Ex-Premie Forum 7 Archive
From: Feb 04, 2002 To: Feb 10, 2002 Page: 3 of: 5


OTS -:- Knowledge is NOT free -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:30:59 (EST)
__ Steve Mueller -:- Re: Knowledge is NOT free -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:40:33 (EST)
__ Silvia -:- *****BEST OF FORUM**** -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:03:53 (EST)
__ OTS -:- Nice work 'Ots'... -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:32:43 (EST)
__ __ OTS -:- Obviously posted by Nigel -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:33:28 (EST)
__ __ __ Oops! -:- Can I call myself 'Oops!'? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:25:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Nigel -:- See my reply to Livia.. [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:39:58 (EST)
__ __ __ Richard -:- Nigel, you missed some great posts -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:50:50 (EST)
__ Joe -:- Other 'costs' -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:30:35 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- What is this CAC2? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 23:16:46 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- What is this about? -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 20:51:43 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Precisely Cynthia and Joe -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 04:42:05 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ * -:- * -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 21:15:15 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Livia -:- Thinking before leaping -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:24:49 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- Thank you for getting my point -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 17:49:37 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- Agree 100% Pat , Cynthia and Joe -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 13:22:29 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- Re: Agree 100% Pat , Cynthia and Joe -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 21:39:39 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard -:- Of course, Deborah -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 22:04:30 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- I agree -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 18:08:50 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Which is why Deborah was deleted -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 04:14:29 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- NO! WRONG PatC -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 18:17:16 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Group attack ??? -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 18:31:46 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- Apparently Livia & Richard understand -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 19:49:42 (EST)
__ Jean-Michel -:- Thanks definitely **** Best of Forum *** -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:45:18 (EST)
__ Livia -:- Re: Knowledge is NOT free -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:39:59 (EST)
__ __ Francesca -:- Please, he's just describing the guy -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:56:44 (EST)
__ __ __ JHB -:- Francesca, but how would it look... -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 17:00:37 (EST)
__ __ Nigel -:- Agreed! 'OTS' please note... -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:35:10 (EST)
__ __ Jethro -:- Re: Knowledge is NOT free -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:58:24 (EST)
__ __ __ janet the half jew -:- if u knew sheldon, it fit. -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:50:16 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- So what, Janet? [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 23:18:06 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: if u knew sheldon, it fit. -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:09:23 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ janet -:- Re: if u knew sheldon, it fit. -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:20:25 (EST)
__ __ __ OTS -:- What's the matter now? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:11:37 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: What's the matter now? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:09:20 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- Everybody simmer down now! -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:14:40 (EST)
__ __ OTS -:- Please lighten up -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:57:35 (EST)
__ __ __ Kelly -:- Re: The scary robotic guy -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 12:00:35 (EST)
__ __ __ Livia -:- Re: Please lighten up -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 11:08:00 (EST)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- OTS, Please lighten up:) -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:07:16 (EST)
__ __ __ Joe -:- OTS, who is that? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:49:22 (EST)
__ __ __ JHB -:- I agree with Livia -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:15:36 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Carl -:- Excuse me, but -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:11:37 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Let me explain -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:51:32 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ janet the half jew -:- ya know? if anyone should apologize.. -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:59:26 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- I sent him an email -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:02:36 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ kamet -:- he's a lawyer now. I say -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:11:20 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Janet -:- misspelled my own name. great. [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:21:42 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- lawyers talk to lawyers -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:13:25 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Lawyers? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:39:00 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Re: Lawyers? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:41:20 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jet -:- ()) ()) ()) ()) ()) hee hee -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:24:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Oh, come on -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:58:43 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Oh, come on -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:22:35 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Re: Oh, come on -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:01:42 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Exactly my point -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:09:08 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Still Ridiculous, IMO -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:53:05 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Not just Jewish -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 18:16:54 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Still Ridiculous -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 18:40:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- NOT Ridiculous! -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:04:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Whoa -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:12:58 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Joe, why is this not clear to you? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:39:32 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Splitting minute hairs. -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:57:47 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- This is definitely racist -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:52:54 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- You don't sound so definite -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:13:16 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- It's so PC to accuse me of not being PC -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:20:31 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Re: It's so PC to accuse me of not being PC -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 04:59:54 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Marshall -:- Re: Exactly my point -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:48:50 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Sometimes it is descriptive -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:57:09 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- would it be better like this? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:21:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Janet -:- Re: would it be better like this? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:34:32 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Livia -:- Hopefully, the last word -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:45:36 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sulla -:- May I...? -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 11:44:17 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Thank you, Livia -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 19:14:38 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- With words like these, I hope... -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 16:50:07 (EST)

Vicki -:- Commotion of Emotion -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 06:38:18 (EST)
__ Cynthia -:- Commotion of Emotion -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:27:02 (EST)
__ __ Friendly Neighbor -:- Good morning, doll -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:54:14 (EST)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- Good Morning to you...LOL -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:20:44 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Deborah -:- A smoke?? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:38:51 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- ^^^Definitely Jim^^^OT [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:17:27 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- ExCUUUUSE ME!! -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:36:59 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Cynthia -:- Re: ExCUUUUSE ME!!())())()) -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 13:23:24 (EST)
__ Silvia -:- Good post! -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:01:26 (EST)
__ Jethro -:- More revisionism -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 07:10:33 (EST)
__ __ Sulla -:- Re: More revisionism -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:00:00 (EST)
__ __ __ Jethro -:- Are you serious??? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:24:35 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Sulla -:- Don't you believe in ghosts???? t -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:06:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Sulla -:- Just kidding... -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:18:34 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- It is not ambiguous -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 03:12:00 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sulla -:- But, really... -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:26:29 (EST)

Janet -:- MSNBC article in full text, in re ^ -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:03:47 (EST)
__ Janet -:- Re: MSNBC article URL for replying -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:10:42 (EST)

Janet -:- MSNBC errs on what a cult does -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 04:53:51 (EST)
__ cq -:- That's a damn good reply, Janet -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:39:46 (EST)
__ __ janet -:- tx, cq. my hope is this: -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:44:45 (EST)
__ __ __ left out a sentence -:- Re: in 'cq. my hope is this'-: -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:01:43 (EST)

Jethro -:- He's the guy that said -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:55:18 (EST)

Abi -:- US paper -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:31:14 (EST)
__ RW -:- QUICK! THE PAWN HAS SPOKEN! -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:57:09 (EST)
__ __ Dermot -:- Why do you do this anon one??? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 22:10:29 (EST)
__ __ __ PatC -:- Dermot, I like you in spite of.... -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 05:06:46 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Ddermot -:- 'while cowards flinch and traitors sneer' :) -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:45:15 (EST)
__ __ __ Jethro -:- Let's call the XpDL nt -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:04:26 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Dermot -:- What's that Jeth?? -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:11:45 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: What's that Jeth? -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 04:09:37 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Dermot -:- Re: What's that Jeth?? -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 11:00:48 (EST)
__ JHB -:- Abi, I've emailed you [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:40:46 (EST)
__ Hey Abi -:- Re: US paper -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:40:45 (EST)

Pullaver -:- Toronto Ashram Black & Whites -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 21:34:43 (EST)
__ Joe -:- Were we ever that young???? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:13:35 (EST)
__ Jim -:- A little gossip? Why not? -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:05:44 (EST)
__ __ Fly in the Ointment -:- Heller in the Ashram Basement -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 08:55:49 (EST)
__ __ __ Brian Smith -:- What i wouldn't give for that fender Strat, WOW [nt] -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 05:04:30 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Everything in the picture's for sale! [nt] -:- Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 20:27:14 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- WELL, not EVERYyhing -- ! [nt] -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 05:26:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Brian Smith -:- Do you still have that Strat ? -:- Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 14:00:07 (EST)
__ Richard -:- Re: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:15:33 (EST)
__ Deborah -:- Gee! They look like cultists to me -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:26:56 (EST)
__ __ Steve Mueller -:- Maybe, but they were gentle souls -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:25:44 (EST)
__ ChrisP -:- Re: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:06:22 (EST)
__ __ Pullaver -:- Re: Lowther Ashram -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:14:03 (EST)
__ __ __ ChrisP -:- This is the End of the Innocence -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:38:49 (EST)
__ Pullaver -:- Re: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 21:41:45 (EST)
__ __ Brian Smith -:- Hey ! What is that thing under your rain coat -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 02:42:49 (EST)

Joe -:- Visions/Dunrite -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 19:15:11 (EST)
__ Loaf -:- Re: Visions/Dunrite -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:48:37 (EST)
__ Vicki -:- Re: Visions/Dunrite -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:53:17 (EST)
__ Francesca -:- Here ya go -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 19:45:18 (EST)
__ __ Deborah -:- No logo for the big M -:- Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:37:06 (EST)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- They have no problem... -:- Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:57:32 (EST)


Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:30:59 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Knowledge is NOT free
Message:
The “Knowledge” or “Self-Knowledge,” as it is now referred to by Elan Vital (if the organization even still exits) and Maharaji, is marketed as a NO CHARGE thing. It’s yours, free, as a gift. Sort of like getting a new toaster when you open up a savings account down at the old Savings & Loan. It’s free, they say. HA!!!!!!!!!! What a joke that is. It cost me plenty. Most everything I had.

For instance, whether you look at it today or 30 years ago, believe me, it costs big time. I believe Loaf below was recalling the complete psycho behavior of one Mahatma Fakiranand, the blissful beggar. And I agree to his taking the cake. During the selection process he asked people if they’d cut their head off for Maharaji, if they’d give the title to their boat/car to Maharaji. He would tell a few to bring the title to the Knowledge session the next morning and the keys to starting the engine. (After the session, I recall people asking the Mahatma for a dollar to take the subway home, as they had dedicated all of their tokens and cash. It was quite embarrassing to have to watch Dr. John reach into his pocket and give the guy a buck to get home. My brother-in-law, now 50, received Knowledge at the 1973 Millennium event at the Houston Astrodome. He, to this day, regrets having to give up his high school ring in order to receive Knowledge. He never had it replaced. He never practiced Knowledge or got into it at all and was never a premie, but is still bitter about this.

My wife, and many other women during the early 70s in the ashrams and the communities, had their jewelry taken from them by this hunchback Jewish premie merchant on the East Coast who would just rip it off the girls and laugh and laugh and re-sell it for cash for the local coffers. He cared nothing for any sentimental value or family heirloom classifications. He is known by all to this day for his divine sales work back then. He sold off these gems for money for M’s mission to bring peace to the world through the dissemination of this free gift -- Knowledge. Thirty years later -- still no peace! Knowledge still free! Not selling like hotcakes, though. The merchant, no longer a merchant, still is in love with Maharaji, and would never come here to F7 and face the truth of the matter. Never. Too brainwashed.

Or how about the cost of Knowledge today. If you are actually finally selected to receive it and get it, after having spent a lot of money and airfare and hotel and car rentals to go to Miami Beach, FL (maybe a few times over a few years) and try to get selected but see other people crying from being rejected as not being “ready to receive Knowledge,” well, you promise to keep in touch. So, I guess that means either (i) going to see M and hear him repeat the same speech over and over year after year, or (ii) watching the heavily edited broadcasts of his speeches, with all the jokes and four-letter words removed.

As for the former (going to see M), for instance, last year, my premie friend spent his hard-earned after-tax money on the following trips: Portland, Ore.; Thousand Oaks, CA; Queensland, Australia; Miami Beach, FL; Nottingham, UK; Rome; Phoenix, AZ; Philadelphia, PA; Miami Beach, FL just to see Maharji and hear him speak. Fine for him, the rich successful fellow and his wife. Some trips were only for an hour’s speech. Other trips lasted a few days or weeks. Can you afford all these trips? How many? Which ones? How do you choose? Is it ever enough? Can you afford the time off from work/family; the spiraling costs of airfare, hotel, food, car, seat registration, darshan cash donation? Year after year after year. Charging and charging and charging on those cards?

