--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, blusc0ut <no_reply@...> wrote: >
> > But Marcos did leave, and that was surely a very positive thing > > for the Philippines. See, I don't think the Maharishi Effect, > > if it exists, necessarily always works the way we--including > > Maharishi--expect or intend it to. > That's a nice perspective to have, but for me nothing more than a > rationalization. Take the Iran example, was it better to have Chomeini > than the Shah? I don't know, and nor do you. But the people wanted Khomeini and they hated the "Shah". Maharishi gave them what they wanted without bloodshed. Was the reason the siddhas had to leave that they had > fulfilled their task, It seems so. Also the government was collapsing and anyone in position to issue visas was fleeing the country, big time. Also the airport was closing and we simply had to go. I was on the last flight of an international airline (KLM) to leave the airport. or was it rather that they were fighting to get > their visas extended but just couldn't? We couldn't for the reasons stated above.
