). To the contrary, the threat of civil war only arises because of the possibility (in the original theory) that Israel might not deal with the Palestinians aggressively enough.

So that's where your cart's before your horse.

But furthermore, you're not giving any apparent consideration to any of the many other reasons that Israel, let's say, might 'make war' against the Palestinians. You've siezed on one possible explanation (which was already ass-backwards) and argue it as if it's necessarily proven as the cause.

That's the same trap conspiracy buffs always fall into. Find some possible reason for something and assume it to be true without any consideration of any of the often many, indeed more likely reasons for something.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:45:49 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Show how much you know about this, Jim
Message:
No, I'm just saying that's a reason worth considering in this case. So what's your theory?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:51:16 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Don't bullshit me, John
Message:
That's not at all what you were saying, that this was a 'reason worth considering.'

Read your post again. You very smugly had it all figured out and THAT was your analysis.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:57:34 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: more
Message:
I forgot to answer your question.

What's MY theory?

The Palestinians don't know what they want.

In other words, they're all mixed up between specific, practical (i.e. compromised) goals, impractical goals, blood lust, religious martyrdom and who-knows-what.

All I know for sure is that Arafat has encouraged the bloodshed for his own goals. I also know that there's no place in the world where people can attack the police force or army -- yes, even with rocks, although here they had some guns as well -- with impunity.

This is all one big, Palestinian set-up and yes, it's partially attributable to Sharon's provocation. But so what? Where does that go? Sharon visits the Temple Mount and the religious leaders cry out for martyrs?

Give me a fucking break!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:06:02 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I don't think you've read this thread, Jim
Message:
Many states do not find it necessary to respond with lethal force to kids chucking stones at cops and squadies. This is something to be happy about.

Now, why do you think the state of Israel feels the need to escalate the conflict the way it has?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:16:06 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: No, I've read it -- I just disagree with you guys
Message:
Tell me one state where people -- not just kids! -- can attack the army or cops with stones with impunity.

And while you're at it, tell me how YOU think Israel should respond? No generalities please. You be the man, you're in charge of the Israeli cops and army. What orders do you give? Retreat? Hide for cover? What?

Again, don't just tell me what they SHOULDN'T do.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:33:04 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: No, you don't get away with that
Message:
You are arguing with some dishonesty here. The question is not one of impunity - the question is lethal force.

I'm not in the dock as the Chief of the Israeli Military for using lethal force against (the children of) civilians in occupied towns. Of course, I accept that Palestinian lives deserve parity of esteem with Israeli lives. It is not clear from what you have written on this subject that you feel this is the case as well.

Incidently, there are other models of statehood which might better meet the needs of the different populations that inhabit the area. The Swiss canton model is sometimes suggested. Do you think that the theistic elements in the Israeli state encourage looking at successful multi-ethnic states for a possible solution to the conflict they have brought to the area?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:04:05 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You don't get away with that either.
Message:
I've asked you several times about parity of esteem of Israeli lives vs those of the civilians under Israeli occupation.

Your silence on that question is disturbing. Do you believe that parity of esteem (for human life) should be applied in thinking through this matter?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:28:47 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: What exactly does that question mean?
Message:
'Parity of esteem' of human life? What IS that?

Are you asking me if I think an Israeli life, in the abstract, is worth more than a Palestinian life, in the abstract? Of course not.

But so what? Maybe the more helpful question is do you think that the Palestinians value their own lives as much as the Israeli's do? Do you think that Palestinians value their children's lives as much as Israeli's do?

Frankly, I think the answer to both question's is 'no'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 16:58:28 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You got your answers, john, where are mine?
Message:
Come on, John, I answered your question (even after you never really answered my first one).

But then I asked you some. What happened?

Again, I'm claiming that the Palestinians don't value their kids lives as much as the Israelis do. Now isn't that an ugly, ugly thing for to say? But let's talk about it. You raised the issue, didn't you?

As far as I'm concerned, when the clergy urged the kids out into the streets with rocks because Sharon visted the Temple Mount, they knew what they were doing. Adn what they were doing was exploiting the martyr tradition for very negligable and cynical goals. Like, really, was it that bad a thing that Sharon did? Really? Enough to lose your life over? How about a few young lives in your congregation?

And, again, did you know that Yassar Arafat, in the arab press, encouraged more martyrdom? For what? A little p.r.? A bit of a bargaining tool?

So come on, John, tell me all about 'parity of esteem' of human life in the region. I'm most interested in your ideas now that you have mine.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:30:49 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: FUCK OFF JIM.
Message:
You are way of the top of your head here. What the fuck do you thing the Palestinians value, you’re fucking dogmatic need for an argument. While your sitting in your friggin causy bed, there a people dying.

Oh, sorry forgot, you live in a civilized country covered with ice.

I can not believe what you are saying.

What would you do if you were the commander of chief of the Israeli army (god forbid), ha, open fire on unarmed mob that is gonna attach your country. The Palestinians have nothing to protect. Their estate is a joke.

Can not you see that the chief of command has no idea what to do? Why are their people working around the clock to stop the fighting? The whole bloody peace process is under threat here. All the mid-east might turn around and decide to go back 20 years in the past and continue the destruction. Iraq is already playing the drums of war and saying 'see I told you'.

Wake up to yourself and think it over. There is a possibility of WAR. Do you know what that is?

Oh now let me see. War in the mid-east. Would the Israelis be in the wrong if they did that? No I do not think so, because Arafat deserves what he gets. What will Al Gore think of this issue and how is going to affect the price of oil. The casualties are not important because……………

WAKE THE FUCKING UP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:53:34 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: After having a coffee
Message:
Man I have not been so infuruated like that for a while. I hate mouthing people like that.

I just do not understand why you carry on like that. Execuse the expression but you are being a shroom.

But then, I do not think that you have seem routing corpses oozing out the entire puss with hundred of flies on. Neither you have seen the grief of families of those insensitive worms the Palestinian. I do not blame you.

Do not bother to reply to my post, I won't read it. In fact I think I won't be comming to the forum for a while.

God bless

Salam

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:44:45 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: FUCK OFF JIM.
Message:
Good analysis, Salam.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:32:36 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What exactly does that question mean?
Message:
Do you think that Palestinians value their children's lives as much as Israeli's do?.

Yes, in an article I read in the Times, where a reporter was interviewing and photographing the Palestinian teenagers who were rioting, one kid said to his friend, 'Stop inviting those TV cameras over here. If my mother sees me on TV, that I'm over here, she'll beat me silly'.

Mothers are wailing for their sons, Jim. I don't think they're the anxious martyrs you see them as. More likely, they're just the latest generation of poor Paestinians who don't see much of a future ahead, and hold the Israelis responsible.

In my humble, and not too certain opinion, of course :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:33:41 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: And here's an even BETTER question or two!
Message:
Do you think that the PLO leadership value Palestinian lives as much as the Israeli government values Israeli lives?

Do you think that the Palestinian clergy value Palestinian lives as much as the Israeli clergy values Israeli lives?

And then, my favorite, do you think that Hamas values Palestinian lives as much as the Israeli leadershp values Israeli lives?

My answers, again: no, no and no!

So what was it we were talking about again? 'Parit of esteem' or whatever you called it. Tell me about it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 18:21:15 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: A little more 'parity of esteem', John?
Message:
Palestinian Authority TV Broadcasts call for Killing Jews and Americans
Independent Media Review & Analysis (IMRA)

Posted Sunday October 15, 2000 - 01:48:41 PM EDT

Jerusalem - Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon in the Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque in Gaza, broadcast live on the official Palestinian Authority television. The speaker is Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Member of the PA appointed 'Fatwa Council' and former acting Rector of the Islamic University in Gaza: '.None of the Jews refrain from committing any possible evil. If the Labor party commits the evil and the crime, the Likud party stands by it; and if the Likud party commits the evil and the crime, the Labor party stands by it.. The Jews are Jews, whether Labor or Likud... They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars. They all want to distort truth, but we are in possesion of the truth.' 'O brother believers, the criminals, the terrorists are the Jews, who have butchered our children, orphaned them, widowed our women and desecrated our holy places and sacred sites. They are the terrorists. They are the ones who must be butchered and killed, as Allah the Almighty said: 'Fight them: Allah will torture them at your hands, and will humiliate them and will help you to overcome them, and will relieve the minds of the believers....' 'O brothers in belief, this is the case of the Jews and their habitual conduct, and what happened yesterday, and has been going on for two weeks, and before that for many years, and which will be repeated in future years unless we stand up like men and unless we have the known Muslim position, [the position] of those who wage Jihad in the path of Allah, those who defend their rights and who sacrifice all that is dear to them.' 'O brothers in belief, the beautiful bride has a costly price and dowry....

Our bride is paradise, O brothers in belief. .The cost and the dowry of this bride, the dowry of this paradise, is that we fight in the path of Allah, and kill and be killed.' 'Allah has purchased from the believers their persons and their property in return for the promise that they shall have paradise, for they fight in the cause of Allah, and they slay the enemy and are slain. This is a promise that He [Allah] has made incumbent upon Himself, as set out in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Koran.' '.We say to the Jews, and we say to Clinton, and we say to all those who supported the Jews and still cooperate with the Jews, we say to them, that this will not shake us, we are the Palestinian people, who are positioned in the land of the Isra' and Mi'raj. It will not shake a single hair of ours.

Our determination will not sway. We will raise the banner of Jihad.' '.America and Europe and the world were shocked by the kidnapping of three tramps, the kidnapping of three wretched soldiers, and the killing of two in Ramallah. But their feelings were not moved, and they did not shudder when they saw the children Muhammad ad-Durrah and others women, and men, and youths being martyred by cannons and missiles, and all the barbaric instruments that the Jews possess.' 'They were moved, for the sake of five persons, and the world went into turmoil and it will not stop for Clinton or for the old hag Albright, they will not be relieved, and they will not cease to be concerned, and they will not rest until the Jews return to their families. But as for the Palestinians, as for this pure blood, it can go to Hell in the eyes of the Americans and Europe and the Jews.' 'This is the truth, O Brothers in belief. From here, Allah the almighty has called upon us not to ally with the Jews or the Christians, not to like them, not to become their partners, not to support them, and not to sign agreements with them. And he who does that, is one of them, as Allah said: 'O you who believe, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies, for they are allies of one another. Who from among you takes them as allies will indeed be one of them.' '...The Jews are the allies of the Christians, and the Christians are the allies of the Jews, despite the enmity that exists between them. The enmity between the Jews and the Christians is deep, but all of them are in agreement against the monotheists against those who say, 'There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger,' that is they are against you, O Muslims.' 'Even if an agreement of Gaza is signed - we shall not forget Haifa, and Acre, and the Galilee, and Jaffa, and the Triangle and the Negev, and the rest of our cities and villages. It is only a matter of time. The weak will not remain forever weak, and the strong will not remain forever strong... If we are weak today . and we are not able to regain our rights, then at least we have to pass on the banner waving high to our children and grandchildren...' '.None of the factions is allowed to stand on the sidelines at this stage, or not to think well of avenging our pure martyrs and wounded. .Our people must unite in one trench, and receive armaments from the Palestinian leadership, to confront the Jews. By Allah, the Jews, O brothers in belief, do not know, nor have they ever known throughout history, anything but force and Jihad in the path of Allah. The Jews are like a [gas] pedal as long as you step on it with your foot, it doesn't move, but if you lift your foot from it, it hurts you and punishes you. This is the case of the Jews.' 'Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them and those who stand by them they are all in one trench, against the Arabs and the Muslims because they established Israel here, in the beating heart of the Arab world, in Palestine.

They created it to be the outpost of their civilization and the vanguard of their army, and to be the sword of the West and the crusaders, hanging over the necks of the monotheists, the Muslims in these lands. They wanted the Jews to be their spearhead .' '. Let us put our trust in Allah, close ranks, and unite our words, and the slogan of us all should be, 'Jihad! Jihad! For the sake of Palestine, and for the sake of Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa!' '...We will not give up a single grain of soil of Palestine, from Haifa, and Jaffa, and Acre, and Mulabbas [Petah Tikva] and Salamah, and Majdal [Ashkelon], and all the land, and Gaza, and the West Bank .' '...Allah, deal with the Jews, your enemies and the enemies of Islam. Deal with the crusaders, and America, and Europe behind them, O Lord of the worlds.

.'

You mean you can't see through this?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 18:26:23 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: And the farce continues
Message:
Restoration Of Palestinian Rights Possible Only Through General Uprising [Opinion]
Tehran Times (Tehran)

Posted Saturday October 14, 2000 - 12:43:30 PM EDT

Tehran - The Palestinians and other Arab nations in the Middle East have suffered from the atrocities, criminal acts and aggressive nature of the Zionist regime for the last 50 years.

In fact ever since its illegitimate inception in 1948, the Zionist entity has done everything to undermine the security and stability in the region and violate the rights of regional nations.

But of course the Palestinians, whose homeland has been occupied by the Zionists and millions of whom have been killed or made homeless, have suffered the most. Although the UN Security Council has passed various resolutions since 1967 in vindication of the violated rights of the Palestinian nation, the Zionist regime has complied with none of these resolutions due to the all-out support of the pro-Zionist U.S. Administration.

Even the head of the Palestinian Authority Yasser Arafat, who pinned his hopes on the U.S.-sponsored peace process and signed the Oslo Accord with the Zionist regime in 1993, is now disillusioned with the so-called peace process due to the cunning and untrustworthy nature of the Zionists and Washington's partial attitude toward the Zionist regime.