As to the latter (seeing the broadcasts), when satellite broadcasts first came out a few years ago, our community had to rent a hotel room and then hire a contractor to put up a Dishnet® satellite dish for that day’s event, then take it down. We didn’t have a permanent “hall.” For the next broadcast, we had to hire the same hotel room and satellite dish installation contractor to come out again to the hotel and install and take down the dish. This brought the per person price of entry to see the one-hour videotaped speech to $30 per person. That’s $60 for me and the mrs. per week, or $240 per month, for us to attend the weekly broadcasts. [For the prior 12 years, we’d always gone and watched the videotapes playing for free and our small monthly donation.] Only most people couldn’t afford the price, so more and more people bought their own dish and watched at home. But for those that couldn’t get transmission, or couldn’t afford the dish, they had to go to the hotel room and pay $30 a person. As more and more people watched from home, the expenses at the hotel were not being met and finally hotel broadcasts were cancelled. Everyone was on their own. The local EV would not allow premies to somehow get together at a local event and see who had the dish and who didn’t and who would invite whom over to watch. Not allowed. This was one of the final drips for me. I couldn’t get the dish at home and couldn’t afford to watch in a hotel room, which was now no longer an option, and couldn’t afford to buy all of the videos, so I bought a couple a year, and that was that. We used to drive 40 minutes to this family’s home to watch the broadcasts, but their kids and the dog would always be running around, and the heavily edited nature of the speeches made them more and more boring, and I’d just fall asleep, so we stopped going.

Finally, I exited the cult. Knowledge is Free -- my ass! It cost me thirty years of hard work, dedication, and crushed hopes -- all because of the fraudulent nature of the entire trip presented by its leader The Maharaja of Malibu. Knowledge, as it was said here last week, is just the cheese on M’s mousetrap. Please mind the bait.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:40:33 (EST)
From: Steve Mueller
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Re: Knowledge is NOT free
Message:
Great post, OTS!

But you know what the real kicker is? Guess what? He gives you absolutely NOTHING! NOTHING at all! If someone shows you a better way to pick your nose or scratch your bum, do you really feel they GAVE you something? He gives you NOTHING! NOTHING! Pushing on eyeballs, big frickin deal. Following your breath. Hell, you can read about that in countless yoga and meditation books. But before he 'GIVES' you this NOTHING, he makes sure you are adequately brainwashed into 'staying in touch' (translation: is assured you will be a regular and significant contributor to his GulfStream jet and Malibu mansion payments). M is the world's all time most successful con artist, bar none. He is a greedy pig who doesn't care how many peoples' lives he fucks up so long as he can continue to live the life of luxury to which he has become addicted. He is not to be pitied. He is an evil sob who needs to be stopped by all legal and socially responsible means available. Mainly, thru education, thru getting the word out to anyone already infected by his evil social disease, as well as warning those who might be susceptible to becoming new victims of his sneaky brainwashing techniques.

Thanks again for your great post, OTS. You accurately described the way it is for those folks who exed long ago who may not have been aware of just how expensive it has truly become to get N-O-T-H-I-N-G from M.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:03:53 (EST)
From: Silvia
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: *****BEST OF FORUM****
Message:
Good post! Of course it is not free. Maharaji is such a con man that engraves in yoru brain much and that one is one. Free. My credit cards I'm still paying tells me the opposite.

Have you posted here before with another name? I like yoru posts. :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:32:43 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: OTS
Subject: Nice work 'Ots'...
Message:
(May I call you 'Ots'?)

You write well. I haven't noticed you here before. If you are new, then welcome - I hope you enjoy your stay. How about thinking of doing a 'journeys' entry?

(Also, in my experience, it is totally safe to use your own name, provided you tell only the truth as you see it - but I realise many new exes aren't ready for that straight away).

Thanks, anyway, for the post. You hit the nail(s) on the head. 'Free' K? - same now as it ever was, and you spell that out clearly for premies who still insist ex-premie posters live in the past.

Cheers,
Nige

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:33:28 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Obviously posted by Nigel
Message:
Nigel: You may call me Ots, but you may not call your self OTS.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:25:03 (EST)
From: Oops!
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: OTS
Subject: Can I call myself 'Oops!'?
Message:
I wondered where my reply vanished to.. ;)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:39:58 (EST)
From: Nigel
Email: None
To: Oops!
Subject: See my reply to Livia.. [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:50:50 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Nigel, you missed some great posts
Message:
The first couple of OTS posts caused quite a stir. They can probably be retrieved from the F7 archives. I tried to find them but get broken links from the search page. Maybe a temporary problem.

First post
TO: Your Readers
FROM: OTS
SUBJECT: Shades of Gray
DATE: July 21, 2001

Second post
TO: EPO Readers
FROM: OTS
DATE: August 27, 2001
RE: Update

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:30:35 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Other 'costs'
Message:
If you go over to the 'Visions' website you find for sale a myriad of publications, videos, tapes, 'cloud books' and the like specifically for those interested in receiving knowledge, and they all COST, from about $15 to about $30. Now, no one is FORCED to buy this stuff if they want to receive knowledge, but given that nobody knows when you are ever 'ready' to receive knowledge, and the selection process is almost entirely arbitrary and subjective, one would feel somewhat pressured to get all the 'stuff' the cult recommends for the purpose of receiving Knowledge, if you think that's what you want.

And what better way to demonstrate your proper "understanding" and that you are "ready" than to make donations, buy cult trinkets, and travel to "events," paying whatever exhorbitant "registration" fees are charged, like paying $100 to watch M speak and react to professions of "love" for a couple of hours in a hotel ballroom, like happened a couple of months ago.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 23:16:46 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: What is this CAC2?
Message:
Delete that fucking picture.

It has no place here or reason to be placed here whoever placed it here.!

This is rotten shit here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 20:51:43 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: *
Subject: What is this about?
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 04:42:05 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Precisely Cynthia and Joe
Message:
We are not here to attack premies. I know Sheldon and wish him only well even if I do not agree with his attachment to Rev Rawat.

I have made my fair share of digs at premies and regret it. Gossip and unkind words about premies was the only part of the attack on me by CAC which I conceded was a mistake on my part.

The rest of the CAC attack on me was despicable and I will never stoop to that level. I am here to help premies see the other side of the story not to attack them.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 21:15:15 (EST)
From: *
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: *
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:24:49 (EST)
From: Livia
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: Thinking before leaping
Message:
Dear Deborah

In light of everything that's been said, and having just reread my angry post to OTS, I now think I could have found a gentler, kinder way to express the feelings I had at the time. I have a tendency to get (inappropriately?) aggressive at times. I think I've learned a lesson.

Thank you, Deborah

With love, Livia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 17:49:37 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: Thank you for getting my point
Message:
Hi Livia,

This was not about WHY a post should or should not get edited or deleted, it is how we communicate. I agree with all the points. Their is no need to have a group of people explode before a point is made. That does not make a good impression on lurking posters. And it is not fair to the person participating.

Thank you for seeing the point in the intention it was made. It's nice of you to come forward to say what you did.

Take care,

deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 13:22:29 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Agree 100% Pat , Cynthia and Joe
Message:
100% agreement. I will not participate in a forum that trashes innocent people. I feel a huge responsibility to tell my story as I experienced it, support others in doing the same and let everyone decide for themselves what path they will take.

FA: Please remove the photo and any personal info.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 21:39:39 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Re: Agree 100% Pat , Cynthia and Joe
Message:
Richard,

Will you participate on a forum that politely discusses its point of view or objection without trashing an un-intentionally trashing poster? Would others?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 22:04:30 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: Of course, Deborah
Message:
I'm not sure what your comment has to do with what I said though. My point was that we shouldn't have a lynch mob mentality here. It serves nothing to do that. If someone wronged someone else years ago, then they have every reason to say so. It's just not right to publish that person's personal information here. If it's done, that's no better than the Cacroaches.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 18:08:50 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: I agree
Message:
But everyone attacking a post that may be unfair is attacking as well. That could have been said without turning the poster into a CAC attacker. Do you really think that was my intent?

My name showed up on one of those CAC attacks as well.

Now if I insisted and argued etc. that would be different. Than I could see a group chiming in, but that wasn't the case at all. I had deleted the posts myself.

I have told PatC that he is welcome to delete any and all posts he feel fits at his discretion.

Thankfully, Livia got the point.

Be well,

deborah who thanks you for a considerate response

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 04:14:29 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Which is why Deborah was deleted
Message:
You said: ''I'm not sure what your comment has to do with what I said though.''

Deborah is upset that some of her posts were deleted. This happened because she first deleted her really bad mistake of posting wrong info about another person whom she thought........oh never mind. Her mistake has been fixed but she has not realized that yet.

I'm sorry but I really did not follow this thread much. Other people who were involved in this thread requested that I delete their posts since Deborah had deleted the offending post of hers to which they were responding. Their responses referring to a serious blunder by Deborah ceased to have relevance and were deleted as requested.

If people give me a good reason to delete posts, I will. I have done the same favor for Deborah in the past when she was attacked by premies. I was given the password to the forum so that I get help in it's admin. I seldom delete anything except anonymous spam attacking exes and now, for the first time, posts which no longer had relevance since the topic that elicited them had been removed by it's author.

PS I am hoping, Deborah, that you will drop this subject in light of the fact that you have been spared the necessity of making a public apology to the person you defamed by the posting of inaccurate information. Deleting all references to your blunder was the only solution.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 18:17:16 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: NO! WRONG PatC
Message:
Jesus! How far off the point can you possibly be. I am delighted that the posts were deleted. Delighted. I can not drop the topic and watch you paint such a pathetic representation of what happened.

I was saying that the above posters engaged in a group attack over a post, which, happened to be already removed without YOUR help.

You have the right to remove and I encourage you to do that, but that does not mean that people should leave a wake of complaints against the poster in it's wake.

I was not debating with anybody on the merits of posting or deleting. It was about decent courtesy to the fellow posters.

Is this clearer to you now?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 18:31:46 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: Group attack ???
Message:
You've already mentioned this to me by email (where it belongs BTW not here) and I have already responded. However, as you have raised the subject in public, I shall respond in public.

As I said to you by email - I really can't be bothered to even ask for an explanation if what you mean by a group attack. The very idea makes me wonder if you are becoming paranoid.

Now please drop this subject immediately. It is highly personal to you and probably of no interest to anyone else. Please contact the people in the ''group'' that you imagine are attacking you and do it privately by email but not on this forum.

That's my final word on the subject.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 19:49:42 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Apparently Livia & Richard understand
Message:
This is not paranoia, dear.

I am talking about the cluster of posts that I responded to. It is not an imagingary 'group' in my head. They have names. Why would I need the email to observe the bulletin board.

I also referred to the 'group attack' on OTS over his comment. If one person complained, it didn't need to be accompanied by ten others. And people slung complaints and cried 'foul' before giving OTS a chance to respond. A dearth of courtesy is and has been my complaint in all posts and email exchanges.

Please do not re-write my posts and emails according to the 'story' in your head. I am talking about tangable and obviousl behaviours here. No conspiracy theory in my head. Got it!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:45:18 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Thanks definitely **** Best of Forum ***
Message:
I know I have to update that page, and I'LL DO IT !!!
[ Best Of Forum Page ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:39:59 (EST)
From: Livia
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Re: Knowledge is NOT free
Message:
'My wife, and many other women during the early 70s in the ashrams and the communities, had their jewelry taken from them by this hunchback Jewish premie merchant on the East Coast who would just rip it off the girls and laugh and laugh and re-sell it for cash for the local coffers.'

