--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > > > > > > Ya betcha, pilgrim. The TMO should get him as the Rajah of > > > Brazil. He would be an efficient executive or administrator > > > for the movement. > > > > The conditions of miners in Brazil is known and > > lamented world-wide. They are considered some of > > the most oppressed people on earth. And that's > > not only OK for you but a sign of someone "doing > > good" and displaying "cosmic efficiency," yes? > > > > Wouldn't it have been MORE cosmically efficient > > to pay them nothing instead of pennies (while > > making millions) and make them work the mines as > > slaves? What would Krishna have done? :-) > > > > My point is that you seem to admire those who > > make money, and don't care a whit about how they > > make it. Very TM of you. > > > > You're making an assumption that the mine featured in the film clip > is owned by the meditator-billionaire in question. The conclusion > one should make is that we don't know who owns the mine. Therefore, > the person in question is innocent until proven guilty. > > This is the kind of mentality that Bush made in accusing > Hussein of having weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In > making this irresponsible assumption, Bush mad an ass of > you, me and the American public.
Bush made an ass of himself, as well as those who allowed themselves to be taken in by him. Which is precisely the case with Barry. Because in his mind he's so highly spiritually evolved, he doesn't need to actually read what he's commenting on; every word out of his mouth will automatically be Golden Truth. Of course, Barry wasn't interested in making a point about the evils of materialism; he simply realized he'd struck a gold mine of opportunities to demonize MMY/the TMO/TMers, material that's been good for (so far) seven separate posts. However, because he didn't read the article and because he's such a sloppy thinker in any case, he made a raft of very amusing mistakes. First, nothing in the article suggests Cavalcanti is a TMer. In fact, if there's any hint of his spiritual preference, it's for Buddhism. Second, he isn't a mine owner. He made his money by finding reserves of iron ore and other minerals, buying the land, then selling it for a large profit. Third, if Barry had bothered to look up the rest of the article, he'd have found that the guy has distinctly philanthropic tendencies: "He and his wife say all living things should be protected. Mr. Cavalcanti said he spurned a deal with a mining entrepreneur in 2004 after the man crushed a large ant with his fist at a Salvador restaurant. 'I told him I would no longer do business with him,' Mr. Cavalcanti said. 'He thought I was crazy.' "He said he planned to become a major philanthropist, along the lines of Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates. The Cavalcantis have established a foundation to protect abandoned animals, some 2,000 dogs and 500 cats so far. Mr. Cavalcanti said he also planned to open a cancer treatment hospital for children." http://tinyurl.com/69s7rp The article doesn't say whether Cavalcanti is as concerned about the plight of Brazilian miners as he is about ants, cats, dogs, and kids with cancer; nor can we count on his following through on his expressed desire to become a major philanthropist. But we might want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Finally, funniest of all, Barry attributes John's admiration for Cavalcanti's financial success solely to MMY, hilariously overlooking the fact that we know about this guy *because of an admiring puff piece in the New York Times*. Well, perhaps we should give *Barry* the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps his extra-special omniscience has determined that the writer of the article and the Times editors who decided to publish it are also TMers.