But unfortunately Arafat, who stabbed the Palestinian people in the back by betraying their rights and signing a peace treaty with the usurper of their homeland, now has no alternative but to serve his Zionist masters. The British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook told the Sky Television that he was happy that Arafat had issued ordered for the arrest of those Palestinians who killed two Israeli soldiers in the West Bank on Thursday.

However, there has been no promise from any side to arrest those Zionist troops who killed more than 100 Palestinians, including a 12-year old boy and an 18-month old girl, and wounded over 1000 in the occupied territories in the past few days.

The Palestinian people have now realized that they can regain their rights only through general uprising and armed struggle against the Zionist occupiers. Also from the incident that took place in Yemen on Thursday, the pro-Zionist U.S. Administration should have received the message that the Muslims across the world will no longer tolerate its all-out support for the Zionist entity and its connivance at the heinous crimes committed by Zionist troops against the innocent Palestinians.


Ah yes, Tehran, the most compassionate regime in the world, worrying about all the 'witto witto wuns' (to borrow a phrase from you-know-who). Tell me, someone, what would happen to people, young or old, who would rise up in a mob and stone the Iranian army.

Give me a fucking break!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:51:56 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: So you won't answer the question?
Message:
Sorry, but I was really looking forward to hearing just how the Israeli military should respond. I thought maybe you would say that they should jsut all go home. That wherever and whenver the Palestinians attack them -- yes, with rocks -- that they should take that as a signal that they're just not welcome anymore and split.

And then I thought you were going to tell me about at least one other place in the world -- now or anytime in the past -- where people have been able to get away with that.

But, alas, nothing. How disappointing.

And a Swiss Canton system? For Israel and Palestine?

I'm supposed to take that seriously? Don't want to fall into the trap of thinking I can read your mind again. This is serious, right? A Swiss Canton system?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:39:24 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: So you won't answer the question?
Message:
That wherever and whenver the Palestinians attack them -- yes, with rocks -- that they should take that as a signal that they're just not welcome anymore and split.

You know, Jim. That's not such a bad idea. It is, after all, in Palestinian controlled areas, on the West Bank and the Gaza strip, that the riots are taking place, and not in Israel proper.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:13:53 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: So you won't answer the question?
Message:

I think we should leave all those people alone to sort out their differences amongst themselves.

I don't see why a devolution of power to small areas (Swiss style) might not be feasable.
.

It'd be up to them , not us , to work out how to live together.

If they want to kill each other , what can 'we' do about it.

They know , as Kipling said , 'We've got the Gatling gun & they ain't'.

So its no skin off our noses how they arrange themselves surely , & Canton government is just as good a suggestion as any other.

Have you got a better one ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:05:52 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Answer the question on parity of esteem nt
Message:
hmmm..
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:56:37 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Don't read my mind Jim
Message:
You look bad when you lay mind reading trips on people.

I asked what's your theory for the state of Israel's recent military actions against a captive civilian population?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:12:33 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Fine, don't try to fudge things
Message:
What do you think you're doing, John?

You want to argue about what you said in your 'Civil War' post? Fine. Tell me I'm wrong and show me how. But don't give me this bullshit that I can't possibly read what you're saying. What you were saying was obvious and inescapable. Here it is again:

Norman Doidge, National Post: No prime minister of Israel could ever ascent to that without civil war.
So Israel is that close to civil war, is it?

Now, let me see, what do political leaders do when threatened with civil war at home? Is it to MAKE WAR on an external 'enemy'? No surely not. It cannot be that the most powerful (theistic) state in the region is held together only by making war on a common enemy.

That cannot be right.

It's unthinkable.

Now you want to tell me how you get from there to:

No, I'm just saying that's a reason worth considering in this case. So what's your theory?

So I read this as saying that you sound pretty damned sure that YOU KNOW why Israel would 'make war' and you tell me I'm 'reading your mind.'

Please explain.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:19:29 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What? Are you insane??
Message:
It goes like this...

Now, let me see, what do political leaders do when threatened
with civil war at home? Is it to MAKE WAR on an external
'enemy'? No surely not. It cannot be that the most powerful
(theistic) state in the region is held together only by making ar
on a common enemy.

That cannot be right.

It's unthinkable.

But it may be a reason worth considering in this case.

Sheesh!! Are you in the Zionist cult or something?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:30:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Yers, John, sure. Anything you say
Message:
Give me a fucking break!

Are you actually saying that the tone of your first post was as if to suggest that all you were suggesting that was this was a 'reaon worth considering'?

Yeah, John, maybe I AM insane. See, I could have sworn that you were downright cocky about how you had it all figured out. But, no, you say that you were just floating a possible explanation out there.

I wonder how other people would read this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:40:21 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Thanks for that!
Message:
I'm glad you've made plain how concerned you are with parity of esteem. That armies of occupation should recognise the lives of occupied civilians are as valuable as the lives of the folks back home.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:53:22 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: What a helpful sentiment!
Message:
John,

What do you think the Israeli forces would do if Israeli mobs were attacking them?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:15:11 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: When Israeli mobs attack...
Message:
they tend to attack Arabs, for some reason. Recently such mobs have conducted pogroms against Israeli Arabs. In such cases the Israeli security forces have been careful to avoid direct confrontation. Where they have confronted these mobs, they have managed to do so without lethal force.

The techniques of coping with unarmed or only lightly armed civilian mobs to inflict only a minimum of bloodshed are thoroughly worked out. The highly trained Israeli squaddies do quite well when so commanded.

This is news to you, isn't it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:16:09 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: You're missing it
Message:
This isn't the same situation at all.

Again, for the how many-th time, can you tell me of one place where mobs have attacked armies with stones and not been met with force?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:11:23 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Get informed at
Message:
http://www.middleeastwire.com/
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:15:49 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: And read what are they fighting about.
Message:
http://www.foxnews.com/fn99/world/israel/issues.sml
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 13:48:34 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Here's another take on the causes of the fighting
Message:
http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,382498,00.html courtesy of the Guardian newspaper.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:38:48 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Politcs and Palestinians (ot)
Message:
That's how we see it from over here (UK). That US presidents are terrified of losing the Jewish vote by supporting the Palastinians too much.

But there's going to be another, conflicting factor brought into play soon and that is the price of oil soaring even higher as the Palestine/Israel conflict spreads. How are the presidential candidates or president going to figure that one out?

If they support the Israelis, the price of oil will go up, whereas, if they support the Palestinians, the Jewish vote goes down.

And I do believe that oil prices will now be used as a very effective weapon against the great Satan (America) by the Arab nations. Of course, the less reasonable Muslim factions will just bomb any Americans and passers by into little pieces. And Saddam Hussain will have a field day if he can declare a Jihaad against Israel, with the support of some of his Muslim brethren.

But don't worry. Maharaji's got it all under control.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:14:16 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Oh no, you really think that?
Message:
Jerry,

I'm sorry but I think that's way, way wrong.


  • Israel offered more to the Palestinians than ever before, apparently. More than Rabin himself would, or so they say. Arafat walked away.

  • Arafat has spurned on this bloodshed very clearly and deliberately as is evidenced in the arab press where, just today, he was reported as urging more and more martyrs to throw themselves into the bloody cause. For what? Afterlife raves that never stop as promised in the Koran? You tell me but the fact is he's goaded them on without a doubt.

Will someone take that man's Nobel Peace Prize away from him before he hurts someone with it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 12:54:21 (GMT)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: How true
Message:
'Israel offered more to the Palestinians than ever before, apparently. More than Rabin himself would, or so they say. Arafat walked away.'

True. In 1948 the West bank was annexed to Jordan and not given to the Palestinians, who didn't even ask for it. At this point in time Israel has given the Palestiniainans a large proportion of the West Bank as well as arming the Palestinian police force.(A stupid move on Israel's part).

The Israelis have given the Palestinans most of the Gaza Strip, previously it belonged to Egypt which also never gave the Palestininans anything anmd kept them in camps.

Maybe the Israelis should have kept the 1000000 Jewish refugees in camps instead of resettling them so that they also could claim a refugee problem.

IMO the Israelis have been mega stupid in bending over backwards to show how 'nice' they are. They are the first people to give the Palestinians anything.

Also most people don't realise that most of the Palestininans are under Palestinian rule in their own territories, so if they are being oppressed it is by their own.

The Arabs want nothing less than the destruction of Israel, although if that happens their leaders will have a problem on where to focus their hatred.

It amazes me how much ignorance surrounds this issue. Still as appears from the posts here,people blindly support some political stand (usually 'left' whatever that means) and anyone showing any support of Israel is a 'right-winger'.

Bye for now.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 13:43:44 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Reality check
Message:
Jethro: The Israelis have given the Palestinans most of the Gaza Strip, previously it belonged to Egypt which also never gave the Palestininans anything and kept them in camps.

From the UK newspaper The Independent of Saturday 14th 0ct p3 (by Phil Reeves from Gaza city):
... The 1.1 million Palestinians who live in Gaza, most of them in poverty and many of them refugees are now confined to their fenced-in camp. A total closure is being enforced by Israel, which controls all the borders, severing the 40 mile long strip of over-populated sand dunes from the hated neighbour on which its economy depends.

...

All the signs suggest that the Israeli tactics of bombing, and then imposing economic sanctions -- closure, cuts in power and water -- will only harden opinion against (the Israeli state) fuelling the ascendant Islamic groups now burning the bars of Gaza. It will also deepen their determination to get rid of the 6000 Jewish settlers who occupy a third of the land. ...

Yup, that's quite a 'gift' the Palestinians got from the occupying forces. Those folks are such ungrateful bastards, aren't they? Don't know when they're well off, it's clear.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:00:59 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: But why did Arafat back down?
Message:
For an interesting evaluation of the situation, read:

http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,382490,00.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 09:25:11 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You can't be serious Jim
Message:
What about offering them their country back?

What about giving them civil rights?

What about attacking stone throwers with helicopter gunships?

The Israelis are treating the Palestinians worse than the white South Africans ever treated the blacks.

It looks like a classic case of the abused becoming the abuser. The only reason Israel still exists is because the USA wants a military foothold in the Middle East, and as was pointd out above, there are lots of Jewish voters in the States.

I never took you for a right-wing apologist Jim.

Anth the Palestinians Pal

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 11:44:07 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: What utter bullshit
Message:
Not at all the way I see it but I'm just getting home after a long night out. But forget it. This is all wrong, Anth. Out of thin air, in response to nothing more than what was at worst a symbolic slight -- at WORST -- the Palestinians provoked an armed response from the Israeli cops and army. Talk all you want about the wisdom of exactly how much force was employed on any particular day, the Israelis might well have gone too far this day or that. But the fact remains that there is no place on earth where people can stone the police or military. Nowhere.

So the Israelis react -- again, maybe without the exact, best reasoned force, but then again, maybe not -- and Arafat calls for martyr blood to increase the pot and away we go.

And as for 'their lands', come on! What the fuck are you talking about? What do you think these guys are actually fighting about these days? I think we'd have to clear that up before we can really discuss it.

But I'm crashing....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:17:46 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What utter bullshit
Message:
And as for 'their lands', come on! What the fuck are you talking about? What do you think these guys are actually fighting about these days? I think we'd have to clear that up before we can really discuss it.

Well, according to the press, the latest outburst of violence is a result of the impasse over who is going to control the holy sites in Jerusalem. But I don't think that's all of it, Jim. Palestinians, on news and talk shows that I've watched, are saying again and again it's about establishing a state for themselves where they can have better and more equal opportunities than they did under Israeli control. I'm sure you'll agree that as second class Israeli citizens, most Palestinians lived at or below poverty levels, and I think that has a hell of a lot more to do with their rage than the desire to dance eternity away in 'eternal raves as promised by the Koran'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:04:40 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: It happened here
Message:
You might have seen it on TV.

It was a few years ago now that a car containing a couple of British soldiers took a wrong turn and ended up right by Milltown cemetry in the North of Ireland. People from a crowd present at the cemetry for the funeral of a couple of IRA guys (killed 'in active service' against the British Military presense in Ireland) beat the soldiers to death in front of the world's TV cameras.

Good excuse to send in the helicopter gunships? Demolish homes? Lay siege to Catholic towns and areas in the North? Shoot stone-throwing kids? I thought not. Did you think different?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 11:04:05 (GMT)
From: Mel Bourne
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: He IS serious ... Anth
Message:
Hi Anth

Jim's a veritable 'not so closet' Zionist! He and I (and others) had an interesting debate a year or two back on the Palestine/Israeli issue. It must be in the archives somewhere and makes interesting reading. Jim's logic was surprisingly faulty on this occassion as I recollect.

We British, of course, have a lot ot answer for in our colonial arrogance about how we held the Palestinians in scant regard and (with UN and Allied support) awarded their territory to the Jews (not that the Jews were shy of a little terrorism themselves at that time!)

There are, of course, no easy answers to the problem, especially as everyone is laying claim to Jerusalem. Imagine if every grouping of people claimed their homeland of 2000 years ago! The Italians would do OK wouldn't they? You'd be sitting in Londinium a subject of the New Roman Empire, Anth (Antionius?).

It's a pity these people have become obsessed about their cultural identities, to the point of the most shocking violence. Tribal wars of the hairless ape species, chattering and screaming monkeys beating each other to death either literally or with gun ships

What an indictment of humanity

Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 09:04:05 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I really think this
Message:
I worked onetime for a small international bank owned by a Palestian family. Occasionally I would be reminded (in a friendly sort of way) that the bank's founder had been jailed by the Brits ('in his own country!') for being a terrorist. Well, that's how the Brits saw Mr Shoman, back in the middle of the last century, when they had the League of Nations Mandate his Palestine.