I'm sorry, while I agree with the spirit of what you say in this post, I just can't let the above go without comment. If 'hunchback Jewish premie merchant' doesn't have anti-Semitic connotations, then I'm a fried egg! Please, what does Jewish have to do with it? Hunchback Jewish - sounds like some horrible Dickensian sterotype. Please apologise.

With regards, Livia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:56:44 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: Please, he's just describing the guy
Message:
And I have a Jewish ex-premie friend who laughed their ass off reading it and knew Sheldon back then.

I don't think he was putting down Jews!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 17:00:37 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Francesca, but how would it look...
Message:
... if you didn't know Sheldon? I didn't and still don't, and there are hundreds reading here, many of whom I'm sure also don't. OTS needs to understand his readership better.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:35:10 (EST)
From: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Livia
Subject: Agreed! 'OTS' please note...
Message:
I was skim reading 'OTS's' post in places - and missed that bit. Yuk!

Well out of order - and I retract my above praise until its writer does the decent thing.

Thanks Livia - it sometimes gets wearying speaking up for common sense and decency at the risk of being seen as some sort of PC-policeperson. But it needed saying.

Nineteenth century is more-or-less right - or perhaps 17th? (I am thinking 'Shylock' now..)

Cheers,
Nige

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:58:24 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: Re: Knowledge is NOT free
Message:
Yes it did sound anti-Semitic but I don't think it was intended. Believe me some of my best friends are gentiles.

When I read the post, I assumed that this premie was either a Hasidic premie(there were some) or looked like Ron Moody playing Shylok.

Maybe OTS can tell us why he use the word Jewish?

Jethro

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:50:16 (EST)
From: janet the half jew
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: if u knew sheldon, it fit.
Message:
it sounded pretty nasty, true--but the sad reality is that sheldon fit the description all too well.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 23:18:06 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: janet the half jew
Subject: So what, Janet? [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:09:23 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: janet the half jew
Subject: Re: if u knew sheldon, it fit.
Message:
'it sounded pretty nasty, true--but the sad reality is that sheldon fit the description all too well'

seems like we all have the same stereotype in our heads.
Thank you Shakespeare

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:20:25 (EST)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: if u knew sheldon, it fit.
Message:
i didn't have any stereotype in my head! I was living in NYC at the time and so was he! All my paternal relatives are full blooded and fully habituated new york jews! it's a lifestyle,a mindset, a way of coping!

'stereotype'
..!?
hell no, babe. I was just recognizing a classic way of behaving, that Sheldon demonstrated with glee and forethought. He was just being the way he had seen everyone else around him be, all his natural born, New York, Jewish life. Same way you and I and everyone you've ever known learned how to be--by watching, imitating and gaining approval from the people who were raising us from the cradle.

and in this particular case, Shakespeare never entered into it. I guarantee you that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:11:37 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: What's the matter now?
Message:
Jetrho/Livia/Pope John Paul II: In my post of February 1st, I wrote:

'Having studied Judaism in my youth for many years, when Guru Maharaji came along, simultaneous with the fading out of the radical left and anti-war movement in America in the early 70s and the rise of heavy metal music, I was just so ripe that part of my faith which promised Jews that their savior will come seemed to be answered for me by his arrival in the West.'

Does this sound anti-semetic? Kinda sounds like perhaps I might be myself Jewish, no?

I used the word Jewish because of facts. And yes, he looked like Ron Moody playing Shylock. Except our premie friend is a nice boy. 'Just doing his service.' Just like the SS troops in WWII?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:09:20 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Re: What's the matter now?
Message:
'Having studied Judaism in my youth for many years, when Guru Maharaji came along, simultaneous with the fading out of the radical left and anti-war movement in America in the early 70s and the rise of heavy metal music, I was just so ripe that part of my faith which promised Jews that their savior will come seemed to be answered for me by his arrival in the West.'

Although I had given up Judaism by the time I came to m(I was a Chabadnik for a short time), I also like you saw m as a fufilment of the messiah. My own studies of the Talmud as a book of Jewish discussion led me to believe that the messiah performed the function of lifting the consciousness of the world and could be just about anybody(Jewish or not). A bit like when m used to say that the Perfect Master could be any person(eeerr it's just a coincidence that he happened to be the son of a PM AND the PM appoints the next PM).

'Does this sound anti-semetic? Kinda sounds like perhaps I might be myself Jewish, no? '

That you may be a Jew does not stop you being an anti-Semite or sound like one. (Big fucking deal, everyone sounds like something!)If you are a Jew then you already know this. All I meant in my post was that I knew someone would be offended by your statement.

'I used the word Jewish because of facts. And yes, he looked like Ron Moody playing Shylock. '
Exactly my first image. Seems like we both bought into the Jewsih stereotype of Shylock. By the way 'what facts'?

'Except our premie friend is a nice boy. 'Just doing his service.' Just like the SS troops in WWII? '

Sounds like a typical premie doing things because 'Maharaji said'.
It also sounds like a parking warden defending himself when giving out a ticket. It also sounds like a lawyer saying 'I am only following the law' in a case where it is obvious that his client is guilty......and yes it also sounds like the Nazis.

Jethro

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:14:40 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Everybody simmer down now!
Message:
Don't let this good thread erupt into an argument just because of one sentence.

OTS explained him/herself. Let it go please.

Cynth

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:57:35 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: Please lighten up
Message:
Livia, even though I am happy to read your posts, no, political correctness does not rule the day here, I'm sorry. Cannot one be described by their religion ever? If you knew this guy, you'd say about my description: 'Exactly.' I have nothing against any religion or against anyone who practices any religion and I'm certainly not an anti-semite or anti-semetic. How boring this place can become with numerous attempts to correct others' expression and demand apologies of this one and that one. And my need to respond to your outrage. [P.S. I know Jewish premies who are actually pissed at Maharaji because he still cracks Jewish jokes constantly in large and small groups.] Some people can't take being made fun of. But, here, I am not blanketly demeaning people of a certain race or religion. Just pointing out this particular guy's obvious characteristics. Love, OTS

By the way below in a post of yours you ask: 'What I'd like to know is: who is the guy who appears quite often [in the Passages video], sitting to the right with a very straight back and something slightly scary and robotic about him? Because that person had a steel rod inserted in his spine some years ago and had a slight stroke and therefore isn't able to emote with his facial expressions like he used to -- shouldn't YOU apologzie to all people who've had back operations and strokes? Ridiculous.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 12:00:35 (EST)
From: Kelly
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Re: The scary robotic guy
Message:
Hi OTS (What does that stand for by the way?)
I've walked in on the middle of an argument, never a good idea, but I'm wondering if you were serious about that guy in the Passages video? if so, can you tell us who he is?
I suspect you were scoring a (tongue in cheek) point, but it's so hard to tell sometimes on this invisible forum.
By the way, I'm tall dark and handsome!
Kelly
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 11:08:00 (EST)
From: Livia
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: Re: Please lighten up
Message:
'But, here, I am not blanketly demeaning people of a certain race or religion. Just pointing out this particular guy's obvious characteristics'

Dear OTS

I'm sorry but I still think you're missing something here, and if you read my post at the hopefully final end of all this, you may understand why.

As for your explanation about the premie in the Passages video, if this is true that he has a metal rod in his spine and has had a stroke, then, aargh I'm guilty of an insensitive remark too. I really had no idea and I should have thought. I'll be more careful next time before I rush to condemn....

With love, Livia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:07:16 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: OTS, Please lighten up:)
Message:
Hi OTS,

I didn't even notice the Jewish reference. But when Jews are mentioned in connection with jewelry, it can be misconstrued as anti-semetic, that's all. Btw, are you Jewish?

I sure wish you would come out already. If you have serious saftey or confidentiality reasons I do understand, however; take some time to consider revealing your real name.

It's hard at first, but once you do it, it takes a huge weight off your shoulders and does give you much more credibility when posting here. No pressure, just think about it.

Best,
Cynthia J. Gracie
Vermont, USA, fearlessness inspires truth

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:49:22 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: OTS, who is that?
Message:
Is that Ron Geaves, who has a rod in his spine? I can't think of who else it might be. Is it John Hampton? John did look not in the greatest health in the video, and come to think of it, he did sit to the right. What happened with him?

By the way OTS, I am probably the most PC person here, or at least I have that reputation, which isn't really true, but there you have it, and I didn't think what you said was offensive, and further, if people knew who you were, they would feel even less that way.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:15:36 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: OTS
Subject: I agree with Livia
Message:
Your description of this premie did come across to me as anti-semitic, whether you intended it to or not.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:11:37 (EST)
From: Carl
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Excuse me, but
Message:
why is the mere mention of a characteristic or description considered 'anti'?

There was no derogatory slang term or disrespect within the language used that I could see.

E.g., 'So-and-so is an arthritic black Catholic gay man premie bowler. . . '

Do we 'apologize' to all men because he was identifed as a man? To all Catholics? All gays? All blacks? All bowlers?

What is so horrible about description and setting the scene?

Screenwriters and novelists pay close attention to the colorful distinctions among us, otherwise all stories would only distinguish between 'Human A' and 'Human B' and so on.

Or perhaps we should apologize to the alphabet.

Am I missing something?

Help me out.

Regards,
Carl

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:51:32 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Carl
Subject: Let me explain
Message:
I hesitate in doing so as the issue has been pretty much put to bed, and in no way do I think OTS is anti-semitic, but I think it's worthwhile explaining why, in my opinion, it comes over that way.

To me, it's for two reasons - firstly, quite a few specific people are mentioned in OTS's excellent debunking of the 'Knowedge is Free' myth, and OTS doesn't refer to anyone else's ethnic background or religion. Unfortunately, the one person about whom he does add this extra information, is painted in a poor light. The information that this premie was Jewish did not add any essential colour to the story.

Secondly, mentioning that the premie was Jewish could be interpreted as that he was taking the jewellery because he was Jewish.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:59:26 (EST)
From: janet the half jew
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: ya know? if anyone should apologize..
Message:
it ought to be Sheldon, for taking all our jewelry like that, the way he did. I he left the kind of impression he did, then he is the one guilty for giving jews and premies, both, a bad name!
and sheldon, if you read this, come on out and take me on! we knew each other, back in the day. you know what you did. it's on YOU to make good, not on us.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:02:36 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: janet the half jew
Subject: I sent him an email
Message:
And I was really nice and polite, just asking if he remembered me from Miami and saying hello. No response. Sheldon didn't want to talk to me. Do you think he hates gays who are one quarter Danish? :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:11:20 (EST)
From: kamet
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: he's a lawyer now. I say
Message:
we let Jim and Marianne be our emisarries. They have the inside polish. uh... i mean panache, not people of poland!
oh christ. here we go again.

let lawyers talk to lawyers. they speak the lanuage, they move in the culture.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:21:42 (EST)
From: Janet
Email: None
To: kamet
Subject: misspelled my own name. great. [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:13:25 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: kamet
Subject: lawyers talk to lawyers
Message:
let lawyers talk to lawyers.

I think that's like saying 'let the blind lead the blind.' :)

And they would be there for DAYS and it would cost a FORTUNE :)

(Okay, no more lawyer jokes!)

