--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 21, 2009, at 9:16 AM, do.rflex wrote:
>
> > You're a fraud, Vaj. You're a fraud as a scholar and a fraud when it comes
> > to defining Transcendental Meditation.
>
> Actually I'm NOT a scholar, nor was I ever.
>
That's obvious. But you sure put on a clever act to make yourself appear as one.
>
So get these false ideas out your head. You don't listen very well it seems!
>
> TM defines itself, supposedly, through the use of science.
I'm not referring to the so-called TM 'science.' As far as that goes, I think
much of it is horse shit.
What I'm referring to is your obvious lack of comprehension FROM EXPERIENCE of
the actual subtle mechanics of how Transcendental Meditation itself works, the
subtleties of the instruction, and the inner spiritual significance of its
practice as a means to begin to experience and to develop God realization.
When you talk about Transcendental Meditation in that context it becomes
obvious that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
>
Most of this has been disproven, or more commonly, ignored as it is largely
fallacious repetition ('if you repeat a lie enough times, people will believe
it). You can choose to believe it if you like. I will just continue to point
out the obvious discrepancies, the shortcoming and the tragedies.
>
> > Now you've also defined yourself as a hateful bigot who would steroetype
> > 1.3 billion human beings as somehow "less then" the rest of humanity.
>
> And, of course, I've never said this. You made this up.
>
Now you're lying.
The following are YOUR words which clearly show that you think 1.3 billion
people of the Islamic faith are "less than" the rest of humanity in intention
and purpose:
"Unfortunately for Rachel, the reason Islam
is considered the "religion of peace" is that
once the whole world converts, they believe
there will be peace on earth, a chilling prospect,
however you parse it...it is not merely a
religion, but a social movement and a system of
mandatory jurisprudence.
In any predominantly Muslim nation, people of
the book are taxed till they convert. People who
are not "of the book"...well they're not as
fortunate.
Both followers of Hinduism and Buddhism would be
considered fit for slaughter, esp. the latter
since they consider god (Allah) worship antithetical
to peace and complete awakening.
I predict that eventually we'll see Islam no
longer classed as a religion by some western nations,
but instead as a dangerous social and political
movement, with a quasi-religious core."
That's just plain outright false, ignorant and inflammatory bigotry.
History shows periods where people of other faiths have lived peacefully and
were treated justly within Islamic empires.
Most of the 1.3 billion Muslims today are like most people of ANY religion.
They lead peacable, law-abiding lives and just want to get along without
conflicts with anyone.
Here's an example. Osama bin Laden, an undeniable extremist terrorist, had to
flee his own Islamic country of Saudi Arabia for his extremist views. No other
Islamic country would accept him with his distorted perversion of Islam and his
fanatic intentions, except Afghanistan where the equally fundamentalist
extremist Taliban ran the show and harbored him.
That's just one example of how Islam in general rejects the nutjob extremists.
Your blind bigoted hate-mongering and fear-based stereotyping of 1.3 billion
human beings is undeniable, Vaj.
> > You're actually doing readers here a favor in discrediting your integrity
> > and authenticity by revealing yourself in this way.
>
> Actually you are the one doing a great discredit, making shit up! You do not
> speak for me and you clearly don't have a clue about what i've said.
>
I'm sure you'd like others to believe that. But you've made your own bed.
> None of your comments seem to have anything to do with what I've said. You'd
> be better off addressing my ACTUAL comments than just trying to mind-read
> what you'd like to imagine I believe.
>
> How to you think Rachel Maddow, a Jewish lesbian lady, would be treated in
> the home of Islam, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, if she were to get onto TV?
>
She would more than likely be treated with respect in responsible governing
circles as a citizen of the USA and a defender of just treatment of people -
not only of the Islamic faith [as she has demonstrated], but for her basic
convictions of equal and fair treatment for people of ANY faith.
Many people of many different faiths live and work in Saudi Arabia, including
many Americans - and they are treated with respect with no problems.
> What do you think of the treatment of Hindus in Kashmir since majority Muslim
> rule there?
>
I'm a firm believer in equal and just treatment for ALL human beings - as I've
emphasized again and again.
What do you think of the continuing treatment of blacks in some places in the
deep South?
Does that mean that ALL Americans are racists???
> Answer topics I've raised, not your strawmen and your tilting at windmills!
>
You're a fraud, Vaj. Your bullshit speaks for itself.