My erstwhile employers are proud of their corporate history. One episode in particular gives the bank some dignity. For when the Catastrophe (the Naqbah) of the declaration of the state of Israel occurred, a lot of folk found themselves no longer citizens of their land. They no longer had a country; instead they were stateless enemy aliens, even though they might not have moved from their shelters for fear of what fate might meet them on their own streets.

And as stateless enemy aliens they had lost more than their country. People lost their jobs; their homes; and even money they had lodged in Banks that were now 'regulated' by an alien power. The Arab Bank is proud that it at least honoured the deposits made by now stateless enemy aliens, and helped many families avoid total ruin.

Many hundreds of thousands of people fled the settlers pouring out of Europe (a Europe then awash with guns and psychos). Some fled to the West bank; some to Gaza; and some to the dreadful squalor and violence of Shatta and Shatilla. These last cannot leave the camps. These are prison camps for hundreds of thousands of stateless persons. No passport, no country, nowhere to go, but home. A home under the occupation of a well armed and ruthless apartheid state.

Let's talk parity of esteem. Let's talk of an Israeli life and a Palestinian life. Let's talk of proportionate response. And please see how the Israeli state does not believe in these things. No! Not for them the crude and bloody balance of the Torah's 'an eye for an eye - a tooth for a tooth'. National Socialist methods of inducing co-operation from an occupied civilian population are more the modern Israeli way.

No-one asked Israel to occupy these lands. No-one asked Israel to lay seige to Ramallah and Nablus and Gaza. No-one asked Israel to lay seige to captive civilian populations and bombard them from the air.

On the contrary, the world in the form of the Security Council of the United Nations has asked Israel not to wage war against the civilians it has captured and whose towns and lands it now occupies.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:54:13 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Oh no, you really think that?
Message:
Jim, I agree with you about this. I think Clinton poorly handled negotiations with Arafat in trying to compromise with him. He's running a police state for God's sake.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 11:32:41 (GMT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: Clinton
Message:
Helen,

I disagree with you about Clinton's negotiations, but I agree that he is running a Police State.

Anth the Euroleftie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:31:53 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Clinton
Message:
Hi AJW
I am a BIG Clinton supporter, BTW. AND I think he has a lot of skill, and I think his intentions were good in trying to 'broker' some kind of peace agreement between the 2 parties. AND there have been times when I thought the U.S. leaned too much on the side of Israel. But how do you compromise with someone like Arafat? What do you think the world should do? FOr example, the English Prime Minister--what do you think his approach toward Arafat should be? I just don't think you can compromise with someone like that. And with this recent violence, Arafat caold have made one statement and called it off, but he didn't . He let the violence continue.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:45:12 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: 'Arafat could call it off with a word'
Message:
Why on earth should you imagine that? Do you think that more than a million dispossessed civilians under military occupation are puppets of one man?

Please understand that people and families have been driven from their homes; from their land; are without jobs or hope; subject to arbitrary arrest and torture; may have thier homes demolished; orchards flattened; have sufferered casualties numbering in the hundreds of thousands; have seen thier brothers and children shot dead for throwing stones.

But yes, it's all Arafat's fault. Nothing to do with the commanders of the occupying army.

No. I think there may be more to it than that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:15:09 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: 'Arafat could call it off with a word'
Message:
I didn't say that those other things haven't happened, John T. A lot has come from the Israeli side, no question. However, Arafat should have issued a strong statement against the violence happening. Now it is a matter of public record that he didn't say anything, and that looks very very bad.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:29:40 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: but how can he?
Message:
Again I urge that people consider who has the whip hand in this situation. It is NOT Arafat. If he does not run ahead of the mob, the mob will run right over him.

Israel is beating up kids because Israeli leaders choose to do that. They need not (the Brits did NOT respond when a couple of their squaddies were beaten to death by a Catholic crowd at Milltown cemetry in the North of Ireland while the world watched on TV).

But they shoot children who throw stones. Then they say to Arafat 'Calm your people'. To help the calming, they bombard the occupied population from the air; lay seige to towns and cities; flatten homes.

Next they say 'See how Arafat is not in control. Why should we deal with him?'

And I see all this, and ask why the leaders of Israel make war on a captive civilian population.

Why?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:54:59 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: It is out of Arafat's hand now.
Message:
Which was the situation during the July's negotiation.

The issue of who and how to rule Jerusalem was always a very sensitive one that no one wanted to confront. Now they are head to head. I just can not see how the Israelis are going to relinquish control of the disputed part. Though Arafat is more cunning than you think. He has taken advantage of the situation to put pressure on Israel for more demands. I believe that there is more happening in the background than we know. Egypt and Jordan seem to be involved this time as you can see by their willingness to meet for the summit on Monday. I think Arafat feels that if Egypt was involved in the negotiation then he will not have to take all the heat of what the outcome will be. Which is most likely a backing of his demand of ruling all of Jerusalem in return to financial aid and better conditions.
We can only wait and see what happens on Monday.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 04:30:14 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: Oh no, you really think that?
Message:
Hi Helen,

I don't think it really matters what kind of a state Arafat is running. What matters is that the Palestinians want the Israelis off of the West Bank and out the Gaza Strip permanently and completely. Personally, I don't think that's asking for too much, and the Israelis are only asking for 'it' the longer they delay in meeting those demands. Once the Palestinians have their own state, to do whatever they please in it, without the presense of any Israeli forces (that's ANY), then there's a chance that peace can be established in that region, but not until then. This, to me, is obvious. As long as the Israelis try to maintain a military presence in Palestinian controlled territory, shit is going to hit the fan. If the Israelis refuse to recognize this, well, they know what's going to happen. And it's debatable that it's ALL in Arafat's hands, anyway. Some experts are saying that even if he told the Palestinians to cool it, they wouldn't, they're so incensed with ridding themselves of an Israeli presence in their land.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 05:52:30 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Oh no, you really think that?
Message:
I don't think that's asking for too much.

If I were in Israel/Palestine I would not say that.

Each side puts an extreme significance to the value of ruling Jerusalem.

You see from a religious point view, the city has the most sacred shrines in the Islamic and Jewish faiths. The Bait-ul-Moqaddas and Al-Haram al-Sharif. Both seen by Muslims as holy grounds. The Jews on the other hand have the Temple and its wall. The problem is complicated further because one is built on top of each other.

The struggle goes further back in history, actually from the days of Prophet Muhammad when he entered the city and was supposedly taken to seven heavens by the magical horse. The Mosque was constructed in the exact spot that this occurred.

The story goes that in the beginning, Mohammed and the Jews were on friendly term. The Jews (or a minority) turned against Mohammed because he veered off the known path. That antagonized Muhammad, because he needed the Jews as allies then,and made him declare that the Jews were the enemy of Islam. In fact there are enough evidence to show that at the start of Islam, and during prayer time, the Muslim turned towards Jerusalem instead of Mecca. There is also evidence that a Jewish priest raised Muhammad.

So, as Muhammad gained in power and entered Jerusalem he wanted to humiliate the Jews in a very bad way and that is why the mosque was built where it was.

The other struggle is that between the Jews and the Palestinians. This is another on of these few thousand years old squabble. In fact I am connived that it is genetic, and that the two factions just can not help it but fight with each other. Well the story goes like this. The palestinians were the original inhabitant of their land. Especially in the south close to the Mediterranean. After the Jews entered the so-called “Promised Land”, they got beaten up by every man and his dog. So the took off to the arid areas where they could minimize their contact with the other powerful tribes that were there. As the Jews started getting more skilled in warfare they moved forward and started kicking ass. In all there conquest, the carried the Arch of the Covenant with them. To them this was the symbol of what Judaism stood for. (There is some stories that the thing was really some sort of box that contained some toxic radioactive material that killed anyone that opened it, and that the priest had some form or another of protection against it). Because of this belief, that is the talking about the Arch, the Jews were motivated into winning most of their skirmishes. But that came to a stop when the faced the Palestinians. Not only did the Palestinian kick some good ass, but also they took the Arch of the Covenant of the Jews. Now you can imagine the morals of the Jewish nation. It is like someone steals your underpants. The Jews did get the Arch at the end, not because the fought the Palestinians, but because the Palestinian returned it to them because when their conquerors opened the box, they died after a while (see above) and so the Palestinian did not want to do anything with it. (P.s. I may be wrong with this last statement).

Now we all have heard of how clever the Jews are in handling money matter. I suggest you update your view to that of: the Palestinian is the only person that can beat a Jew when it comes to money, followed by a Muslim.

During all these times the Palestinian converted to either Islam or Judaisim, however the three factions or races, Jews, Arabs and Palestinians did manage to work their differences out and managed to live in some sort of harmony, until recent times and the creation of the State of Israel.

The super powers know this, the governments of the mid east know this. They all know the depth of the antagonism and all are playing their cards. Petrol and stratigic importance are key factors.

When I look at the death and destruction that is going on, I feel what a cheap way to lose one’s life in a never ending power struggle that will never go because of few rocks and a block of land with a building on top.

Compare this story to that of the Hindus and Muslims and the threat of nuclear war. And also look at the other fight between Seikh and the Hindus.

Is it not a fact that a billion people can be wiped out if a cow was found dead in an Indian temple, or a pig killed at the steps at a mosque. The British used this to conquer the Indian continent.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 18:15:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Yes and that's exactly why Islam is fucked
Message:
So, as Muhammad gained in power and entered Jerusalem he wanted to humiliate the Jews in a very bad way and that is why the mosque was built where it was.

Okay, this goes back a few centuries. But isn't the real problem that Muhammad already shoved his stupid new religion right in the face of another, older, already established stupid religion?

I mean, relly, is it some bizarre coincidence that Jerusalem, which was already long-established as the spiritual centre for the jews, somehow became a spiritual centre for Islam?

Ha ha hahahahahhaa

Oh yeah, and while I'm telling jokes I've got agreat one for you:

Well, it's not really a joke but it IS kind of funny....

Imagine that the jews suddenly considered Mecca or Medina one of THEIR holy spots.

Too funny, eh?

Islam is a parasite religion. You know, I think all religion's false but that's not the point. Some religions kind of do their own thing and others, like Islam, simply glom onto other, already established faiths.

The real answer to all this mess is getting rid of ALL the religious baggage but I ain't holding my breath.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 04:02:53 (GMT)
From: john
Email: None
To: Helen
Subject: Oh no, you really think that?
Message:
Isreal not running a police state?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:39:46 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yes, I do
Message:
But like I say, I'm modestly informed. What I know (or think I know) about this is that Palestinians don't really want to negotiate with Israelis, at all. As far as they're concerned, there's no need to negotiate for something which already belongs to them, but was taken from them back in 1948 when the state of Israel was formed without any consent from them, whatsoever. They want their land back, and they don't want to have to negotiate for it. They're tired of doing so. They just want the Israelis out of Palestinian controlled land, period. They don't feel they should have to ask for or get Israeli approval on that, and I agree with them.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:11:45 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Yes, I do and further thoughts
Message:

The consensus of opinion on this thread seems to favour the Palestinians.

Whatever the injustices done to them , & there have been many ,what they really want is not just 'their' land back (a debatable & very complicated point , go back pre 1917 & you could argue a claim to it from the Turks) , but the destruction of the state of Israel.

As this would mean killing all the Jews , I'm not at all surprised that Israeli crowd control is so heavy handed.

Arafat is a political gangster who has betrayed the real interests of the people he claims to represent.

What about the unfortunate Arab Christians in all this ,who after all have been there , obviously , since before Mahomet , & are now getting muscled out by fanatics both Jewish & Muslim.

Their cause is deeply unfashionable , so they never get a mention ,neither do the Druze for that matter , or other small minorities.

The Western press assumes , probably correctly ,that its readers prefer things kept simple , just goodies & baddies.

I really do think that the oil issue is a bit of a red herring.

We have to have it whatever the cost & are perfectly willing to pay for it.

If for any reason its production were to be witheld , that would cause our sophisticated but very flimsy civilisation to collapse.

In that event I would expect my political representatives to go & take it by main force.

Thank god we've still got a couple of atomic gunboats , even if permission to use them is now in the hands of He who Never Inhaled , rather than those of Her Britannic Majesty.

Peace to all.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 08:31:56 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: My 2 cents worth
Message:
I gotta agree with you Jerry. And I'll go a little further. Israel is a police/racist/theocratic state. (But not all Jews there agree with this policy!)

The Palestinian people have been ripped-off, murdered, tortured, humiliated and stranded in refugee encampments for almost 50 years and they are sick and tired of it and so are the other nations who have hosted them in their lands, and watched the injustices. They are willing to die to try to get back what was theirs.

The ridiculous religious superstitions are for the chumps on both sides of the fence and are used by their leaders to manipulate them for political ends! (Mohammed went to the 7 heavens on a magic horse!!! Sheeesh..what nonsense...Sounds like he was shooting up heroin! 'horse')

Israel would have had to stop their oppressive nazi tactics a long time ago, as the entire area surrounding them pretty much disapproves, BUT the USA has been standing behind them and giving them military weaponry and BILLIONS of dollars of our tax money for DECADES!!! Without the USA backing this crap would have ended a long time ago. The UN ruled over and over on this whole thing but Israel and the USA refuse to go along with the world's decision.

Why does the USA take this position? Because the US feels so bad for what happened to Jews during WW2??? NO.
Because the USA believes that the Jews deserve to have the Palestinians land? No.
Because Israel is a Democracy and the USA always backs Democracys? ABSOLUTELY NOT (on both counts)!!
Then why does the USA give BILLIONS and BILLIONS of US citizen's tax dollars to prop up Israel?

Because Israel is the USA's armed-to-the-teeth with weapons of mass destruction GAURD DOG OF THE MIDEAST!!! That is why. And there is a simple reason for it...OIL! OIL! OIL! OIL! OIL!