Joe,

Who works with, and fights with lawyers every day.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:39:00 (EST)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Lawyers?
Message:
Haven't I mentioned that we are superior to everyone else on the planet? If I neglected to say so before, I am now. That premise is what I base my legal practice upon. Anyone who has met me knows I am insufferable class snob.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:41:20 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Re: Lawyers?
Message:
Of course present company excepted! Of course and always, for sure, yes, absolutely......:)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:24:33 (EST)
From: Jet
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: ()) ()) ()) ()) ()) hee hee
Message:
it's a secret society, doncha know
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 15:58:43 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Oh, come on
Message:
Secondly, mentioning that the premie was Jewish could be interpreted as that he was taking the jewellery because he was Jewish

Sorry John, but that's kind of ridiculous, and really reaching. Why would a Jewish person steal other people's jewelry, more than a Christian would, maybe, because:

1. He killed Jesus?:)
2. He thinks he's so smart?;:)
3. He's trying to make a fast buck?:)

Come on. Plus, since OTS is Jewish himself, he is innoculated from being called anti-semitic for making Jewish jokes, even though this wasn't a joke, or at least only partly was.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:22:35 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Oh, come on
Message:
'To me, it's for two reasons - firstly, quite a few specific people are mentioned in OTS's excellent debunking of the 'Knowedge is Free' myth, and OTS doesn't refer to anyone else's ethnic background or religion. '

I think John means that the statement is pandering to peoples' prejudice against Jews.

Try loooking up 'Jew' in a good dictionary, here's part of Chamber's 20th century Dictionary:

Jew: a person of Hebrew descent or religion; an Israelite:
(offensively)a userer, a miser, etc:- fem Jewess v.t.(offensively)to overeach or to cheat.....

Have you never heard anyone say 'I've been Jewed' meaning I have been cheated.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:01:42 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: Oh, come on
Message:
Have you never heard anyone say 'I've been Jewed' meaning I have been cheated.

Yes, but not since I was a kid, but that doesn't mean that 'Jewish' is a racist or anti-semitic term just to describe someone.

As I said to John, OTS described Sheldon Jaffe as being 'Jewish', among other things, because he knew a bunch of us would then know who he was talking about. In that sense, it was purely descriptive. The other people in OTS's piece (Fakiranand, his wife, and his friend who travels everywhere to see M), were NOT described at all. There were no descriptions, racial, religious or otherwise.

Jerry Seinfeld, Judd Hirsch, Seymour Hirsch, Ed Koch -- saying they look 'Jewish' is not a negative or anti-semitic thing to say, anymore than to say somebody looks Irish or is black is a negative thing to say.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:09:08 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Exactly my point
Message:
Therefore mentioning he was Jewish was completely unnecessary, just as OTS didn't mention the religions, colour or ethnicity of himself or anyone else in the post.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:53:05 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Still Ridiculous, IMO
Message:
Therefore mentioning he was Jewish was completely unnecessary,

If he had said the guy was 'black' or 'white' or 'Irish' or 'Scottish' would you say the same thing, or is it only the word 'Jewish' that gets that reaction? None of those things might be 'necessary' either, it's just a description, although it's pretty subjective for you, who didn't write the piece, to say it wasn't 'necessary.'

Or what if he said he was "gay"? Same thing?

You guys, are way, way way, overreacting.

By the way, David Goldberg has a great editorial in the Guardian about how the label 'anti-semitism' is sometimes used to label every liberal critic of the Isreali policy in Palestine.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 18:16:54 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Not just Jewish
Message:
In the UK, newspapers were (maybe still are) renowned for only mentioning a defendant's skin colour if it happens to be black. If it's white, it doesn't get mentioned. If a newspaper was reporting on the trial of a burglar, and mentioned that the burglar was gay, would that be OK, if they never say the straight burglars are straight? If we use the descriptions 'white', 'black', 'gay', 'straight', 'Latvian', 'Russian', 'Jewish', 'Moslem', we have to be careful to use them even-handedly. As I said two times already, OTS never mentioned any ethnic or religious details of anyone else in his story. If I, as a reader, need or want to know that this premie is Jewish, why don't I need or want to know similar information about all the other people mentioned?

And as I said before, I don't believe OTS was being racist in his post - just that it comes over that way. Already five exes have expressed the same view, so it is established that it does come over that way to some of us.

But no big deal:-)

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 18:40:28 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Still Ridiculous
Message:
. If I, as a reader, need or want to know that this premie is Jewish, why don't I need or want to know similar information about all the other people mentioned?

Well, obviously, because Sheldon Jaffe was the ONLY person in his story that was described. And, believe it or not, some peole LOOK Jewish, and it's completely legitimate, and not anti-semitic to point that out. The only other people mentioned were OTS's wife, Mahatama Fakiranand, and a 'friend' who traveled to see M a lot.

But Sheldon (not named) was described, because OTS knew that a whole bunch of us would know who he was talking about by his description. And, if the guy was known to be gay, then that would have been legitimate to say as well. There is just a huge difference between being descriptive and being racist.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:04:21 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: NOT Ridiculous!
Message:
Joe,

I didn't know who OTS was talking about. I still don't - the name means nothing to me. The one person in the account who has his religious/ethnic/physical characteristics described, is also the person who is cast in the worst light. OTS's account, taken on its own merits without the background information we now have, comes across as racist, and others agree with me.

You didn't respond to my other examples which I used for comparison. Do you agree that mentioning defendants' colour only if they are black is racist?

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:12:58 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Whoa
Message:
You didn't respond to my other examples which I used for comparison. Do you agree that mentioning defendants' colour only if they are black is racist

With all due respect I did respond. But your other statement has no relevence to what we are talking about. OTS isn't writing crime stories for the newspaper. He is writing to a bunch of people who would know who was being described. Maybe not everybody, but still a limited group nonetheless, and the description was relevent.

Do you disagree that some people look 'Jewish,' and do you think it's racist or anti-semitic to point that out? I don't.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:39:32 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Joe, why is this not clear to you?
Message:
Joe,

OTS was writing for the readers of this forum, in the same way that a newspaper reporter writes for the paper's readers. I had no idea who he was refering to, and still don't. Using the description 'Jewish' is absolutely fine as a description, but here it was used to describe someone whose main attribute, that of taking jewellery, was derogative. Why can't you see that for those who have no inside knowledge, picking this guy out to add extra descriptive detail, came across as racist.

Joe, it is an indisputable fact that it came across as racist to me, Livia, Marshall, Nigel, and Jethro; although I'm sure we all now understand it wasn't meant that way. Are you arguing that it shouldn't have? If so, that's irrelevant - it did come across that way.

John the likes a good argument before bed:-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 19:57:47 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Splitting minute hairs.
Message:
OTS was writing for the readers of this forum, in the same way that a newspaper reporter writes for the paper's readers

I completely disagree; it isn't anywhere near the same. Miles apart.

but here it was used to describe someone whose main attribute, that of taking jewellery, was derogative

How far do you take that, John? It's okay to describe someone who's Jewish and attractive, but not to describe someone who's Jewish and fat? No, don't buy it. That's taking PC to extremes that just limit what people can say when there isn't anything racist about it.

Why can't you see that for those who have no inside knowledge, picking this guy out to add extra descriptive detail, came across as racist.

Dunno. Maybe because I'm a bigot? :)

What you don't get, maybe because I haven't said it six times yet, is that this guy was the ONLY, the ONLY person in the story who WAS described. The others were NOT, so your whole argument that he was treated differently for some racist reason makes no sense.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:52:54 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: This is definitely racist
Message:
My wife, and many other women during the early 70s in the ashrams and the communities, had their jewelry taken from them by this hunchback Jewish premie merchant on the East Coast who would just rip it off the girls and laugh and laugh and re-sell it for cash for the local coffers.

How can you even argue that this isn't at least a BIT racist, Joe? Of course it is! Why? Because, in a few deft strokes, OTS paints a brief but undeniable sketch of the ugly, odious jew, repugnant in his disregard for sentimental values and other noble concerns but driven by a crass preoccupation with money, even if the money in this case was Maharaji's, not his. Shylock redux, no doubt about it.

I don't think it matters that he was the only guy described, that the stereotype was negative, not positive, or who OTS' audience is. It's a bit of a dig against a certain trait OTS perceives in some jews as surely as if he'd said something about some 'prissy fag'.

The problem I have is that, just when you think you've overcome all tendencies to employ or believe in these stereotypes you meet someone somewhere, somehow, who seems to have been sent by Central Casting itself. I mean, my mother's jewish and, for all her 'jewish princess' traits -- which she has -- she's still far from the classic 'jewish mama'. But then some of my friend's mothers are. In spades! So what do you do? Deny the truth inherent in the stereotype at the risk of disregarding some fair and useful generalizations? Or ... or what?

I think the real problem with these stereotypes is that they're so powerful and thus so unforgiving. They don't allow much breathing room for qualifying the person in and around the margins of the template. Once we know that the hunchbacked premie jeweller is a money-grubbing jew, well, we think we know him. Maybe too well. Maybe unfairly in the extreme.

I don't know. Life's a bit messy in this area.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:13:16 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You don't sound so definite
Message:
This is so unlike you and your usual diatribes against all that is PC. I'm usually the one who's arguing the other side here, but I am getting tired of all the restrictions on speech that seem to go too far, like being unable to describe people by attributes they actually have, for fear of being labeled racist.

So, if he had said that the guy was black, or Christian, or gay, it wouldn't be a problem because there isn's a stereotype with them like there is about Jews and money? Maybe I'm not as sensitive to that, but it just seems so tenuous to me because I don't even see that in the description.

I don't think the singling out thing is an issue either, but it was to John, and I don't think he was singled out anyway.

I just think 'theft' of jewelry from ashram women, or being a rabid cult member who abuses other people for the cult he's in, is unrelated to race or religion and it was something lots of people did of all kinds of backgrounds, although probably primarly Catholic and Jewish, because those are the groups the ashrams were full of. And as you said, even the stereotype of Jews making money is a bit removed because Sheldon wasn't doing it for himself, nor was he 'making' money, he was 'stealing' it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:20:31 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: It's so PC to accuse me of not being PC
Message:
Hi Joe

(I breathed a sigh of relief once I typed my first letter and was NOT told that my subject line was too long)

I'd wished you picked up on my one, subtle and original thought in that post which, as you know, I'd hit you over the head with if I could remember it.

But anyway, my bottom line is that it's messy. Perhaps a little bit of racism never really hurt anyone. Kind of like jokes. Or stepping out of line. If you step out too much, then you aren't in line and won't get a cookie. If you step out a bit, and then get back in, it's okay. Well, okay for everyone but the teacher.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 04:59:54 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: It's so PC to accuse me of not being PC
Message:
Jim: ''I'd wished you picked up on my one, subtle and original thought in that post which, as you know, I'd hit you over the head with if I could remember it.''

My choice: ''Deny the truth inherent in the stereotype at the risk of disregarding some fair and useful generalizations? Or ... or what?''

PC talk, like New Age rubber language, premie cult-think or even - god forfend - ex-premie argot stifles free speech.

PatC, the ''prissy fag.''

PS: I took no offense at OTS's Shylock reduxness. He was simply painting in broad strokes. We all do that - and take the consequences.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:48:50 (EST)
From: Marshall
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Re: Exactly my point
Message:
JHB is right in my opinion.
Mentioning Sheldon was jewish didn't help describe him the way black or asian would have(for instance), since jews are white, and so many premies were jewish anyway.
The fact that OTS is jewish doent make it right, or the statement any less anti-semitic.There is racism within races(light vs. dark skinned blacks). So aryan looking jews might look down on semitic (hairy, big nosed)looking jews. Part of the problem with the hunchbacked part of the description is that a lot of nazi propaganda in the 30's depicted a hunchbacked, old, big hooked nose person as a 'jew'.
I thought it sounded mean towards jewish people, that's my last word on that subject(for now).
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:57:09 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Marshall
Subject: Sometimes it is descriptive
Message:
And sometimes that's all that's meant by it, which I think is the case here. BTW, OTS is Jewish himself. I doubt he's anti-semitic.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:21:28 (EST)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Carl
Subject: would it be better like this?
Message:
for 'hunchback Jewish premie merchant'

read 'disabled Jewish PWK business person'?

