> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra no_reply@ wrote:
> And I ask you, Steve, in all my posts at FFL is there evidence for me
> acting in some dishonest and cowardly and deceitful way? Or do my
posts
> make it unlikely that I would lieno matter whathere at FFL?
Well first of all, I am not able to read all of your posts in full.
Second they take time to sort out. Third, there is nothing to indicate
that you are cowardly,or deceitful, but when it comes to Vaj, I believe
I have seen your response to some of his accusations change over the
course of a few posts. There is nothing wrong with that, it's just that
sometimes it appears as anomoly in the matrix, and that can spell
trouble. But overall, I have to say that Vaj has been defeated in his
attempts to smear you.
> > Think about that, Seve. Vaj knows whether he has this video of Robin
> or not. I have proposed a means whereby he can vindicate himself in
this
> accusation by showing it confidentially to Curtis. If you really are
> keen on proving I am a liar, why don't you urge Vaj to show the tape
to
> YOU? That would be an acceptable alternative to me. But you would then
> just have to say: "I have seen the tape, Robin, What Vaj says is
true."
I have thought about that very thing. I have asked myself, "Steve would
you want to be an arbiter of the truth of this video?" And the answer I
have come up with is, that, no, I wouldn't care to. But if someone
asked me to do it, then I guess I would consent. But I would much
rather have someone like Curtis take on that role. He has more gravitas
here.
> > I think you will have to settle for this level of satisfaction in
your
> quest to make me appear to be someone other than how I have appeared
> here at FFL so far.
> >
> > Your dogged refusal to open yourself to the context of reality
before
> seizing upon a certain item that quite possibly possesses the power to
> reinforce your: "You scored dude" syndrome, this is much more
> significant than this dispute over how it can be established whether
> Robin physically struck some person who attended one of his seminars.
Let me tell you my exact impression. I thought Curtis's reply to you
was brilliant. He shot and he scored. After that reply of his, in the
little bit I read of your second and third parts at least, I thought you
came off that hard line of attack, or a full court press. I felt that
some of the tension got let out of the room. But yes, I thought his
response to you was appropiate. You were minding someone elses business
IMO.
> > You had no business believing in that nun, Steve, unless you were
> making contact with something about her which contradicted the
> suspicions of those who were going after her. Similarly, you are
> obsessively focusing on a particular 'fact' hereRobin did not
> actually just tell Vaj to go ahead and post the video of Robin hitting
> someone: ergo he must be trying to slip out of the noose.
Perhaps I misunderstand what you said. But right now, I don't care to
go back and reconstruct it. You say you didn't, and I am willing to
accept that. Maybe I will go back, maybe later tonight and revise that
postion.
> > But I have had my say, Steve. There is a simple means for Vaj to
> establish the existence of that tape, and I am happy to have this
matter
> resolved to the point where there will not exist any equivocation
about
> itand therefore any issue about my own tendency to equivocate,
> which only you, among the posters at FFL, Steve, have thought to
charge
> me with.
I guess this one of the ways I gain knowledge. I sometimes make rash
judgements which I then have to change. And often they come with an
apology on my part. Sometimes I even have to pay money. I wouldn't
care to lose a friend over it, and I am not being overly sappy here,
and I am not necessarily referring to you.
> > You have the means to find out whether I am like the dishonest nun.
> Now go out there and get your satisfaction, Steve.
During the day I took a 10 second peak at a post Vaj made. Something
about "teasing" you about the video. I suppose I will come across this
post shortly. But the brief time I had to look at it, it seemed rather
odd.
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks as always for your reply. You've brought up some things
that
> I
> > > need to think about. I have a tendency to come to some rash
> > > conclusuions. Some times I have to back away from them, and some
> times
> > > I hit the mark. But it's not often that we have an opportunity to
> > > resolve a claim in a definitive way.
> > >
> > > You are saying that there is no video, but if there is a video you
> don't
> > > want it posted publicly. Or maybe you are saying that there may be
a
> > > video but it does not show what Vaj claims it shows, and that you
> want
> > > to preserve the privacy of the inividuals who are in the video.
> > >
> > > If that is the case, why don't you say so. Otherwise, why not ask
> Vaj
> > > to post the video. That would expose Vaj as a liar if he could not
> > > produce the video, or if it clearly did not portray what he says
it
> > > portrays. These are events that took place 25 years ago. I would
> think
> > > that this might be sufficient time for those portrayed in the
video
> to
> > > put events in their proper perspective.
> > >
> > > Things posted here fade pretty fast. Or in some cases the posts
can
> be
> > > deleted if they are determined to be detrimental to a person's
well
> > > being. And we know Rick's threshold is pretty low for this.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > No equivocation at all, Steve. Your nun story breaks down in
this
> > > response. Vaj has no such video. What is equivocal about having
Vajj
> > > share this evidence with someone like Curtisor Rick Archer?
The
> > > point is not to see the video; the point is to confirm that Robin
> struck
> > > some participant at one of his seminars, something I did not do.
You
> > > don't understand context, Steve, or you would never accuse me of
> > > equivocating. You are literalizing me out of the honesty of my
> response
> > > to Vaj. I appreciate the nun story, but here you are a victim of
> > > something unconsciously mischievous. I am a straight shooter,
Steve:
> you
> > > have no idea what happened in those ten years [when I was
> enlightened].
> > > Do you not think it significant that not one person who
experienced
> the
> > > power of the context of one of those seminars has ever come onto
FFL
> to
> > > give their own testimony about this? Let that tell you how intense
> and
> > > complex the reality was. You have a tendency, Steve, to make
> superficial
> > > what is something deep, and something that asks something more
from
> you
> > > than you are willing to give. Read my responses to Curtis and Vaj
> and
> > > tell me whether I am someone who equivocates. This is a misreading
> of
> > > me, Steve, and a serious one at that. I do not equivocate; I will
> not
> > > equivocate. You have to let reality have some say in your
> understanding
> > > of something, Steve. Think of how happy you were when Curtis first
> > > turned back my post to him: "You scored, dude. You scored!" And
then
> > > consider how you felt upon reading my final five-part response to
> > > Curtis. You liked, you were predisposed to like, Curtis initial
> post,
> > > but you hated my own post, even though you would never post
> something
> > > negative about it. Because you couldn't. But this is
uncontrollable
> > > prejudice in you: you would much rather I had never responded to
> Curtis.
> > > You have a problem with me, Steve; I am asking more of you than
you
> wish
> > > to give of yourself.
> > > >
> > > > There is no video, by the way, of me striking someone in a
> seminar.
> > > >
> > > > But for you re: Robin and Vaj, it all comes down to finding
> something
> > > about Robin which would disqualify him from criticizing Vaj, and
by
> > > golly, you are going to do your darndest to smoke this out. You
get
> me
> > > wrong, Steve.
> > > >
> > > > Neil Young was great.
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"
steve.sundur@
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@>
> wrote:
> > > > > > Vaj seems to feel he needs to not just bring Robin down
> > > > > > but grind him into the dirt, destroy him as a human being.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Well Judy, doesn't Robin equivicate? First he says bring on
the
> > > video,
> > > > > then he says, to post it privately. Which is it?
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you really think the people in the video are going to be
> damaged
> > > by
> > > > > its release? I'm asking. I don't know. Likely it will be a
> splash
> > > > > for a moment and then fade. I say let's see it. Let's draw our
> own
> > > > > conclusions.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