The oil companies want to go back to the way it was pre-opec...when had the rights to that mideast oil. (Oh guess where the 7th largest oil field in the world is? COLUMBIA! Connect the dots!)

The same reason that they are STILL bombing Iraq and (according to a July Unicef report) over 300 children a day are dying from the direct result of the Clinton/Gore/Tory Blair/BP blockade!!
They want Saddam's oil, as well.

NO US PRESIDENT HAS STOOD UP TO THE OIL COMPANIES!! And the Gore/Bush team won't either.
(Vote Green. Vote Nader! Build an option!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:45:29 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Off-the-rack bullshit, ExTex
Message:
You simply don't know what you're talking about. But where to start? And, more to the point, why would I want to?

Forget it. Go back to your other paranoid conspiracy theories. Why should I care?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:49:03 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Empty abuse, Jim
Message:
Like you say, why bother?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:20:36 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: 'Abuse'? Oh my god! Call Social Services!
Message:
Very funny, John. ExTex posts one long, block-letter screed decrying the western world and I post back saying that he doesn't know what he's talking about and you cry 'abuse'.

Very, very funny.

Hey do you think ExTex is okay?

Better check, huh?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 21:46:32 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: 'Abuse' = insulting or coarse language
Message:
I was referring to the posts header of 'Off-the-rack bullshit' as constituting 'insulting or coarse language'. And the post was empty, of course.

No, I don't find ExTex annoying. But then I don't find it odd that kids throw rocks at armies of occupation. I just don't think it's a reason to kill them. And you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:01:44 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: My 2 cents worth
Message:
ExTex,

It was a Unicorn.

You obviously chose to discard the cultural background to the mid-east struggle. I do not wish to enter in the debate. But I do agree with most of what you said.

During the seventies and during the Egyptian initiative to establish peace with Israel I was saying let us have negotiation with Israel? I was looked at as being a bad 'element' and possible sympathizer with the enemy.

It was apparent from the beginning that no one really wanted any peace; that was proved by the assassination of the Egyptian president (Anwar Al-Sadat) during a military parade. I remember how the shock reverberated in every corner of the mid-east.

However, there are people who do want that peace. The power struggle is draining every other resource in the countries involved, that drain is not only economical and military, but extend to every aspect of life, including psychological and sociological. When we were little we were taught that the enemy was Israel and we should throw the Jews in the ocean. We had it drummed in us through the government controlled media each time the government had to cover up on something, like a string of assassinations, economical failure or something else.

A large gap was created between the countries that surrounded Isabel, especially between Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and those that did not have direct boarders . President Sadat saw that there is no way in the world he could continue the power struggle and support a population of 40 million. A shift in policy from the Soviet Union (which was giving military aid) to the west had to happen. Though as you say, the west knew that Israel could protect the petrol field, the co-operation of the largest Arab nation was certainly a bonus.

What the west did not count on, is that the continuos brain washing of the people eventually worked.

One of the major thorns in US policy in the area is the loss of the SHAH of Iran and the rise of the Ayatollahs with their strict Islamic laws. A lot of the fuel for what is happening now is coming from the Al Mujahideen movement, which Iran supports. Iraq and Syria are also involved and have their own faction.

But the issue still remains; it is a religious struggle as well as territorial. There is no way in heaven that these can be separated.

You seem to get a bit emotional when it comes to the number of children dying in Iraq. Most of it is government propaganda. Am not sure if you have seen the TV shots of all the little coffins on top of the taxis, if you have, did you know that the same taxis passed in front of the cameras several times to inflate the number. Did you also know that the sanctions on Iraq do not limit the amount of medical and food supplies, and are you aware of Saddam’s little venture of selling back on the black market what he receives as aid through a most vicious network of assassins including his son Audai. I can tell you some good stories that will give goose bumps for weeks. But again, what is the fault of an Iraqi father that has to sell his cloths to feed his family.

Funny. I thought that at one point of my life that I have walked away from this power struggle, but this shit is still there.

The main issue is that there is no trust between all parties involved. Would you blame them? The Jews at on point or another have had enough of being scattered around the earth and decided to do something about it. They did the most outrageous thing and took over a country claiming that it was theirs 2000 years ago. The Palestinians have had their share of massacres and living in concentration camps they are fighting with their nails and teeth to claim back what they think is theirs, and everyone else is watching to see how to use the situation to their own advantage.

Israel should be left to exist. No one can change that. The Palestinians need to be listened to. They also want to have their own sovereignty. Jerusilim should have a special status, becuase of it is importance to the three main religions.

How to resolve these issues is the problem?

belive me, it makes me cry when I see what is going on.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 22:16:32 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Salam, That was a TERRIFIC POST!! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 15:40:25 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: typo
Message:
Al Mujahedeen should be Jihad
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 08:41:51 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jerry/All
Subject: PS
Message:
And isn't it odd how not many in the USA seem to find it arrogant that the USA seems to think that the USA OPINION is what people in the mideast should measure their actions by.
RIDICULOUS ARROGANT SELF-ABSORBED SELF-IMPORTANT ATTITUDES THAT ARE WAY OUT OF SYNCH WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD!

All the 'good' people of the world must think:

'Gee, if only the American President would help us decide what to do or send his military over to decide things. We are such lost 'little' people without the GREATEST NATION IN THE UNIVERSE guiding us with their special wisdom!'

The rest are all 'rogue states' and potential 'terrorists'.
PUKE!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 16:13:59 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Roots of the conflict:Sacred Sites, deadly dispute
Message:
October 12, 2000
Web posted at: 11:59 a.m. EDT (1559 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/12/conflict.explainer/index.html

(CNN) -- The Palestinians want east Jerusalem as the capital of their independent state, while the Israelis insist the ancient city remain undivided and under their control.

But the root of the dispute likely lies far deeper -- and further back in time. The sacred sites in the Old City in east Jerusalem are a particular sticking point.


Currently under Muslim control, they include the spot known to Jews as the Temple Mount, the location of their religion's great Temple, destroyed two millennia ago.

The Western Wall, the sole remaining segment of the ancient Temple, is Judaism's holiest shrine.

The Arabs call the site by a different name -- Haram as-Sharif, or the Noble Sanctuary -- and hold it to be Islam's third holiest site behind Mecca and Medina.

Two mosques -- The dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa -- mark the spot from which tradition holds the Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven.

The Israelis and the Palestinians each claim that only under their own control will the sites remain accessible to all.

Palestinians consider hard-line Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon's visit -- under heavy guard -- to the Western Wall on September 28 to have been a direct provocation, while Sharon insists that he has a right to visit the site as an Israeli citizen and a Jew.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:14:02 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Michael -- hit the back button!
Message:
Just noticed that your post came up blank.

But don't worry, you haven't lost it necessarily. Hit the back button on your browser a couple of times. It's probably still there in which case you might want to copy and paste it into a new post.

This glitch has plagued the software ever since Forum Five has been up and running.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:52:12 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Here's a tip I learnt
Message:
The forum posting machinery can be very fickle at times, so if you plan to write a lengthy tome, do it in a text editor like Notepad first, save it, then copy/paste it in.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:03:24 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Email: dettmers@gylanix.com
To: Joe
Subject: My responses to your additional questions
Message:
Joe,

Some quick responses to the additional questions you asked in your thread below.

Does your confidentiality agreement extend to things that happened prior to the date of the agreement, back when you were dutifully doing full time service as an ashram premie and had no contract?
Yes.
Did Maharaji ever talk about the welfare of the devotees who were working on the project, and did he consider how they might feel when he sold the plane they had worked on for years?
I don’t recall Maharaji ever really caring, in a consistent way, about the welfare of anybody but himself, Marolyn and his children. Why would he care about how premies might feel when he sold the plane? He always had plenty of more projects up to keep us focused on him.
How much did he get for the plane, by the way?
This is one of those questions that I shouldn’t answer. I will say this, however. We didn’t get very much money for it because, when we tried to sell it, we discovered that there really wasn’t much of a market for it. It was, after all, an old aircraft, very inefficient to operate, and wasn’t configured for corporate use.
In what ways, in particular, did the ashrams fail, according to Maharaji? How did that manifest, in his opinion? Did he talk about it? How much personal consideration did Maharaji put into closing the ashrams, and did he consider how that might affect the lives of those people? Did he, in any respect, recognize the severe contradiction in pushing people to move into the ashrams, which he said were life-long committments, and then just closing them? Did people around him discuss this?
Even though I strongly recommended that the ashrams be closed, I was not involved in their closing, nor was I a party to all of the conversations on this issue. But yes, this was a topic of considerable discussion with Maharaji and others. Especially in the aftermath of DECA, it was obvious that there wasn’t an infrastructure in place necessary to fulfill the “mutual” responsibilities implied in the ashram covenant, as you so correctly point out. The discussions about what constituted an appropriate infrastructure seemed very costly as well as bureaucratic to Maharaji. In his experience, it was so much easier in India. The ashrams there were self-sufficient communities with premies and mahatmas of all ages, and supported by the larger community of premies. They did not need to deal with issues of health insurance and OSHA requirements, etc.

So Maharaji, in effect, threw up his hands in frustration because the financial resources were limited, and if we spent those limited resources on creating an infrastructure that avoided the kind of abuse that took place at DECA, there would be precious little money left for Maharaji to live in the style to which he had become accustomed, and to which he felt he was entitled. So the ashrams failed because the legitimate needs of the ashram premies became more of a burden than an asset to Maharaji. To him, it was all supposed to be so simple. The devotee gives everything to his lord, the lord plays and everyone lives happily ever after. He expected unquestioned devotion but he never took a serious interest in the welfare of the people who had dedicated their lives to him. Of course, in this sick game, I and a few others were well taken care of. Cult hierarchies are inequitable by there very nature and, when I look back, I am ashamed that I was ever a part of it. So, in the end, Maharaji decided that, instead of trying to create a support structure that covered all of the ashram premies, he limited that support structure to the instructors.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:24:22 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: katie@ex-premie.org
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Thank you, Michael
Message:
I really appreciate this post and the other ones you made recently. I think most of us have had the experience of having only one little piece of the Maharaji puzzle when we found this site and forum and then suddenly getting a LOT more pieces to fit in with it. (I would guess that this experience was similar for you as well.) And learning what someone who was actually around Maharaji saw as being his feelings and motivations is very helpful - most of us can only guess. What you have said about him definitely fits in with the picture that other people have begun to put together here.

My feeling is that many people here - particularly those who were involved for a long time, or who lived in the ashram - would like an apology from Maharaji. Or at least some sort of admission that HE made mistakes - accountability, if you will. Judging from what you have said, and from what other people have said about him, I think the possibility of Maharaji accepting any kind of responsibility for anything - or even acknowledging that people were hurt - is extremely unlikely.

You wrote:
Of course, in this sick game, I and a few others were well taken care of. Cult hierarchies are inequitable by there very nature and, when I look back, I am ashamed that I was ever a part of it.

I REALLY appreciate you saying this - thank you. It can't have been easy to write, or to come to terms with. I know there are a lot of things that you cannot talk about because of your confidentiality agreement, but frankly, I am far more interested in your feelings about your involvement than in the details of Maharaji's business dealings. And I think hearing about how you felt, and how you feel now, could help a lot of people who post (and the even greater number of people who read) this forum.

I have a request - although it may be something you do not want to do. Would you consider writing a Journeys entry for ex-premie.org? Obviously we could take your forum posts and make a web page out of them, but they don't say very much about how you became involved and the history of your involvement. I understand that you might not want such a document to be available to a web search - particularly because you have your own web page and business, but you do not have to put your last name on it (I do not have my last name on mine because of some things I have said about my family in the entry.) I hope you'll consider this.

Thanks again and take care -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:27:30 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: all
Subject: P.S. to MD and all re empty posts
Message:
The empty posts are caused by a server routing problem, which we can't fix from our end, and which is extremely frustrating (especially to the programmer :)!) Everyone should know, though, that the posts ALWAYS show up eventually (at least so far). This has been a problem ever since our server moved to a different physical location.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:46:26 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: P.S. to MD and all re empty posts
Message:
Very funny. The posts are wizzing around the plant because the router is too confused figuring out the best route.

hahaha

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:08:22 (GMT)
From: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Salam
Subject: re empty posts
Message:
The problem first appeared after the company hosting the site was swallowed up by a larger 'Bad Music On Eternal Hold' company, and moved to their servers in Maryland. The new location used to house AOL - a bad sign. Maybe AOL moved and left their tech people with the building...

When Katie used the term 'server routing problem' she was describing her understanding of my explanation to her. And my explanation is admittedly vague, since I haven't been able to get through to 'Tech Support' yet.

The problem isn't due to internet (global) routing, although it may be caused by routing on the server's local network. My best guess goes something like this:

Due to some other network process running 'randomly', the server is not correctly fetching the contents of files created while the other process is running. If this were only happening when they do tape backups, for instance, that would explain the apparent 'randomness' of the times involved.

But even if they were buffering the files temporarily on another disk during backup, any file that Perl finds and opens should be able to be read correctly. That isn't happening, so the problem seems to involve disk buffers not being written to properly, perhaps due to misdirected packets. Since the problem is most apparent in larger posts, I suspect that disk buffer size, or packet count, is a factor.

The pre-existing index file is being updated correctly and the new listing appears in the index, so the problem seems to only affect newly created files rather than updated files. But this may alternately be due to the index file not having exceeded a size threshold that triggers the problem.

Sometimes the post contents aren't correctly read for 8 hours after the file was created! Yet I've been able to FTP to the site and download the file to my computer during this 'dead' time. Everything is where it should be in the file, yet the machine that the script is run on isn't able to retrieve the contents - even though the 'open file' function returns no error.