I tried to think of another word that describes someone of the Jewish faith, but drew a blank. Is it the association with the other words (hunchback, premie, merchant) that causes offence?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:34:32 (EST)
From: Janet
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Re: would it be better like this?
Message:
if you really want to go the distance.
for 'hunchback Jewish premie merchant'

how about
'was approached by an overeager, excited reseller of secondhand merchandise, whose ancestry traced back to Moses, and whose posture was unfortunately compromised by years of bending over desks for long hours, while tallying accounting figures, and from prolonged lack of opportunity to exercise in the open and fresh air'

THERE. DOES THAT SATISFY EVERYONE'S SENSIBILITIES OF GRACIOUS MANNERS AND LITERATE DESCRIPTION?????

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:45:36 (EST)
From: Livia
Email: None
To: Janet
Subject: Hopefully, the last word
Message:
PLEASE, everybody! I never thought my words about what seemed to me to be a racist remark would lead to a lengthy OT debate. Obviously, wrangles of this type belong on other forums, but the original remark was made on this forum so when I felt compelled to respond to it, I had to do it here.

BTW, I think/hope I would have responded in exactly the same way if the remark had negatively stereotyped any other ethnic group.

I can see that some of you agreed with me and some of you didn't, and this probably all depends on what perspective you bring with you.

In my own case, my family were refugees from Nazi Vienna. Many of them lost their lives in concentration camps and some were shot in their village in Hungary. As a child I was periodically the subject of anti-Semitic remarks such as 'dirty Yid' or 'money-grabbing Jew' (this when politely reminding someone to repay a long overdue loan). Oh, and 'I hate the Jews because the Jews killed Jesus'. And because i was a child at the time, it all affected me deeply.

I have also had anti-Semitic remarks directed at me as an adult on occasion by people who I'm sure meant no real harm. Only recently a visiting acquaintance made one of these remarks in my own home. She doesn't know I'm Jewish, otherwise I'm sure she would never have said it. But it even made my (non-Jewish)partner feel queasy and he's made of strong stuff!

So maybe you can understand why OTS' remark gave me a somewhat unpleasant chill.

And as for someone's comment that 'Sheldon Jaffe gave Jews a bad name' - well, how many times have I heard that one..... It reminded me of my mother and I groaning whenever a Jew was convicted of a crime: do members of ethnic minorities have to behave impeccably at all times lest they reinforce their negative stereotyping? And if so, why must this rule apply only to ethnic minorities? One rule for us, another for everyone else?

So please, no negative racial stereotyping - it's just not really on in a civillised forum/world.

And I'll promise to try hard not to go OT again!

Wearily, but with love to all of you, Livia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 11:44:17 (EST)
From: Sulla
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: May I...?
Message:
Dear Livia, you asked:

do members of ethnic minorities have to behave impeccably at all times lest they reinforce their negative stereotyping? And if so, why must this rule apply only to ethnic minorities? One rule for us, another for everyone else?

I think, yes, and more so because it is the right thing to do rather than because we are under the gun. Since anything you could do to change the concept would never be enough, at least the people who you are in contact with will recognize the fine person that you are. Here in Fl. Jews are white, they are not seen as minorities.

I think everybody has had and will have, their turn to be or to feel like the victims in the story of this humanity. Jews got a lot of sympathy and good things in return after the tragedy they went through. Blacks weren't as lucky, and even now there is a lot of discrimination against them as there is with Latinos or Hispanics here in the USA and in Europe. I'm of white color and I was born here in the USA, but my parents are from S. A. and Spanish is my first language, so my race is not white, but Hispanic. In the USA, 'Hispanic' became a race that includes all the races where Spanish happens to be the first language, be you Indian, Chinese, black, white, Japanese. To register your children in the school or to fill any official or employment paper you always have these choices: white-non Hispanic or black-non Hispanic, (the clarification of non Hispanic being new because some people marked both the white or black and the Hispanic square) and then Hispanic, which is not even a race but a language or cultural background. In the schools if you are Hispanic Jewish or a white with some Hispanic background you can choose to be called Hispanic, rather than white American, for the privileges you can get as minority when the balance favors it, depending on the circumstances. Though in the case of whites you have to fight for it since it looks suspicious.

I also think, that it is illogical more than racist to call a person Jewish because of his Jewish appearance, Jews being able to look as American, Latin American, or European as some Latin American people, being as mixed as they are. I'm not Jewish and I have been asked by Jewish people if I'm from Israel, and the people from Israel that I know are darker skinned than I am. My husband can also look Italian or Jewish. On some occasions I have been asked if I'm French or from Spain, from Argentina or Italy. My son came from school one day scared because a person insulted him thinking he was Jewish, he told him he was not Jewish and the guy walked away, looking for his next target. That wasn't the first time something like that happened, so my son asked me for a cross to wear. In the public Elementary school my children assisted, Catholic or Christian children had no concepts about these religious differences, but some Jewish children were kind of greedy about it, always competitive and trying to demonstrate that Jews were better, as their mothers did. There were also a group of people always trying to find a way to separate their children from the rest of the mostly minority groups. Children aren't born with these kind of concepts, they learn them. The fact that a certain group of people have been discriminated against, be it Latino, Jewish, black, etc., doesn't make it right for that group to commit the same mistakes against another group. There is no excuse to discriminate, take advantage of, or to have extra privileges over any other person or group.

Being Latin American, and having had a place of privilege in a country full of poverty, injustice and discrimination and being taught to be concerned and sensible about it, I don't mind being called Hispanic as a whole, but I don't think it's right to be labeled as something so specifically incorrect, that it constitutes a form of discrimination. While a system remains identifying people not for purposes of physical identification but for purposes of discrimination I would rather be Hispanic and colorless.

Love.

Sulla, who also has Jewish blood in the mix.

PS: English is not my first language so I got a little help from my children.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 19:14:38 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: Thank you, Livia
Message:
You said: ''So maybe you can understand why OTS' remark gave me a somewhat unpleasant chill.''

I sure do now. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 16:50:07 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Livia
Subject: With words like these, I hope...
Message:
...it won't be your last word on any subject.

As Clint Eastwood said in 'The Outlaw Josey Wales', 'I guess we all died a little in that damned war'.

Love,

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 06:38:18 (EST)
From: Vicki
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Commotion of Emotion
Message:
Does anyone remember the little ditty Maharaji told about the woman who's husband died, and at the funeral, she didn't cry or exhibit any emotion? Because of this, she was the object of much gossip and speculation that she did not love her husband. He elaborated about emotion vs real love and coined the phrase 'commotion of emotion.'

Cynthia brought up the PBS special that is currently running on the brain. Fasininating stuff!

I think it is especially useful for those of us that were caught in Maharaji's web. Maharaji took simple, basic, human emotions and flat out said they were detrimental to living a real life.
Science has quite a different viewpoint based on new, hi-tech instruments which can literally see what happens with emotions, and how they are basic to human survival.

I noticed when I ended up here, out of the cult, I had very little emotions. It was as if my life had been a vast, endless, gray vista that was only allowed the brightness of colors if it pertained to Maharaji ie bliss, grace, his words, his joys, his laughter, his revelations, his fun, and of course the same applied to his family. In short, they were free to have emotions but I, from what I could see, and premies were not allowed. He took them from us, in many, many ways. He pounded over and over how vastly superior practicing knowledge is compared to living a life chained to emotions.

Losing the fantasy Maharaji presented himself to be and the flawlessness of knowledge, left me in a state of emotionless depression. I was appalled, I was shocked, I was repulsed, but I couldn't shake the feeling that life wasn't going to be worth much ever again. If you've lived in this world with the lord, even if it's an illusion, there's not really much to top that.

The turning point came after getting very sick, and a forced convalescence. I don't know what happened, but I knew something had changed when I could start to feel again. In short, my emotions weren't something that were evil and separate, and a lightness, hopefulness and dare I say, happiness, found the lid had been lifted. A lid that had sealed them in nearly thirty years ago.

All this time, normal emotions that are necessary for human existence, had been subjegated to Maharaji.

It seems ludicrous in hind sight. His survival depends on dulling emotions out of normal, human beings. We cease, and are replaced by his wims and emotions. Crickey, even his own wife seems emotionless now. Our IV is knowledge, but he rules and manipulates even that. And when those basic, human emotions bubble in the least little bit, he comes at them full force with KIT trainings. Search and destroy and keep premies dependent on him while being convinced it is the supreme feeling of eternal/internal beauty.

It makes sense to me why these honchos, and so many premies are not happy. How could they possibly be? He hijacks the prefrontal cortex.

The good news is, they have shown that 'talk' can heal these traumatized pathways in the brain. This forum is very healing. Here we can talk and re-open our basic, human biological makeup, and begin to interact once again with life in its entirety.

As the wise Mr. Anth once said, 'Come on in, the water's fine.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:27:02 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Vicki
Subject: Commotion of Emotion
Message:
Dear Vicki,

Hi Vicki,

Real good post. Your characterization of the removal of human emotions by devotion is very important, thanks for bringing it up.

I've been having a bout of insomnia lately and I'm still on my first cup of coffee, so my head's a bit fuzzy right now. I want to say more about this disconnect of emotions but I need to wake up first.

Thanks again,
Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:54:14 (EST)
From: Friendly Neighbor
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Good morning, doll
Message:
Thanks for chiming in so early in the wintry New England morn. I can just picture the little light bulbs going off under that still messy coif, having turned and tossed for hours, as the coffee beans spin in the grinder for that second cuppa Joe. [Did you drive to Beantown for the Patriots Super Bowl Parade party or is it really insomnia?] As we speak, I bet you're still wearing those little pink bunny slipers and that slightly pilled but comfortable housecoat? [loud high-pitched full out Yaaawwwwnnnnn.]

Your longing to comment on the disconnect of emotions mentioned in Viki's wonderful post while battling the cobwebs in your overtired little head is so nobel. I agree with you, however: WAKE UP before posting! (But we appreciated the wake-up call.) By His Grace, at least we all don't have to share in experiencing the sense-around odorama of your nectarful breath during this somewhat crabby start today. I bet this'll get you in the shower in about 5 seconds and to typing up a bitter five page reply complete with cursing.

[P.S. I am not a troll. Been reading you for a long time, Cynth, and been enjoying your company and improving behavior over the past many months, but just had to make a little funny here.] Your post was damn funny, girl. I know you're lighter and lighter of late and will be able to deal with this gentle ribbing and fun-poking.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:20:44 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Friendly Neighbor
Subject: Good Morning to you...LOL
Message:
Gee, Thanks Jim?, Gerry?

Well, I've learned not to turn and toss when I get insomnia, it's a worthless endeavor. A sentence in Barbara Kingsolver's, Prodigal Summer which is excellent, btw, ''When I get insomnia, I join it.'' Or something to that effect, as you can see, I'm tired.

Bunny slippers, gawdy, it's not me! Think layers, my friend. Very feminine long-joans with a pretty roses, matching flannel nightgown, socks, and black suede slippers with soles so I can go outside without dressing or booting up to git in an armload of wood. Ah, the pleasures of going outside in sleepwear (with a parka on top of that).

Cynth, coffee and a smoke are the staff of life

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:38:51 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: A smoke??
Message:
Do you mean wake and bake, or the cancer stick variety. ha ha.

Can't believe you said a smoke. Sorry. I think the whole world quit.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:17:27 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: ^^^Definitely Jim^^^OT [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 21:36:59 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: ExCUUUUSE ME!!
Message:
Sorry, Cynth, but no. I've never even BEEN in this thread before, let alone posted something.

Get some sleep. :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 13:23:24 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: ExCUUUUSE ME!!())())())
Message:
Sorry, Jim, I have since been informed who posted that to me and their identify is safe with me.

