--- nadarrombus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the way to talk about the sex lives of people who
> claim to have a
> superior knowledge and practice of conducting
> themselves sexually, ie.
> claiming purusha, or brahmachari yet commonly known
> to have had sex
> partners is exactly this way.
You are a hopeless idiot. It is important to talk
about this issue, but you don't start listing names of
the people the alleged perp had sex with. What the
hell does that do? Its just pure slander. What is so
difficult to understand about that?
> you are sounding like
> a zealous
> terrorist. your tone suggests you would protect the
> reputation of tm
> leaders with violence to promote your beliefs.
You completely miss my point. English must be your
second language because you completely and totally
miss the point I'm making with your recent post and
this one of mine from several years ago. I am not
protecting the reputation of the TM leaders. I am
protecting the reputation of these woman that you
treat like a terrorist, not giving a shit about the
effect this has on them and they are the innocent
victims here. Do you understand this?
> you
> believe you are
> more right and special like they are cause they are
> a superior human
> or have a better purpose than others. you ignore the
> way of our free
> society and attempt to introduce totalitarianism.
> our individual
> rights protect us from weak minded fools like you.
More rant from your erroneous assumptions.
> it is ok for john,
> bevan and nader ram to be duplicitous in your mind
> as they are the
> state before the commune of heaven on earth
> establishes itself. you
> continue to use a threatening tone towards the
> people interested in
> truth in this forum. there is no slander except your
> continued
> aggression to free and truth loving people in your
> stupid claims that
> they are not moral enough to have their own
> information and opinions.
> we have the right to discuss freely our ideas and
> opinions despite the
> terror tactics you continue to employee. no
> discussion on a forum such
> as this can have any legal implications whatsoever
> as it is an open
> media undefined as fact or fiction, not intended to
> provide or deride
> information toward anyone or any group and contains
> no contractual
> agreements regarding statements in any
> way...........
Pal, you are arguing with yourself, because this is
not even remotely my position. I really don't think
you get it at all. Here it is again: DO NOT POST THE
NAMES OF PEOPLE THAT YOU THINK HAVE HAD SEX WITH JOHN,
BEVAN OR WHOMEVER BECAUSE THAT IS SLANDER. YOU DO NOT
HAVE THE LEGAL PRIVILEGE NOR THE MORAL RIGHT TO POST
NAMES. THIS IS HERSEY WRITTEN AS FACT.
Talk all you want about the hypocrisy of the TMO,
because I agree with you there is plenty of that, but
listing the names of the innocent is absolute
bullshit.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