Since the length of the 'dead time' seems to vary, the problem may simply persist until some periodic machine reset takes place somewhere on their network.

Anyway, I'll keep trying this week to get through to them. Either they rectify the problem, or I'll start looking for another server.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:50:30 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Salam, I have the exact same picture in my head!nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:35:06 (GMT)
From: SUCHABANANA
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: NO Talk? DLM REVENUES,ASSETS,M EXPENSES,TRANSFERS?
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:10:03 (GMT)
From: janet of venice
Email: None
To: michael dettmers
Subject: 2 empty posts-is someone jamming you??
Message:
michael, you have tried twice to post your words and both times they have come up blank. yet the thread posted. i wrote the FA about it. we do want to hear what you have to say. my posts are going up just fine. wanna email your text to me and i'll try putting it up? i can ccp it and slap it up here.

Jai_Choix@webtv.net

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:07:19 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Email: dettmers@gylanix.com
To: Joe
Subject: 3rd try re above
Message:
Joe,

Some quick responses to the additional questions you asked in your thread below.

Does your confidentiality agreement extend to things that happened prior to the date of the agreement, back when you were dutifully doing full time service as an ashram premie and had no contract?

Yes.

Did Maharaji ever talk about the welfare of the devotees who were working on the (DECA) project, and did he consider how they might feel when he sold the plane they had worked on for years?
I don’t recall Maharaji ever really caring, in a consistent way, about the welfare of anybody but himself, Marolyn and his children. Why would he care about how premies might feel when he sold the plane? He always had plenty of more projects up to keep us focused on him.

How much did he get for the plane, by the way?

This is one of those questions that I shouldn’t answer. I will say this, however. We didn’t get very much money for it because, when we tried to sell it, we discovered that there really wasn’t much of a market for it. It was, after all, an old aircraft, very inefficient to operate, and wasn’t configured for corporate use.

In what ways, in particular, did the ashrams fail, according to Maharaji? How did that manifest, in his opinion? Did he talk about it? How much personal consideration did Maharaji put into closing the ashrams, and did he consider how that might affect the lives of those people? Did he, in any respect, recognize the severe contradiction in pushing people to move into the ashrams, which he said were life-long committments, and then just closing them? Did people around him discuss this?

Even though I strongly recommended that the ashrams be closed, I was not involved in their closing, nor was I a party to all of the conversations on this issue. But yes, this was a topic of considerable discussion with Maharaji and others. Especially in the aftermath of DECA, it was obvious that there wasn’t an infrastructure in place necessary to fulfill the “mutual” responsibilities implied in the ashram covenant, as you so correctly point out. The discussions about what constituted an appropriate infrastructure seemed very costly as well as bureaucratic to Maharaji. In his experience, it was so much easier in India. The ashrams there were self-sufficient communities with premies and mahatmas of all ages, and supported by the larger community of premies. They did not need to deal with issues of health insurance and OSHA requirements, etc.

So Maharaji, in effect, threw up his hands in frustration because the financial resources were limited, and if we spent those limited resources on creating an infrastructure that avoided the kind of abuse that took place at DECA, there would be precious little money left for Maharaji to live in the style to which he had become accustomed, and to which he felt he was entitled. So the ashrams failed because the legitimate needs of the ashram premies became more of a burden than an asset to Maharaji. To him, it was all supposed to be so simple. The devotee gives everything to his lord, the lord plays and everyone lives happily ever after. He expected unquestioned devotion but he never took a serious interest in the welfare of the people who had dedicated their lives to him. Of course, in this sick game, I and a few others were well taken care of. Cult hierarchies are inequitable by there very nature and, when I look back, I am ashamed that I was ever a part of it. So, in the end, Maharaji decided that, instead of trying to create a support structure that covered all of the ashram premies, he limited that support structure to the instructors.

Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:59:03 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: My responses to your additional questions
Message:
Joe,

Some quick responses to the additional questions you asked in your thread below.

Does your confidentiality agreement extend to things that happened prior to the date of the agreement, back when you were dutifully doing full time service as an ashram premie and had no contract?

Yes.

Did Maharaji ever talk about the welfare of the devotees who were working on the (DECA) project, and did he consider how they might feel when he sold the plane they had worked on for years?
I don’t recall Maharaji ever really caring, in a consistent way, about the welfare of anybody but himself, Marolyn and his children. Why would he care about how premies might feel when he sold the plane? He always had plenty of more projects up to keep us focused on him.

How much did he get for the plane, by the way?

This is one of those questions that I shouldn’t answer. I will say this, however. We didn’t get very much money for it because, when we tried to sell it, we discovered that there really wasn’t much of a market for it. It was, after all, an old aircraft, very inefficient to operate, and wasn’t configured for corporate use.

In what ways, in particular, did the ashrams fail, according to Maharaji? How did that manifest, in his opinion? Did he talk about it? How much personal consideration did Maharaji put into closing the ashrams, and did he consider how that might affect the lives of those people? Did he, in any respect, recognize the severe contradiction in pushing people to move into the ashrams, which he said were life-long committments, and then just closing them? Did people around him discuss this?

Even though I strongly recommended that the ashrams be closed, I was not involved in their closing, nor was I a party to all of the conversations on this issue. But yes, this was a topic of considerable discussion with Maharaji and others. Especially in the aftermath of DECA, it was obvious that there wasn’t an infrastructure in place necessary to fulfill the “mutual” responsibilities implied in the ashram covenant, as you so correctly point out. The discussions about what constituted an appropriate infrastructure seemed very costly as well as bureaucratic to Maharaji. In his experience, it was so much easier in India. The ashrams there were self-sufficient communities with premies and mahatmas of all ages, and supported by the larger community of premies. They did not need to deal with issues of health insurance and OSHA requirements, etc.

So Maharaji, in effect, threw up his hands in frustration because the financial resources were limited, and if we spent those limited resources on creating an infrastructure that avoided the kind of abuse that took place at DECA, there would be precious little money left for Maharaji to live in the style to which he had become accustomed, and to which he felt he was entitled. So the ashrams failed because the legitimate needs of the ashram premies became more of a burden than an asset to Maharaji. To him, it was all supposed to be so simple. The devotee gives everything to his lord, the lord plays and everyone lives happily ever after. He expected unquestioned devotion but he never took a serious interest in the welfare of the people who had dedicated their lives to him. Of course, in this sick game, I and a few others were well taken care of. Cult hierarchies are inequitable by there very nature and, when I look back, I am ashamed that I was ever a part of it. So, in the end, Maharaji decided that, instead of trying to create a support structure that covered all of the ashram premies, he limited that support structure to the instructors.

Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:22:41 (GMT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Really appreciate your honesty and openess,
Message:
and I'm intrigued as to the process of how you have come to terms with the wasted time and effort which you hinted at in a previous post.

From another angle it has struck me for a while that it's his stage show, and the confidence/arrogance while on stage, that enabled him to con so successfully, admittedly one of the naivest groups of people ever, what a bunch of innocents, even for hippies we were.
Any info re his psychological states before he went on stage, or other relevant materials re this topic area would be much appreciated. We still see premies believing he REALLY cares for them. How conscious do you think he is of this manipulation, and the dependency states he feeds off, and do you think he is SO deluded that he really believes stuff like that recent quote that it was all the mahatmas fault for the lord of the universe stuff.
Same goes for his organizational incompetence, know he always blames others, but do you believe that's the way he truly thinks.

All of these questions really relate to his degree of awareness, or not, around the social, organizational & psycho mind games he has always played

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:57:18 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Email: None
To: hamzen
Subject: Really appreciate your honesty and openess,
Message:
hamzen

These are really good questions – one’s that I have been reflecting on for some time. However, I don’t have the time to properly respond now. I will give them some further thought and get back to you sometime this weekend.

Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:08:11 (GMT)
From: Cynthia G.
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Thank you
Message:
Dear Michael,

I thank you for your courage and candor. I was just today thinking about the cult hierarchies.

You were in a much closer position than most and certainly more I ever was, even though I saw him so much at DECA. I appreciate your comments about it being a cult dynamic, which it is.

Your comments about the closing of ashrams also is very validating for me and I'm sure, many others here.

Thanks again, I hope you continue to communicate here.

Best,
Cynthia G.


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:13:38 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: the power of validation
Message:
It really helps to read this. Us humans really want to understand our lives and what occurs in them, and sharing and validating the feelings of so many who lived through this is so helpful.

Pretty cool we are living here in the year 2000 isn't it? If we had joined a cult in any other time in history there would have been no mechanism in place for us to network and tell our stories. The power of the information age.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:51:41 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: Susan/Michael
Subject: Susan, Michael
Message:
So true, Susan, well said! THIS is what the internet is for! I am fascinated by your interpretations of events, Michael. You put in pretty plainly when you said that M's thinking was 'It's so much easier in India!' That is priceless!

Poor Maharaji, we Americans made dumb, blind devotion so darn difficult!
Seriously though, thanks for your posts, they are great.
Helen

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:57:43 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Wow...
Message:
Michael,

You know, it's strange. I had a similar experience reading your post as when I read one from another person, who posted as KK and was a finance person for Maharajio, when she said that, basically, Maharaji closed the ashrams because he felt they would become a financial burden, or at least wouldn't make as much money for him that they hed, and that the actual lives of the people in them were of no interest or concern to him whatsoever. We had dedicated our lives to him, but he completely and intentionallly failed to fulfill his part of the bargain. We always gave to Maharaji and he never gave anything back.

I had already come to the conclusion that Maharaji didn't give a toss about his devotees, and I felt that strongly and that was mainly why I couldn't follow him anymore, but somehow, even now, I still get this slightly sad feeling when it's confirmed by somebody like you who was actually around him. I mean, I guess there is still something inside of me that kind of hopes that Maharaji, this person I loved more than anything and dedicated everything to, really isn't as bad as every stick of evidence leads me to believe.

Thanks so much for your comments, Michael. They really are helpful.

Have a good weekend. I hope to. I'm headed to the Sierra, were we ALREADY have skiing thanks to early snows.

Joe

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:40:30 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: You're a godsend, Michael
Message:
Really, your candor here puts to rest a lot of questions about the attitude of Maharaji, what his priorities were and why. Some people will say that your's is just one opinion of M, but I, personally, feel that it's accurate.

Thanks, again.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:59:05 (GMT)
From: ham
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: And fits exactly all the other descriptions of him
Message:
that have leaked through, the guy is a complete egomaniac control freak who thinks the whole world exists to serve him in the lifestyle to which he's become accustomed, whatever the cost.

So where now is all the bullshit homage to god and shri hans, and service from the heart for the good of mankind, exactly where it always was, in the minds of premies and nowhere else.

Calls for another rolex watch, a new plane, a new blonde bimbo, another toke, another fag, some new people to abuse, and a bullshit stage show.

What a load of bollox.

And dontcha just know that he's exactly the kind of insecure, obnoxious multi-millionaire that none of us would want to spend a minute with in real life.

And I would still like to know the details of his practice in the bedroom that is so bizarre.

There must be someone out there who has been shagged by him who can spill the beans, by the sound of it there's no shortage of individuals who he's tried it on with.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:18:50 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: My responses to your additional questions
Message:

That was more interesting than the earlier efforts , keep it up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:09:07 (GMT)
From: Don't worry
Email: None
To: MD
Subject: Text will appear in a little while, by his grace.
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:15:13 (GMT)
From: janet of venice
Email: None
To: michael and FA
Subject: wheres the text? i was highly interested
Message:
the thread shows, but theres no posting. what gives?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:19:34 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: janet of venice
Subject: Obviously he's got nothing further to say
Message:
Think, Janet, think.

(Good spacing this time, though!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:07:08 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Mike, it looks like you tried again but.....
Message:
you can't just hit 'submit' again. You have to copy and paste the text into a brand new post.

Hey, even that doesn't work sometimes in which case you just have to do it a third time. Oh well, it's still an indoors job.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:19:45 (GMT)
From: janet of venice
Email: None
To: michael
Subject: try this as safety measure
Message:
try composing your response in an email you mail yourself first. that way you have hard copy. then use that received mail to ccp your response into a virgin posting page. if it fails, you can leave the area, come back, fresh, and paste it again.
}}%^([
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:14:17 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: janet of venice
Subject: try this as safety measure
Message:
Or just write it in Windows Notepad and then save it as a file on your desktop such as temp.txt and then once it's saved, try pasting it into a forum post.

If it fails, you've still got it on your desktop to try again and even if there's a powercut, you won't lose it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:35:55 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Or is all else fails.....
Message:
You can just stuff it up your arse!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:08:11 (GMT)
From: Q/Way/Q
Email: None
To: Way/Q/Way
Subject: The 25 Dragons/The master dragon/RU sure?
Message:
Q: There is a Legend that the Keys to the Kingdom were entrusted to 25 Dragons and that the One Who Would Escape the Dungeon and move on to the Kingdom would need the 25 Keys. Thus the One would have to do Whatever Was Necessary to get a Key from each Dragon. So, the question is: Got Keys?

Way: And the biggest and best and most awesome dragon comes in glory and proclaims 'I have the key, the final key, key no.25 in fact!' So the brave hero in search of the Kingdom goes up to the master dragon and stetches (sic) forth his hand, with ever so much groveling, asking perfectly meekly for the key. When the master dragon condescends to deliver the 25th key, the hero takes out his sword of discernment and plunges it into the Master's wicked heart. And the the hero goes home and washes up for dinner. Good night.