I really did think it was you, though...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:01:26 (EST)
From: Silvia
Email: None
To: Vicki
Subject: Good post!
Message:
Losing the fantasy Maharaji presented himself to be and the flawlessness of knowledge, left me in a state of emotionless depression. I was appalled, I was shocked, I was repulsed, but I couldn't shake the feeling that life wasn't going to be worth much ever again. If you've lived in this world with the lord, even if it's an illusion, there's not really much to top that.

This is what I felt after leaving the cult, and yes, emotions, life comes back. If any premie wants to say that K is life is simply because as you pointed was inculcated in us: Life is so much more than the little box maharaji puts a human being into!

Cheers! Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 07:10:33 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Vicki
Subject: More revisionism
Message:
Your post reminded me of the Peace Bomb satsang, where maharaji says in relating to his fathers death 'Dear Children of God, why are you crying, don't you know that Guru Mahraj Ji never leaves you...'.

He often mentioned this during all the years of his programs that I attended.
So he gave tye impression of why be sad if someine close dies.

In contrast I read a talk of his given a few years ago where he says that he cried for 3 days when his father died(I don't have the quote at hand).

Which one are we meant to believe??

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:00:00 (EST)
From: Sulla
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: More revisionism
Message:
Could be that he was posessed by his dad, so the one who was talking wasn't the one who was crying. Who knows.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:24:35 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Sulla
Subject: Are you serious???
Message:
'Could be that he was posessed by his dad, so the one who was talking wasn't the one who was crying. Who knows.'

Oh yes now I remember m said 'I suddenly felt this power coming thru me and it was not me speaking...'

Sulla, I just don't buy that stuff. It's a complete copout.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:06:33 (EST)
From: Sulla
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Don't you believe in ghosts???? t
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:18:34 (EST)
From: Sulla
Email: None
To: Sulla
Subject: Just kidding...
Message:
I don't have any clue, it may be one of those ambiguous quotes that doesn't have any reasonable explanation at all.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 03:12:00 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Sulla
Subject: It is not ambiguous
Message:
'I don't have any clue, it may be one of those ambiguous quotes that doesn't have any reasonable explanation at all.'

Not an amibiguouos quote.
Instead of projecting himself as a person who is so enlightened that he is above the emotions of losing his father (and guru), he now wants to project hinself as a human teacher who has emotions just like anyone else.
That's why he gave agya to destroy all old publications and videos.

It is revisionism.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:26:29 (EST)
From: Sulla
Email: None
To: Sulla
Subject: But, really...
Message:
Who knows? Is there any Neurotheology experiment on possessions that could clarify this phenomenon?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:03:47 (EST)
From: Janet
Email: None
To: All
Subject: MSNBC article in full text, in re ^
Message:
'Your Honor, Osama made me do it'

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
-
  Will Walker's, Moussaoui's, and Reid's lawyers use the 'brainwashed' defense? 
 By Dahlia Lithwick
SLATE.COM
Jan. 29 —  As the first suspects in the terrorist war on America prepare to stand trial, their defenders and apologists are invoking a word from the Cold War: 'brainwashed.'
          
 
 
       LAST WEEK, the father of Richard 'Shoe Bomber' Reid insisted his son was 'brainwashed.' A friend of John 'American Taliban' Walker's told People magazine that Walker had been brainwashed by al-Qaida. And recently, Slate reported that Abd-Samad Moussaoui, the brother of Zacarias '20th Hijacker' Moussaoui, believes that, in Britain, his brother 'became prey to an extremist brainwashing cult.'
       What is 'brainwashing,' and is there any scientific basis for believing it works? Were Osama Bin Laden's suicide bombers no different from the members of Heaven's Gate or the residents of Jonestown? Is a 'brainwashed' defense open to criminal defendants? Has such a defense ever been used successfully in an American trial? Is the American belief that cults and new religions routinely brainwash their adherents rooted in science or is it merely a marker for a Western intolerance toward novel or strange religions? And might this same public certainty that brainwashing works lead to acquittals in the upcoming terror trials?
       
THE MINDS OF NONBELIEVERS

       British journalist Edward Hunter coined the term 'brainwashing' in his 1953 book, Brain-Washing in Red China, which described Communist techniques for controlling the minds of nonbelievers. American scholars, journalists, and the public loved the term, and by the time The Manchurian Candidate was released in 1962, the nation was sold on the possibility that evil Communists could, with the flip of a queen of diamonds, brainwash normal citizens into becoming robotic assassins. (In 1968, when Michigan Gov. George Romney claimed that the Johnson administration had 'brainwashed' him about Vietnam, Sen. Eugene McCarthy quipped that in Romney's case 'a light rinse would have done.')
       With the emergence of strange new cults and sects over the past decades, 'brainwashed' has become the best explanation we can muster to explain seemingly normal Americans' decisions to commit mass suicide or troll the airports in unflattering saffron robes.
       
COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION
       The 'Moonies/Scientologists/Hare Krishnas made me do it' defense has received a good bit of play in American courtrooms over the last 25 years-much of it successful. The most famous attempt at the defense came in the Patty Hearst case. Hearst, a 19-year-old heiress to the Hearst publishing fortune, was kidnapped, held in a closet, and tortured for several months by the Symbionese Liberation Army, whom she then joined and aided in several armed robberies.
       At trial, Hearst's lawyer F. Lee Bailey advanced a 'duress' defense, explaining that she would never have robbed the bank had the SLA not 'brainwashed' her. The jury didn't buy it, even when Robert J. Lifton, one of the earliest scholars in brainwashing, himself testified in her defense. Hearst was sentenced to seven years in prison.
       Hearst's brainwashing claim ultimately succeeded — not in any court of law, but in the court of public opinion. Six of Hearst's former jurors joined a massive national movement to commute her sentence, and John Wayne, one of her many famous defenders, declared, after the tragedy in Jonestown, Guyana: 'It seems quite odd to me that the American people have immediately accepted the fact that one man can brainwash 900 human beings into mass suicide, but will not accept the fact that a ruthless group, the Symbionese Liberation Army, could brainwash a little girl by torture, degradation and confinement.' President Carter commuted her sentence, and President Clinton granted her a pardon.
       
THE SCIENCE OF RELIGION
       Why does the American public embrace brainwashing as scientific fact, long after the scientific community and the courts have made it clear that the phenomenon is dubious at best? Perhaps because brainwashing became so much a part of mainstream popular culture; perhaps because it offers a 'scientific' explanation for religions we cannot accept. Perhaps, more profoundly, if everyone who doesn't think as we do can be dismissed as 'brainwashed,' we can keep asserting cultural and religious supremacy and still appear open-minded and tolerant. Religious crusades are not elitist. They are medicinal.

       There is good empirical evidence to shore up the early claims about brainwashing, primarily in studies done mostly on former POWs by Edgar Schein and Robert Lifton in the early '60s. Prisoners could indeed have their minds and values shaped by their captors. According to Lifton, the standard requirements for a really sparkling clean brainwash include: isolation of the subjects, control over their information, debilitation, degradation, discipline and fear, peer pressure, performance of repetitive tasks, and renunciation of formerly held values. (All of which sounds eerily like law school to me.)
       Where the empirical proof really broke down, however, and where the anti-cult movement unleashed a witch hunt, was in the 'second-generation' brainwashing theory: a branch of scholarship trying to prove that subjects could be brainwashed without physical coercion.
       Most of the early brainwashing scholars disavowed these applications of their theories in non-coercive settings. It requires a long, airy leap of logic to believe that a subject released from physical restraint will continue to obey the commands of her captors for protracted periods of time. But two Berkeley-based scholars — sociologist Richard Ofshe and psychologist Margaret Singer — made names for themselves in the '80s with theories of 'coercive persuasion,' wherein manipulation, exploitation, and misrepresentation by cult leaders can substitute for physical coercion. This became the most satisfying public explanation for why Americans were joining the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church or the Krishnas.
       And while the second-generation, non-coercive theory of brainwashing is almost entirely without empirical support, Ofshe and Singer managed to corner the expert witness market in a host of post-Jonestown, post-Cold-War brainwashing cases.
       
SECOND-GENERATION BRAINWASHING Most brainwashing cases have involved former cult members suing the groups in civil court for false imprisonment, infliction of emotional distress, or fraud.
       The vast majority of brainwashing cases are civil. Some concern the 'deprogrammers' of the brainwashed. Mostly, they involved former cult members suing the groups for torts including false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, or fraud. Some have resulted in multimillion-dollar jury verdicts. But every dog has its day, and all junk-science has its limit. The watershed for the second-generation brainwashing defense (and the end of Ofshe's and Singer's impressive run as unbeatable expert witnesses) came in 1990 with U.S. v. Fishman, a California federal criminal action in which a defendant put forth an insanity defense in a mail fraud case, alleging that he'd been brainwashed by the Scientologists. The judge tossed the brainwashing testimony, holding that the views did not represent the consensual view of the scientific community.
       More and more, the idea of brainwashing is dismissed by courts as either Cold War hysteria or the anti-cult mania of the '70s and '80s. With their new affection and tolerance for cults (now respectfully renamed 'new religious movements') and a dearth of empirical evidence that evil geniuses can force innocents to do what they would not normally do, the scientists aren't around to testify.
       The most dramatic phenomenon revealed by the current empirical evidence is that something called 'social influence' exists. (This is more or less the same thing that makes you buy the Ralph Lauren turtleneck instead of the one from Sears.
       And the scientists themselves have tended to break down over definitions, politics, and empirical evidence (click here for an excellent account of the meltdown over brainwashing that has beset the academy of late).
       
A PSYCHOLOGICAL PHENOMENON
       But still, Americans love the idea of brainwashing. In much the same way that we clung to myths about ritual satanic abuse of schoolchildren long after the McMartin preschool case was proved a sham, we are simply sold on the notion that brainwashing works. Studies show American jurors overwhelmingly still believe brainwashing is a highly potent psychological phenomenon. In one much-cited 1991 survey of 383 random subjects, nearly 78 percent believed brainwashing can occur even if the subject 'is not actually held captive against their will.' In a 1992 survey of 1,000 random New Yorkers, about 43 percent of respondents believed that brainwashing is absolutely necessary to make someone join a religious cult. Some religion is nice, but shaved heads, communes, and the eating of too many legumes make us nervous. So does mass suicide.
       What is it about the Moonies or the Branch Davidians that makes Americans so certain that their adherents must have been brainwashed into compliance? First, brainwashing offers a clinical/scientific explanation for frankly un-American levels of religious fervor. Some religion is nice; the sort that comes with a tasteful choir and topical sermons. But head-shavings, communes, and the eating of too many legumes make us nervous. So does mass suicide. Second, Americans place a high premium on personal freedom, such that any religion that restricts movement, choices, or association, smacks of cults to us. Believing in brainwashing allows us to consider our own religious beliefs normal, even rational, while allowing us to dismiss Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and Scientologists as zombies. We can feel sorry for them and still go to church on Sunday.
       If the American public is comfortable with the notion of brainwashing as the best explanation for religious zealotry, it remains to be seen whether we will also accept that fundamentalist Islam is merely a 'cult' that's subjected its members to relentless brainwashing. If the Sept. 11 bombers are just so many 'Manchurian candidates' and John Walker just a California kid who got brainwashed, juries may have a tough time finding them guilty.
       
A CULT OR A RELIGION
       Our ambivalence about fundamentalist Islam is clear. We can't decide whether Muslim fundamentalists are an enemy to be vanquished or a cult to be 'deprogrammed.' A search of Nexis since Sept. 11 reveals hundreds of references to Islam in tandem with brainwashing, including numerous assertions that all madrasahs are Islamic mind-control factories. Already the cult experts are arguing that Walker, Reid, and Moussaoui are victims of extremist cults. Rick Ross, a lecturer, deprogrammer, and expert witness on cults recently told Time magazine that that the Taliban 'is an apparitional cult.' Former Moonie and author Steven Hassan claims to see unmistakable signs of brainwashing in both Walker and Moussaoui, both of whom apparently underwent radical personality changes upon converting to Islam.

