--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "boo_lives" <boo_lives@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@>
> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > ("World domination." Hilarious.)
> > > >
> > > > > Should we go through the criteria, one by one?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd really enjoy that. Let's do it!
> > > >
> > > > Oh, yes, let's! Why don't we start with this:
> > > >
> > > > "If you cannot find anyone who has all of these
> > > > attributes, at least find someone who has more
> > > > good qualities than defects."
> > >
> > > Very few give any response to the posts by this
> > > Buddhist fundamentalist Vaj. He is ignored yet
> > > year after year he spends a lot of time here with
> > > his foolish propaganda and downright lies. I
> > > suppose he must be retired to have so much time
> > > on hand. Doen't he have better things to do,
> > > walking dogs for example ? ;-)
>> > WHY THE NEED for tmo TBs to try to enforce official
> > tmo thinking here?
>
> I'm not a "tmo TB" by any stretch, although I
> suspect you're including me here.
>
> From my perspective, it isn't at all a matter of
> trying to "enforce" official TMO thinking; it
> would be foolish in the extreme to make such an
> attempt.
>
> Often the "alternative world view" incorporates
> an extremely uncharitable interpretation of why
> the TMO has done or said something. In some of
> those cases, there's a more positive
> interpretation that's at least somewhat plausible.
> Since we don't know for sure what the TMO was
> thinking, it makes sense to me that both possible
> interpretations be provided.
>
> Plus which, there are a few people here whose
> negative views of the TMO/MMY/TMers are
> consistently expressed in an unnecessarily
> unpleasant, superior, demeaning, insulting tone.
> In at least some cases, what we're responding to
> is as much the tone as the specifics. My response
> to Vaj that you quote above was one such case.
>
> And then there are the flat-out factually
> inaccurate or grossly misleading criticisms.
> Nobody sensible should want their alternative
> worldview to be based on such statements.
>
> And when one of the unpleasant people mentioned
> above consistently comes out with factually
> inaccurate or misleading criticisms, it's
> awfully hard to resist thinking they're being
> deliberately dishonest.
They are; Barry and Vaj are receiving sponsorship for their long-time
anti knowledge, anti TM-activities at FFL.
>From whom/what one could only speculate, though it is becoming
increasingly clear. What we do know is that armed americans were
caught with arms on the bridge to the Kulm. They where also payed for
by "you know who".