Q: Yo Way! Have you really gone thru the other 24? Do you really think that M. is 'the biggest and best and most awesome 'dragon'? That would make you truly legendary. And the question STILL is: Got Keys?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:31:46 (GMT)
From: Joseph Campbell
Email: None
To: Q/Way/Q
Subject: The legend of Q and Prem Pal - final chapter
Message:
Our hero, Q, seeker of the Kingdom, having successfully escaped from the dungeon, arrives near the gates of the Kingdom. He arrives with all 25 keys in his pocket, and holding the hand of Mr. Prem Pal Singh Rawat, his trusted guru.

Q and Prem Pal have come a long way, through a large desert. Q mentions to Prem Pal that he is thirsty, very thirsty. 'Good!' says Prem Pal, smiling sweetly.

As Q and Prem Pal approach the gates, Q notices with slight alarm that there are two stone dragons on either side. As they approach even closer, Q notices with increasing alarm, that the stone dragons eyes have started to shine with a red light.

Q swallows hard, but proceeds on. He glances at Prem Pal, who gives him a wink. Freshly tuned up by his guru's incouragement, Q steps closer to the gates. A strange wind arises. A creaking sound is heard. The eyes of the dragons are focusing on Q! And their lips have separated.

Q is instantly awash in sweat. His knees no longer support him. He falls. He loses hold of Prem Pal's hand. The dragons suddenly freeze back in their original position.

'Are you sure you're the messiah figure in the West, and the Satguru in the East?' Q asks Prem Pal.

'Yes, but don't quote me on that,' answers the Master.

Q empties his pockets and counts his keys. Sure enough, all 25 are there, shiny and impressive. This is just the final test, Q decides. He is once again the confident and happy hero he always knew he could be.

He stands up once again and takes hold of his precious guru's hand. A bit of fire immediately escapes from the dragons' mouths and their eyes are once again trained on Q. Q again looks at Prem Pal, who smiles his best Boddhisatva smile. But Q looks a little closer. There is something about that smile that he has never noticed before. It's looking more like a grin. In fact, 'snear' might be more accurate, come to think of it.

Q shakes his head. He drops Prem Pal's hand. The dragons retreat. But soon Q is once again feeling the need for some inspiration. He looks over at Prem Pal once again.

'Oh, master, tell me again about the master's grace, about the four techniques, about pianos constantly needing tuneing, about the high cost of maintaining private jets. And...uh...are you really sure about this?'

'I'm not taking questions at this time, but never you mind. Just take my hand, Q, I will see you safely into the Infinite. Leave no room for doubt in your mind.'

Q once again takes the master's hand. The dragons have had enough and they evaporate him on the spot. Q has successfully merged with the Infinite. Prem Pal Singh Rawat waves to the dragons and goes home for dinner. Marilyn asks him if he has had a nice day. 'Same old, same old,' he replies.

The End

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:31:58 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Joseph Campbell
Subject: lol
Message:
Great story, whoever this is. Love the ending.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:33:00 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Q/Way/Q
Subject: The 25 Dragons/The master dragon/RU sure?
Message:
Yo Q,

Thanks for the sic. But you should have also put one after the other mistake I made.

I don't think this thread deserves a new spot on top. I don't think most people here are too much into Joseph Campbell type stuff anymore, either.

And no, I do not think that M is an awesome dragon, rather a silly fake.

But I do believe that the hero's reliance on a guru figure is indeed one of the hurdles to the kingdom, and kicking your guru to the curb is one of the keys, cause you can't drag the guru in through the gates with you, the dragons don't allow that.

I'm not going to tell you how many keys I have in my collection. This isn't a race. And it is unseemly of you to try to shame and/or inspire people back into a cult.

Fred vaere med dere.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 20:52:07 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Moi?
Message:
Way: And it is unseemly of you to try to shame and/or inspire people back into a cult.
Q: You're at least a bit obtuse if you think that's what I'm trying to do. IMNSHO, M has another key to offer, currently. The simple enjoyment of life Key. This makes the search for other Keys a lot more peaceful, Fred. Unfortunately, it is given with a whole bunch of other keys that go to old doors no one should bother with. Nevertheless, I think I was prepared to sort them out, thanks in part to these Forums. I agree that it is not a race. Ideally, it should be a cooperative effort to escape the dungeon. In light of that ideal, run a search engine search on 'pnohteftu'. They seem to have some keys too.
Fred være med Dere, også.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:34:58 (GMT)
From: janet of venice
Email: None
To: Q/way/Qway/Q ad nauseum
Subject: Moi?
Message:
ok you two. enough with the secret language. what is this? a game of D and D?
sorry to pop your lazy hopes, but the search isnt peaceful. cant be. wisdom isnt gained that way. the dragons you are facing down, arent out there. they are in your self, in your psyche. yeah i can talk the joseph campbell thing. or the tarot. or astrology. whatever mythology or system ya want. fine. or none.

life makes you grow up. you start out innocent and experience by experience, chapter by chapter, you learn. your illusions get stripped. the more times you get fucked, the more you lose your virginity, and i dont just mean by sex.

the dragons are your fears, your weaknesses, your imaginary beliefs of how life is. to slay the dragon--or just to win him to your side, you have to face your fear, make up your mind to go in, arrive at the courage to do it and quit cowering around, waiting, hoping, begging for someone else to come and do it for you and make it easy.
the sheer fact of it is, if you don't win those keys for yourself, one by one, they arent yours. you can't know what each of them means unless it's your journey. if someone DID just hand them to you, ignoramus that you are, you wouldnt recognize those keys, wouldnt know what they were about. wouldnt undertand what each one was, wouldnt know what they were for. the dragons are your teachers. you learn from them and from yourself. no one can just hand you the keys and make it all nicey nice. slaying that wishful thinking in itself is one of the dragons.


now--what th hell do the strange little words on the end of your posts mean? gimme the damn keys!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:43:11 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: janet of venice
Subject: the key to the secret language is...
Message:
found in another thread, started by SQ, and entitled Just Sent. And a little 'fred' to you, too, Ma Cheri.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:38:35 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: janet of venice
Subject: lazy hopes
Message:
Dear Janet, Google is the Key to everything.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:22:53 (GMT)
From: jof v
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: lazy hopes
Message:
fine. i have google. what am i supposed to put into it?? the quote??

i read the 'just sent' threads. so what?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 18:36:08 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: jof v
Subject: some confusion here
Message:
In this thread, there are two different and unrelated sets of strange words, one is a Norwegian phrase that Bjorn translates below, 'may peace be with you', and the other is pnohteftu, which is the one that Q meant to be successfully searched in google to bring up a particular site, something about leaving the planet. Not that it matters.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:22:29 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: jof v
Subject: lazy hopes
Message:
check out 'alltheweb.com' - a search engine for the cognoscenti.

Here's 62 matches on the phrase


'Fred være med Dere'

... and I still don't know what it means

(though my guess is that it's 'for thine is the kingdom' or somesuch.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 00:40:11 (GMT)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Fred være med Dere mystery solved...
Message:
'Fred være med Dere' means 'Peace be with you' (or something close to that).

It was in one of Bjorn's posts.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:32:03 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Help - any AppleMac clone users out there? (ot)
Message:
I'm trying to post a lengthy document that I typed up on my Starmax clone (running system 7 - still!)

I've formatted several floppy disks for PC and write the Simpletext files to them. But for some reason when I take the floppies to the PCs at the University where I have online access, the PC just WON'T read them.

Any solutions out there? Or am I going to have to re-type the whole kaboodle?

Help!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 00:26:12 (GMT)
From: hamzen
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: From a 7.5.3'er
Message:
What about scanning the print-out and using ocr to load into your pc software?

Is the pc having problems reading from the disk or just the files?

Or you could post the disks to me and I'll send them in.
I've got an old power mac which seems to read pc disks ok.

What about saving in another format such as word, if it's getting into the disks ok but not the files?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:10:38 (GMT)
From: suchabanana
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Help - any AppleMac clone users out there? (ot)
Message:
Just a question?

Did you name the PC disk text files: 'filename.doc'?

e.g. EVI mailer.doc

PCs need to read text files in a format. If you put .doc after the file name, then a PC will assume MS Word format.

Peace,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 16:35:38 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: suchabanana
Subject: Thanks Swamiji, I owe you a drink! (nt)
Message:
slurp
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 17:01:55 (GMT)
From: Stonor
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Hey cq!
Message:
Hi Chris,

Did their suggestions solve your problem? I thought the 'doc' thing sounded promising. Is that why you're drinking to swamiji? I hope so!

Hugs,

Stonor

And did you catch that 'vacuum' post to shp? Remember our discussion of a 'vacuum' being empty a while ago? :-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:22:36 (GMT)
From: Zen
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Gracias por tu Translation al Forum Spanish (nt)
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:17:00 (GMT)
From: Cynthia G.
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Outing People
Message:
To Everyone,

Several months ago, in a fit of rage, I outed some very personal information about someone on this forum. I had obtained this information from Katie, when we were posting on a 'new-exes' forum (which we had promised eachother would be kept confidential). I broke that trust.

I had no right to do that. I won't be specific because I don't want to stir the bucket of crap that I created back then.

I betrayed Katie by using confidential information to vent misdirected rage, and I did so in a very mean and hurtful way. It didn't feel good at all and I apolozied profusely. That didn't take away what I had done to that person and I betrayed them too.

Sadly and unfortunately, mean words hurt, I should have known better, and I couldn't take those words back.

I'm not aware of the background and context of the discussion below about outing Roger, (I 'm not asking for an explanation), but based on my experience of being the 'outer' I can tell you it feels like shit. I learned a lot from that and believe now it's just not the right thing to do.

I choose to use my real name. I get confused when people use multiple aliases, but I understand and accept that some people feel the need to protect their privacy.

My 2cents,
Best,
Cynthia G.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 08:15:06 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Cynthia G.
Subject: Outing People
Message:
Hi Cynthia -
You're off the hook with me, for whatever, because I don't even remember the incident - too much water under the bridge since then. I think it was likely not a big issue with me, or I would have remembered. I am guessing that the person you did it to likely remembers, though, and I, personally, appreciate it that you DID think about it and have chosen to apologize. I think most people on here understand about posting ill-chosen words in fits of anger, because almost all of us have done it. (I know I have.)

You're right that mean words hurt, too. We've had a lot of discussion about this lately on the forum!

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:35:31 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Cynthia G.
Subject: Outing People
Message:
Don't underestimate people's ability to 'read between the lines' Cynthia. After using this text only medium for a while you can become quite adept at it.

Rage here is often misdirected but that is also understood. At least it's better than being completely ignored.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 14:43:29 (GMT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Thank you, Sir Dave (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 17:59:46 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot)
Message:
I think many of us in the USA are very tired of the slow torture of the Presidential election that we have all been subjected to for what seems like years. At least here in California we are not subjected to television ads from either party because Bush as written off the state. I would probably be about to commit suicide if I lived in either Ohio or Florida, though.

But I continue to be fascinated by the fact that Dubya far outpolls Gore among men. One guy played football, went to Vietnam, and is notoriously emotionally distant. The other guy was a cheerleader who got into the National Guard through family influence, lost money in the oil business, and worst of all by far, he traded Sammy Sosa. That guy is now sliding through a Presidential race on his charm. Do I not get American men, or what?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:03:17 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot)
Message:
Dubya's a good ol' boy, Joe. And kinda a bad boy, too. And he's from Texas, everything in Texas is BIG, ya know wudimean? Gore is a sissy boy tree hugger, too darn intellectual and out of touch with the real people, he's a policy wonk. Also, Bush is proud that he has sent more people to the electric chair than anyone (ain't that sumpin' to be proud of now)? He's not afraid to be tough on crime.
That's my take on why men like Bush.
I have to admit, I'd rather be sitting next to Bush at a bar having a beer party cause Gore seems like a pompous bore, but Bush is so NOT qualified to be president it's ridiculous. ANyway I don't need to have a beer with the Prez, I just need him to be smart and run the country which I trust Gore can do. You think people in Ohio are sick of the election? Try living in DC.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:59:49 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: I don't get it either, Joe (ot)
Message:
Hi Joe - I can't comment on the 'typical American male' - I don't understand the whole electorate.

I saw a poll on the news today where people said they thought George W. would be a much stronger international leader than Al Gore. I honestly don't get that - I watched the debates and George W. seems to know nothing about foreign policy issues. Maybe people figure he will just ask Dick Chaney or his father if he has a problem.

I also don't get how George W. can get away with talking about 'Washington influence' when his own father was president, ambassador to the U.N., and ran the CIA. Are people's memories that short? I was practically foaming at the mouth during the debates ever time W. mentioned the evils of 'Washington'.

Plus the guy looks and acts stupid (NOT dyslexic) and acts like he's running for governor, not president. And he completely waffles on being 'pro-life' - I would think that the Christian Right would be pretty P.O.'d about that.

I know people are getting pretty bored by this election, but George W. scares me because he is anti-choice (I guess?), anti-gun control (and pro-NRA), and definitely anti-environment. So I hope anyone on here that might be feeling like they don't want to vote but does care about these issues WILL do so.

P.S. Joe - we don't have ads for the presidential race here either because I guess Gore has written off Virginia. However we have to watch endless attack ads about the senate race here - George Allen (yuck) v.s. Chuck Robb (blah). At least Oliver North isn't running :)!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:05:15 (GMT)
From: janet of venice
Email: None
To: Joe and all
Subject: -- I don't get it (ot)
Message:
i have to honestly say for the first time in my life, i don't get it, period. maybe its washing my hands of looking to a leader that's doing it .i flat out have lost my taaste for the concept.nobody looks good enough to lead anything to me anymore. i see these two guys saying they want us to make them our leader and i just cant see any need . maybe i've finally grown all the way up.
leadership feels like a total non-thing to me now. i dont need anyone to lead me. i lead myself just fine, thank you, and don't you, as well? the whole idea of someone-anyone- wanting to 'lead', is a bafflement to me.

george and al are papa's pet boys. theyre babies sitting on their father's shoulders, crowing and saying'look how big i am'.

at least Al has breeding and manners and class. george (the W stands for weasel) is just a mean, selfish little fuck, with shit on his bootheels. that boy needs a lickin an sent ta bed without dinner.