       In the terror trials of 2002, defense attorneys will be hard pressed to find a judge who will still recognize a second-generation brainwashing specialist as an expert or a brainwashing expert who would even testify that bin Laden can remotely control the minds of thousands of innocent young men. The real problem is that jurors, and the public, may still believe it regardless. A perfectly credible legal narrative can be crafted to play on the same sympathies that ultimately freed Patty Hearst: Reid, Moussaoui, and Walker, young converts to a religion that is a vicious brainwashing cult. Your Honor, Osama made them do it.
       If anyone has been brainwashed, it's the millions of Americans who still view new, radicalized, or unusual religions as 'cults' and their leaders as masters of mind control. We must try these terror cases free from the patronizing assumption that strange, even crazy beliefs are necessarily products of illness or undue influence. The proper word to describe a savage act committed at the behest of a charismatic lunatic is not 'brainwashed.' It's evil.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:10:42 (EST)
From: Janet
Email: None
To: Janet
Subject: Re: MSNBC article URL for replying
Message:
i have sut and pasted the article verbatim in full, but if you want to respond to MSNBC with an opinion letter, the input place to do it is on this page below the article.
It may only be up for a day, so if you don't read it by Feb 7th, you may have to write your response thru their all-purpose opinion page linked at the page bottom. either way, it'll get there.

i recommend citing the article's URL

http://www.msnbc.com/news/695903.asp?0si=-

if you cannot find the article in time to use the connected form on the same page, provided for feedback to it.
[ "Osama Made Me Do It" ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 04:53:51 (EST)
From: Janet
Email: jai_choix@yahoo.com
To: All
Subject: MSNBC errs on what a cult does
Message:
I have just read today's opinion columns on MSNBC, and responded to a piece by Dahlia Lithwick , titled 'Your Honor, Osama made me do it'.
I will post the link to it just below this, when i can go back and reuse my cache to grab the URL for you all. I feel strongly that the writer has grossly misunderstood what cult brainwashing is, and I endeavored to make it more accurate to her by this response:

'Dahlia Lithwick has never experienced what she is trying to assess. Her concept of Brainwashing is simplistic and cartooned.
I myself have in the last 2 years emerged from 27 years in a cult. I am one of thousands,if not tens of thousands. We can each explain personally what Second Generation Brainwashing is--how it happens, how you maintain it, in fact, you want it, seek sources that boost it, and how the leader doesn't have any magic trigger that they use at remote distance to 'make' you do anything on command. This stipulated whine of 'your Honor, Osama made me do it' is not the way it works.
Whatever you do, you do voluntarily, in the self adopted belief that you are doing it for God, that you are Special, that you have a rarefied Understanding of God's Will, favor, grace, that the rest of the impure world does not, by dint of your belief, faith, sincerity, submission to what you are taught, and your certainty that your life, fate, future, Place In The Great Judgement, and afterlife, are all secure, settled, bought, paid for; Signed, Stamped and Approved.
There may be Scriptures used to intrigue your attention, or there may be compelling words originating with the Leader. You play a voluntary part in the fascination, the seeking, the listening, the wanting to be counted in. Or you may be worried into it, psychologically thrown off balance into fearing that you're at risk if you don't.
It is not a crime to trust another, to believe them, to listen to them and to take them at their word.But it IS a crime to knowingly con someone by their trust. The trusting person can not or does not discover that they have been conned until a good long time after the perpetrator has succeeded and absconded. In fact, usually the victim discovers they have been conned , right about the time that they realize or find themselves liable for what the con has done to them and vanished. They are left holding the bag, left to take the rap for the real criminal, whom they believed and trusted.
I do think this describes 'American Taliban' John Walker Lindh, right about now. He gets to be the victim-- of not one, but two--towering institutions he believed and trusted in! First in Islam, and all his teachers in it. Now, The United States--its FBI, its Justice System, its supposedly enlightened Due Process of Law.
When you are in a cult, you can't see it. You have selectively edited and reframed your entire view of existence so that you don't see the signs. You have heard and read and accepted explanations for what you are told to do, to think, to adopt, that are so fantastic, that you have long since abandoned your rational ability to see it. If you had not, you would never have ben drawn in and convinced to join! You would have been among the majority who frowned and said 'no,thanks' or 'no way!' and put distance between themselves and the offer.
There Is a difference between a genuine religion, and a Cult. Being all Politically Correct and calling cults 'New Religions' is a mistake. All cults eventually are exposed for what they truly are. Always, they reveal themselves to have at the heart of them, some self centered, self aggrandizing, demanding, hypocritical, human figure who may speak of, but actually places themselves above, God, and the members and dissidents come to harm.
A true religion puts the divine above any human being. It is open, welcoming, forgiving, humble, does not harm its members, nor others who do not count themselves as members.
Members--rather, former members of cults, can not and do not begin to recognize the extent of their brainwashing until they have left it, and even then, may not until they can share their recollections with other former members, and see their self-held prisons for what they were.

Let me frame it to you this way:
An abused wife thinks what happens to her is all her fault. She clings. She says she loves the man. She excuses his faults. She believes she could not survive without him. She fears him. She is dependent upon him for everything. She can not hear the truth in others urging, begging, reasoning with her to leave him.
You know where that story ends.
Either she never sees it for what it is, and she dies at his hands...
Or he finally committs some act so shattering that she finally 'gets it' that it isnt any fault of hers, that it's Him-and that she has to get out, no matter what.
Your mincing around cults and calling them New Religions is tantamount to wheedling to the judge that the husband isn't 'really' abusive, he's just excitable [or whatever excuse].
No, the fact of experience is, he's abusive, and no amount of her staying in the relationship is going to cure it. The problem is Him, not her. Only by getting out can she save her life and recover her sanity, and come to know what it is to value and respect and honor herself.
The cult member still on the inside is what she is while she cannot bring herself to leave.
The ex cult member is the wife after she makes her break for herself.

You have acutely misunderstood cults, brainwashing, and what a true religion is. And if you hold these mistaken views, then millions of others likely do, too.
I had to correct you.
I have been both abused woman, and ex cult member.
I know the experience intimately.'

***************
Having done this, I would invite all of you to go and read her piece, and to write your own letters of clarification to her, and to MSNBC, for the readership is enormous, and is a brilliant place to push this understanding out into the public's general comprehension while it is topical.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 12:39:46 (EST)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Janet
Subject: That's a damn good reply, Janet
Message:
I particularly liked this para:

'There Is a difference between a genuine religion, and a Cult. Being all Politically Correct and calling cults 'New Religions' is a mistake. All cults eventually are exposed for what they truly
are. Always, they reveal themselves to have at the heart of them, some self centered, self aggrandizing, demanding, hypocritical, human figure who may speak of, but actually places themselves above, God, and the members and dissidents come to harm'.

How about preserving it for posterity in a 'Journey' on EPO?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 16:44:45 (EST)
From: janet
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: tx, cq. my hope is this:
Message:
as I am following various aspects of the daily news on the war, I am forming this hope that we ex's--not just ex premies, but ex satsangi's, ex moonies, ex-scientologists,-in other words, all of us who have ever been conned by a cult and wised up later,
i am thinking that if we speak up and school the media and the military, and our respective governments, about the real workings of what goes on inside a cult, particularly with respect to comprehending how the cult of Islamic radical terrorism has gotten its hooks so deep into the minds of so many, worldwide. This could be how we get our stories heard. It could also become a new level of public enlightenment in general.
France has their Picard Law to spur them to investigate. We have our fanatical Islamic enemies and our War. from all appearances, it looks as though the time has come [again] for the educated world to understand how this happens, so that sanity can reign again. You live, you learn. Not just individuals: whole countries, whole governments.

at any rate, I hope all of you who read this and are following the fate of the war, will speak up and write to the media, anytime you see a chance to connect what happened to us, to what is happening out there.
If the real-life dynamics of how cults--i.e.-fanatical religious beliefs-- can do this, don't get widely educated, we may well be on the way to World War Three, in a three way global free-for-all, pitting defenders of the God of Isreal against the God of Islam against the God of Jesus, and it may well turn into the Last Great Battle.
Maybe only we Recovered Fanatics can head it off by raising our voices and making the rest of the world comprehend what they don't understand.

The US military intelligence and PsyOps [psychological operations] have already realized that the best way to counter the one-track propaganda that afghani's and the Taliban were hearing, is not by force or bribery, but by opening up the population's exposure to the full spectrum of world discussion, so that each person could form their own opinions, based on uncensored thought.
In contemplating the question of how to effect this, they were confronted with the facts of the remoteness and isolation of so much of the populace, the destruction of the electrical grid, the illiteracy of many, and the mass scale of poverty, post war. TV was not possible, neither were newspapers, but they hit upon a solution: solar powered and crank powered radios, to be passed out, gratis, all over the country formerly controlled by the Taliban. It basically brings the scattered and illiterate into the global discussion by their ability to listen and to think. They can tune to whatever they like, from world band radio broadcasts, hear different points of view, different arguments reasoned out, and make up their individual minds, as they deem best.
In other words, bust open the controls, over what meager information they were formerly able to receive beyond their immediate surroundings. Bring them into the world dialog, the greater family of humanity, to dispel their ignorance.

And we, too, can dispel the ignorance of our particular regions of the discussion. So by all means--write, call in, speak up. Tell your story to anyone it bears on. What we know is extremely relevant to the condition of the world, at the present.
Strangely enough, we can still work towards World Peace.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 17:01:43 (EST)
From: left out a sentence
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Re: in 'cq. my hope is this'-:
Message:
i am thinking that if we speak up and school the media and the military, and our respective governments, about the real workings of what goes on inside a cult, particularly with respect to comprehending how the cult of Islamic radical terrorism has gotten its hooks so deep into the minds of so many, worldwide, that we can change the consciousness, and the direction of the present response to, the phenomenon that culminated in the leveling of the World Trade Center, et al. We know from experience that force and threat are pretty much useless in combatting fanatic religious beliefs. We lived it. I know I did, having been subjected to family efforts to have me deprogrammed, hospitalized, losing custody of my son, being locked up for 9 months, and then shut out of the family for 15 more years, none of which liberated me from my tenacious beliefs.
And it isn't going to work any better on the Islamic fanatics [read, cult members] who have been riled and programmed to believe that destroying America is their salvation and Holy Jihad, either.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:55:18 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: All
Subject: He's the guy that said
Message:
the bit about the West having a large material foot and small spiritual foot etc..
[ Swami Satchitanand exposed ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:31:14 (EST)
From: Abi
Email: None
To: All
Subject: US paper
Message:
Someone mentioned to me off-line that a US paper contacted the forum. Is this true? If so can the details be posted again please.

thanks

Abi

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 20:57:09 (EST)
From: RW
Email: None
To: Abi
Subject: QUICK! THE PAWN HAS SPOKEN!
Message:
EVERYONE STAND TO ATTENTION IMMEDIATELY!

ALERT THE MEDIA!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 22:10:29 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: RW
Subject: Why do you do this anon one???
Message:
Is it not enough that she was molested as a child? Is it not enough that years later EV have messed with her publicly. Do anonymous premies also have to add salt to the wounds?

Just for spite? Just to stick up for your 'Master'?

After thirty years of his teaching in the west, is this the fruit of his teaching? Did you ever think that one day YOU would actually be reduced to spending time sitting at a keyboard (afraid to use your real name) and nastily poke fun at a victim of 'Mahatma' Jagdeo, one of Maharajis closest, trusted servants? I don't want to just paint Abi as just a "victim", I'm sure she's not just that stereotype. However given her original treatment and her subsequent treatment and the total lack of sympathy, compassion and understanding she's received from Maharji, his organisation and the likes of you, then I think she's got every right in the world to contact the press or whoever she wants to.