But,i mean, i look at each of them, as adults, and i think, dont they have enough on their own plates to work on, just having wives and children and property and debts? don't they know that we all do?
i really dont care at all anymore. i'm not talking about apathy. im saying, like lao- tsu and the tao-te-ching, that we don't need anything. go home. leave us alone. i like life, straight, no chaser, enough. when it isnt what you live, then government springs up. meaning? to me?--government is a huge illusion, an evil, that substitutes itself for what we just do,each, ourselves,in reality, and sells itself to us, as if we need it, as if it were real.

its all so strange and alien to me this time.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:12:00 (GMT)
From: comix relief?
Email: None
To: janet of venice
Subject: Holy Joe Lieberman Invokes the G-Word ...
Message:
Holy Joe Lieberman Invokes the G-Word Over and Over Again!

other comix available:

Alpha Gore
Al Gore gets multiple personality implants to become Alpha Gore!

DR. LAURA
Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the Radio shrink, has her life placed on the analyst's couch and the prognosis is hilarious.

or (especially for Jim)

Mrs. Larry King
Find out the shocking secret about Larry King's wife. A secret so horrible that Larry will do anything to keep you from finding out about it.

And many others.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:32:51 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: janet of venice
Subject: Not bad paragraphing, Janet. Not bad (nt)
Message:
hhhhh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 05:56:03 (GMT)
From: j of v
Email: None
To: Jim the persnickety
Subject: Not bad paragraphing, Janet. Not bad (nt)
Message:
ya know what jim?? it isnt me!! its the damn server!!
i know how to set up html. i know good english writing. hell, i scored 790 on the english comp achievement of the SAT's, for crissake.
what is screwing me up in trying to post on this damned thing is that it's half-assed html! it isnt like a test bed , where i have to program everything in html from the git-go, in full-on html; and it isnt fully pre-programmed, like my email is. but it looks like it is, when i'm typing it into this damned field!!
so i type what looks to me like a well parsed composition, and then the damned thing undoes all my spacing and paragraphing when i post it!!!
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
i do not like this, at all.
not to mention there's the behind the scenes aggravation of my being on webtv, which i dont think any of you are fighting with, over on your respective sides of the glass.
jim, if i can come up with a way to outwit this screwy, half assed system, my parsing will look to you as it looks to me, when i type it, and you will find out i'm nowhere near as illiterate as this thing makes me look!!!!!}8[
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:21:29 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot)
Message:
George Bush is promising a bigger tax cut. He's a champion of self determination, supposedly, where Gore represents a 'bigger' government that will take care of our needs. I think Bush appeals to the machismo in American men, mostly white middle class men, that is. What these guys don't seem to get, though, is that, with Bush, we become more dependent on the 'boss', corporate America. And we know what their philosophy is -- 'if you don't like it, there's the door'. But with government, if we don't like it, we can vote the fuckers out of office. I, myself, prefer the latter. And I'm a guy, a 'REAL' guy, who played baseball, football, AND basketball in high school. I'm just not a dumb one like, personally, I think most middle class Bush supporters are who are drawn to the illusion of self determination he's offering. They must like that 'trickle down' feeling that Bush's father use to talk about, the one where you feel pissed on.

Where does 'Dubya' come from? I must have missed that, although every time I pick up a paper, some article is referring to Bush with that term.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 02:20:17 (GMT)
From: Mickey the Pharisee
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: I think that Molly Ivins came up with 'Dubya' nt
Message:
Yes, Molly Ivins.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:14:00 (GMT)
From: Helen
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: George Dubya and Men -- I don't get it (ot)
Message:
Great post, Jerry. Excellent actually!

The republican philosopy might be okay if there were a level playing field everywhere. But there isn't.

Rush Limbaugh proudly states that he would be fine if social security were cut --well, YEAH, the guy's a millionaire! You don't need those basics if you're rich rich rich.

Oh no I am talking about politics, AIIIEEEE!

signing off From the town of the News junkies

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:48:54 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Dubya -- and a Poem re George Dubya
Message:
'Dubya' is just the way they say 'W' in Texas. I guess it has just caught on, I guess.

Anyhow, Gail Sheehy is pretty convincing Vogue that Dubya is dyslexic. Of course, maybe that's a guy thing and might help him get elected. In that regard, the following poem:

ON THE SPEAKING PROBLEMS
THAT SEEM TO RUN IN THE BUSH FAMILY

He thinks that hostile's hostage.
He cannot say subliminal.
The way Bush treats the language
Is bordering on criminal.

His daddy had the problem:
He used the nounless predicate.
Those cowboy boots can do that
To people from Connecticut.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:36:01 (GMT)
From: Cynthia G.
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: I think George Dubya is a stupid as a stump (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 10:04:49 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Cynthia G.
Subject: I think George Dubya is a stupid as a stump (nt)
Message:
What is just eerie to me is that George Dribble-yew HAS NOT GOT EVEN ONE ORIGINAL THING TO SAY! NOT ONE! Everything he says is right out of an old Reagan/Bush/Nixon speech. Completely stale. All cliched. 'Build up the military. Get big government off our backs. Bring back the great moral leadership that the world expects from us. Let the corporations decide, they know best. Give tax breaks to the rich and big business because they made America great. This country was founded on God. Blah Blah Blah. Like a broken record. And God bless America.'

The Gore rap is a bit of a spruced up version of the old crap about how the Democrats are for the little worker. Yea, sure.

But the media and their moron 'focus groups' act like-
Wow! These fresh ideas need to be considered before we make that final decision.
And those polls...for idiots. They are complete crap. Who cares what OTHER PEOPLE ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR? What exactly are the polls suppose to be about but to guide and herd by peer pressure the moron voters to vote for tweedle-dee OR tweedle-dum. Just why should you change your position because someone says your candidate isn't liked by those that don't like him/her!!!! That is no reason to change your reason to vote for someone! Stupidity.

zzzzzzzzz

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 17:50:31 (GMT)
From: Yves
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: To Jim about your last post to Weirdo
Message:
You wrote.
Okay, you question whether or not Maharaji sired Nevlata. Fine. Question it.
Here's how you ask a question:

'Does .......?' or 'How ......?', that kind of thing.

But you're not questioning that allegation at all. You're assuming it as a fact and that isn't fair.

Really, Yves, imagine for a second that it isin't true. Don't you see how unfounded allegations like that -- broadcast without qualification -- only hurt this site, not help it

I am not certain yet wether I do agree or disagree with you. I'd like to discuss it further if you will.

1) Who is it unfair to? Nevlata? The price she has to pay to belong to a 'rich-and-famous' bunch is having her genetics discussed in public. I think she got a fair ride.

2) How would this 'hurt' this site. I frankly don't understand this concept. Hurt the site with premies or with ex-premies? How do you mean? What if it attracted interest from visitors who wouldn't be interested with other subjects discussed here? This is grocery store tabloid stuff. None of our business, but try to imagine next sunday family reunion in Malibu.

3) should I be quiet about everything which is not 'Supreme-court-safe-proved'? I might as well stay on the beach where the only such thing was photographed.

4) Wether or not Nevlata's uncle is her uncle, and I made it clear in my last post, doesn't really matter to me. There are hints he isn't. We never will have 'Supreme-court-safe-proof' of it. Only hints which point at a discrepancy between Fatrat's divinity and family genetics. I know it is disgusting to talk about it, but I paid plenty the right to be disgusting with Fatrat. Would it be nicer if it was proved? I don't think so. By the way... have you noticed... (Nudge-nudge, wink-wink)

Those were my thought about it. I am eager to read you on this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:48:27 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Yves
Subject: To Jim about your last post to Weirdo
Message:
Hi Yves,

1) Well, it's particularly unfair to all the people immediately concerned -- M, Claudia, Raja and, of course, Nevlata. I'm not saying it isn't fair for her to have her 'genetics' discussed in public. Bill Burke was the first to suggest that there's reason to believe that M might be N's father. In the context of this forum and the relevant issues I think that's extremely fair game. But only as a good faith question to be explored, not as a rumour or innuendo turned into a suposition.

2) It could hurt the site immensely, I think. We're trying to uncover the truth about the cult we were stuck in. Necessarily, we rely on a fair bit of hearsay and our own good faith discrimination. We -- and the various sources we stumble upon from time to time -- always have our credibility at issue. Look at Bjorn the other day. He can't find a certain 'I'm God' quote in WIGM? and I'm automatically a 'liar'. Premies will look for any excuse they can find to dismiss the reports here and their best excuse is that we're irresponsible. Alleging that M is N's father without proof of some kind plays right into that excuse. Really, Yves, do I need to explain all the many reasons why that's so?

Yes, we can have some fun and say any damned thing about Maharaji -- did you hear about the time he came on to me in an airport bar in Chicago? -- but we are much more effective in the long run with a little credibility. That should be obvious. Why, any weirdo should understand that!

3) My suggestion? Be reasonable, that's all. You got a rumour that's worth checking out because it may be true? Go for it. This is the place. But please, don't blow things out of proportion (See answer to #2 above).

4) I don't understand this question.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:04:42 (GMT)
From: Yves
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Mussolini issue
Message:
Awhile ago I brought-up what you called the 'Mussolini question', (What would it take to take him off the hook.) Remember? Put another way, it ask 'What do I want to achieve here?' I asked myself. Do you want to hear about it? Great. I'd like to talk about it. Now this works like a One-wish-genius. I'd better ask the most for I won't get any more than what I plan for. Here it is :

1)I wish he was ruined and have to earn his own living. This is very unlikely. Keep reading.
2)I Wish he’d stop recruiting and milking premies. Chances are he will soon do just that but it won’t change much his lifestyle given the fortune he accumulated. Read-on.
3)I wish he’d admit being a fraud, create a blind fund that would serve some humanitarian cause AND pay his fixed monthly living allowance. Something decent short of extravagant. Say 100 000$ a year. He’d become the spokesperson for a cause and do service for the community. Chances are so skinny, they are being treated for anorexia.
4)I wish he’d become the focus of public attention and one of the many skeleton in his closet would have him convicted for a long time. I’ll spare no rumor and l leave no lead unpulled.
5)I wish to make his life miserable. Now imagine a family reunion where Nevlata doesn’t know which one is her dad. If that’s all I can get for now, I’ll get at least that. Rawat may be starting to understand he’s got one hell of a mean monkey on his back.
6)I wish the Rawat clan would offer me so much money for doing something else, I’d have to accept it. Say… I don’t know… ONE MILLION U$ DOLLARS. With that much money, I’d get myself a red velvet suit like Austin Powers.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 05:34:11 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Yves
Subject: Mussolini issue
Message:
Yves,

First you suggest we put Maharaji on some kind of stipend as such:

Something decent short of extravagant. Say 100 000$ a year.

Then you say this:

I wish to make his life miserable.

Er, dude, your idea of making somebody miserable and mine are, like... different? I say we give him and Marolyn both jobs where they make 30,000 a year, tops, so they know what it's like to struggle making ends meet.

100,000, Yves? Sheesh! That's livin' LARGE where I come from!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 14:59:41 (GMT)
From: Yves
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: I don't know, I just imagined
Message:
I just imagined the guy probably spends many millions a year as now is. What do you suggest? I thought 100 000$ would be a nice effort from the crook.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:59:32 (GMT)
From: Yves
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: About number 4
Message:
4) Whether or not Nevlata's uncle is her uncle, and I made it clear in my last post, doesn't really matter to me. There are hints he isn't. We never will have 'Supreme-court-safe-proof' of it. Only hints which point at a discrepancy between Fatrat's divinity and family genetics. I know it is disgusting to talk about it, but I paid plenty the right to be disgusting with Fatrat. Would it be nicer if it was proved? I don't think so. By the way... have you noticed... (Nudge-nudge, wink-wink)

Second try: I believe (was it right this once or was it belive or beleive or ...) there is a point, beside the basic fun of being obnoxious, to shuffle shit. Say, it provokes reactions. 'Nudge-nudge. Wink, wink.' referred to MD's recent involvement here we benefit from which may have been provoked by some attention-getting posts. I understand you don't bel..ve in those. Now what car do you drive? Chances are it once was advertised. Attention-getting works some. I rest my case.

On the other hand... (Harry Truman was reported to have once said he wished for a one-handed economist for he was tired of being told by them what was on the other hand.)

If you say so, I'm willing to try acting normal some. What do you say?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:06:02 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Yves
Subject: Her name is Navlata not Nevlata
Message:
Vine of mercy. Nav not Nev.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 17:18:34 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: Is Hindi a real language?
Message:
I thought you just made the shit up as you wnet along. Like Mata Ji with all her 'apne hay's and 'apne he's. You know, like pig latin.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:56:10 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite
Message:
According to the always riviting and exciting 'What's Happening' section on the Elan Vital Website, last night (Thursday, 10/12), there as a satellite broadcast of the following video. [Why people would pay the money to turn to a satellite to watch a video is kind of beyond me, but I guess Elan Vital thinks its 'non-members' are gullible enough to accept anything.] Anyhow the description was as follows:

Introducing the Possibility of Knowledge
This broadcast was taken from the recent meeting about the propagation of Knowledge held in Atlanta, Georgia. It discusses introducing people to Maharaji and Knowledge. It is not an introductory broadcast.

Anybody hear anything about this? I'd be very interested in what this covered, especially in light of what we heard from La-Ex that Maharaji is now openly acknowledging that 'propogation' of Knowledge in the USA is going down the toilet. Maybe they have come out with a new, highly synchronized, 'Discover the Sunny Kingdom' poster or something equally significant as part of Phase II to deal with this problem.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 20:28:26 (GMT)
From: Daneane
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite
Message:
They'd have no problem propagating if you lying anonymous net people would shut the fuck up.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:00:04 (GMT)
From: Elan Vital
Email: None
To: Daneane
Subject: Thank you Daneane
Message:
Dear Daneane:

We appreciate your support and in helping us deal with the shock, dismay, and downright physical nausea we have experienced because of the unsubstantiated attacks we have sustained on the internet by anonymous people, who are living in the past, making up lies, and are just upset because Maharaji is doing what is best for them and no longer offering a shelter where they can be celibate and poor.

They have just been unable, probably because they are mentally defective, or maybe because they are demented because of DRUG CULTURE,to move on, get with the times, and keep up with a master as enigmatic and financially successful as Maharaji. Elan Vital would feel terribly sorry for them, but we have an official policy that these people shrivel up and die.

However, Daneane, we here at Elan Vital have received voluminous, synchronized reports from your 'SACT' (Synchronized Aspirant Coordinating Team) about you that have us very concerned. They have been filed in triplicate, and show that you are currrently scoring very low on the 'DATTO' (Destroyed Ability To Think for Oneself) and the 'SWG' (Synchronized Willingness to Grovel) scales, and what really concerns us, very high on the dreaded 'OCWM' (Observed Communicating With Monmots) scale.

While it is obvious from the disturbing questions you asked one of our instructors some time ago, that are you are absolutely not ready to receive the gift of Knowledge, we believe that if someone spent a few weeks carefully selecting videos of Maharaji that fit your personality, and if you watched them over and over without sleeping or taking food for a period of 6 months, you might just be saved from a eternity of damnation, although this is not a religion, and Elan Vital has a policy that these kinds of choices are completely up to the individual. You can either experience supreme love and joy, or live in the hell of maya and darkness forever. It is a free choice, after all. We just hope that you will make the right one, like we have.

If you have any additional questions, please talk to your 'SAG' (Synchronized Aspirant Coordinator), or contact us here at Elan Vital, which is not a cult, being that we have a policy that there are a number of characteristics that cult's have that Elan Vital does not. Our email address is: ElanVital@wearenotacult/wereallyaren't.org.

Sincerely in leaderless, synchronized teamwork,

Elan Vital

ELAN VITAL: ABSOLUTELY NOT A CULT SINCE 1971

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 21:24:34 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Elan Vital
Subject: O hope you're saving these
Message:
I really think that these EV posts are brilliant. Mind you, Sir Dave's and Daneanne's are pretty funny too.

You're saving these EV posts somewhere, aren't you? Maybe Sir Dave would let you put them up somewhere. You need his email?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:07:31 (GMT)
From: Elan Vital
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Thank You
Message:
Dear (Infamous, Antichrist, Satan) Heller:

Although we shouldn't even been acknowledging your evil existence, and in violation of our policy that you should shrivel up and die in the most painful fashion imaginable, we wish to that you for saying our words are 'brilliant.' But Elan Vital hastens to point out that any brilliance you may observe is not coming from the non-cultish Elan Vital, but rather is the supreme beauty that is flowing from us because we have experienced the gift of that Knowledge and because we experience such joy and happiness in the presence of Maharaji.

Elan Vital

ELAN VITAL: ABSOLUTELY NOT A CULT SINCE 1971

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 06:06:36 (GMT)
From: Curious George
Email: None
To: Elan Vital
Subject: Great sense of dry humour - must be a Brit
Message:
Dear Elan,

I vote Elan's works to be saved in The Best of the Forum.

Soooooo funny!

Curious George

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:41:21 (GMT)
From: Daneane
Email: None
To: Elan Vital
Subject: Mighty right(nt)
Message:
oo
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:16:43 (GMT)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Elan Vital
Subject: BRILLIANT!!!! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 20:42:03 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Daneane
Subject: hey Daneane this one IS all about you
Message:
.....[fill in the blank]

Hi just joking around. Good to hear from you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:34:38 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite
Message:
Joe-my previous post referred to the video about introducing people to m.That was the video that you saw posted on m's site;it was shown on thurs. night.
One other point;m made reference to how hard it would be if he had to listen to everyone's viewpoint in the room(I was told there were 85 people)and how it would essentially go nowhere.Therefore the only way to run it was for everyone to listen to him.

Another point;(this one really amazed me,to see how out of touch he must be) m said that one person in the US has an 'amazing success rate' of introducing people to knowledge and getting them to stay on board and recieve it.How did he accomplish such an amazing thing?m said that the premie studied each video thoroughly and then hand picked the particular video to match the personality of the potential aspirant.m said that because the premie 'did his homework',the rate was high!

I think it was after that gem, that he told the audience that he couldn't take their individual opinions or questions...

Let's see,should I show the video with the clocks or with the shot of the swans to my boss?.......

BTW,had lunch with John today...

Regards,
La-ex

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 23:04:50 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: M should consider merging with Scientology
Message:
If you need to do some personality profiling why not go with an outfit you can trust?

The folks at $cientology have been testing personalities for years and years. We know how to find that little somethin' somethin' that can really fuck you up.

As out late founder, the venerable Admiral L. Ron Hubbard, once said, '[TOP SECRET -- NOT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE HOLLYWOOD CELEBRITY CENTER WITHOUT THIRD-LEVEL THETAN CLEARANCE AND A PROPERLY VALIDATED VALET STUB] and you can quote him on that.

Any day of the week.

At $cientology, your personality is our business.

Your business is our business ... and has been for millions and millions of years.

$cientology -- we've got your number!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 20:59:53 (GMT)
From: DeProGram Anand Ji
Email: not given
To: Jim
Subject: M should join the million family march
Message:
M should join forces with the Nation Of Islam and Rev. Sung Young Moon for the Million Family March.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 20:00:21 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: DeProGram Anand Ji
Subject: That's pretty damned funny (nt)
Message:
fffff
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 19:57:15 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: That's amazing
Message:
And what's also amazing is that you refuse to put any spaces between your sentences, after commas .... OH MY GOD!

La-Ex, how in the world can we get a transcript of that video? Can someone get it and painstakingly transcribe it? How?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 01:48:50 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: That's amazing/video copy and another point.....
Message:
Jim-I'll see if I can get a copy of that video somehow,and maybe we can get a transcript for the forum...

Another interesting point that m made during the presentation:
regarding all of the crazy concepts about him that were promoted during the 70's. First of all, he took absolutely no responsibility for promoting any of them himself. He motioned to all of the people in the room (85 people) and said: there were a lot fewer people back then than those of you in this room today,and look at all of the damage that they did! He actually insinuated that all of the hindu cult worship concepts came from a few dozen mahatmas and indian honchos that came over here.

I think he called it 'deadly damage' and said that it was like playing 'russian roulette',in terms of having people tell others about m and knowledge. So, he is big on synchronization of information these days. Also, he said that people must be 'comfortable' with talking about the master and knowledge to others.'How many people are comfortable?' he asked.

I guess my big question is 'who could ever be comfortable talking about m and knowledge' once they know even a few things about him,especially his personal life.I think you either have to be totally unaware,in total denial about what you do know,or be out and out brainwashed to not feel uncomfortable with him.

I can't for the life of me figure out how he goes on, knowing that he has so much baggage.
I also can't figure out how he thinks people will not eventually know all of this stuff that is on this site.
I can't imagine what the response will be when people who are going out now to propagate m's knowledge, finally know the truth about him, and realize that he knew all the time, while he was sending them out to front for him.
I think m's day of reckoning is not far away...

La-ex

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 01:14:33 (GMT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: That's amazing/video copy and another point.....
Message:

Nice one La-ex , got to rethink my prejudice that Californians are all air heads.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:15:24 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: And I used to think that the LORD thing was weird
Message:
This scapegoating is even weirder.

Ooooooooooooooooooo I'd love to cross-examine him! Who wouldn't?

Sometimes I think that's all I'm hanging in for, the dream that one day I could confront my former cult leader on the witness stand.

And how would it go? I can imagine a very straight-forward confrontation with the evidence but it'd all depend where he'd take it, wouldn't it? What kind of desperate tricks might he try to play on me or the audience? How twisted would it get? Would it be like Grishom or would it be like Mamet?

That mother-fucker!

Well, it is SO fucking good that he knows that we know that he knows that we know. Tell me he goes a day without cursing this web site. I wouldn't believe it.

And will EV FAQ again? That'd be fun.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 17:27:37 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: May your dream come true. NT
Message:
no text
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:23:21 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: EV 'Introducing People to Maharaji' Satellite
Message:
This isn't fair. I wanna get on the band wagon here. Next weekend at the Sleaze Hotel, near Victoria station, London I am holding a seminar on Introducing the possibilities of doing something synchonised.

You can rent hotel rooms there by the hour since they're usually used for other purposes and so I'll be charging a nominal fee, just to cover expenses mind, of £150 per hour, minum of 3 hours.

I might drop in and say a few words if I feel like it but will probably just phone the hotel reception and pass a message on. I will however, leave an audio tape on the bed which people can play and listen to in a synchronised and powerful way, with their hearts.

Refreshments will be served at MacDonald's round the corner in Victoria Station. I hear they also serve vegeburgers, for those who are still vegetarian.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:06:12 (GMT)
From: Steven Quint
Email: sequint@home.com
To: Everyone
Subject: Another Interesting Link
Message:
Looks like an interesting and relevant site.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 18:16:10 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Steven Quint
Subject: You can ask God a question there
Message:
Mine was: 'When did you last laugh?'

The answer came:
'When did you last laugh? Hmmmm....let me think,' God muses. 'Oh, yes, I forgot,
I DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS OF PUNY MORTALS LIKE YOU. MY JUDGEMENT IS BEYOND THE COMPREHENSION OF MAN. Where were you when I made the mountains? Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades, or loose the cords of Orion? Where is the way to the dwelling of light, and where is the place of darkness?'

.
.
.
.
Well, I only asked ...

If you want to ask a question of God, here's a quicker link:http://www.princeton.edu/~ahutgoff/otadventure.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:43:32 (GMT)
From: j of v
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: ok. been there, did that. whats next
Message:
ok. been there, did that. whats next
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 12:02:57 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: j of v
Subject: There can be only one place left to turn ...
Message:
'eternal salvation or triple your money back'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:57:16 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Steven Quint
Subject: Another Interesting Link
Message:
Check the quackwatch website ........

That's a good one!!!!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:39:31 (GMT)
From: jondon
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Question RE: Satellite Videos
Message:
Is there a $15.00 fee per person to attend these local events. Or is it $15.00 for the house, and everyone is asked to ante up a buck or two?

The premie roomies are getting restless. They are becoming bored now that the summer is over and there are no scantily clad women to oogle. They feel that something is missing in their lives and so it is time to check in with M. Here we go again. These guys get bored and think sitting in on this monotone, high-pitched, gerbil voiced, egomaniacal snake oil salesman will give them what it is they are looking for. You know that place, it is within yourself. Ooops, I digress. Maybe it is time to start a pot of popcorn and watch the LOTU video with them.

Thanking you in advance,

jondon

Maharaji is a fraud

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 16:39:02 (GMT)
From: JTF
Email: None
To: jondon
Subject: Question RE: Satellite Videos
Message:
Thanks for these updates about your housemates' behavior regarding slurpi ji. I don't think M cares what they do accept participate in helping his cash flow.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:12:37 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Is this how Amoroo will look like?
Message:
The worlds largest tent:

http://www.trancenet.org/noway/photos/roa.shtml

from:

http://www.trancenet.org/noway/

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:15:31 (GMT)
From: Bidouc
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Is this how Amoroo will look like?
Message:
Not at all

In the latest newsletter from Amaroo, the project is far from a tent city.
The tents are for the premies, little tent with high rent price.
A big place with different kind of restaurants (indian, chinese, italian, french, ...) shops for anything you could need (double price) and of course shops with videos, photos, cups, little spoons, books, everything that could be useful to enjoy rawat's world.
Just take a picture of the first supemarket you see and you will be able to imagine Amaroo's project.
Bayside in Miami would a good example if they had donation tables.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 16:21:50 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Bidouc
Subject: Is this how Amoroo will look like?
Message:
What news letter?

p.s. while you are here say hello to shp and Bjorne. They are two lost souls that come here often for no obvious reason.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 22:24:31 (GMT)
From: Bidouc
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Is this how Amoroo will look like?
Message:
When you give money every month by credit card you have the great pleasure to be updated about the udge project of Amaroo.
I was one of those who gave constantly.
I still receive this letter, one every six or more months.

The Ivory Rock center is also a business for rawat.
There is a private company who is managing the center and rent the land to EV australia.
Maybe somebody could have a look on this company. Could it be possible that australian devotees had any interest in that company ??????

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 03:40:58 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Bidouc
Subject: Is this how Amoroo will look like?
Message:
Am a marked man Bidouc. I use my real name so it is all hanging up.
How much money you pay for this newsletter?
Are you talking about Ivory's Rock Conference Centre or something else.

( I am sure I was a cat in one of my other incarnations)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:16:05 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: How are they?
Message:
http://www.caic.org.au/biblebase/theway.htm
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 14:17:45 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: oops, typo: Who are they?..nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index