Isn't the deep and precious knowledge not fulfilling and satisfying enough for you? Do you have to supplement it with cowardly taunts?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 05:06:46 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Dermot, I like you in spite of....
Message:
...the fact that you're such a bloody commie pommy. ;)

Well said.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:45:15 (EST)
From: Ddermot
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: 'while cowards flinch and traitors sneer' :)
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:04:26 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Let's call the XpDL nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 01:11:45 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: What's that Jeth??
Message:
xpDL? ......and you're up early or are you just going to bed?:)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 04:09:37 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Re: What's that Jeth?
Message:
The Ex-premie Defense league.(Joke!!)

My sleeping has been eratic for years. If I get more than 4 hours a day it is really good. I've been like this since I was thrown out of the ashram.

I've learnt to live with it and do have the occassional(about once a year) 8hr or more sleep. When I do, I become a nice guy for a least a week.

I just watched some recent videos of m. The first I've seen for years.
How ANY premie can stay with it, I just don't know.

Premies have obviously thrown away any human values they had.
Tyhey just don't seem to care that m is a blatant liar and egoist extreme.

I have just lost any remnant of respect I may have had for any follower of m.

jethro

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 11:00:48 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: What's that Jeth??
Message:
Ah I get it.....I'm good at cryptic crosswords so I should have worked that out immediately. Was just about to hit the sack ,though, so not as bright as usual:)

Me too Jeth re sleep.....always been amazed how some people can be regular sleepers.My sleeping is erratic...worst of all, at some point in the day I just drift off into deep slumber for one session of 10 to 20 mins max and that messes everything up.Then I know I'll be wide awake when I should be tucked away in bed. Also, apart from forums I laso have work to do on the comp so that doesn't help. I always tell myself that one day I'll get my sleeping patterns sorted out but it never happens.....ah well !

Videos huh? Haven't seen the animated version of him for yonks. A friend recently sent me a tape of the recent Nottingham event recently.Just seemed so alien !!

I know what you mean about premies but I still, I guess, have a lot of premie friends and just try my best to view their 'faith' as I do my Ma's Catholicism.Apart from their faith I think and hope they aren't too far gone .....though I guess many consider me beyond the pale now.I don't see too many of them these days but I expect I will at some point.

Some though are like 'family' to me so I cut them slack providing we can agree to disagree and leave it at that....

Funny old world...

Cheers

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:40:46 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Abi
Subject: Abi, I've emailed you [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:40:45 (EST)
From: Hey Abi
Email: None
To: Abi
Subject: Re: US paper
Message:
leave your email and someone will contact you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 21:34:43 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites
Message:
Some of the Canadian posters might be interested in this photo taken around 1975 in the Lowther Street Ashram in Toronto. This is about 2/3 of the people who lived there at the time. It may be b&w but Ann always wore white anyway and as housemother would not have the walls painted any other colour. Back Row L-R: Hugh Kimble, Jeremy Taylor, Roger Dickey, Paul Stevens, Yves Pageau; Front Row L-R: Kathy Beeson, Ann Johnson, Paul Gobes, Janet Wallace, Allan Cardiff, Barb Marvin, Alex Perlman
[ Graphic Link ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 13:13:35 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: kevjo@mindspring.com
To: Pullaver
Subject: Were we ever that young????
Message:
That photo pisses me off. We were so young, so idealistic and it was such a waste of idealism and talents. And seeing Anne Johnston is really sad, when you think of how her life got sucked up in the M's uncarring world.

It does look like a great group of people, and number of the faces I recognize.

Once again, like housemum said, it really was about the people for me. That's what attracted me -- cool, idealistic people who thought M was going to help the world. Too bad he never delivered what he promised, and now the cult is blaming THEM for getting it wrong in the first place. It's disgusting.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:05:44 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: A little gossip? Why not?
Message:
Hugh Kimble

Lives right here in wee, small Victoria, I understand. I tried to see him once but he wasn't interested (the word was out). Works as a security guard, I believe.

Jeremy Taylor

Remember the face, but that's about it.

Roger Dickey

Got in a fight with him one day painting one of the ashrams. He spat at me and I painted him. Besides that, nice guy. Most of us were nice guys. Of course.

Paul ?

Yes, Paul ..... I want to say 'Stevens' or something like that. Another nice guy. Toronto had a bunch of kind of wimpy guys who were overwhlemed by the likes of Ann Johnson and, in the earlier days, Helen McLellan and Susan Butcher. Some heavy Mata Ji modelling going on there.

Yves Pageau

Now an ex, Laurie and I saw him in Montreal the summer of 2000. Had a great night but, since then, he's turned a bit paranoid re the ex scene.

Kathy Beeson

What a wonderful woman! Kathy was there when I was just joining the cult in Vancouver. She's more of a former premie than an ex, for people who make that distinction. Lives in Vancouver again. Works as a nurse, into latin dancing, I think. Had dinner with me and a bunch of other exes a few years ago there.

Ann Johnson

Who's she?

Paul Gobes

Also from my early seventies days in Van, Paul moved down to Mahararji's office in the late seventies to do his books. Back in Vancouver area, Paul came to that dinner too. He's hilarious.

Janet Wallace

As in the Passages video. A wonderful person who Maharaji never, ever deserved. (Weren't we all?)

Allan Cardiff

Can't recall.

Barb Marvin

Good ol' Barb. Really nice, smart, smooth. Wonder what happened to her?

Alex Perlman

Saccharine sweetness with a big, fat two-bit smile, Alex became a mini-cult leader of his own, escorting new age weenies to this resort he rents on some Carribbean island where they all touch and feel each other. I called him when I was in Toronto and gave him ex-sang. He wanted to get me into some multi-level marketting thing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 08:55:49 (EST)
From: Fly in the Ointment
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Heller in the Ashram Basement
Message:
The X-Flies in their glory
[ Graphic Link ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 05:04:30 (EST)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Fly in the Ointment
Subject: What i wouldn't give for that fender Strat, WOW [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 20:27:14 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Brian Smith
Subject: Everything in the picture's for sale! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 05:26:28 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: WELL, not EVERYyhing -- ! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 14:00:07 (EST)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Do you still have that Strat ?
Message:
If you do you are lucky, they don't make em like they used too. Something about old guitars, like old wine, if the vintage is good they just get better with age.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:15:33 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: Re: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites
Message:
I spotted Jeremy, Paul and Ann right away. Worked with the two guys in Denver DLM. Jeremy was an accomplished photographer and Paul, I think was a writer. In all a nice looking group of people.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:26:56 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: Gee! They look like cultists to me
Message:
Friggin amazing to think that those people didn't get arrested for looking so removed. OH! But they had gone to a higher place. Forgot!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 14:25:44 (EST)
From: Steve Mueller
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: Maybe, but they were gentle souls
Message:
when I knew them back in '75. Very polite and warm people. What a special treat to see them again. Thank you so much Pullaver.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:06:22 (EST)
From: ChrisP
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: Re: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites
Message:
A terrific thank-you to you, Pullaver! What a wonder! I know all these people (to varying degrees, but haven't seen many of them for years) - what a treat to view this pic.

I was at Lowther early '76, maybe shortly after this pic was taken. I actually survived kitchen service training with Anne Johnson there!

? = Bottom row, 3rd from right is Alan Cardiff and I'm pretty sure the 2nd from right is Barb Myers. Top row, 4th from left = I've forgotten his name, too, but I remember the face...

Are you in this pic? What a treat! Many thanks!

Cheers,

ChrisP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:14:03 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: pullaver@yahoo.ca
To: ChrisP
Subject: Re: Lowther Ashram
Message:
You're welcome Chris. No, mercifully I am not in this photo although I was living there at the time. I must have met you so pls e-mail me at pullaver@yahoo.ca so you can jog my memory.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:38:49 (EST)
From: ChrisP
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: This is the End of the Innocence
Message:
To Pullaver, great thanks, I'll email you, as Chris is my alias. Who knows? we may indeed have crossed paths! And what a question to ask if you're in this pic - let's see, how dumb can I get?!

And I stand corrected: Barb MARVIN is indeed her correct name. Alan Cardiff is also a former premie, and runs his family's farm in rural southwestern Ontario.

When I first saw this photo last night, my immediate reaction was joy and excitement to see all these good people's faces again. I immediately saved it. But revisiting it again this morning, I'm hit with sadness to think that so many good, innocent, sincere, loving hearts have been, in the end, deceived and played with.

Thanks again for the lovely pic,

ChrisP, can I RETURN to innocence?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 21:41:45 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: Re: Toronto Ashram Black & Whites
Message:
When two or more are gathered in my name . . . (Kathy Beeson, Ann Johnson, Jeremy Taylor and Alex Perlman). Can anyone guess what Ann is pointing at?
[ Graphic Link ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 02:42:49 (EST)
From: Brian Smith
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: Hey ! What is that thing under your rain coat
Message:
Now put that away and do an extra hour of meditation you Rascal! Kathy, don't look .....oooops too late
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 19:15:11 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: Kevjo@mindspring.com
To: All
Subject: Visions/Dunrite
Message:
Does anyone know who does the video editing at Durite/Visions? Any names? Also, know of other premies on the staff who put videos together?

I think it might be important to try to contact them on the way the Passages video was edited which was highly dishonest.

I did send copies of my emails to Tim Gallwey and Linda Pascotto to Visions, but gee, they haven't responded yet. They must be busy putting together new issues of Pravda or something. :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:48:37 (EST)
From: Loaf
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Visions/Dunrite
Message:
My guess is that Ray has his hand in the editing..but Back passages has the 'cobbled together' feel of a piece put together by a committee - or presented on paper to M for approval.

John McNelly I know well - hes a great guy. I know that he waited YEARS waiting for the chance to work for Maharaji personally - and my guess is that it isnt the way he thought it would be.

I watched one of the Premlata videos with him when it was first shown in the UK - he was not proud of it and I am certain that a lot of his creative and journalistic instincts have been compromised by the working conditions.

I hope Chris, 'Tree' and Dan McNally are OK. Havnt seen them for years. Dan had a bad time when he went to India on his own.. and shortly after which John buggered off to malibu to be a honcho.

I dont know where they are but I likes them and send them my friendship and love

Jossi (who Mike Finch reminds me is NOT a Programmer) is such a lovely guy too. I remember at UCM how exciting it was for those guys to be building something which might bring them closer... to HIM.

Lovely guys.

I hope they are all happy. They have been with Maharaji for years now, so working for him directly cant be as bad as some exes would have it. My suspicion is that they get their kicks out of running Dunrite as a business with a Royal Commision.. like Price Edward's fine work at Ardent .

Sorry, what was the question again ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 23:53:17 (EST)
From: Vicki
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Visions/Dunrite
Message:
Well, Premlate aka Wadi, did an entire video on the editing capabilities with some new machine at Visions/Dunrite, whatever/whichever. It was quite lengthy and it was obvious from what she was saying that she's involved. Maybe she'll take questions from the audience?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 19:45:18 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Here ya go
Message:

[ Dunrite people ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 22:37:06 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: No logo for the big M
Message:
You would think they would proudly display that one.

Hey Premies,

Have you noticed no celebrities or professional business premies ever dare mention Maha to the public. Why? Do you think they KNOW M and his magic K formula would never pass the scrutiny of the public.

Premies know inside their gut, something is weird about Maha. They think it is the doubt-maker (yea! your brain) that is tricking them.

Reality check!! It is M who is fucking with your brain. Sorry, I don't mean to offend anyone. Just stating the facts.

cheers,

deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:57:32 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: They have no problem...
Message:
advertising their work for big, multi-national corporations.

Hmmmm....where do their profits go?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index